for counsell both because he allowes a distinction of them in the Synod which had the authority of a determining voyce from them that did onely dispute or consult and because he intimates a judiciall proceeding in the Synods by mentioning parties accused their citing or calling of them the condemning of them which imports a further matter then onely of admonition or counsell Whereas Bellarmine accuseth us that we allow any learned men though Laicks to have a determining voyce let their office be what it will Junius answereth (m) N. 4. These things have none of us sayd or thought as they are here layd downe This is that which we say such are to be taken into the Synod which are furnished with gifts and calling which for gifts are godly honest learned for their calling which are either ordinarily appointed to teach or extraordinarily sent for and brought by just authority Now this necessity of a calling which he so (n) See c. 16. n. 10. 18. 20. c. 17. n. 1. often urgeth and requireth to be in the members of a Synod doth argue a speciall power and authority belonging unto them by vertue whereof they may give sentence in the judgement of causes whereas to admonish or counsell requires no more power then that which every Christian hath in another for his good as Mr D. himself confesseth To the same purpose Junius shewes against Bellarmine that the meaning of Theodosius and Valentinian was not to admit Bishops onely but that (o) Ibid. c 15. n. 13. those onely might heare examine and give sentence in a Synod which being sent from the Churches unto the Synod were reckoned up of the Bishops according to their letters of publick authority which they were wont to exhibit Againe he sayth (p) N. 15. They which are present without the authority of the Church of them some may onely heare as the laicks or common people some may be used in consultations as the learned men especially Ecclesiasticall persons but they may not give definitive sentence And thus still by distinguishing those that gave counsell from those that gave sentence in the Synod it appeares he acknowledged a power of jurisdiction in Synods and that they were not onely for counsell So when Bellarmine sayth it was a fault in the Councell of Basill that Presbyters or other learned men besides Bishops were allowed to have not onely a consulting voyce but a deciding suffrage affirmeth that this was against the custome of all antiquity c. Junius answereth (q) N. 19. This we denye for it was the first institution Act. 15. and not onely the manner and custome Seeing therefore there was such an institution of the Apostles in their assembly what need was there to alledge custome c. When Bellarmine chargeth the Protestants as holding that a Synod is nothing but an inquisition and that Christ alone and his written word hath a determining voyce Junius sayth (r) Ibid. in c. 18. n. ◠It is false for Synods have both an inquisition of that which is true just holy by religious communication and also a ministeriall giving of sentence Though he shew there and in many annotations following that it is not lawfull for Christians to obey them further then they agree with the Scriptures that their sentence of it self is but a persuasion and not a constraint a ministeriall judgement not of absolute authority of itself c. yet he (ſ) N. 3. grants the Lord hath commanded that we should obey the sentence of a lawfull Synod assembled together in his name c. He sayth (t) N. 14. Synods have true judgements so farre as they are of God according to the tables of his trueth and commandement of themselves they are not judgements but declarations publications and ministeriall pronouncings of the trueth and judgements of God And more then this cannot be yeelded to any Ecclesiasticall judicatory whatsoever Herein he fully grants as much jurisdiction to Synods as belongs to any particular Congregation or Eldership either apart or joyntly together When Bellarmine blames the Protestants for their exception against the Councell of Trent Junius answereth (v) Ibid. in c. 21. n. 1. It is the ordinary way of right in every appeale that the judgement of Synods and the exequution of their sentence be suspended and stayed so long untill the matter be againe examined in another more free or greater Assembly c. This answer had bene needles and impertinent unlesse Synods had more power then of counsell and admonition onely He sayth (x) N. 7. Certainly in every just Synod Hereticks being cited heard present or willfully hiding themselves have bene condemned c. When Bellarm. objects that Protestants will have nothing to be determined in Synods and so strifes to be never ended Junius answers (y) N. 23. that he perverts their meaning and referres us to his preface nota 40. where the Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction of Synods is plainely avouched IUnius proceeding to the examination of his second book touching Synods where Bellarmine repeats that Synods of Bishops may judge all controversies both of faith and manners Junius answereth (z) Animadv in Bell. l. 2. deCōcl c. 1. n. 1. We have granted it of those that are lawfull Synods When Bellarmine had sayd that nothing is greater then a lawfull and approved Generall Councell Junius answereth (a) Ibid. c. 4. n. 2. It is false for Christ is greater and the Scripture is greater seeing Christ and the Scripture are great of themselves the Church is great by them c. But this answer had bene insufficient not direct enough if my opposites opinion were true For then according to their opinion he might more fitly have answered that the authority of a particular Congregation is greater then the authority of a Generall Synod because though the counsell and advise of the Synod was more to be reverenced in respect of many excellently learned and godly men from many Churches that were in it yet seeing Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is limited to a particular Congregation therefore the same is greater in the power of censuring and in the use of the keyes for binding and loosing of impenitent sinners seeing Synods have no jurisdiction at all over any other Churches Againe when Bellarmine sets downe this insolent proposition that the Pope cannot commit neither unto a Synod nor to any man the coactive judgement over himself but onely the discretive Iunius answereth (b) Ibid. in c. 18. n. 1. The proposition is most true he cannot commit because God hath committed it to the Synod and lawfull Councell Wherefore we say on the contrary neither can he commit it for if he be the servant of God God hath committed the judgement concerning him unto his Church neither can he reject it but though he be unwilling yet both the Church is bound to judge concerning him and he to undergoe the judgement thereof discretive and coactive howsoever it
please men to call it If Mr Dav. doe fully agree with Junius as he professeth then must he acknowledge that Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited to a particular Church that lawfull Synods have authority not onely to counsell and admonish the Pope himself and so other obstinate offendours but also to censure thē to give sentence both of directive coactive judgement against them as occasion requires Junius to make this more plaine repeats it againe and speaking of the Synods judging the Pope saith (c) N. 2. Truely we grant that he cannot appoynt judges in his owne cause because God hath already appoynted them by the Apostle saying The spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets 1. Cor. 14.32 and that he may appoynt Arbiters but we adde this withall that the judges which God hath ordained may by no right be rejected or refused of him When Bellarmine pretends that divers Popes as Sixtus the 3d Leo the 3d Symmachus and Leo the 4th being accused were willing to have their causes discussed in a Synod of Bishops c. Junius sayth (d) N. 6. And this ought so to be done of them for they are subjected of God to a Synod of Prophets by authority of the word When Bellar. addes that yet the Bishops durst not judge them affirming also that they left the whole judgement unto God Junius answers (e) N. 7. This is a fallacy from that which is not the cause as they call it For they did not therefore abstaine from judging because they wanted authority to judge but partly because they had rather that the Popes being guilty should be first judged of themselves and their owne conscience partly because they thought it better to have their cause examined in another more full Synod partly also because when they would examine it the matter was not evident enough c. Whereas the Popes that thus farre submitted their cause to tryall pretend that by this fact they doe not prescribe a law to their successours whereby they should be constrained to doe the same Junius sayth (f) Ibidē The impudency of these men is so much the greater who after they are delivered from judgement doe after this manner mock their judges and such as examined their cause and will have their ambitious licentiousnes to be esteemed for a lawfull order asscribing the lawfull order of judgements in their cause unto an extraordinary and voluntary dispensation as they call it But had Junius bene of my opposites minde he should have answered after another manner should have sayd The Bishops in the Synods which durst not judge the cause of the Popes but left the whole judgement unto God did well therein if they had knowne what they did and the right ground thereof for they did indeed want authority to judge Synods might advise and counsell but have no jurisdiction to give sentence in censuring either the Pope or any other Synods may onely direct particular Churches to use their power aright but have no power themselves to judge other Congregations or any member thereof c. How farre was Junius from giving such an answer Other examples and instances alledged to shew the power of Synods in the judgement of causes are avouched cleared and maintained by Junius against Bellarmines exceptions as appeares in the cause of (g) Ibid. in c. 19. n. 1. Marcellinus of the (h) N. 3. Donatists and of (i) N. 5. Leo. Had he thought that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction had bene shut up within the bounds of a particular Congregation he ought to have reprehended those Synods rather then to have spent time in vindicating their practise from the cavills of adversaries AS in these books de Conciliis alledged by Mr Dav. Junius hath plainely shewed his agreement with us so in his disputations against Bellarmine de Verbo Dei he hath likewise declared his consent with us touching the authority of Synods He writes there that (k) Animadv in Bell. contr 1. 〈◊〉 Verbo Dei l. 3. c. 3. n. 9. there be two kindes of judgements in the Church one Private which belongs to all the faithfull universally and severally the other Publick depending upon a publick calling and authority the law and rule of both these judgements is the holy Scripture the authour and guide is the holy Ghost The publick judgement is either of a particular Church or of many Churches meeting together into one body or of all which body they call a Synod a Councell or an Assembly c. Seeing the Praesident and judge of the private judgement whereof the publick is compact is the Spirit of God and the Scripture the law there can be no other judge or law appoynted in the publick judgement of Synods without most hainous blasphemy against God and reproach to his Church And the Praesidents which are given to Synods have not the dominion and arbritement of the busines but the procuring of order committed unto them to determine matters by that one judge according to his law It is here to be observed that under the publick judgement of the Church he doth in like manner comprehend the authority of particular Churches and of Synods consisting of many Churches he speakes no otherwise of one then of the other as touching the kinde of power that they have he doth not attribute jurisdiction to one counsell to the other he notes both to depend upon a publick calling and authority for a ground of their proceeding And though in both the Spirit of God be the principall judge yet as he (l) Ibid. in c. 5. n. 3.5.28 afterwards notes more plainly he acknowledgeth a ministeriall judgment committed to them for the denouncing of his judgement against such as are guilty according to his word Afterward Junius (m) Ibid. in c. 6. n. 3. shewing how unlike the Councell of Trent was to the Nicene Councell where the Arian Bishops being present were heard convicted by the authority of Gods word and being convicted were condemned though he avoucheth the Bishops of Trent to have bene the enemies of the Gospel yet he sayth (n) N. 4. Otherwise as for lawfull Bishops or Elders and Deacons lawfully called into a Synod holding the same lawfully we acknowledge all these things When Bellarmine alledgeth Basilius Emperour who speaking of the judgment of Ecclesiasticall causes in a Synod sayd To try and search out these things it belongeth unto Patriarkes Bishops and Priests who have an office of government alotted unto them who have the power of sanctifying of loosing and binding who have obtained the keyes of the Church and not unto us which are to be fed which stand in need to be sanctifyed to be bound or loosed from binding Junius answereth (o) Ibid. in c. 7. n. 9. We allow this testimony of Basilius touching the lawfull order of Synods as before Herein we have the expresse confession of Junius touching the authority and jurisdiction of Synods in the use of the
for it while he addeth three other causes wherein the authority of Synods is superiour unto particular Churches wherein is expressed contained as much power as we asscribe unto Synods But that it may further appeare how Mr Dav. is condemned by his owne witnesse it is to be considered touching this famous light of Gods Church that as he (z) Epist Dedicat. undertook that great work at the appoyntment and command of a Synod as his sonne Adr. Chamierus after his fathers death dedicated that work unto the excellent and faythfull servants of God the Pastours and Elders of the French Churches assembled in a Nationall Synod comparing them to the threescore valiant men of the valiantest in Israel compassing the bed of Salomon all holding swords expert in warre every man with his sword upon his thigh because of feare in the night Sol. song c. 3.7 8. and as againe speaking of the Synod he applyes unto them that which is sayd of the Tower of David where the shields of the mighty men are hanged up c. Sol. song 4.4 so in the book itself there are many ample and pregnant testimonies touching the authority jurisdiction of Synods And first of all where he proves that the government of the Church is Aristocraticall by many and not Monarchicall by one he makes this distinction (a) Chamie Panstrat Cath. Tom. 2. l. 10. c. 5. The government of Churches is either of severall Churches or of many together viz. by Synods In both he maintaines an Aristocracie or jurisdiction of many He doth not restraine jurisdiction to particular Congregations and allow onely counsell or advise to Synods but he useth the same words and phrases to describe the power and government of one sort as well as of the other to note a like kinde of authority in both For the government of many Churches together in a Province he savth (b) Ibid. c. 7. For the disposing and directing of publick affaires Provinciall Synods were appointed that is companies of Bishops in the same Province which were assembled so often as need commodity required For evidence thereof he alledgeth divers Canons commendeth Cyprian for observing that order Touching the administration of all Churches in the world he sayth (c) Ibid. c. 8. He that denyeth these to have bene governed by Vniversall Synods must be either notoriously impudent or ignorant of all antiquity For in the very beginnings when a great question was raysed about the rites of Moses and some would have those that were converted from heathenish Idolatry to be subjected unto them Luke testifyeth that a Synod was assembled Act. 15. The Apostles and Elders came together to looke unto this matter And by the authority of this Synod that question was compounded which authority that they might signify to be the greatest the decree is conceived in these words It seemed good unto the holy Ghost and to us And that this was an Oecumenicall or Universall Synod he there maintaineth by divers reasōs against Ioverius who in regard of the small number that met together affirmed it to be a particular Synod It seemes also that this was the place from whence Mr Parker took that which he alledged out of Chamierus because in these two chapters 7. 8. are contained those testimonies which he citeth And here it is that he speakes of causa communis or the common cause which Cyprian would have to be judged by a Synod And here it is that he speakes of some proper causes belonging peculiarly to some Bishops in their speciall charges viz. c. 7. But these things are not onely misquoted by Mr Dav. by putting the 2d book for the 10th but the sense is altered while Chamierus comparing Bishops with Metropolitanes restraines some things from Metropolitanes to such Bishops as had divers countries under them And though he shew how Cyprian brought a common cause unto the Synod yet he doth not affirme that onely such common causes were to be brought unto Synods Chamierus doth not witnesse that the power of every particular Church is chief in its owne particular matters as Mr D. alledgeth him for witnesse thereof And in c. 8. he brings many evidences to witnesse the power of Generall Synods in judging the causes of all Churches Againe in the Question whether the Bishop of Rome may be judged of any Chamierus shewes the opinion of the Protestants whom he calleth Catholicks in opposition to the Papists that (d) Ibid. l. 13. c. 17. No Bishop at all may by divine right be judged of another but of many to wit in a Synod so as it hath most often bene done And when Bellarmine objected the examples of some Synods that refused to judge the Bishop of Rome Chamierus answereth that some of them were particular Synods consisting onely of such as were under the Romane Therefore they could make no generall decree but could onely ordaine that the Bishop of Rome should not be judged of them assembled in a particular Synod which certainely they either did not speak concerning a Generall Synod or els they spoke falsely A plaine confession of the jurisdiction of Synods for had he spoken of counsell or admonition onely why might not any one particular Bishop or Synod have admonished the Pope upon occasion and given their advise touching him In his dispute touching Appeales he sayth (e) Ibid. l. 14. c. 2. We doe not take away all appeales For they are of common equity and truely without them the Discipline of the Church could hardly or not at all subsist And he speakes there of such appeales as were made unto Synods Afterward speaking of the imposture or coosenage of the Bishop of Rome in the sixt Councell of Carthage where appeales denyed to Rome are yet expressely allowed to be made unto the Synods of their owne Province or to a Generall Councell hereupon Chamierus cryes out (f) Ibid. c. 3. Immane quantam crucem c. O how unspeakable a crosse is procured unto our Papists by the sincere constancy of those good fathers among whom were those great men Aurelius of Carthage and Augustine of Hippo c. Now look what weight and strength the testimony of those African fathers hath against the Papists even so much authority hath it against such as stand for the single uncompounded policie which deny the jurisdiction and power of Synods to determine such causes as by appeales are brought unto them For the jurisdiction of Synods in receiving appeales is in the same place as plainly confessed as the jurisdiction of the Pope is denyed by their prohibition of appeales to be made unto him Againe when he proves that the Pope is subject to Ecclesiasticall judgement he doth in the same question with one conclude that there is a superiority of power and jurisdiction in Synods to judge of him He instanceth (g) Ibid. c. 10. in Honorius a Bishop of Rome who by the sixt Synod was not onely judged but condemned as a
inferreth from hence this common law that other members of the Church which have no Ecclesiasticall office are to be subject to this government and ought to advance the same according to their power c. it is thereby evident that he could not like the course of W. B. or any such other schisming from the Church for this cause and complayning that they were not a free people if they were subject to Classes and Synods Mr Udall in the Demonstration of Discipline pag. 24 25. in that edition thereof which I have hath no such matter as is alledged before out of that treatise of English Puritanisme against the authority of Classes and Synods neither is it to be found in any part of that Demonstration that Christ hath not subjected any Congregation unto any other superiour Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction then unto that which is within itself c. And therefore it is untruely affirmed of Mr Canne that there is nothing there sayd but Mr Vdall with others above mentioned hath sayd the like On the contrary in that writing asscribed to Mr Vdall there be sundry testimonies shewing the authority of Synods to judge the causes of particular Congregations As it was (m) P. 204. before noted out of D. Fulke that there is a double authority of the Pastour one with the severall Congregation in which he is Pastour the other with the whole Synod or Assemblie whereof he is a member and both these authorities sufficiently authorized in the Scriptures so saith Mr Vdall to like purpose (n) Demōst of Discip c. 1. The word of God hath described sufficient ministers ministeries for doctrine exhortation overseeing distributing and ordering of every particular Church or generall Synod And againe he saith of Bishops or Pastours that (o) Ib. c. 10 they are of equall authority in their severall charges and in the generall government of the Church And in the same chapter he alledgeth the decrees of divers * 2. Concil Carth. tom 1. c. 10. 3 Conc. tom 1. cap. ◠Councels shewing how the causes of one Church or Congregation were judged by many Bishops of other Congregations meeting together In speciall when some (p) Demōst of Disc c. 14 objected that there would be so many Elderships so many divers fashions seeing one may not meddle with another Hereunto he answers The Government desired is uniforme for every Church and admitteth no change no not in outward ceremonies without a Synod of the choyce men of severall Elderships Hereby he plainely declares his meaning what he judged concerning the power of Synods for alterations to be made in particular Churches The Agreement of the English Church at Franckford in Queene Maries dayes is also alledged as a proofe of the Non-conformists dissenting from me whereunto I answer I. Those three Articles of their Discipline objected the one that the Ministers and Seniours severally and joyntly shall have no authority to make any manner of Decrees or Ordinances to binde the Congregation or any member thereof But shall execute such ordinances as shall be made by the Congregation and to them delivered Another that none shall be excommunicated untill the matter be first heard by the whole Church And further that Ministers and Seniours and every of them be subject to Ecclesiasticall discipline as other priváe members of the Church be these doe not at all concerne the question betwixt us For these things being granted it doth not follow that then the authority of Synods is overthrowne that they may not judge of any ordinances made in such a Congregation or that such a Church where these Articles are agreed upon hath thereby denyed and condemned such a Classicall government as we submit ourselves unto II. These Articles of their Discipline are not rightly and plainly but darkly and confusedly cited In the quotation of the first the page 115. is put for pag. 125. The two next are alledged without any quotation at all either of page or number of Article specifyed in the booke and both are joined together as if they were but one Article And in the second Article there is omitted that disjunction which affords an exception touching the strict observation thereof For whereas Mr Canne alledgeth it simply thus None shall be excommunicated untill the matter be heard by the whole Church the (q) Disc of troubl at Frankf p. 129. booke itself admitteth the liberty of a different practise by adding this clause or by such as it shall specially appoynt thereunto This falsification is so much the greater in that Mr Horne objecting against this Article and arguing that thereby (r) P. 163 164. the authority of the Pastour and Seniors is all wiped away for every thing is referred to the confused multitude of the Congregation Mr Whithead in the same booke answereth him on this manner Where he saith all things is referred to the confused multitude it is manifestly false For it is alwayes added by such as the Congregation shall appoint thereto as it is also in the 54 Article added in plaine words Let the Reader observe this deceitfull allegation both against the expresse words of the Article against the plaine explicatiō thereof by Mr Whit. in the name of that English Church at Frankford Whereas Mr Canne (ſ) Chu pl. p. 36. objecteth further from Art 26. 67. that in some cases the forenamed English Church agreed that appeales should be made unto the body of the Congregation I answer that in such cases as are there specifyed If the Ministers and Seniours which have authority to heare determine c. as it is elswhere specifyed though not in this Article be suspected or found to be parties that then they had reason to appeale rather to the body of the Congregation then that parties should be suffered to be judges in their owne cause And no marvell considering what I have noted (t) P. 121-125 before touching the state of that Church where the Reader may see a further answer unto these objections But then he askes me what I say to this and hopes I will not say that they were Brownists I answer His hope is right in this poynt I may not say they were Brownists nor their practise the same with the Brownists 1. Because they made this agreement through necessity when they wanted a Classis whereas the Brownists wilfully oppugne and refuse Classicall combinations 2. Because the Brownists deny authority of judgement unto Ministers and Elders in such cases where they are no parties which this (v) Art 59.63 Church at Frankford did not 3. Because the English Church at Frankford did not teach the doctrine of Separation as the Brownists doe but when they could not obtaine the reformation desired did (x) Disc of troub Frākford p. 187-191 still hold one another brethren in the Lord though greeved for the defects among them But it is wonder that Mr Canne is not ashamed to alledge the example of this English Church
all sorts the sayd words as they are written in their owne letters being compared together eyther joyntly or severally II. If the Deacons may distribute some almes ūto the poore without the knowledge of the whole Congregation then may the Elders also judge some causes without the knowledge of the whole Church But the first is true Therefore c. The consequence of the Propositiō is proved by this Because the whole Church hath as much right authority to dispose of the Church-treasure almes as they have to judge of the offences that are committed therein This the Scripture sheweth by the examples of sundry Churches of Antiochia Macedonia Achaia c. Act. 11.29 30. Rom. 15 25-28 1. Cor. 16.3.2 Cor. 8.1.4.19 Phil. 2.25 with c. 4.18 The Assumption is manifest and your owne practise confirmeth it III. If Arbiters chosen by consent of some particular persons may judge the causes of wrong injury whether publick or private wherein they strive against one another then may the Elders chosen by consent of the whole Church judge the causes offences that arise when they willingly submit unto the same But Arbiters so chosen may judge the causes referred unto them Therefore the Elders may doe it also The truth of the Proposition appeares because the free solemne consent of the Church in any election gives authority unto such persons either in generall or speciall workes as well as the choyse of any particular men in their causes Act. 14.23 2. Cor. 8.19 The truth of the Assumption appeares by the doctrine of the Apostle giving such power of judgement unto Arbiters 1. Cor. 6.4 5. If you answer hereunto as you (l) H. Ains Animadv to Mr Clyfton p. 43. elswhere expound this place that these controversies to be referred unto Arbiters are for civill things of this life that such are not Church-matters nor there to be heard c. this is insufficient and will not help you seeing it appeares by the text that these Controversies in Corinth might as well have bene sayd to be Ecclesiasticall causes as Civill and belonging to the judgement of the Church as of the Magistrates or Arbiters Had their controversies bene touching a wound or stroke given touching any slander or theft which may be sayd to be Ecclesiasticall causes as belonging to the judgement of the Church yet might the Apostle have sayd unto them thereupon all that he doth 1. Cor. 6 1-9 for 1. These are businesses which Infidell Magistrates in those times used to judge and the generall speech of the Apostle imports as much v. 1. 6. 2. The reason which the Apostle useth taken from the honour dignity of Saints in their judgement of Angels the world serves to perswado them to submit the judgment of such causes to one another mutually as well as any other causes v. 2 3. 3. The reason taken from their shame as if there were no wise men among them to judge these causes serves to reprove them for a want of wisedome in Ecclesiasticall things as well as Civill 4. The matters of controversy among them were of wrong injury done to brethren v. 7 8 9. And these being sinnes scandals belong to the judgment of the Church as doth the judgment of * 2. Cor. 10.4 5 6. 1. Cor. 5.7 all knowne sinnes This Argument is in effect yeelded unto by your self when you (m) H. Ains Animadv to Mr Clyf ton p. 9. allow the Articles of the Discipline agreed upon in the Reformed English Church which was at Franckford in Q. Maries dayes for whereas in the 62. art thereof in case of difference betwixt the Governours of the Church others it is there concluded that the body of the Congregation may appoint so many of the Congregation to heare determine the sayd matter or matters as it shall seeme good unto the Congregation hereupon in approbation of this Discipline you observe that hereby the reader may see what the learned most conscionable of the Church of England held heretofore which if they had continued in would have freed them of all Antichristian Prelacy the bane of so many Churches And hereupon I observe further against you how the reader may hereby see that if the body of the Church may appoint so many Arbiters as they will to heare determine matters then may the Elders of the Church receive this authority as well as any others then is it no unlawfull usurpation for them to heare determine some matters among the brethren by themselves IV. If particular persons may lawfully passe by some lesser offences leave them unto the consciences of the offenders without prosequuting thē or bringing them to the Church for any judgment at all then may the Church also leave some lesser offences unto the judgment of the Elders But the first is true Therefore the second also The consequence of the Proposition is proved because God doth no more require the Church to judge of sinnes made knowne unto the same then he doth require particular persons to prosequute and to deale against the offences made knowne unto them the Scripture speaking as fully giving unto particular persons as ample commission charge to * Mat. 18.15 16 17. Lev. 19.17 admonish and complaine of sinne as it doth unto the Church to judge censure the same The Assumption is proved 1. By expresse testimonyes of Scripture that teach us to passe by some sins offences and not to prosequute them Prov. 19.11 Eccl. 7.21 2. Particular persons being taught to love their neighbour as themselves to doe good unto all Levit. 19.18 Matt. 22.39 Rom. 13.9 Gal. 5.14 Iam. 2.8 are thereby bound to admonish them that are without those that are not mēbers of the same Church with them but of any other eyther true or false or of none Now if this be to be done it followes necessarily that the reproofes of many lesser faults are to be omitted because otherwise men could never discharge this duety neither would their time suffice to performe these dueties of admonition to all such as they should finde subject thereunto both within the Church without Yea suppose they had no other calling to attend upon yet could not the whole age of man be sufficient to testify effectually in order against all such transgressions which an intelligent person might discerne to be committed dayly before his eyes both in private publick 3. Even yourself seem to acknowledge this also when touching the difference of offences you say (i) Com. of Saints cap. 22. § 2. 3. when offences arise it shal be our glory if we can passe them by as Solomon hath sayd But if the trespasse be such as we may not but insist upon both for the honour of God who is offended soule of the sinner which is endangered our owne or neighbours good who are endammaged thereby then are we bound to admonish the trespasser hereof
of H. C. it is testifyed that in the examination of an uncleane fact imputed unto him there were certaine men deputed to heare and examine the cause apart from the Congregation that the eares of women and children and of the whole multitude should not be offended therewith And why may you not now still by the like reason yeeld that the hearing and examining of offendours may be done apart by the Elders which are the Churches deputies thereunto as well as heretofore by some other deputies new chosen Touching the Scriptures alledged by you although that which is sayd already might serve for answer thereunto yet this in particular may be further considered As for 1. Cor. 5.4 there is not a word of the Churches meeting together to examine the fact of the incestuous person but onely of giving sentence after it was sufficiently knowne In Act. 14.27 we read that the Church was gathered together and so with us both on the Lords day and on one of the week dayes there is a gathering of the Church together What an idle thing is it to prove that there should be publick assemblies of the Church which none denyes But this place shewes not that the Church was gathered together to the publick examination of scandals to heare the proceedings against offendours according to the question in hand As for Act. 15.4 the receiving by the Church there mentioned doth not so much as shew that the Church was then gathered together The Church might be sayd to receive Paul Barnabas some others with them and to heare what things God had done by them though not in a publick assembly met together for that end even as the Church of Rome might be sayd to receive Phoebe Rom. 16.2 though not in a publick assembly Gaius might be sayd to be the host of the whole Church Rom. 16.23 consequently to receive the same though not gathered together at one time In Act. 15.30 Luke shewes that the Epistle of the Apostles was delivered to the multitude assembled at Antiochia So we read that the Epistle written to the Colossians was to be read in the Church of the Laodiceans Colos 4.16 So the letters and decrees of Princes States at this day are often times upon sundry occasions delivered and openly read to the multitude people in severall cities assembled and called together to heare the same even as these decrees of the Apostles and Elders were delivered in sundry places Act. 16.4 But doe these manner of assemblies prove that no cases of controversy scandall or sinne may be examined heard by the Rulers Governours without the presence of the people gathered together in such an assembly according to the question betwixt us How can such kinde of collections be ever justifyed by you That place Act. 21 18-22 is oft alledged by you to shew the peoples power while it is there sayd that the multitude must needes come together touching which words though neither the Syriack nor the Arabick versions of the New Testament have them though the want of these words from the text in this place is by (p) Inn. Annot in Arab transl in Act. 21.22 some learned men judged not to be unmeet yet will I not insist thereon But 1. to take the words as they are in the Greek the word (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated must needes doth not alwayes signify a duety to be done but sometimes onely a necessity of a thing comming to passe done by men though they ought not to doe it and so this very word is elswhere used by the Apostle when he saith there must be herefies 1. Cor. 11.19 shewing thereby the necessity of an event but not the duety of any person to doe that thing Neither doth any thing hinder but that the word here also in Act. 21. may be taken in like sense viz. that the multitude would needs come together though not bound by duety thereunto 2. Suppose that this comming together of the multitude was according to duety yet seing that both the occasion was extraordinary that also the forme of their comming together is not specifyed whether they were to come as hearers onely of Pauls doctrine or as judges in judiciall manner to examine him how can you now conclude from hence that all cases of controversy among brethren are ordinarily to be examined by the multitude of the Congregation in a publick assembly THE SECOND PART Touching The power of Classicall and Synodall Assemblies CHAP. I. The State of the Question and the importance thereof THe summe substance of the Discipline or Church-government appointed of God practised in the Reformed Churches consists chiefly in this that when as for the remooving of private offences private admonition in the first and second degree prevayles not or when as the offence is publick at first the matter be then brought unto the judgement of the Eldership and so that in weightier cases as receiving of members excommunication election deposition of Ministers c. nothing be concluded executed without the knowledge approbation of the Church likewise that in more weighty difficult cases as the aforenamed or the like the advise help and allowance of the Classis under which they stand and if need be of the Synod unto which the Classis is subordinate be sought rested in this in such manner that if any person eyther Minister Elder or any other even the least member of the Church doe finde any evill to be maintained either against faith or manners either by the Eldership or by the Congregation it is then lawfull for them for the redresse of such evill to repaire unto the Classis or Synod that by their authority sentence the offence may be censured the abuse reformed As the Eldership of a particular Church consists of Ministers Elders chosen out of the same so the Classis consists of many Ministers Elders sent from many Churches assembling together to heare determine the cases above written That the State of the Question may yet more clearly be understood it is to be remembred that in this combination of Classes and Synods I. The authority which they exercise is not absolute nor their decrees held to be infallible but to be examined by the word of God and not to be received further then they doe agree therewith And therefore also (a) Kerckē Ordeninge Synod Nat. Dordr art 31.36 there is liberty of appeale from them from the Classis to the Synod and from a Provinciall Synod to a Nationall II. The authority of Classes Synods is not Civill neither have they power to inflict Civill punishments they (b) Ibid. art 30. judge onely of Ecclesiasticall causes that in Ecclesiasticall manner using no other then spirituall censures III. In the Classicall union consociation of neighbour Churches (c) Ibid. art 84. no one Church hath any prerogative or power above another nor any
one Minister or Elder greater authority then another but their questions are determined by most voyces and they are all mutually equally subject unto one another in the Lord. IV. This government of Churches by Classes doth not deprive particular Churches Congregations of their liberty power but serves to direct strengthen them in the right use exercise of their power for example when a particular Church with their Elders or the greater part of them agree together to choose a Minister that is offensive or unfit for them if the Classis upon due consideration of the matter doe disanull their election hinder their proceeding yet doe they not hereby deprive them of their liberty nor take from them their priviledge of election forasmuch as they doe still leave unto them a freedome to choose another fit Minister they doe not in this case goe about to choose for them or to obtrude upon them another Minister against their will but onely exhort them to use their power and liberty aright and to shew more care and godly wisedome in seeking out such an one as may be more inoffensive fit for the edification of their Church Against this authority of Classes and Synods divers opposites have risen up and have pleaded for a new kinde of Discipline contrary to the order of all Reformed Churches and contrary to that Reformation which the ancient Non-conformists in England have so much desired laboured for And yet many of these Opposites doe in the meane time in generall termes seeme to (d) Mr Iacob in his Auestation of Church-gov p. 118. 178. Churches plea. p. 94. embrace Synods and greatly to approve of the benefit that comes by them But herein is the poynt of difference that they doe limit confine all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction within the bounds of a particular Congregation Though they acknowledge Synods to be lawfull expedient and necessary yet this they hold to be onely in regard of counsell advise for provocation direction countenance but doe not acknowledge them to have any authority to give sentence for the decision of causes they doe not allow Classes or Synods to use any Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction or censure in judging the controversies that arise in particular Congregations They maintaine that (e) Churches plea. pref Mr Dav. Reply p. 229 c. every particular Congregation is independent not standing under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves This opposition of Classes Synods is made specially by the (f) H. Barrow Discov p. 190. 191. Apol. of Brown pos 9. Brownists and by them have the Ministers of England bene reproached for the respect which they had unto Synods After them Mr Iacob in his writings often allowing them for counsell (g) Necess of Reform p. 31 32 33 yet denyes the power authority which we asscribe unto them And in that booke which is intitled English Puritanisme (h) Chap. 2. art 3.6 c. this their opinion is most plainly peremptorily propounded And now also Mr Davenp though he (i) Apolog. Repl. p. 226 allow a combination of particular Churches in Classes and Synods and such a consociation of them as is betweene equalls and is by way of counsaile or brotherly direction yet he saith (k) Ibid. p. 229. that their authority is not a prerogative of jurisdiction but of aestimation reverence rather because Gods ordinance hath limited the former viz. jurisdiction to particular Churches as his delegates in their owne matters it is not in their power to alienate it from themselves But the latter viz. estimation reverence is due to Classes consisting of grave learned prudent and faithfull men for their excelent personall gifts in which respect their judgment is to be much valued receyved with due regard But if any doe asscribe unto Classes a power of jurisdiction over particular Churches and that in things which he calls proper unto themselves this he saith (l) Ibid. p. 230. is to subject particular Churches under an undue power this he calles an usurped power Now then behold what this estimation reverence is which Mr Dav. allowes to Classicall assemblies or Synods viz. not so much power as is allowed to any one man though it were the most ignorant and offensive that is a member of a particular Church for when a controversy ariseth about the election of a Minister the one half of the Congregation giving voyces for him another half excepting against him as unsound in doctrine unfit for thē if a whole Classicall assembly of Ministers Elders deputed from all the Churches round about doe also except against him as unsound and unfit and with one consent judge that he ought not to be called yet for one voyce of that one ignorant person whereby the one part of the Congregation comes to exceed the other in number is that unworthy one to be received called This is that due regard that estimation value which Mr Dav. affords unto this Classis consisting of so many grave learned prudent faithfull men of excellent personall gifts while he maintaines that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is limited to the particular Church and all the counsell brotherly direction of the Classis must be of no authority against the resolution of such a wilfull company to censure their unjust proceedings to stay the same So againe (m) Apol. repl p. 47. he pretendeth Mr Cartwr his authority to prove that other Churches have no power of hindring a faulty election but by admonition which power every Christian hath in another for his good The speciall or onely remedy which the Opposites flye unto in such cases is the help of the Magistrate But hereby the importance of this Question and the danger of despising Synods may appeare Though they hold that Christ hath not subjected any Church or Congregation of his to any other superiour Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction then unto that which is within it self c. yet they hold (n) Engl. Purit cap. 2. § 6. 3. that if in the choyse of Ministers any particular Church shall erre that none upon the earth but the Civill Magistrate hath power to controule or correct the same for it c. that in such cases others are to leave their soules to the immediate judgement of Christ and their bodies to the sword of the Civill Magistrate c. But this help remedy is weak insufficient that many wayes for I. The Churches of Christ doe sometimes remaine under heathenish Magistrates that either regard not the cause of the Church refuse to judge their controversies as Paul Gallio Iohn 18.31 Act. 18.14 15. or els seek wholly to root out the same II. The Churches are sometimes dispersed sojourne in the countries of Popish Princes and Magistrates as the Churches which at this day live under the Crosse in Brabant Flanders sundry other places where they keep themselves as secret
as may be and what help can they expect from the Magistrates which seek to expell them out of their territories III. Other Churches of Christ doe abide in such Popish countries where though they be tolerated to have their meetings as in many parts of France yet it would be in vaine for them to seek help of the Popish Governours that have dominion in some of the places where they have their abode IV. In these Vnited Provinces of the Netherlands where the Reformed Churches are maintained yet forasmuch as here is a toleration of many Sects and Religions and among the rest of the Brownists the Magistrates doe not use to judge their Ecclesiasticall controversies so afford no help unto those Sects in that kinde When did the Brownists ever seek any help from them to represse their contentions and schismes V. That or those Churches wich are secretly gathered in England according to the direction example of Mr Iacob doe they not altogether want the help of the Civill Magistrate in their controversies He prescribes this remedy (o) Necess of Reform p. 28. that if people in their Church-elections c. will presume to be unruly violent then the Princes next dwelling Officers of Justice may ought to make them keep peace quietnes But durst he or his in any of their contentions ever seek that remedy Lastly suppose that in every country the Magistrates did seek the wealth of Sion and did use their authority to correct and punish the disorders committed in true Churches yet would not this remedy be sufficient to humble obstinate offenders God having appointed other meanes of Spirituall censure as well as Civill punishmēt to work upon the consciences of sinners of which more is to be spoken hereafter The importance of this Question may further appeare unto us if we consider the manifold great offences scandals which many have the rather fallen into through their neglect contempt of Classes Synods and through want of that help which they might have obtained by them And this is most evident in the practise course of the Brownists In that infamous contentiō whē Francis Iohns the Pastour with his company did excommunicate not onely his brother George Iohnson a Preacher also but his owne father likewise Iohn Iohnson comming out of England for this purpose to make peace betwixt his two sonnes had they used the help of neighbour Churches permitted them to judge betwixt them it might have bene a meanes through Gods blessing to have preserved them from such extreme courses Hereof George Iohnson oft complaineth in his booke (p) Discourse of troubles c. p. 74. p. 38.39 41. they will not consent hereunto they will not be perswaded nor intreated to let the Reformed Churches heare try judge end the controversy between them and us And this is not the complaint of G. Iohnson alone but the Ministers both of the Dutch and French Churches in Amsterdam doe likewise give testimony thereof being deputed by the Elderships of both those Churches that upon the request of the father to see if they could procure Franc. Ioh. and the Elders of his Church to submit the controversy to their tryall judgement This appeares in the Testimony hereof given unto the father Iohn Iohns by the (q) Iohannes a Vinea Petrus Plancius Iacobus Arminius Simon Goulattius Ministers of these Churches in writing under their hands Yea further the Church of the Separation did so much abhorre to have their causes and affaires submitted unto any censure or judgement out of their owne Church that in the excommunication of the father an old man of 70. yeares that had undertaken so hard a journey as he confessed for the reconcilement of his sonnes sought such meanes from other Churches to end their strife this was set downe as one distinct speciall cause of his excommunication viz. for labouring to draw the Church into Antichristian bondage in the the judging the causes thereof This appeares in the Copy of his Excommunication delivered unto him subscribed by (r) Daniel Studley Stanshall Mercer two of their Elders in the name of their Church And since that time when the Brownists have so often schismed rent in the midst as in Mr Iohnson Mr Ainsworths division whē they separated one from the other when after the death of Mr Ainsworth that company rending againe in the midst one half followed Iohn de Cluse the other Mr Canne when after the death of Mr Robinson his company also rending in peeces they forsooke their old fellowship together when Mr Canne was first rashly elected a Minister by the Brownists when shortly after that election he was censured and deposed from his office by that half that rejected him renounced communion with him In all these the like controversies they wanted help durst not seek the benefit of Classicall Government nor submit their cause unto such an order of tryall and censure lest they should enthrall themselves in Antichristian bondage as they call it They that allow not Synods with authority to decide causes doe yet professe that they are to be approved embraced for counsell advise but it appeares by these other not unlike passages among those that are of the same opinion that they which deny the power of censure in Classes doe seldome enquire after their counsell And although the importance of this controversy doeth hereby appeare plainly enough yet doe we not hold the same to be so great as some of our opposites doe make it as if the essence of the Church our owne salvation depended hereupon Mr Canne calls it (ſ) Churches plea. p. 77. a matter of faith appertaining to life salvation Mr Iacob speaking of this particular Church wherein this single uncompounded policie is maintained saith (t) Necess of Reform p. 5. This onely ought to be allowed beleeved to be a true Church by all Christians and againe (v) Ibid. p. 6. This is the onely true visible Church of Christ having from him the spirituall power of order government in it self ordinarily The proper Ministers thereof are the onely true ordinary Ministers of Christ He saith further (x) The divine begin instit of Christs true visible Church pref The true forme indeed of Christs visible ministeriall Church is an Inward thing It is the Power of a single uncompounded spirituall politie He denyes the Profession of saving faith to be the essentiall forme and often inculcates that the forme essence nature constitution of the Church consists in that power of spirituall politie before rehearsed He complaines of them that doe not practise according to his rule saying (y) Ibid. pref These truly seeme to destroy the conscience faith of the people c. And he gives this exhortation that (z) Ibid. A. 4. All Christians every where ought to frame the visible Church where they
make nothing to the purpose The first is Deut 17. c. Hereunto I answer I. Though the Papists argue from the Jewish politie and from the same places of Scripture alledged by us yet it is false which Mr Canne here saith viz. that they use the same argument They argue thence aâ—â—er another manner make other consequences draw other conclusions from those places then we doe Their abuse of those Scriptures doth not hinder us from the right use of them for then we might be quickly deprived of the whole Scriptures wrested by many unto their destruction 2. Pet. 3.16 The (l) Bellarm. contr de verbo Dei l. 3. c 5. Papists alledge Mat. 18.17 as well as Deut. 17. to stablish their Romish authority yet my opposites think it to be no prejudice to themselves that argue in another manner from the same place II. More particularly the Papists argue from Deut. 17. to prove that there should be one person supreme judge of Ecclesiasticall causes as there was one High Priest among the Iewes This is justly refuted both by (m) Conf. with Hart c. 6. div 2. p. 204. D. Rainolds by (n) DePont Rom. cont 4. qu. 7. p. 818.819 D. Whitakers shewing that the judgement given there was not by the High Priest alone but by a Colledge or Senate of Priests noted in that Text. The Papists argue from Deut. 17. to prove an infallibility of judgement in this one Judge to shew that the Pope cannot erre These such like false collections from the Policy of the Jewes are justly reproved by Orthodox Divines Had I used any such reasonings then had there bene cause to have complained III. Whereas Mr Iohnson used to plead for the power and authority of Elders in the Church and to maintaine the same from the Civill Policy of the Jewes from the authority of the Magistrates in Israel Mr Ainsworth had just cause to dislike the same and doth (o) Animadv p. 16. justly alledge against him the Testimonies of D. Whitakers Iunius Cartwright others It is true which they affirme The argument is not good from Civill Government to Ecclesiasticall and againe The example is altogether unlike of temporall empire and spirituall ministery between these there is not neither ought neither can a proportion or comparison be rightly made viz. in such a confused manner as Mr Iohnson hath done it But as for me I never pleaded on that manner I argue not from the Civill but from the Ecclesiasticall Policie in Israel to shew the lawfull government of the Church by Synods Mr Canne therefore doeth not rightly imitate Mr Ainsw in the allegation of these Writers IV. If Mr Canne would see who they be that doe in speciall manner offend by reasoning from the Iewish Policie and government let him looke yet better upon the writings of the Brownists There he shall finde not onely Mr Iohns worthily complained of for (p) Animadv pref wresting a proportion from the Princes of Israel to the Ministers of the Gospell for (q) Ibid. p. 14. streyning too farre in proportioning the authority and power of Elders in the Church with the authority of the Elders the Magistrates for (r) Ibid p. 19. matching the power of the Ministers in Spirituall things with the power of the Magistrate in Civill things c. But there shall he also finde the rest of the Separation so many as doe allow their Confession Apology pleading from the Jewish Policie government to establish confirme the authority power of particular Churches in their administration of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall censures he shall finde Mr Ainsw proceeding yet further not onely to reason from the Jewish politie but from an imagined power of the people in Civill judgements such a power as was not due unto them by the Law These errours have I noted refuted at large in the (Å¿) Pag. 7-13 former part of this Treatise V. Whereas these Opposers doe often alledge that (t) Animadv pref p. 14 15. c. Moses politie is done away abrogated I answer Though the Ceremonies that were shadowes and figures of things to come be abrogated yet the Judiciall Lawes are not wholly boargated but onely so much as served to establish the Ceremonies or had a peculiar respect to the condition of the Jewes to that land of promise given unto them Otherwise that part of Moses Politie which was of common equity grounded upon principles of reason and nature serving for the maintenance of the Morall Law is perpetuall not changed This is shewed at large by Orthodox Divines Iunius (v) De Poliâ—ia Mosis cap. 3. thes 13 14 15 c. in speciall doth manifest this both in generall rules and in particular instances as in the law of making battlements upon the flat roofes of their houses Deu. 22.8 in the law of not putting to death the childreÌ„ for the offence of the fathers Deut. 24.16 in the law of not admitting one witnesse Deut. 19.15 These and the like Judiciall lawes in the Politie of Moses are not abrogated This is likewise shewed by that learned (x) Gersom Bucerus Discept de Gubern Eccl. p. 51 52. Writer who defending the Government Discipline of the Reformed Churches against D. Downam declares such Judiciall lawes to be ad perpetuam Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the perpetuall good order of the Church Now our present controversy is neither about Ceremoniall ordinances nor other Judiciall lawes peculiar to the Jewes but onely about the liberty of Appeales from one Ecclesiasticall judicatory to another from the judgement of a particular Church unto a Synod Classicall Provinciall or Nationall This liberty of appeales being granted then a dependency of Churches is granted and then the single uncompounded Policie is not to be urged upon us That this liberty of appeales dependeth upon common equity the light of nature the practise of all ages nations generally witnesseth unto us It was the light of nature that taught this law of common equity unto Jethro Moses his father in law approved of God himself Exod. 18 22-26 for there as Iunius interprets the same there was a law appointed touching Appeales from subalterne or subordinate Judges (y) Analy Explic. in Deut. c. 17. That if any matter did either seeme obscure unto them the Judges that they could not determine it or did appeare hard unto the parties contending that they could not rest therein then they were to betake themselves unto superiour Iudges And againe in the same place comparing Deut. 17. with Exod. 18. he writes that according to the summe substance of that counsell which Jethro gave and ex illo fundamento c. from that ground Moses here viz. Deut. 17. defineth the manner of the appealing of parties of consultation to be made by inferiour Iudges when any weighty busines should be c. Thus doth he expound this law of appealing to a
Rome so both do grant liberty of Appeales unto Synods Yea and all the Arguments generally both of Greekes and Latines directed against the appeales made unto the Pope doe yet reserve a liberty of appeale unto Synods This may be observed from D. Whit. in his (g) De Pont. Rom. Qu. 4. p. 4 6. 48â— c. large ample defence of the Arguments of Nilus the learned Bishop of Thessalonica as he calls him and in his maintaining of the Arguments of the Latines also And now if these appeales be granted then is the question clearly granted and fully yeelded unto me then is not all spirituall jurisdiction limited to a particular Church then are not Churches independent then is there a superiour Ecclesiasticall power to judge the controversies of particular Congregations out of themselves Lastly though Mr Canne cannot endure that we should seek to strengthen the authority of Synods from the Policie of the Jewes yet if he would open his eyes he might see beside those above noted others also arguing in like manner The ancient Fathers have often argued from the Judiciall ordinances delivered by Moses unto Israel yea they have often alledged this very place in speciall Deut. 17. to shew thereby the practise of Christians in the New Testament Cyprian (h) Lib. 1. Epist 8. ad plebem p. 94 Epist ad Pompon de virginibus p. 170. Epist ad Rogat p. 192. citeth it often and the like might be observed in other writings of the Fathers Among later Writers the lights of this age Vrsinus (i) Tom. 1. in Expl. Catech p. 295 Tom. 3. Iudic. de Disc Eccl. p. 806.807 pleadeth from Deut. 17. to shew the authority of the Church for the excommunication of obstinate sinners Mr Cartwright (k) First Reply to D. Whitg p. 192. to shew what authority Ministers and Ecclesiasticall Governours have now in the New Testament for the governing of the Church argues from the Jewish Policie and from that Ecclesiasticall Synedrion described 2. Chron. 19.8 11. which had power to judge the causes of particular Synagogues Dudley Fenner speaking of the Presbytery in generall as it containes under it both Classes and Synods as well as the Elderships of particular Churches to shew the authority and use thereof among other places taken from the Jewish Policie (l) 8. Theol. lib. 7. c. 7. p. 276.277 alledgeth this also Deut. 17.9 with 2. Chron. 19.8 11. Zepperus to shew a divine warrant for the government of Churches by Synods (m) Polit. Eccles l. 3. c. 8. p. 707. 709. alledgeth these same places of Scripture Deut. 17.8 2. Chron. 19.8 Ruardus Acronius in like manner in his treatise (n) Cap. 7. with c. 13. of the Church of God the government thereof to teach how the more weighty controversies were to be brought from Synagogues and from particular Congregations unto greater Assemblies he alledgeth out of the Judiciall lawes of Moses this speciall place Deut. 17.8 c. To omit many other how is it that Mr Canne doth so much forget the practise of his owne Sect Is it not their manner frequently to alledge the ordinances of the Jewish Policie to strengthen and confirme that power of the Church and that order of government that is maintained and practised by them of the Separation Their Confession and Apology is full of such reasonings But instead of the rest consider we at this time the writings of H. Barrow who to prove the duety of the Church (o) H. Barr. Disc p. 1. alledgeth this place Deut. 17.8 c. To prove the power of the Church in driving away and keeping out the profane open unworthy from the table of the Lord alledgeth at once (p) Ibid. p. 17. the whole book of Deuteronomy and if the whole book then this 17. chap. also that is contained therein What unreasonable men are these to eat up and devoure at one mouthfull a whole book of Judiciall lawes and not to permit another to have a crumme thereof or to alledge one of those ordinances To prove that Princes for their transgressions are subject unto censure and judgement (q) Ibid. p. 14. 245. to be disfranchised out of the Church and to be delivered over unto Satan as well as any other offendour he alledgeth sundry examples and all out of the Old Testament all of such Kings as stood under the Jewish Policie Can they from the Jewish Policie prove them to be subject to the greatest censure and can they not from the same Law procure them liberry of appeale when they judge they are oppressed Is the Policie of Moses in force to binde them and is it then abrogate when they seek releef by appeale unto a superiour judicatory This is indeed an injury a misery to Princes people to high and low to be brought into greater bondage under Christ in the New Testament then others were under Moses in the Old THese things being duely considered it may hereby also appeare how vaine that is which Mr Dav. excepteth concerning appeales or the bringing of causes unto Classes Touching that which I had sayd upon another occasion from Deut. 17.8 with 1.12 2. Chron. 19.8.9 10. he excepts as followeth I. DAV (r) Apol. Repl. p. 215 The pretended reason c. will not help him in the cases questioned unlesse he can prove I. That the Classes are of the same use by Divine institution for the help of Pastour which have the assistance of their Eldership whereof that judicatory was for the help of Moses c. ANSVV. I. Observe how Mr Dav. being an Accuser and an Advocate of accusers instead of bringing any proof to justify the accusations calls upon me for proof of that established order of government so long enjoyed in these countries II. Seing it appeareth that the order of Ecclesiasticall government prescribed Deut. 17. 2. Chron. 19. was for the substance of it no part of the Ceremoniall law but of common and perpetuall equity and that the power of Classes for the receiving of appeales judging the causes of particular Churches was included therein it is thence also manifest that the power authority exercised by Classes Synods is therefore of Divine institution for the same use from the same grounds of holy Scripture III. What reason had he in describing the use of Classes to mention this onely that they were for the help of Pastours seing both they those judicatories Deut. 17.2 Chron. 19. were for the help benefit of every member of the Synagogues then and the Churches now as well as for the help of Pastours IV. What reason had he also in speaking of Pastours now to adde these words which have the assistance of their Eldership seing in the Synagogues anciently their Pastours Teachers had the assistance of an Eldership and Rulers of the Synagogue as well as now I. DAV It is to be proved II. That the causes in question which
Church which was the title then given unto the Ecclesiasticall Senate and his words of having as a Publicane Heathen doe manifestly prove he meant to speak according to their custome c. And therefore also in his (z) S. Theol l. 7. c. 7. p. 276. generall description of a Presbyterie comprehending under it as well the government of many Churches by Synods as of one particular Church by the Eldership thereof for the proof and warrant of one as well as the other he alledgeth this rule Mat. 18.18 even as he doth other places taken from the Jewish Policy under the Law Mr Brightman when he shewes that Christ in his Church hath appointed a more accurate order for remove all of lesse offences then that which the Pharisees observed who corrupted the Law with their erroneous glosses condemning grosser sinnes as murders and neglecting lesser transgressions yet for the forme of the Judicatorie he declares that it was such an one as the former Writers doe witnesse to have bene taken from the Jewes Policy when as he thus describeth it (a) Comment in Cant. cap. 4. The Synedrion is a Senate of Elders watching for the soules of that Congregation over which they are set in things that belong unto manners Christian honesty which Senate because it represents the state or * quoniam vicem sustineat c. beares the place of the whole Congregation is called of Christ himself the Church saying Tell the Church Mat. 18.17 and of Paul is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Eldership 1. Tim. 4.14 And againe in the next leafe shewing the meaning of that text Matth. 18.15 c. Onely remember thence that the Church is not the vvhole Congregation but a Synedrion or Senate of certaine chosen persons And for ought that can be gathered from this his exposition it was no new rule but a renewing and confirming of that which had bene of old prescribed unto Israel Mr Parker for the maintenance of Classes and Synods whereby many particular Churches are combined united together argues also from Mat. 18. and that after a double manner for first to shew withall that the right manner and forme of combination doth consist in a mutuall obligation of Churches without subjection unto the rule or dominion of any one he reasons thus (b) Polit. Eccles l. 3. c. 22. p. 331 Let us goe to the very fountaine of combination which as Chamierus saith well is found in Mat. 18. because many Churches are combined together after the same manner that the prime Churches viz. particular Congregations doe grow together in their members into one frame And he maintaines that the forme of this combination comming together is noted in those words in my name and if they agree together Mat. 18. v. 19 20. Thus he derives the combination of Churches from their mutuall consent agreement And hence it may appeare further that as members of particular Churches are united together by the bond of mutuall consent not onely for counsell advise but also for the censuring judging of their offences and this without superiority of one member above another so by the like bond of mutuall consent many Churches are also united not onely for counsell but for the mutuall censuring deciding of one anothers causes and this without superiority of any one Church above the rest Otherwise also how could he have applyed these things as he doth for the defence of the Reformed Churches wherein such authority of Classes and Synods is exercised Secondly whereas D. Whitgift others dispute against the Classes Presbyteries of Scotland the Low-countries where the faults and causes of particular Churches are judged censured and aske for Scripture to prove and justify such an order of government Mr Parker in defence of them besides other answers proofes alledges this place Matt. 18. for the warrant thereof and sayth (c) Polit. Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. p. 355. This proceeding from an Eldership to a Classis from a Classis to a Synod is founded in the institution of Christ Matt. 18.17 by proportion on this manner He commands that from the admonition of one being despised men proceed unto the admonition of two or three if that be contemned unto the censure of the Eldership if that be despised unto the censure of the whole Church therefore why not from one whole Church unto many in a Classis againe from many in a Classis unto yet more in a Synod And having layd this just foundation he reprooves the opposites further from the confessiō of some of them contradicting the other (d) Ibidem Both Sutlive Downam doe interpret the Church Mat. 18. to be either a Consistory or a Synod Behold therefore by the judgement even of Hierachicall men themselves a manifest commandement of Christ for Classicall assemblies for what Is not the Classis a certaine kinde of Synod Zepperus having spoken of the Ecclesiasticall Policie or government in the Judaicall Church shewes how the same was continued when he sayth (e) Polit. Eccl. l. 1. c. 16. p. 198.199 This administration of Ecclesiasticall discipline Christ also established and made to be perpetuall Mat. 18.15 c. Gersom Bucerus that excellent and worthy servant of God who hath given so full an answer to D. Downam in defence of the Discipline practised in the Reformed Churches is as full in this poynt that the Rule of Christ Mat. 18. is no new rule He maintaineth that (f) Dissert de Gubern Eccl p. 182. the forme of the sacred Politie in the new Testament ought to be framed according to the manner of the Jewes Politie To this end he (g) Ibid. p. 48. brings the testimony of many learned Writers witnessing with him unto the same trueth Philip Melanchthon as he is there alledged by him shewing what order of Discipline was appoynted by Christ in those words Tell the Church Mat. 18. sayth (h) P. Melā cōment in 1. Cor. 15. This custome was not first instituted of the Messias but was the old manner of the Leviticall Priests who in their place maintained the discipline by such judgements though they had also other Politicall judgements punishments Victorinus Strigelius cited also by him speakes in like manner (i) Hypom in N. T. in Mat. 18. A new forme of judgement is not instituted in this place but the old manner is repeated delivered from the first fathers the steps whereof have alwayes remained in the Church c. Pezelius having expressed the forme of Government in Israel writes thus (k) Argum. Resp Theol. part 7.8.690 According to this example of the old Politie almost the same order of judgements was kept in the new Testament c. Musculus (l) Loc. cō de Eccl. c. 5. Aretius (m) Problē Tom. 2. loc de Excom are likewise brought in by him as deriving describing the Discipline of the Church Matth. 18. from
no new rule in the new Testament when the like order was established for going first unto the Eldership and seeking redresse of evill by them Mr Ainsw acknowledgeth that (v) Ibid. p. 451. the keyes of the kingdome of heaven are in more speciall manner given unto them and therefore in speciall manner ought they to be told and spoken unto for the reformation of evils seeing they were to guide and goe before the people as in other affaires so in administring the censures of the Church therefore ordinarily matters were to be brought unto them before they were brought unto the whole Congregatiō 11. As it is the ordinance of God in the new Testament 1. Cor. 5. accordingly the practise of the Reformed Churches in these countries that the more weighty affaires censures of the Church should not be administred without knowledge and consent of the body of the Church so that none is either received for a member of the Church or cast out by excommunication but they doe first tell the Church even the whole Congregatiō is solemnely publickly acquainted therewith liberty granted unto them to shew their assent or dissent therein so Mr Ainsw himself acknowledgeth that there was a like order in the old Testament The Scriptures which he alledgeth and his manner of arguing from them doth import so much Of Israel he saith (x) Cōmun of S. c. 18. § 8. Vnto all every of the Israelites was commended the care observation of all Gods statutes that neither all nor any of them man nor woman nor familie nor tribe should forsake the Lord nor suffer among them any root to bring forth gall and wormwood c. Deut. 29.18 So of the multitude of beleevers and people in the new Testament he writes in like manner that (y) Ibid. § 9. they were willed to exhort and admonish each other even the Officers of the Churches c. and to look that no root of bitternes sprung up and troubled them c. Heb. 12.15 c. Againe he saith (z) Ibid. c. 18. § 8. Even the leprous unclean though the tryall of them apperteyned to the Priests Lev. 13. yet all the children of Israel were to look that such were removed out of the host yea the care of the Priests purity in their administration apperteyned to all the people Levit. 21.1 8 24. And long after both in counsels in the redressing of publick evils and trespasses all Israel indifferently had their hand and presence as the Scripture sheweth 2. Chron. 30.21 23. Ezra 10.1 9 12 c. Then presently he parallels the course of the Churches in the New Testament with this supposed practise in the Old saving The Churches in the Apostles dayes had also the like right and liberty for the multitudes of beleevers were both beholders and actors in the common affaires c. Afterwards againe speaking of the rules of admonition of the censures of the Church he saith (a) Ibid. c. 22. § 12 p. 449. The keeping of which rules belongeth to all the Saints as the commandement directed of old to the children of Israel Num. 5.2 Levit. 19.17 and in the new Testament to all the brethren Church doth shew Matt. 18.15 1. Cor. 5. And thus by his owne confession yea even according to his owne opinion in respect of the Churches power and the peoples right there was no new rule given by Christ in Mat. 18. Whereas it is objected that the Jewish Synedrion (b) H. Barr. Resut of Giff. p. 76. by the institution of God was merely Civill c. that (c) D. Bilsō perpet gov ch 4. p. 21. Moses appointed neither Iudges nor Elders in Citie or Synedrion but they were Magistrates to execute the judgements of the law had the sword to chastise the body and punish with death c. The errour of this assertion hath bene shewed (d) Pag. 34 35.41 before from the Scriptures Deut. 17. 2. Chron. 19. From these places is the distinction of Civill and Ecclesiasticall judgements maintained by many learned Writers as (e) Conf. with Hart c. 6. div 2. p. 203 204. D. Rainolds (f) First reply to D. Whitg p. 192. Secōd reply latter part p. 152.153 Mr Cartwright (g) Counterp in part of Regist p. 490.491 Mr Fenner and the (h) Ibid. p. 522. Defender of him and most largely by (i) Diss de Gub. Eccl. p. 59. c. G. Bucerus As for H. Barrow he sufficiently resutes himself when he acknowledgeth that the Priests did beare the charge and had the deciding of all Ecclesiasticall causes Numb 18. Deut. 17. This they could not doe without judging of them therefore it appeareth hence that they had a double Synedrion one Ecclesiasticall the other Civill CHAP. VI. The third Argument taken from the practise of the primitive Churches in the Apostles times OUr third Argument is taken from the practise of the primitive Christian Churches after the Ascension of Christ from which we reason on this manner That government of the Church which is commended unto us approved by the example of the Apostles and Apostolick Churches is worthily to be embraced of us But the government of the Church by Synods which besides their counsell and admonition doe also with authority judge and determine the weightiest causes and affaires of particular Churches is commended unto us as is above sayd Therefore c. The Assumption of this Argument is proved I. By that holy assembly or Synod which is recorded Act. 1 15-26 wherein there was not onely counsell given but also an exercise of Ecclesiasticall power authoritie and that in such a busines as was of great and rare importance in the choyse of a new Apostle This Assembly was not an ordinary Congregation or particular Church but it was a Synodicall assembly and performed such a work as did not belong unto any one particular Church This appeares divers wayes I. In respect of the persons of whom this Assembly did consist and these againe of two sorts First of Apostles who being such persons as were not tyed unto any particular Church but had an universall charge Matt. 28.19 Rom. 10.15 18. This commission was unto them as much as if they had had a speciall delegation from many or all Churches so that their presence and concurrence was sufficient to make this Assembly in some measure as a generall or universall Synod These eleven Apostles having also a peculiar charge to be at this time at Ierusalem the place of this Assembly and to tarry there for a while Luk. 24.49 Act. 1.4 were by divine direction brought unto this Synod Secondly for other persons the Disciples that were present at this Assembly it appeares they were from divers places some of them from Galilee as the brethren of Christ there mentioned Act. 1.14 with Mat. 13.55 56. how many of them were inhabitants of Ierusalem or Iudaea it is not specifyed
so that the 120 persons met together at this time Act. 1.15 cānot be sayd to have bene a distinct particular Church of persons dwelling in Ierusalem but an occasionall assembly or Synod upon such ground as the story of the Scripture doth manifest II. In respect of the busines it self here performed viz. the election of an Apostle it was such a work as did not appertaine unto any one particular Church but all Churches had interest therein seeing the care of all the Churches was cōmitted unto the Apostles 2. Cor. 11.28 All Churches were alike bound to beware of false Apostles that could transforme themselves into the Apostles of Christ 2. Cor. 11.13 It had bene a presumption in any one Church and a wrong unto all the rest if without their consent one alone should have chosen an Apostle especially considering there were even at this time a multitude of the faithfull in other places whom this work concerned Many had bene lately converted by the ministery of Iohn Baptist Matt. 11.12 and now immediately before the Ascension of Christ we read of more then 500 brethren at once which were witnesses of the Resurrection of Christ 1. Cor. 15.6 These 120 had done injury unto them save that these generall persons the Apostles called of God for the service of all Churches did for them by divine appointment appeare in this Synod III. In respect of the manner of this election which was made with a threefold limitation 1. Unto one of those men which had companyed with the Apostles all the time that the Lord Iesus went in and out among them beginning from the baptisme of Iohn even untill that same day that he was taken up from them Act. 1.21 22. Now these Disciples that thus waited on Christ such as Barsabas and Matthias were being no inhabitants of Ierusalem what power had a particular Church to determine and dispose of them that were no members of their particular society 2. There was a restraint from absolute electing of any one of these they were onely allowed to present two and to offer them unto the choyse of the Lord. vers 23.24 3. The way and meanes of inquiring the will of God herein was determined and restrained unto a Lot whereby the judgment and definitive sentence of God was declared unto the Synod that rested therein And by these extraordinary directions it pleased God to honour this first Synod of the new Testament It is here also to be observed that although some Writers have spoken of this election as made by a particular Church yet we have sundry learned men consenting with us in the exposition of this story who labouring to shew the profit and necessity of Synods (a) Whitak de Concil qu. 1. c. 3. doe argue from this place Act. 1. and affirme that in the New Testament the Apostles and whole Church did celebrate a Synod for the choosing of Matthias into the place of Iudas The Professours of Leyden to the same purpose (b) Synops pur Theol. Disp 49. alledge this example Act. 1. and call it the first Synod at Ierusalem II. The example of that renowned Synod which is recorded Act. 15. is a sufficiēt warrant wherein the use and authority of Classes and Synods is commended unto us and this not onely for counsell and admonition but also for the judgement of causes and for the exercise of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction As that which went before the Synod namely the great dissention about a dangerous errour with seeking of redresse by a solemne deputation of messengers from the Church of Antioch Act. 15.1 2. did call for help in the most effectuall manner so the things done in the Synod are an evidence of the authority which they used therein both by a definitive sentence which they pronounced concerning that controversy which was brought unto them vers 28 29. and by an authentick ambassage of chosen men sent from that Assembly of Apostles Elders and brethren both to carry the Epistle that was written and by word of mouth to declare the same things vers 22 23 25 27. That also which is noted to have bene done after the Synod in the publication of the acts thereof doth also beare witnesse touching the authority of those acts in that they are called the decrees ordained of the Apostles and Elders c. Act. 16.4 The fruit also which by the blessing of God followed hereupon in being a meanes of great consolation and establishment of the Churches in the faith Act. 15.31 16.5 is to be considered as an argument whereby the H. Ghost doth further commend unto us the authority of such Synods in the right government of the Church Upon this example doe generally all judicious Writers build the authority of Synods as upon a sure foundation groundwork Calvine saith that (c) Cōment in Act. 15.6 here is prescribed of God the forme and order of gathering Synods c. Beza upon this place (d) Annot. maj in Act. 15.12 V. 23. having shewed that here was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or foregoing consultation of the Apostles and Elders which was related unto the whole Church and ratifyed in the common assembly thereof he affirmeth that this was the right forme of a lawfull and true Apostolick Synod c. And both these are to be understood of such Synods as exercised authority of Ecclesiasticall censure according to the practise of those Churches wherein they lived of which more hereafter Bullinger observeth here as is noted by (e) Expos Eccles in Act. 15.6 Marlorate that this custome was in old time diligently kept of the holy Bishops in imitation of the Apostles and complaineth of the neglect thereof D. Rainolds when as the Papist objected unto him that there must be a chief Iudge to end controversies to keep the trueth of faith peace of the Church that it be not pestered with heresies and schismes he answers thereunto (f) Conf. with Hart. c. 6. div 2. p. 206. that The wisedome of God hath committed that chieftie of judgement so to call it not to the soveraigne power of one but to the common care of many For when there was a controversy in the Church of Antioch about the observation of the law of Moses some Iewes teaching contrarie to that which Paul and Barnabas taught they ordained that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them should goe up to Ierusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question Act. 15.2 And so by their common agreement decree the controversy was ended the trueth of faith kept and peace maintained in the Church After which example the (g) Euseb hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 14. 21. 22. lib. 7. c. 26. 28. Cypr. epist 6. 14 31. 53. 72. 75. Concil Ancyr Gangr Antioch Laodic c. Bishops that succeeded them made the like assemblies on the like occasions and by common conference took order for such matters both of doctrine and discipline
doeth not follow from a particular that because the decrees of an Apostolicall Councill are to be observed therefore the decrees of all Councills must be so kept Contr. 3. li. 4. cap. 16. And whereas Bellarmine affirmeth that the question there was not defined by Scripture but by the voyces of the Apostles Iunius denyeth that any thing was ordained in that Councill but from the Scriptures as he had before demonstrated and thereunto referreth the Reader ANSVV. I. It may be observed here how untrue it is which Mr Dav. pretends in excuse of his large writing saying (v) Pref. to the Reader For the help of the Reader in comparing the Reply with the Answer I have inserted his owne words every where This hath he not done here nor in many other places I shewed (x) Answ to unj cōpl p. 88. how this place Act. 15. had bene alledged by another against the Brownists and that this his allegation served to condemne both himself and his fellowes Mr D. hath neither inserted mine owne words nor yet the words of him that had alledged this place II. In alledging the two answers of Iunius unto Bellarmine he wanders wide from the question in hand I am of the same minde with Iunius in both those answers Though the decrees of that Apostolicall Synod were infallibly true and just yet is it not so with other Synods many whereof are to be rejected for their erroneous and unjust decrees All the decrees in that Synod Act. 15. were grounded upon the Scriptures and rested not merely upon the suffrages of men Iunius had just cause so to answer Bellarmine that maintained an unlawfull and absolute authority of Synods and exacted obedience of necessity to all their decrees Is not this to abuse both me and his Readers and to bleare their eyes that they should not rightly discerne the state of the question III. That the Reader may better conceive in what manner an authority and power is asscribed to Classes and Synods let the authority of particular Churches be considered as an example and modell of that authority which is in Synods My opposites themselves confesse that there is in particular Congregations an authority and power to judge and censure offendours and yet they will not deny but that they may erre in their judgements that they want such infallible direction as the Apostles had and that their decrees and Ecclesiasticall censures are to be regarded no further then they are grounded upon the Scriptures So is it with the authority of Classes Synods I. DAV (y) Apol. reply p. 255. And whereas Bellarmine sayth that the decree of the Apostles was not left to the examination of the Disciples but that they were simply commanded to obey Iunius chargeth him with falsely supposing two things 1. That the Apostles alone made this order For the Elders concurred with the Apostles in this sentence and the whole Church all of them being taught by the spirit of trueth to think the same thing And this he saith is the manner of proceeding in those Councills where Christ is praesident 2. That the same respect is to be had to the determination of others as of the Apostles Which is an errour he sayth For it was the singular priviledge of the Apostles that they had immediate assistance of the Holy Ghost and infallibility in their Apostolicall determinations so that what they delivered was to be received without examination whereas the dictates and sentences of all other are to be examined by their writings whereby it appeareth that the Scripture acknowledgeth no such power of making lawes to be due to the Classes unlesse they can produce some other texts which when they shall be alledged shall be further examined if God permit ANSVV. I. All that Mr Davenp hath here set downe is wholy impertinent and all being granted our assertion touching the lawfull authority of Synods Classes remaineth firme We grant with Iunius (z) Animadv in Bellarm Contro 4. l. 1. c. 18. § 11. that the Apostles alone did not judge but the Elder and others also concurred with them not onely in counsell but in giving judiciall sentence with them We grant that there is not the like respect to be had to the determinations of others as of the Apostles we grant that no such power of making lawes is due to Classes that is no such power of infallible determinations c. and yet we hold they have a lawfull authority of judging and deciding controversies c. The like we hold concerning particular Churches with their Elderships we grant they have no such power of infallible determinations and yet a lawfull power to determine and judge of causes We grant that there is not the like respect to be had to the determinations of particular Churches as of the Apostles and yet a due respect not onely for admonition and counsell but also for power to censure and to give sentence We grant that the censures sentences and judgements as well of Elderships and Churches as of Synods and Classes are in like manner to be tryed and examined by the Scriptures and yet this grant impeacheth not the lawfull authority of either of them in exercising a power of judgement II. For the better direction how to discerne judge of the actions of the Apostles and how farre their example is a rule of practise and imitation to the Church of God it shall not be amisse to set downe a profitable and usefull distinction observed by Iunius (a) Ibid. lib. 2. c. 16. n. 6. which is that the Apostles had a twofold manner of Power Common and Proper The Common is that ordinary power which they had together with the Elders as they were Bishops The Proper or peculiar is that extraordinary povver which was for a while given unto the Evangelicall Church at the springing up thereof in respect of which the Apostles were above the whole Church According to that common power Peter was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fellow Elder 1. Pet. 5.1 according to this peculiar power he destroyed Ananias and Sapphira Act. 5. By that common power Paul sayth 1. Cor. 5.4 You and my spirit being gathered together in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ but by that peculiar power he sayth what will you shall I come unto you with a rod c. 1. Cor. 4.20 This he sets downe elswhere more fully and applyes it to the power exercised Act. 15. saying (b) Ibid. l. 1 c. 16. n. 1. Here the Aposles are sayd to have used communication therefore this power was common to the Church and not a peculiar action of the Apostles in this Synod at Ierusalem We doe therefore thus determine distinctly concerning this thing All that were furnished with gifts and calling judged in this Synod first the Apostles and Apostolick men then the Elders that laboured in the ministery of the Word as well they of the place in Ierusalem as those of Antioch if any moreover
time they came more then twise so farre unto Synods Had this combination of Churches and their authority in judging brought the Churches into Antichristian bondage as the Brownists call it See before Pag. 32. then might it have bene sayd unto all these travellers as once unto the Idolatrous Jewes O ye swift dromedaries c. keep your feet from barenes and your thoat from thirst Ier. 2.23.25 IV. It is to be observed how he omitteth the things that were specially intended by me for the conviction of those I had to deale with by the testimony and reasoning of one of their owne fellowes Whereas I grounded my reproof of them upon his confession and the conclusion I made did arise from the premisses of his assertion this is passed by so that the Reader cannot understand the force of my reasoning in that place and yet he cryes out to me teaching his client to say But before you make such hasty conclusions have a little patience to heare us to speak for ourselves W.B. should rather have sayd to heare what a Brownist can say for us and how Mr Canne can defend the matter I desire the Reader to look on my (t) Answ to W.B. p 87. 88. first Answer and then to judge whether that was a hasty conclusion wherein the ancientest of themselves went before me But let us heare how he proceeds I. CAN. (v) Churches plea. p. 34. I pray how can you prove that the Officers of these two Churches being 200 miles asunder were combined and met ordinarily together as the Classes doe to determine the cases of many Churches ANSVV. I. Their combination is manifest in this act of communion and comming together for the judgement and decision of the controversy raised among them II. That they met ordinarily together I never sayd neither doe I affirme it this being not a Classicall but a Synodall Assembly according to the common distinction thereof and according to the practise among us III. That they determined the cases of many Churches I shewed * Pag. 69. before from Act. 15.23 16.4 I. CAN. Orhow doe you prove that there was any officer at all of Antioch in Ierusalem at this time ANSVV. I prove it I. Because Paul and Barnabas were both speciall Deputies of the Church of Antioch and likewise had such a generall calling as made them Officers of every Church II. Because the Apostles which then remained at Ierusalem as Peter and Iames were as well Officers of Antioch as of Ierusalem Apostles being Governours of all Churches III. For the other messengers sent from Antioch seeing Elders are approved by the Church as sittest to mannage the affaires thereof therefore it was reasonable that at least some of them should be sent about this busines thereupon Iunius as is * Pag. 68. before noted takes it for granted that the Elders of the Church of Antioch were among those that judged in this Synod I. CAN. Briefly or how doe you proove that the brethren sent from Antioch exercised authority in the Church at Ierusalem ANSVV. That the Deputies sent from Antioch had authority and power of suffrages in the Synod at Ierusalem appeareth by the generall and speciall commissions given unto them as is mentioned in the answer to his former demand As Paul once answered for himself and for Barnabas upon another occasion when he was carped at by some in the Church of Corinth Or I onely and Barnabas have we not power c. 1. Cor. 9.6 so might he have answered for both in this case for let Mr C. shew if he can what publick Ecclesiasticall meeting could have bene in those times in any Church touching any controversy that concerned any generall doctrine of the Gospell yea or the censure of manners in any other person wherein Paul and Barnabas might not exercise authority with others I. CAN. Yet all this you must make good otherwise you are guilty of abusing and perverting the Scripture in affirming that the power which the Classis exerciseth was practised at Antioch and Ierusalem and by Apostolicall direction This you have spoken but it is untrue c. ANSVV. I. Suppose I had not made good all that he required me to proove suppose the Church of Ierusalem alone had judged the controversy and that no Officer of the Church of Antioch had bene among them with any authority yet this example of one Church judging the controversy risen in another doth shew that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited unto a particular Church within itself but that the causes of one Church may be submitted unto the judgement of another This is the substance of the Question betwixt us and this being granted it followes that Churches have liberty to appoint Classes and Synods for the mutuall judging of their causes as occasion shall require II. By charging me with untrueth in such manner as here he doeth he makes himself guilty of double untrueth for 1. This affirmation here mentioned was not mine at that time but his in whose name I repeated it and that with condition if it were so If the Churches here doe practise c. as may be plainly seen in the forementioned place of my Answer 2. Though at that time I intended not to dispute the cause but first waited for the proofes of such as accused me yet had I then used such an affirmation yet it had bene true as I shew throughout this Chapter and therefore it was an untrueth in Mr Canne to avouch the contrary And as for that place Ier. 23.31 which he misapplyeth against me the threatning contained therein is to be feared of him who hereafter abuseth perverteth so many Scriptures for the subverting of Synods I. CAN. IIII. It is certaine that at Ierusalem not onely the Apostles and Elders met together but as Luke expresseth it vers 12 22. the Church also being interested in the thing And therefore gave sentence with the rest to the decree then made Observe what D. Whitaker replyes unto Bellarmine denying the multitude to be called It was alwayes sayth hee (x) De Cōc Qu. 8. c. 3. Qu. 3. c. 3. p. 96. 97. the practise of the Apostles in common cases to call the whole Church together and no doubt but they did so here Now there was no need to have it mentioned seeing it had bene their constant custome formerly so to doe Mr Parker (y) Polit. Eccl. l. 3. c. 12. p. 108. 126. 334. affirmes the same So the Authours of the Cent. (z) Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 9. p. 547. 548. And it seemes in Cyprians (a) Lib. 4. Epist 16. time the Church was not deprived of her right herein howsoever the Papists (b) Bellarm. de Conc. Eccl. l. 1. c. 16. p. 39. in those dayes teach otherwise and Mr Paget and others doe otherwise practise ANSVV. I. In that not onely the Apostles and Elders but other brethren also gave sentence with therest to the decree then made
173. D. Whitgift calles for proof of Scripture commandement or example to justify this order Mr Cartw. in his second Reply having first shewed other warrant for admonition by Churches proceeds further and saith (h) T.C. 2 Reply p. 231 232. That from the admonition of the Churches it is meet to come to Synods if the judgement of the Churches be contemned may be shewed by proportion from the place of our Saviour Christ in S. Matthew ch 18. for as when one brother is not mooved with the admonition of two or three the matter must be referred unto the Church to see whether the majestie of it will moove him whom the authority of two or three would not even so it is meet that the Church that maketh light of the judgement of two or three Churches should be pressed with the judgements of the Diocesse or Province as shall be in that behalf advised From this proportion seeing the rule Matt. 18. was not onely a rule of admonition but also a rule for the exercise of authority in censuring it followes hence in like manner that many Churches combined in a Synod have power to censure as well as to admonish IV. Mr Cartwr doth further declare his meaning in the same place when he alledgeth the example of the Reformed Churches in this matter If I were in this poynt saith (i) Ibid. p. 232. he destitute of the word of God yet the naked examples of the Reformed Churches ought to weigh downe a Popish custome Now it is undenyable that the Reformed Churches doe allow the use of Classes and Synods not onely for counsell or admonition but also for the exercise of Ecclesiasticall authority and jurisdiction in judging of causes censuring of offendours V. Mr Cartwr speaking of the utmost that can be done by a Classis or by Ministers and Elders of neighbour Churches in time of persecution wanting a Christian Magistrate against an obstinate Church that refuseth to be admonished saith (k) T.C. 1 Repl. p. 52. If they excommunicate the whole Church it is a hard matter and yet if they may doe that there is all they can doe To excommunicate a whole Church together is indeed a hard thing and such a thing as I never heard of in the practise of the Reformed Churches yet this intimates that he thought they had a power of excommunicating at least some if not all upon a just occasion And when D. Whitg (l) Def. of Answ to Adm. p. 675 answering to a testimony of Cyprian alledged by Mr Cartwr saith Who ever denyed but that the Synods might excommunicate Mr C. (m) Rest of 2 Rep. p. 89 replying againe unto him yet shewes no dislike at all or difference from his Opposite herein which yet he ought to have done if he had thought it an undue power to have reproved him for giving this power of the greatest censure even of excommunication unto Synods Hence it appeares that he was farre from limiting all jurisdictiō unto a particular Church that he allowed Synods more power then of counselling or admonishing VI. Mr Parker speaking of this very place in Mr Cartw. and vindicating it from the opposition of D. Whitg shewes that he agrees with me in the interpretation thereof and not with Mr Dav. He sayth (n) Pol. Ecc. lib. 3. c. 24. p. 353. Cum pressisset Thomas Cartwrightus Ecclesiarum Reformatarum morem c. When T. C. had urged the manner of the Reformed Churches in correcting the faulty election of Ministers first by a Classis if that prevayled not by a Synod if that fayled also by the Magistrate c. For if the example custome and practise of the Reformed Churches be urged herein then doth he not speak of hindring an unlawfull election by admonition or counsell onely then doth he acknowledge a further authority of judgement censure in the Classes VII The judgement of Mr Cartwr touching the authority of Synods is manifest by that right which he asscribeth unto them for the decision of causes and not for counsell onely as was shewed * Pag. 47. 48. before and this may further be seen by that blame which is imputed unto him for Scottizing and Genevating declared * Chap. 7. sect 5. hereafter Had he bene of this new opinion he could not have defended the cause of Reformation so as he did but should have opened the mouth of his adversaries against him otherwise then he hath done SECT II. His Allegation of Mr Fenner examined FOr Mr Fenner in the allegation of his Testimony Mr Dav. hath made himself guilty of a threefold unfaithfulnes 1. in the omission of such things as snew his minde fully touching Synods 2. in the mistranslation of his words 3. in the misinterpretation and false collections that he maketh from them I. For his omissions I. He omitteth that definition of Ecclesiasticall politie set downe in the (o) S. Theol l. 7. c. 1. p. 241. beginning of that tractate viz. that it is a divine politie so farre as it is instituted of Christ for the government of particular Churches joyntly and severally This definition being admitted overthrowes that single uncompounded policie maintained by Mr Iacob as also the assertion of Mr Dav. for jurisdiction limited to particular Churches because herein he allowes a compounded policie not onely for counsell but for the government of Churches as well joyntly as severally Herein Ecclesiasticall policie and jurisdiction is extended further then the limits of one particular Church even unto a Synod or Classis because there is no joynt government of Churches perfectly found but in such assemblies The Scriptures also which Mr Fenner alledgeth for confirmation of this definition being many of them taken from the old Testament doe undenyably lead us unto such a joynt compound government of the Church II. He omitteth the definition of a (p) Ibidē particular Church which Mr Fen. applyes as well to the Churches and Synagogues under the old Testament as unto any since This appeares in divers of the Scriptures and instances which he bringeth to confirme his definition as namely 1. Sam. 10.5 Psa 107.32 111.1 Luk. 5.17 Mat. 4.23 Hereby it may appeare how farre different and contrary he is to Mr Iacob and those of his opinion (q) Divine beg instit of Chr. vis Church A 1. A 2. A 4. C 8. c. teaching that the Churches of the old and new Testament and their government doe differ one from the other in the very kinde nature and forme by a specificall and essentiall difference c. Then could not both have had one and the same definition in such sort as Mr F. gives it unto them comprehending also under it such assemblies as stood under a compound policie and were subject to an Ecclesiasticall judicatorie out of themselves III. He omitteth that which Mr Fenner writes touching the election of a Minister where the controversy of the Church upon the peoples objecting against the
helpe they sent to Ierusalem freely for the help of their counsell in this matter 3. In case of right and lawfull administration 4. In case of no evill administration presumed by those who finding themselves wronged by an unjust sentence appeale to the judgement of the Synod In which 3 last limitations other Churches to whose judgement or advice persons injuried by an unjust sentence appeale doe concurr in way of counsail declaratiō of their judgement to helpe particular Churches to exercise their power aright P. 47. P. 239. in their owne matters as was before noated out of Mr Cartwr Mr Fen. out of the Authour himselfe in the foregoing passages which being so understood doeth not justifie any undue power of jurisdiction if it be exercised by the Classis over that Church in the cases manner complained of by the Subscribers how fully it agreeth with my stating of the question in the beginning of this Section will appeare to the indifferent Reader whē he shall have compared both together ANSVV. The judgment of Mr P. is very partially corruptly described by Mr D. in this place for whereas Mr P. here describes 4 bridles of restraint or 4 limitations by which the supremacie of power in particular Congregations is to be moderated and kept within bounds lest it should seem to be absolute by every one of these it is manifest that he acknowledged this authority power and jurisdiction of Synods and that they were not onely for counsell and admonition He sayth (f) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 20. p. 301 302. The first limitation is ad rem propriam unto their proper businesse for in a common matter the Synod is chief that is the authority of Churches joyntly gathered together is the chiefest Hence it is confessed that Synods have power of jurisdiction over Churches for 1. In judging these common causes particular Churches though differing one from an other are overswayed by the most voyces and each Congregation is subject to the sentence of the Synod 2. Let any Scripture be alledged by Mr Dav. to shew the summity or soveraignty of Synods in these common causes and he shall finde thereby the use of Synods proved to be for jurisdiction in one Ecclesiasticall cause as well as in another being lawfully brought unto them for what reason is there why the counsell and admonition of a Synod may not suffice for the help of particular Churches in a common controversy as well as in other speciall businesses leaving the sentence and decision unto the prime Churches The second limitation is also in a proper businesse to wit ad casum sufficient is potestatis in the case of sufficient ability for if any Church be found unable to end their owne businesse vvho doubts but that it is bound to require the help of fellow-Churches In this case Mr P. acknowledgeth the superiority or soveraignty of power and authority in Synods but if Synods were onely for counsell admonition what needed a supremacy of power seeing inferiours may give counsell unto their superiours admonish them also of their duety Mr P. shewes well that in case of impotencie or weaknes the Church of Antioch sent to Ierusalem c. Act. 15. But this Mr D. seeks to pervert by his glosse when he saith they sent to Ierusalem for the help of their counsell as though they did not as well desire help by their authority and sentence in determining the controversy If counsell onely had bene sought why did not the Synod at Ierusalem content themselves to give counsell and advise why did they also make a decree and this not onely by authority of the Apostles but also by common authority of Elders and others that were in the Synod Act. 15.23 16.4 The third limitation is in a proper busines and ability also to wit in the case of right and lawfull administration for vve are to think the same of the Church as of every Pastour of the Church now vve have shewed before out of Gerson touching the rectour that he in case of right administration is subject to none yet in case of aberration is subject so the Church which in case of right administration is subject to none yet in case of aberration doth now beginne to be subject Even as therefore the Pastour erring and offending is subject to no one of his fellowes as to a Bishop but onely to many of his Church so also the Church that erreth and offendeth is subject to no one Church as to a Diocesan but to many assembled together in a lawfull Synod Hence it is evident that Mr P. asscribed unto Synods more authority then a bare counsell or admonition onely for 1. He often useth the word of subjection which implyes an authority and jurisdiction in those to whom in regard of their calling men be subject This is passed by as unseen or unregarded in Mr D. his allegation 2. He speakes of being subject so as the Pastour erring and offending is subject to many of the Church that is to their jurisdiction and censure 3. He speakes of such subjection as is distinguished from receyving of counsell and admonition otherwise it should not be true which he sayth of the Pastours and Churches subjection seeing every Pastour erring and offending is bound to receyve counsell or admonition from any one of his fellowes and the Church erring offending is bound to receyve counsell or admonition from any one particular Church though it be not subject to the jurisdiction of any one in speciall but onely to many in a lawfull Synod The fourth limitation is in case of right administration when no evill administration is presumed or imagined for although the Church administer aright yet if any man thinking himself wronged do appeale from it the same is now become obnoxious or subject unto the censure of her fellowes and sisters so that judgement may be given in a Synod touching her administration That Mr P. here also speakes of subjection unto the jurisdiction of Synods it is evident while for the allowance of appeales he alledges in the same place the testimonies of the Synod of Sardica of the University of Paris and of D. Whitaker who doe all speak of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction for the correction and redresse of unrighteous sentences and proceedings by inferiour judges Againe in the same chapter he sayth (g) Pa. 31◠Christ would have every man to be judged of his owne Church Matt. 18. or if the judgement of his owne Church displease him yet alwayes of the Church that is of a Synod of many Churches Againe in the same page We certainly finde Mat. 18. that causes are to be ended by the Synods of the Churches and not by one man if any doe appeale from the judgement of his Church Thus we see 1. that he makes Mat. 18. a common ground for the jurisdiction of Synods as well as of particular Churches 2. The very phrase of terminating or ending controversies shewes that
alledge for the warrant of this combination of Churches in Synods for their mutuall help they are all of them such as doe equally yea and primarily concerne the communion and society of severall persons and members in a particular Church where it is confessed by our opposites that there is jurisdiction as well as counsell If these places would have removed jurisdiction from Synods and condemned the subjection of Churches unto a Synod then would they also have done the like for particular Churches and have condemned the subjection of members thereunto Seeing they doe not the one therefore not the other also II. In prosequuting his 2d Argument (o) P. 330.331 taken from the forme of combination which is consociation consisting in a mutuall obligation he confirmeth it by the testimony of D. Whitaker alledging that Calvine sayd well that by brotherly charity Cont. 4. qu. 4. p. 448. not by naked authority but by letters and admonitions and other such meanes Hereticks were deposed in the time of Cyprian Deposition of Hereticks was an act of jurisdiction in Synods And againe alledging Mat. 18. as the fountaine of this combination he sayth Many Churches are combined after the same manner that the prime Churches grow together into one body in their members and therefore it must be confessed that as Mat. 18. is a ground of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in particular Churches so is it also for Synods III. Mr Parker for confirmation of his 3d Argument (p) P. 331.332 taken from the matter of this combination which are the severall Churches equall members of one body alledgeth the example of the Reubenites who when they would expresse their combination with the Tribes on this side Iordan do call it their part in the Lord which was not unequall because of the distance of place Ios 22.24 25 28. And from hence then it may appeare that as the Tribes of Israel equally combined together were not subject to any one Tribe apart and yet were each of them subject to the whole society and body of Israel so the particular Churches having each of them equall part in the Ecclesiasticall consociation of Classes and Synods though they be not subject to any one Church apart that is exalted above the rest yet may be subject to the whole society of many Churches concurring together in Synods IV. In the explication of his 4th Argument (q) P. 332 333. taken from the object which is a common matter concerning all or many Churches he alledgeth a distinction (r) Conf. with Hart. c. 8. d. 5. maintained by D. Rainolds betwixt questions of the Church requiring knowledge onely and causes of the Church requiring jurisdiction also for the judging of them Questions of the Church were sent unto them that had no jurisdiction over those that propounded them but the causes of the Church not so They in Africa were (ſ) Concil Carthag Graec. c. 2◠Milevita c. 22. forbidden to appeale unto them beyond sea viz for the decision of their personall causes which yet were to be judged by the Synods in Africa whereby it is acknowledged that Synods have a power of jurisdiction which is more then counsell Whereas Mr P. addeth The first combination of Churches is in matters of faith c. The second combination of Churches is in personall causes yet by accident onely for these properly belong unto each severall Church as they are proper yet when they become publick by accident then Churches are combined indeed but without subjection as it fell out in Cyprians time in causa lapsorum in the cause of them that fell in time of persecution which thereupon became publick because the offence was common in many Churches Lest any should stumble at these his words it is to be considered that as personall causes and offences are by accident the object of Classicall and Synodall judgements so by like kinde of accident they are the object of that judgement and jurisdiction which is exercised by particular Churches In that maine ground of Ecclesiasticall discipline Mat. 18.15 16 17. all the degrees of admonition and censure are ordained to be used according to those 4 accidentall ifs If thy brother sinne If he will not heare thee If he will not heare the witnesses If he will not heare the Church And so in like manner those 4 limitations before noted by Mr Parker are 4 accidentall cases wherein the power of Synods is to be exercised and wherein it is greater then the authority of particular Churches viz. if it be a common cause if the Church be unable if the Church administer unlawfully if it be so presumed Such kindes of accidents are properly the lawfull and just object of Classicall and Synodall jurisdiction by proportion from the same rule Matt. 18. If one member sinne or suffer it becomes a common cause so farre as it is knowne all the members suffer with it and take care for the redresse of it in a particular Church 1. Cor. 12.25 26. And if one Church sinne be in danger it becomes a common cause all the Churches that are members of the same body especially those that are united by covenant in a Classical and Synodall government are to take care for it and to seek help according to the quality of the danger Thus the community of cause inferreth combination And further for that which he repeats againe that this combination of Churches by accident is without subjection it is still to be remembred that his meaning is without subjection to any one above the rest for so he againe largely explaines himself in the same place giving instance in the Church of Carthage and in Cyprian the Bishop thereof maintayning against D. Downam that Cyprian was no Metropolitane that the province was others as well as his that in the Synod there held there was a parity that the Churches were equally combined without subjection to any one that Bishops Elders had equall power in giving their suffrages V. In setting downe the 5 t Argument (t) P. 334. taken from the outward manner of proceeding which was by conference and communication of counsels he shewes withall that therein there was an exercise of jurisdiction when as in the words of Cyprian he shewes the end of those counsels ut communi consens◠figerentur sententiae that by common consent firme decrees might be made And the authority of these judiciall sentences and decrees touching those that were fallen is further declared by Cyprian when he shewes that they were (v) Cypriā L. 1. Ep. 8. tempered with discipline and mercy whereby it is evident that there was an exercise of discipline or Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction therein and that Epistle of Cyprian containes in it sundry other sentences which shew that he spake of the administration of censure and not of counsell onely VI. In his last Argument (x) P. 335. taken from the end of this combination which was not to receive mandates but for consent counsell
shewes the contrary He saith (t) P. 358. 359. The superiour power that is in Classes ariseth from the Churches that are combined in Classes c. No Church hath dominion or preheminence over another He sayth that in the Metropoliticall or Episcopall jurisdiction Churches have not their owne government but are spoyled of their Elderships and subjected to the power of one and to an externall Church namely the Cathedrall All which things are contrary in our Classes Every Church injoyeth her owne government by her owne Eldership the Classis is no externall Church much lesse an externall Court for it consisteth of these Churches that are combined so that here is no authority over many the parishes doe joyne their authority together and that equally After the combination of many Churches into one Eldership and one Classis Mr Parker proceeds (v) Pol. Eco lib. 3. c. 25. p. 362. to speak of that combination of many Churches in many Classes which is into one Synod and that either Provinciall Nationall or Generall the Nationall containing under it the Churches of sundry Provinces and the Generall comprehending the Churches of many Nations Touching Synods he speaketh of the 7 controversies about them and first of the Necessity of Synods He sayth he never knew any in the Reformed Churches to deny the necessity of Synods before Hugo Grotius that was the great friend of Arminius He sheweth from Bogerman that the Reformed doe stand for the necessity of Synods more then any other Whereas D. Sutlive condemneth such as would have status Synodos Synods kept at certaine set times and not onely extraordinary as he saith that Synod of the Apostles was Act. 15. (x) P. 364. 365. Mr Parker refureth him and argueth thus from that place This example of the Apostles sheweth that Synods are to be called as the necessity and edification of the Church requireth but there fall out so many abuses errours controversies scandals and other such things that set and frequent Synods are necessary for the neglect whereof the English Hierarchy doth sinne grievously which contenting it self with an extraordinary Synod onely doth not call a Synod after the example of the Apostles so often as abuses errours controversies and scandals doe arise but contrary to the example of the Apostles committeth all these things to the care of one Bishop alone And whereas he addeth further in the same place that the Hierarchy is crept in in place of the Synod taking violently unto it self those things which by divine right doe belong unto Synods he doth herein acknowledge the authority of Synods to be of divine right for what els or what more doth the Hierarchy snatch unto themselves then authority of censure and jurisdiction in the judgement of Ecclesiasticall causes Touching the second controversy about Synods viz. the authority and power of them (y) Ibid. c. 26. p 367. he notes that as there is an Aristocraticall government in Elderships so there is an Aristocraticall government by Synods and from this his assertion it followes that as the Consistories or Elderships have a jurisdiction and power of government in them and are not onely for counsell so the Synods in like manner When as he saith further (z) P. 368. that the Synods borrow that authority which they have from the prime Churches this argues that he confesseth they have some authority els how could they be said to borrow it To like purpose he argues there againe (a) P. 370. It appeares by the very obligation that Synods have their authority from the prime Churches for otherwise Synods should not binde the prime Churches unlesse by sending their Delegates they did avow their consent unlesse they have just cause afterwards of dissenting Thus he acknowledgeth a bond of authority and an obligatory power in Synods as for the exception which he addeth it is as well to be added unto any judicatory either Civill or Ecclesiasticall whatsoever for there is no jurisdiction nor authority of the highest Governours on earth that ought to binde us unto the obedience of their decrees if we have just cause of dissenting For the Convocation of Synods which is the third controversy (b) Ibid. c. 27. p. 371. Mr Parker doth maintaine and much commend the practise and order observed in these Reformed Churches and declares at large what their manner is from divers acts of their Synods He sayth it is cum sapientissime tum saluberrime instituta a most wise most wholesome institution He shewes that the Church hath power of calling Synods but where there is a Christian Magistrate (c) P. 372. this power is regulated of the Magistrate He brings (d) P. 373. c. 10 Arguments to prove that this power of calling Synods is not in a Metropolitane Bishop He sayth touching Ecclesiasticall persons (e) P. 375. The power of convocating is in no one but in many therefore Synods are not to be called by one nor by the authority of one but by the Synods themselves by the precedent assembly itself as is usuall in the Reformed Churches And speaking of Act. 15.6 he sayth Doth not this example binde all ages that the meeting in Synods be by common consent even as the Acts in the Synod are by common consent decreed This decree of calling together is an act of jurisdiction more then counsell or admonition onely The fourth controversy about Synods is concerning the Persons (f) Ibid. c. 28. p. 379. c. whereof the Synods consist Whereas Bellarmine distinguisheth betwixt the greater lesser Clerkes and alloweth unto Hierarchicall Bishops to have a deciding voyce and to the inferiour sort to have onely a consulting voyce Mr Parker shewes at large that whosoever is lawfully deputed and sent whether Ministers Elders Deacons or any of the people have a deciding voyce and may give definitive sentence in Synods and thereby he acknowledgeth the jurisdiction exercised in them He saith (g) P. 387. As the materiall foundation of Synodall right is the excellency of inward gifts not the dignity of any office so the formall foundation thereof is delegation from the Church from which whosoever they be that have receyved authority and therefore Elders also they have power of decreeing and judging in Synods And many other testimonies thereof he gives in that chapter A fift controversy is about the Praesident or Moderatour in Synods (h) Ibid. c. 29. Mr Parker labours to prove that this presidency doth not belong to an Hierarchicall Bishop or Arch-bishop but maintaines the practise and order of the Reformed Churches where the President of the Synods is elected or chosen by the Synods themselves (i) P. 402. We argue first sayth he from the authority of the Church for in Matt. 18. Ecclesiasticall authority is given primarily and originally unto the prime Church so that no rectour without the election and designation thereof may challenge any authority unto himself The Synod is a combined or
secondary Church which receiveth authority from the prime Churches that under the like condition to wit that no rectour or Praesident be made without election of the Churches which are combined in that Assembly This he declares at large and refutes the contrary arguments Now this Election of a Praesident is an act of Ecclesiasticall authority a part of the Churches power and seeing this is confessed to be in Synods it appeareth hence also that Synods are not onely for counsell admonition but also for the exercise of jurisdiction A sixt controversy about Synods concernes the Execution of the Synodall Canons (k) Ibid. l. 3 c. 30. Mr Park holds that this belongs not unto any one Bishop or Arch-bishop but unto particular Churches and their Elderships He argues on this manner (l) P. 428. The execution of Canons of what kinde soever whether they be those which are published of Christ in the Scriptures or whether they be ordained in Synods according to the Scriptures is a part of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction a part of the exercise of the Keyes as the Parisians call it But the Keyes and Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction are not given to one Bishop but are promised to the Church and Eldership Mat. 16. and given unto them Matt. 18. Therefore the execution of Canons belongeth not unto one Bishop but unto the Church which importeth many Now if the execution of Synodall Canons by an Eldership or particular Church be a part of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and of the Keyes then much more is the making of these Canons in the Synod and then Synods have not onely liberty of giving counsell and admonition but power of jurisdiction also which Mr Daven denyeth This conclusion and inference is afterward noted by Mr Parker himself also when as he addeth (m) P. 432. Why should not he be judge in the execution of Canons who hath power of judging in the sanction or decreeing of the Canons c. And againe If it be not lawfull for them to execute the Canons neither will it be lawfull to ordaine them on the other side if they have authority of making Canons then have they authority to execute them and that much more The seventh controversy about Synods is concerning the Conditions (n) Ibid. c. 31. thereof And among other conditions Mr Parker (o) P. 452. requires this for one that there be a common consent or a community of suffrages and he complaines of it as a great corruption when there is in Synods a negative voyce allowed unto Bishops or Archbishops He notes (p) P. 454. that to be not without reason called an Oligarchicall Synod when things are not done by common consent but one maketh frustrate the consent of the rest Now if it be a violation of the Synods right and authority when the generall consent of the greatest part is made frustrate by the dissenting of one or of a few then much more is the authority thereof violated when as notwithstanding the universall and entire consent of the whole Synod both of the Praesident of all the Deputies of all the Churches there assembled yet by receiving this erroneous opinion of my opposites the definitive sentence of them all is made frustrate and disannulled as if they had no jurisdiction nor power of censure but were onely to counsell or admonish AS that which Mr Parker hath written particularly touching the combination of Churches in Classes and Synods doth sufficiently shew his minde touching this controversy and that Mr Dav doth in vaine seek to shrowd himself under his shadow so that which he writes more generally in defence of the Discipline practised in the Reformed Churches where the authority and jurisdiction of Synods is maintained doth serve for a more full declaration thereof He laboureth to prove q by 10 Arguments (q) Pol. Ecc. lib. 1. c. 29. p. 84. that the Church of England is bound to imitate the Reformed Churches in their Discipline which yet if Mr Dav. his opinion were true they ought not to doe but rather to avoyd it flee from it as being an usurpation of unlawfull power whereby their people are kept in bondage under the undue power of Classes and Synods In speciall Mr Parker following Mr Brightman in his exposition of the Revelation (r) Ibid. p. 84.85 86. saith that in Philadelphia which is the type of the Reformed Churches nothing is reprehended but all things are commended and among the rest the discipline which is noted by the key of David Rev. 3.7 He saith that the Angel of the Reformed Churches stands in the Sunne Rev. 19.17 as being the naturall sonne of the woman clothed with the Sunne Rev. 12.1 that the Reformed Churches are as the beautifull mountaine the mountaine of Christs delights Rev. 16.16 the hill of precious fruits He saith againe that the Philadelphian Church is the type of the Reformed Churches that it is commanded to hold fast her crowne Rev. 3.11 Now if Mr Parker did judge this rare and high commendation to be due unto the Reformed Churches and that by divine warrant by the testimony of the holy Ghost foretelling their estate and the purity of the Discipline observed by them then was he not of Mr D. his minde for then he should have judged them not to be a free people while the causes of particular Congregations are judged and determined by another superiour authority in Synods Then should he rather have judged that their Churches wanted the key of David and were deprived of their lawfull and proper priviledges and prerogatives being subject to an Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in the assembly of the combined Churches And in summe then should he according to Mr D. his opinion have judged them to carry a yoke of servitude and subjection to be cast off with all speed rather then a crowne of lawfull liberty to be held fast by them then should he with Mr Canne (f) Churches plea. p. 74. have taught them to complaine in the misapplyed words of the Prophet Ier. 4.13 Woe unto us we are spoyled viz. by the authority of Classes Synods TO conclude for the judgement of Mr Parker in this controversy there are few that did better know or at least had more meanes to know his minde then I. The trueth is when he came from Leyden where he and Mr Iacob had sojourned some while together he professed at his first comming to Amsterdam that the use of Synods was for counsell and advise onely but had not authority to give definitive sentence in the judging of causes But after much conference with him when he had more seriously and ripely considered of this question he plainly changed his opinion and professed so much not onely unto me but unto sundry others upon occasion so that some of Mr Iacobs minde were offended with him and expostulated not onely with him but with me also as being an occasion of altering his judgment I had meanes to understand his minde aright and better
then those that doe so many wayes pervert his meaning he being not onely a member of the same Church but a member of the same family living under the same roofe with me where we had continuall and daily occasion to talk of these things and at that time when Mr Iacob published his unsound writings touching this question He being afterwards also a member of the same Eldership and by office sitting with us dayly to heate and judge the causes of our Church and so becomming a member of our Classicall combination yet did he never testify against the unduepower of the Classis or complaine that we were not a free people though the Classis exercised the same authority then as now it doth Yea he being also for that time the Scribe of our Consistory the Acts of our Eldership and Church being recorded with his owne hand are extant to shew his agreement with us in the government of this Church And it appeares hereby that he was of another spirit and judgement then Mr Davenp who hath published so many vaine cavills against the government and discipline of these Reformed Churches and this under the cloake pretence of his agreement with Mr Parker Yea and further it is apparent that the knowledge and experience which Mr Parker got by this his living here in communion with these Churches hath bene a speciall help unto him in the writing of those learned treatises of Ecclesiasticall policie which for the substance and maine are as a lively Table wherein the government of these Reformed Churches is plainely pourtrayed before our eyes his discourse being as it were a narration and defence of their practise which discourse might yet have bene more perfect had he lived to finish the same SECT IV. His Allegation of D. Ames examined IO. DAV To these I might adde D. Ames in that which he wrote in his latter time wherein the Answerer pretendeth that he set downe his judgement more warily in this matter Casus cōsc l. 4. c. 24. q. 4. c. 25. qu. 5. then formerly See his Cases of Conscience the 4. Booke where he speaketh clearly of this power as essentially belonging to particular Churches ANSVV. Thus instead of Arguments from the Scripture for the confirmation of his cause Mr D. still leads us from one mans testimony to another thither I am forced to follow him And for D. Ames 1. I may justly testify that I have found him wavering in his opinion touching the authority of Synods For through the inward familiarity which I had with him a long time for more then 20 yeares together while he lived in these countries having oftentimes had earnest conference with him touching this question and much complayning of the wrong done to many Ministers by that booke entitled English Puritanisme which he had translated into Latine wherein there is such a peremptory restraint of all Ecclesiasticall authority unto particular Congregations though he did never plainely retract that which he published yet he shewed himselfe divers times enclining to a change of his judgement yea sometimes acknowledged that Synods had power to judge of causes and by their sentence to decree the excommunication of such as had deserved the same II. For his writings D. Ames when he (t) Preface to Mr Par. book de Pol. Eccl. anno 1616. gave so great approbation of Mr Parkers work which he wrote of Ecclesiasticall policie wherein he doth so largely maintaine the power of Classes and Synods might cause the Readers to think that he was of the same judgement with him seeing he gives such generall allowance and commendation thereof without any exception about this question III. It is to be observed that in none of his latter writings he doth use that peremptory phrase in limiting Synods or Churches combined in Classes or Synods onely to counsell or advise in such manner as was done in that (v) Engl. Purit c. 2. first writing IV. And more particularly in his Treatise of Divinity he writes thus of particular Churches (x) Medull SS Theol. l. 1. c. 39. th 27. that as their cōmunion requires the light of nature equity of rules and examples of Scripture doe teach they may and also ought frequently to enter into a mutuall confederation and consociation among themselves in Classes and Synods that they may use common consent and mutuall help as much as commodiously may be done in those things especially which are of greater moment Now as in particular Congregations the greatest acts of power and jurisdiction which are exercised therein receive their strength from common consent and doe consist therein so if in matters of greater weight the common consent of Synods is to be used then is a power and authority asscribed unto them then ought not particular Churches to proceed without and against the authority of common consent in Synods And that mutuall help of other Churches is then most effectuall whē there is not onely advise but authority also to cōfirme the same Though D.A. adde in the same place that this combination doth neither constitute a new forme of the Church neither ought by any meanes to destroy or empaire that liberty power which Christ hath left unto his Church for the directing furthering whereof it onely serveth this we also willingly grant When a particular Congregation is hindred stayed frō the exercise of their authority in an unlawfull businesse in an unjust excōmunication or electiō their liberty power is not hereby destroyed or taken away but rectifyed and preserved Here is to be remembred that which Mr Par. as was noted before sayth upon like occasion when some objected that the Churches of the villages in the Netherlands wanted the power of excommunication he replyes (y) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 23. p. 349. Imo potestas excommunicandi ordinandi jurisdictionis caeterae illis illibata relinquitur c. The power of excommunication ordination and other jurisdiction remaines unto them uncorrupted c. though they doe not proceed thereunto but with common consent of the Classis V. After this D. Ames in his Disputation against Bellarmine touching Synods or Councels doth sundry times acknowledge that they have more authority then onely to counsell and advise This is to be observed in divers povnts as first in the Question whether the greater Prelates onely have jus suffragii decisivi the right or authority of a determining or definitive suffrage or whether the same belong unto the Elders also or inferiour Officers to whom Bellarmine allowes a consulting voyce but not a definitive Here D. Ames according to the receyved opinion of the Protestants (z) Bellarm. enerv Tom. 2. l. 1. de Conc. c. 2. allowes unto them also the right and authority of suffrages when they are deputed and sent as the Delegates of their Churches unto Synods This he oft repeateth And although he say (a) Ibid. th 8. that in matters of faith there is no
prevaile to take away the offence either immediately or mediately for a meanes is so farre good as it makes to the obtaining of his end As though God did not blesse his owne ordinance above our hope and reason above all that we can thinke or as though we were not to use his meanes and leave the successe unto him He that begins a good work and proceeds so farre till he be stopped by others is accepted of God as if he had finished it SECT V. His Allegation of Mr Baynes examined IO. DAV (r) Apol. reply p. 242. Dioc. tryal p. 13. â—â— To him I may adde Mr Paul Baynes a man of singular noate for learning and piety in Cambridge where he succeeded Mr Perkins who freely expresseth his judgment for the right of particular Churches and their independence in this sense in his Diocesans tryall ANSVV. As Mr Baynes was a man of singular note for learning and piety so is his testimony of singular note to shew the right use power of Synods not onely for counsell but for authority to censure and judge Ecclesiasticall causes so that particular Churches may not doe within themselves what they would without their consent 1. After he had set downe 4 conclusions wherein we agree with the opposites he comes to speak of the poynt of difference and sayth (f) Dioces tryall p. 13. That wherein we contradict one another is we affirme that no such head Church was ordained either virtually or actually but that all Churches were singular congregations equall independent each of other in regard of subjection Secondly we say were there a Diocesan granted yet will it not follow that Parish-Churches should be without their government within themselves but onely subject in some more common and transcendent cases As it was with the Synagogues that Nationall Church of the Iewes and as it is betwixt Provinciall and Diocesan Churches This doe I willingly assent unto And this is no other thing then that which is practised in these Reformed Churches with whom we are united Here is no one head-Church that hath more authority then another all Congregations are equall independent each of other here is no subjection to any one Diocesan all are equally and mutually subject to the Synod consisting of many their dependency is not upon one more then another but it is onely in regard of many combined notwithstanding which combination they have their government within themselves being subject to the Synod onely in some more weighty and difficult cases II. As for that other place when some had pleaded from the example of the Reformed Churches as if they had not bene distinct Churches c. Mr Bayes so explaineth their estate and practise as Mr Parker (t) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 23. p. 348 349. c. more largely had done before that therein he doth not at all prejudice their subjection to Synods for speaking of the 24 Churches at Geneva and of their combination and subjection unto one Presbytery he sayth (v) Dioc. tryal p. 21. They have power of governing themselves but for greater edification voluntarily confederate not to use nor exercise their power but with mutuall communication one asking the counsell and consent of the other in that common Presbyterie Secondly it is one thing for Churches to subject themselves to a Bishop and Consistory wherein they shall have no power of suffrage Another thing to communicate with such a Presbytery wherein themselves are members and judges with others After that againe he addeth Geneva made this consociation not as if the Prime Churches were imperfect and to make one Church by this union but because though they were intire Churches and had the power of Churches yet they needed this support in exercising of it and that by this meanes the Ministers and Seniors of it might have communion Thus he notes not onely the counsell but the consent of others required And as at Geneva a particular Church proceeded not without or against the consent of many Churches concurring by their Deputies in a common Presbytery so in these Low-countries in weightier affaires they proceed not without or against the consent of many Churches concurring in their Classis III. Mr Baynes having shewed how every Church being an Ecclesiasticall body and having Governours every way equall there is yet no feare of confusion seeing Aristocracie especially when God ordaines it is a forme of government sufficient to preserve order hereupon he propounds this objection (x) Dioc. tr p. 68. But every Church might then doe what ever it would within it self And hereunto he answers thus Not so neither for it is subject to the censure of other Churches Synodically assembled and to the Civill Magistrate who in case of delinquencie hath directive and corrective power over it And thus we have his expresse testimony and confession that Synods have authority not onely to counsell and advise but to censure that particular Churches are subject to the censure of other Churches that consequently there is a double Ecclesiasticall Aristocracie one in particular Churches severally another in many Churches Synodically assembled that if a particular Church erre in matters of faith and religion that it is subject not to the power of the Magistrate alone but both to him and to another superiour Ecclesiasticall jusridiction arising from the combination of many Churches contrary to that assertion in the English Puritanisme chap. 2. IV. Speaking of Presbyters that is of Ministers and Elders and of their government he saith (y) Ibid. p. 67. There is nothing found belonging to the power of the keyes in foro externo but the Scripture doth asscribe it to them power of suffrage in Councell Act. 15. power of excommunication which is manifest to have bene in the Church of Corinth c. While he alledgeth Act. 15. for an evidence of the Presbyters power in Synods or Councels he doth hereby acknowledge that in Synods there is a lawfull exercise of jurisdiction and of the power of the keyes and that therefore they are not onely for counsell and advise To like purpose he saith afterwards againe (z) P. 82. The Apostles did not offer alone to determine the question Act. 15. but had the joynt suffrages of the Presbyterie with them Not because they could not alone have infallibly answered but because it was a thing to be determined by many all who had receyved power of the keyes doing it ex officio and others from discretion and duety of confessing the trueth And a little after he there addeth It is manifest by Ecclesiasticall writings of all sorts that Presbyters had right of suffrage not onely in their owne Presbyteries but in Provinciall Synods and therefore in Oecumenicall Synods which doth arise from a combination of the other to which their mindes went in the instruction of Bishops receyved from their Churches V. Whereas one errour useth to accompany another and commonly those that deny the authority of Synods doe also in
Regall authority to assemble or to ratify them they thinke that by Divine or Apostolicall ordinance their decrees or canons ought not to be imposed on any Churches without their particular and free consents It is here to be observed how he notes onely what they thinke without approbation thereof he declares their opinion but doth not acknowledge it to be his owne judgement Neither had he reason so to judge for in the primitive Church when there were no Christian Magistrates there was then a lawfull use of Synods and that by Divine and Apostolicall ordinance as hath bene shewed before And as for particular consents if any Church walked disorderly and offensively there is no reason to think that the censures and decrees of Synods against such Churches should be differed untill they did consent unto the censuring of themselves It was sufficient that at their first combination there was a generall and free consent to submit themselves in the Lord mutually unto other Churches Synodically assembled And yet more plainely in the same place he professeth that he differeth in judgement from them when he concludes Thus much shall suffice to be spoken in defence of those later Disciplinarians from whom although in somethings I confesse I dissent yet I cannot consent to the D. taking away of their innocency Though in some things Dr D. did unjustly charge them yet Mr S. the Refuter of D. D. did also judge that in some things there was just cause to dissent from them IV. Besides the foresayd Refuter of D. Down there is also another learned man who besides his great learning having also as great experience in the discipline and government of the Church according to the practise of the Reformed Churches hath of later time written a compleat and large refutation of D. Downam And in this refutation he hath dealt more plainly and circumspectly in this poynt then Mr S. hath done For whereas D. D. relating the opinion of these later Disciplinarians as new and false sets downe their assertion in these words (p) Sermon at Lambeth p. 4. That every parish by right hath sufficient authority within it selfe immediately derived from Christ for the government of it selfe in all causes Ecclesiasticall this assertion is not admitted but with sundry cautions To omit the rest these are the two last wherein the authority of Synods is evidently acknowledge viz. (q) Gersom Bucer Dissert de Gub. Eccl p. 14. The fourth caution is that the authority given to a particular Church is not sufficient for the handling of all Ecclesiasticall causes by their owne judgement but for those onely which are so particular that they may be deemed altogether proper unto it For whatsoever case falles out belonging unto the common order of neighbour Churches we judge that the same is to be brought unto a more generall assembly wherein these Churches doe joyntly meet together The last caution is that both the institution and observation of all things especially if they seeme to procure any discommodity or not to make for aedification be subjected unto the judgement of the next Churches meeting together in one For we doe not permit that the Governours of parishes should dispatch all things as they list but will have them to submit themselves to the inspection of the Churches For we think that of Augustine ought by all meanes to be observed (r) Aug. l. 2. de Bapt. in Donat. ca. 9. Semper universum partibus jure optimo praeponi that by good right the whole is alwayes to be preferred above the parts c. Thus expressely hath this Authour given warning that the whole combination of many Churches united in Synods is of greater authority then any part that particular Churches owe a subjection unto the same Lastly as for those many other Authours the Centurists Illyricus D. Andrewes B. of Winch. D. Fulk Willet Thom Bell Cyprian Augustine Gerson Ferus whose names are here alledged by Mr Dav. without specifying their words they are all of them except one or two alledged by Mr Canne and in answer unto him (f) Chap. 7. sect 1.2.4.6 hereafter it is shewed that all every one of them are against Mr Davenp his opinion all giving a cleare and plaine testimony for the jurisdiction of Synods SECT VII His Allegation of D. Voetius examined IO. DAV (t) Apol. reply p. 242 243. Desp caus Pap. lib. 2. sect 2. cap. 11. p. 186. To the same purpose hath a worthy and learned wrighter of these countries Voetius Professour of Divinity in Vtrecht whose words I thus translate The Church is the spouse of Christ which is the proper and adaequate subject of that power to whom Christ hath committed that delegate right reserving the chiefe to himself Which ought to be and to remaine so proper to the Church that it neither may be snatched away by the authority of others nor lost by their voluntary concession nor committed to the trust of any other although divers acts belonging to the calling of a Minister may ought to be performed by certaine members of the Church ANSVV. All that is here affirmed by this worthy Writer being granted of us yet is not Mr Dav. his opinion justifyed nor the authority and jurisdiction of Synods overthrowne hereby for I. Christ was the Bridegroome of his Church and the Church was the Spouse of Christ and honoured with this title under the old Testament as well as under the new Sol. song ch 1. 2. c. Esa 50.1 Ezek. 16.8 Hos 1. 2. 3. 1. c. And yet it is confessed by my opposites that under the old Testament before Christs comming in the flesh particular Congregations and Synagogues were subject unto the Synedrion and that all jurisdiction was not limited unto the severall villages or cities in Israel or to the Synagogues therein And therefore this title of Spouse and Bridegroome doth not inferre any restraint of jurisdiction in the new Testament more then in the old II. As when the Church of Antioch sent their Delegates or Deputies unto Ierusalem and the controversy raised in their Church was decided and determined by the definitive sentence and decree of the Synod Act. 15. they did not thereby loose their power but it still remained with them for the judgement of their causes so those Churches that now submit their causes to the judgement of Classes and Synods are not thereby spoyled of their power yea it is their owne authority and power which by their Delegates is â—â—â—rcised in those Assemblies Moreover the Churches are herein so farre froâ—â—oosing their power that on the contrary they might be sayd to loose their liberty right and power if they had not authority for their owne help and others thus to send their messengers unto such assemblies III. It is to be observed how Mr Dav. doth mistranslate the words of D. Voetius by omitting a word of speciall importance which both he and D. Ames also (v) Cas coÌ„s
l. 4 c. 25. q. 5. th 26. using the like speech have expressely mentioned for whereas their words touching the power of the Church and the propriety thereof are these ut alienae fidei planè committi non possit that it may not altogether be committed to the trust of others he omitting this word planè which signifyes altogether utterly or quite and cleane doth hereby corrupt the testimony which he alledgeth For though the Church may not utterly or quite and cleane commit her power to the trust of others yet in some kinde and in some measure it may and ought to be done For the kindes D. Voetius gives instance in divers acts belonging to the calling of a Minister which may and ought to be performed by some certaine members thereof and the same is to be considered for divers other acts of like nature And for the measure so as he also notes that Christ the Bridegroome reserve the supreme authority unto himself which is then acknowledged by his people when they doe not receive nor follow the authority or sentence of any man or Officer of any particular Congregation or of any Synod further then they in their consciences finde it to agree with the sentence of Christ revealed in his word As the Lord himself by an immediate call committed power and authority unto the trust of his servants whose faithfulnes is thereupon commended 1. Tim. 1.11 12. 1. Cor. 9.17 Gal. 2.7 so doth the Church also both in the ordinary calling of men unto office and in the occasionall sending of them about particular workes and affaires of the Church Phil. 2.25 2. Cor. 8.19 23. 1. Cor. 16.3 especially in communicating their power unto them to give sentence in Synods IV. That D. Voetius doth allow the authority and jurisdiction of Synods we have many testimonies our of this very book of his which Mr D. alledgeth I. Though he shew that Ecclesiasticall power of judgement is first and immediately in particular Churches yet he notes withall (x) Desp caus Pa. l. 2. s 1. c. 5. p. 96. that this power arising thence is by a certaine fit proportion applyed unto many Churches united in some kingdome or kingdomes or in the whole world This is done in Nationall Generall Synods II. Speaking of a publick Reformation which he calles authoritative he shewes (y) Ibid. p. 62. how it being universall may be done either in an universall Synod or without a Synod Speaking of Reformation made by instruction exhortation or invitation he sayth it may be done of any one Preacher yea and in some sort of any one Christian but for the Reformation wherein there is an actuall change of publick worship he saith it is necessary that the help and consent of many and those not of one order doe concurre and that one or a few are not sufficient unlesse it fall out that the authority and parts of those many who are interested therein be devolved unto them Thus he alloweth the jurisdiction of Synods while he acknowledgeth that the authority of many may be derived and communicated unto a few which is the very thing wherein the jurisdiction of Synods doth consist III. He defends (z) P. 79. Luther appealing from the sentence of excommunication given out by Pope Leo the tenth unto a lawfull Generall Synod he allowes the like appeale made by the Arch-bishop of Colen and the appeale of the King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde the forme whereof was affixed or set up at Rome in all which the authority of Synods is acknowledged IV. He allowes (a) P. 85. the example of those Churches which determined matters by a publick and Nationall or Provinciall judgement Speaking of the Reformers of Religion he sayth (b) P. 169. Luther had the right of suffrage and used the same in the University of Wittebergh as one of the Professours in the Church as one of the Pastours in the neighbour-churches of Saxony as a member of them in the name and by commission from the Church of Witteberg and not further So did Zuinglius Farell Viret Calvin and all the rest A just patterne of the Classicall and Synodall jurisdiction exercised in the Reformed Churches in these countries at this day V. He avoucheth and maintaineth (c) P. 201. that a lawfull Synod or Church by their sentence and authority may and ought to depose Ministers that are Idolatrous Hereticall and the like An expresse testimony that Synods have not onely right of counsell and admonition but also of exercising Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in the censuring of offenders He addeth there that the Westerne Churches ought to remove such Clerkes or keep them out from entring either by a common or each of them by their particular judgement either in a Synod or without a Synod VI. Even in this very page place that Mr D. alledgeth (d) P. 186. D. Voetius alledging the example of the Synod at Ierusalem Act. 15.3.4 22 23. to shew that Ecclesiasticall power is given to many in the Church doth thereby acknowledge the authority of Synods If he had thought they might onely counsell and admonish then had this place alledged bene insufficient to prove the thing propounded by him nor suitable to the other places alledged together in the same place viz. Matt. 18.17 2. Cor. 2.6 with 1. Cor. 5.4 which are to be understood of the jurisdiction and authority of the Church in censuring This power is also againe (e) P. 187. 189. poynted at by him in the same chapter Lastly to come from his words unto his practise Whereas this learned Minister of Christ was deputed and sent (f) Act. Sy. nod Nat. Dordr sess 2. with others unto the last famous Nationall Synod at Dort was reckoned among those Worthies whose praise is so great in the Gospell being the messengers of the Churches and the glory of Christ when as he there among the rest did exercise the authority of suffrage for the decision of divers controversies and gave sentence with others in the (g) Ibid. ses 138. censure and deposition of divers both Ministers and Elders it appeareth hereby that he did not thinke all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to be limited unto a particular Congregation If Synods might goe no further then to counsell and admonish then had D. Voetius with the rest bene an usurper of unlawfull power Besides this order of Classicall and Synodall assemblies together with their jurisdiction and authority in such sort as it was before and is still practised in these Reformed Churches was confirmed and established (h) Rerckēorden Nat. Syn. Dordr Art 22.52 in that same Nationall Synod where D. Voetius appeared as a member thereof and according to which he was bound to practise both while he was Minister at Heusden and since also at Vtrecht being not onely Professour in the University but also Pastour of the Church in the sayd city So that there is no cause to doubt but that his
decision of such causes as cannot be so well ended among themselves V. Lest any should object that in all these Deputations the judgement of controversies was referred unto such Officers or members of the Church as were within the same Congregation and that they did not submit their causes to the determination of any other judges out of themselves it is therefore further to be observed that there was an order agreed upon by the English Church at Franckford that in the time of their contention (r) Ibid. p. 37.38 41.48 the matter should be determined by these five notable learned men which were of other Churches to wete Calvin Musculus Martyr Bullinger Viret This agreement was put in writing To that all gave their consents This day was joyfull Thankes were given to God brotherly reconciliation followed c. Yea the holy communion was upon this happy agreement also ministred This agreement is often repeated layd downe as a ground of comfort as a proof of their equity that did most constantly cleave thereunto Afterwards againe when more contention was raysed in that Church both the opposite parties were content not onely to heare the counsell advise of men in other Churches but to submit unto their judgement as farre as men may submit unto the sentence of any particular Church whatsoever And for evidence hereof it is recorded how the one part of the Church declared their minde by this (Å¿) P. 100.101 writing following We offer permit with most willing mindes having the licence of the Magistrate as it may well be for this purpose that all our controversies and contentions whatsoever which have bene sowne and brought in among us sithence the beginning of this breach and since the first day we began to strive untill this present time and houre to be debated decided and determined by Arbiters being none of this our Congregation and yet from among the brethren our countrie men equally and indifferently by the parties disagreeing to be chosen upon this condition that not onely the election of Ministers and besides all other things done by the order of the sayd discipline stand in suspence to be allowed or disallowed by the determination and judgement of the Arbiters to be chosen as is aforesaid written the 5. of April Anno 1557. The other part of the Church did in like manner witnesse their consent by their writing the copie whereof was as followeth We submit ourselves and are contented to commit all manner of controversies that have heretofore risen amongst us in the Church to such Arbiters as the Magistrate hath appointed and to all such as they call unto them to the hearing and determining thereof according to Gods word and good reason And thus simply and plainly without any manner of exception or condition In witnes whereof we have subscribed our names the 5. of April Anno 1557. Though there were some differences betwixt these parties in other particulars yet they all agreed in this to commit authority power unto some out of themselves whom they would set up as Judges over them Hereby it doth appeare that they did not confine and restraine the judgement of Ecclesiasticall causes within the limits of one particular Congregation onely And if a particular Church might thus referre their controversies to the judgement of foure or five persons out of themselves then might they as well or better be referred to the judgement of many Churches united together in Classes and Synods VI. This English Church which sojourned at Franckford for foure or five yeares in Q. Maries time was not a setled and established Church they wanted the opportunity of combining themselves with other English Churches It was the misery of this Church that they wanted the help of ordinary Classes and Synods and it is unreasonable to make the speciall defect or want of some one Church a precedent for other Churches to deprive them of that mutuall help which they may conveniently enjoy and which God offers unto them This English Church (t) Disc of troubl in Engl. Ch. at Franckf p. 27 c. p. 62 c. p. 135 c. was exercised with great troubles and continuall dissentions all the time of their abode at Franckford to the great grief and offence of many The forme of their Discipline and these Articles here objected by Mr Dav. and Mr Can. were not fully agreed upon the Pastour and the Elders with some of the Church dissented from the greater part of the Congregation And in such case as Mr Fenner before mentioned doth testify (v) S. Theol. l. 7. c. 7. p. 278 c. the controversy ought to have bene brought to a greater Senate to a Classis or Synod which he calles a Presbytery of more Churches for the deciding thereof The want of this was the cause of their woe VII The English Church at Franckford in the want of a Classis might so much the rather allow appeales unto the Congregation because there were in that Church many learned men able to discerne and judge of causes In that Church (x) Disc c p. 60. they set up an Vniversity and chose severall men for the reading of Hebrew Greek and Divinity lectures The learned men that repaired unto this Church were also as famous for their piety and sincerity enduring persecution for the Gospell of Christ choosing rather to live in banishment with their afflicted brethren then to enjoy the pleasures and promotions of Antichrist which they might have had in their owne countrie if they would have bowed their necks to his yoke In such a Church it was more tolerable to appeale unto the body of the Congregation then in many other that are farre unlike And yet if such a Church abounding with so many Worthies could not well subsist alone in their want of a Classicall government but fell into so great contentions and scandals this may justly serve for the warning of other Churches and teach them to seek the help of neighbour-churches to submit themselves mutually unto such combinations as the Lord shall give opportunity Lastly when as afterwards it pleased God to visit his people and to restore the light of the Gospel and true Religion unto England by that gracious and noble instrument of his goodnes Qu. Elizabeth of ever blessed memory then these excellent and eminent lights of his Church returning againe into their country did give a plaine testimony unto this trueth that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited unto a particular Congregation Some of them being promoted unto chief places of government in England did by their practise professe that particular Churches may submit themselves unto a superiour authority out of their owne Congregation Some of them became Ministers of the Church of Scotland stood for the maintenance of that Discipline which from the beginning of the Reformation acknowledged the authority and jurisdiction of Synods None of them for ought I ever heard that dreamed
of the single uncompounded policie Though there were some differences among them concerning the government of the Church yet no one of them or of those other exiles who had sojourned at Strasbrough Basel Zurick Arrow Geneva and other places in Q. Maries dayes that left behinde them any monument of their agreement with Mr Dav. Mr Cann in limiting Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction unto a particular Church But of this story we have occasion to speak further hereafter (y) Chap. 7. Sect. 5. where Mr Can. againe brings more objections from thence SECT IX Mr Dav. his pretence of agreement with Iunius examined BEsides the former Allegations Mr Dav. pretendeth his agreement with Iunius in this question And after his vaine excuse of H. Grotius for slighting the authority of Classes and Synods as he did in that treatise which he published against Sibr. Lubbertus he sayth (z) Apol. reply p. 225. thereupon Bogermannus published his Annotations learnedly and succinctly penned in defence of D. Sibrandus wherein for answer of that part which concerned the necessity and authority of Synods he referred Grotius to what Iunius had written against Bellarmine de nceessitate potestate Conciliorum wherein I fully agree with Iunius ANSVV. Had Mr Dav. fully agreed with Junius then had it bene meet that the should have brought at least some one pregnant testimony out of Junius to have manifested their agreement which he hath not done If he will constantly and fully abide by this confession of his full agreement with Junius in that which he wrote against Bellarmine concerning the necessity and authority of Synods then must he acknowledge that they have jurisdiction over particular Churches for the judging of their causes and that they are not onely for counsell and admonition c. because (a) Animadv ad Bellarm Contr. 4. de Concil Junius is plentifull in witnessing thus much of them as appeareth First Bellarmine complayning how the Protestants by the instigation of Satan did destroy Ecclesiasticall judgements Junius answereth (b) In proefat nota 1. We also complaine of the deceytfull arts of Satan but they are not to be deemed to take away Ecclesiasticall judgements which with Paul 1. Gor. 14. doe urge that the spirits of the Prophets be subject to the Prophets but that do we urge c. Junius applying this to Synods doth thereby confesse that they are for censure and judgement of causes and persons not for counsell onely He acknowledgeth the Protestants justly desired such a Councell (c) Not. 11. in quo cognosci decerni confici omnia posse confiderent that is wherein they hoped that all things might be examined decreed and dispatched This was more then counselling and implyed jurisdiction and power of judgement More plainely he saith we desire a Councell c. (d) N. 13. after such a manner as we see to have bene done of old in the examples of Synods especially of the first Nicene of the Chalcedon c. Now it is manifest in the Histories that in these Synods there was not onely a giving of counsell but an exercise of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in the censure and condemnation of Hereticks as is hereafter shewed at large Againe when Bellarmine accuseth the Protestants that they desire a Generall Councell but such a one as never was Junius answereth (e) N. 38. It is false But if we should desire such a Councell as Mr Dav. describes such a one as should be for counsell and admonition without jurisdiction then should the Answer of Junius be false we should desire such a Synod as never was It cannot be shewed that ever such a Generall Councell was held When Bellarmine accuseth Melancthon for requiring such conditions of a Synod that neither the persons nor causes of men should be condemned and that so nothing at all should be decreed in the Synod Junius answereth that this is fayned or forged of him and shewes further that though it doe not become the Church to use a bloody cure and corporall punishments yet there is a more wholesome order and tells what that is saying (f) N. 40. What Arius being overcome and convinced how was he punished of the Synod How was Macedonius Nestorius Eutyches in those renowned Synods Silence was injoyned them and their office taken away nothing more A most expresse testimony of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction exercised in the deposing of evill Ministers This was more then counsell onely After the Preface when in the book it self Bellarmine complaines of Hereticks that they devise a new forme of Synods and then give almost no authority unto them Junius answereth (g) Animadv in Cōtr. 4. de Cōcil l. 1. c. 1. n. 1. As for us we deny both and will God willing confute the first affirmation in the first book and the latter in the second But Mr Dav. cannot justly deny eyther of those assertions for first the single uncompounded policie doth necessarily inferre a new forme of Synods if it be not so let him shew when and where such a forme was ever used of old And for the second it is granted by Mr D. his owne confession when he alledgeth (h) Apol. reply p. 47. that other Churches have no power of hindring a faulty election but by admonition which power every Christian hath in another for his good Is not this to give almost no power to Synods Bellarmine to shew the divine originall of Synods alledgeth Matt. 18. there am I in the midst of them Iunius assenting to him sayth (i) In cap. 3. l. 1. de Conc n. 1. It is also demonstrated in these words of the Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 14.32 The spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets Both places import an authority whereunto subjection is required When Bellarmine sayth of Bishops in Synods that they are not Counsellours but Judges Junius noteth (k) N. 2. that they are neither Counsellours nor Iudges but declarers ministers of the judgement of God in the holy Scripture in which words he asscribeth as much power and jurisdiction unto Synods as he doth unto particular Churches His meaning for both according to his use of speech is that they are not absolute but ministeriall judges Whereas Bellarmine reckoneth up sundry sorts of persons that may be present at Synods some as judges which have a deciding or determining voyce some for disputation which have a consulting voyce some as servitours or attendants some for the defence of the Synod to maintaine peace c. Junius denyeth not this but shewes that his enumeration is insufficient saying (l) Ibid. in c. 15. n. 2. It is to be added others as parties or persons accused whose cause is to be handled for certainly it is inhumane that any should be condemned not cited or not heard Others againe to be Auditours seeking their edification by enjoying that communication of holy things Hereby it is plaine that he acknowledged the jurisdiction of Synods and that they were not onely
fire yet hereby heat is not denyed to be in the water but on the contrary acknowledged to be derived into the water and experience shewes that by the heat so communicated unto the water many excellent effects are produced for the service of man And so when Ecclesiasticall authority is by the Church committed and communicated to Ecclesiasticall Officers in calling of them then doth it belong unto them though secondarily and lesse principally as both D. Whita confesseth Mr Dav. himself repeateth THat it may yet further appeare how unjustly the name of D. Whitaker is pretended and alledged both by Mr Dav. here by Mr Canne hereafter against the authority of Synods I will here set downe divers pregnant assertions and expresse testimonies of his gathered out of sundry of his writings for help of the Readers In them all may see how fully opposite he was to my opposites To beginne with this treatise de Conciliis of Councells or Synods out of which Mr D. took this allegation above-mentioned This book comprehends 6 Questions touching Synods in handling every one of these Questions he speakes plainly for the authority jurisdiction of Synods These 6 Questions are 1. Touching the necessity and profit of Synods 2. By what authority they are to be assembled 3. Of what persons they consist 4. Who is to be Praesident in them 5. Whether they be above the Pope 6. Whether they can erre For the first Question touching the necessity of Synods There he brings 8 reasons to prove the necessity and profit of them I will not insist upon each of them as I might but mention onely one or two of them The third cause is sayth he (i) Whitak de Conc. q. 1. c. 3. p. 18. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or good order and right and lawfull discipline may both be appoynted and maintained and that Canons may be made and confirmed For the Church hath alwayes had authority of making and enacting Ecclesiasticall lawes and of prescribing them to others and of punishing those which did not observe them And this authority hath alwayes bene accounted necessary This was more then counselling or admonishing (k) P. 21. The eight and last and that the chiefest cause of Synods is that even as in Politick and Civill judgements malefactours upon examination are accused and condemned so in the Church Hereticks might be condemned and pronounced anathema by publick judgement and that the trueth might be vindicated from their calumnies But as there judgement is not to be given according to the will of the judge but according to law so here Hereticks enemies of faith and religion are not to be condemned but according to the publick and Imperiall law that is the Scripture For a Synod is as it were a publick Court or Imperiall Chamber or Parliament wherein the Judges hearing both sides do give sentence and decree matters of greatest weight For although Hereticks may be condemned of severall Churches apart yet when they are condemned as it were of the whole Church the sentence is more solemne and of greater weight So Arius was condemned first of Alexander and the Councell at Alexandria but afterward with greater authority by the Synod of Nice c. By these words of D. Whitaker we may see what wrong they doe unto him which pretend that he should deny the jurisdiction of Synods The second Question is by whose authority Synods are to be assembled Here D. Whitaker relating how Bellarmine pleads for the Popes authority (l) De Cōc q. 2 c. 2. p. 42 c. repeats his 4th Argument taken from an ancient Canon wherein it was concluded that without the minde of the Romane Bishop it was not lawfull to celebrate or hold Synods D. Whit. answers that this Canon mentioned by (m) Lib. 2. cap. 8. Socrates is not rightly translated he sayth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signify celebrare Concilia to hold Synods as Cassiodorus hath ill translated it whose translation they abuse nor yet Ecclesias consecrare to consecrate Churches as Illyricus doth amisse translate it but leges Ecclesiasticas sancire et canones Ecclesiis praescribere to ordaine Ecclesiasticall lawes to prescribes Canons unto Churches And being thus translated he sayth We acknowledge approve this Canon as most just For reason itself teacheth telleth that that which concerneth all ought to be approved of all Therefore it was meet that those Canons which should be generall should be approved also of the Bishop of Rome who was one of the chief Bishops Now if D. Whita allow that Canon to be most just which grants unto Synods an authority of making Ecclesiasticall lawes and enjoyning the Churches to keep them then it is manifest hereby that he confessed the jurisdiction of Synods and that they were not onely for counsell admonition And in the same place D. Whitak (n) P. 45 46 relates how the Bishops of the Orientall Churches meeting together in a Synod at Antioch did by common sentence write unto Iulius the Bishop of Rome and by way of rebuke sayd unto him that they were not to be overruled by him that if they would cast any out of their Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that such ought not to be restored of him even as those whom he cast out could not be restored of them Although D. Whit. acknowledge the errours and faults of some that were in that Synod yet he approveth this their writing in reproof of Julius and sayth they all did gravely rebuke his arrogance insolence Though that Synod abused their power in censuring Athanasius unjustly yet that they had a power of censure casting out of their Churches is not denyed but maintained against the Bishop of Rome The third Question is touching the persons whereof Synods doe consist Here D. Whit. (o) De Cōci Qu. 3. c. 1. first describes the Popish opinion and reckons up the foure sorts of persons whom they allow to come unto Synods namely that Some are present as judges who have a determining voyce Others to dispute and examine difficulties and these have a consultative voyce Others to defend the Synod and to see that peace be kept within without Others to serve as notaries watchmen servants Then he shewes that they allow onely the greater Prelates that is all Bishops and Archbishops to have the right of a determining voyce in universall and particular Synods ordinarily but that Cardinals Abbots Generalls of Orders though they be not Bishops yet by extraordinary priviledge may also have a determining suffrage as for all others whatsoever they be they may be profitable but not have a determining voyce or suffrage After this he shewes the opinion of the Protestants that not onely the greater Prelates but whatsoever learned and godly men are sent being chosen by the Churches of severall Provinces and judged fit for that busines ought to have equall authority in giving suffrages and so to be judges as well as any
lawfully not onely when it condemneth and excommunicateth those which are to be condemned pronounced Anathema but also when it ordaines and maintaines those decrees which agree with the Scripture c. Had he bene of my opposites opinion he should have sayd the contraty viz. that a Synod may not lawfully excommunicate or condemne those that deserve to be condemned but onely admonish them and so leave them to others Yea he proceeds further sayth concerning Generall Synods that (b) Ibid. p. 270. In them is a soveraigne power and they have the highest authority in the Church He doth not onely grant unto them jurisdiction but greater then is in any particular Church or in any other Ecclesiasticall judicatory Moreover whereas Bellarmine maintaines that Synods cannot erre when they are approved and confirmed of the Pope and that all their authority depends upon him hereupon D. Whita argueth thus against him (c) Ibid. c. 1. p. 214. If there be such weight in the Pope that without him neither Provinciall nor Generall Synod have in them any force it may worthily be demanded what part the Bishops have in a Synod whether they be onely admonishers or counsellours or whether they be judges for if they be counsellours onely why are none but Bishops admitted unto Synods why not others rather who are more learned then Bishops c. He notes it as a poynt of great absurdity and as a great strait whereunto the Papists are brought against their will against their profession that Bishops should have no other place in Synods but of admonishers and counsellours For indeed what use is their of suffrages of definitive and determining voyces if in the end all be determined by the Pope why might not advises and counsels have sufficed in such case This observation D. Whitaker holds to be of speciall use and worthy to be remembred and therefore repeats it oft (d) Ibi. c. 2. p. 221 222. What place I pray you doe Bishops obtaine in Synods what doe they to whâ—â— end doe they meet Is it that they may judge or is it that they may onely counsell and admonish Are they therefore judges or are they onely admonishers counsellours This indeed some of them thinke that they may onely admonish in Synods that they may move questions and dispute but may not judge Naclantus Bishop of Clug as we taught before in his treatise de potestate Papae Concilii sayth The power of the Pope is royall the power of the Synod is consiliaria by way of counsell the power of the Pope is altogether definitive the power of the Synod is of ambulatory definition that is as I interpret it wandring uncertaine Bellarmine indeed and the Iesuites that now are hold that the Bishops are judges but doubtles they meane an ambulatory judgement that is none at all For indeed they give all judgement unto the Pope alone Now this absurd opinion which he notes to have bene the conceit of Naclantus expressed in plaine words and of Bellarmine and other Papists by consequence is even the same that is professed by Mr Jacob Mr Dav. Mr Cann for though they differ in respect of the power of the Pope yet in respect of the power belonging to Synods they make the persons whereof the Synods consist to be no other then admonishers or counsellours not having any jurisdiction at all D. Whitaker yet leaves it not thus but speaking againe of the Popes over-ruling of Synods he doth againe record this observation saying (e) Ibid. c. 3. p. 267. Certainly this is that which we sayd before that Bishops assembled in a Synod are not judges but onely admonishers that the Pope alone is judge of all controversies that the rest have no authority For if Bishops were judges judgement should be done according to the greatest number and the sentence of the most judges should prevaile We may think that D. Whitaker was guided by a speciall providence of God and directed by his Spirit thus particularly and remarkably aforehand to poynt out and commend to our consideration this evill consequent of making Synods to be onely admonishers or counsellours that so we might have his writing for a Testimony against this errour which within a while after was to be broached made common by Mr Jacob and some others that which the Brownists had done before being neither so commonly knowne nor regarded VNto this his writing De Conciliis we may adde his treatise De Pontifice Romano in which controversy he discusseth 8 questions and in the most of them he gives testimony for the authority of Synods against my opposites The Questions be these 1. Whether the government of the Church be Monarchicall 2. Whether any Monarchy of the Church was setled in Peter 3. Whether Peter was Bishop of Rome and dyed there 4. Whether the Bishop of Rome succeed Peter in a Monarchy Ecclesiasticall 5. Whether the Pope be Antichrist 6. Whether the Pope can erre in the faith 7. Whether the Pope can make lawes to binde the conscience 8. Whether Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction be given by Christ to the Pope immediately In handling the first Question whereas the Papists require a Monarch to keep inferiour Officers in order and unity D. Whitaker sayth (f) De Pont. Rom. q. 1. c. 2. p. 19. If any will not doe their duety and discharge their office they are to be admonished and rebuked and except they obey they are at length to be remooved by the judgement of the Church or the Synod or the Christian Magistrate and there are knowne meanes enough of keeping Ministers in their duety and the Church in unity without a Pope He acknowledgeth that Synods have not onely power to admonish which every Christian may doe but after admonition to censure remove or depose the obstinate When Bellarmine to prove the superiority of Bishops objects 1. Tim. 5. Those that sinne rebuke before all D. Whit. answers (g) Ibid p. 43. This equalls also may doe So of old if any Elder or Bishop was accused the Bishops brought the matter unto an Ecclesiasticall Senate or Synod and if he did seeme worthy of it they condemned him by a publick judgement that is they eyther suspended or excommunicated or deposed him He declares (h) P. 48. 49. that the Church hath bene preserved in greatest tempests and troubles by Synods and commends them for their use of jurisdiction in judging of causes and shewes how those that would not yeeld unto such authority were removed from their places and others amended by their examples He sayth (i) P 92. Though one alone could not judge of another yet a Synod and as it were a Senate or Session of Bishops hath had the right and power to take cognition and judge of their causes He observeth againe out of Cyprian (k) P. 93. No Bishop could be judge of another of another I say not of others because a Synod of Bishops could alwayes judge
should serve for proofe of his Major that he brings for confirmation of his Minor The Scriptures which he alledgeth he referres to the proofe of his mis-named Proposition the Testimonies of Authors here alledged he referres to the proofe of his mis-called Assumption This errour I doe the rather note 1. Because it is no slip or oversight in him through want of attention in this place but an ordinary and frequent errour as appeares in that which followeth 2. Because of his insolent and arrogant boasting against others (c) Churc plea p. 2. 3. 15. Necess of Sep. p. 188 189. for want of art and want of wit of Logick c. Who can relate unto us such an example of a man professing himself a Logicall Disputant with such abundance of printed Syllogismes with such contempt of others and yet to be so rude as not to know the plainest things and the A. B. C. in Logick the difference betwixt the Major and Minor in a Syllogisme 3. Because of his spirituall pride not onely in separating himself from the Churches of Christ as other Brownists doe but taking upon him to be their Pastour their guide their champion for defence of their Separatiō against all men O miserable men that follow so blinde a guide III. A third errour in the prosequution of this Argument is this that although the premisses of this argument being rightly understood are granted to be true yet the Scriptures alledged doe not prove the same Though the Churches planted of the Apostles had power fully in themselves immediately from Christ to practise all his ordinances yet these places 1. Cor. 5.2 3. Act. 14.23 1. Cor. 16.2 Col. 2.5 2. Thes 3.14 doe onely prove their right for the practise of some of his ordinances that are mentioned and poynted at in them but not of all other As for example the administration of the Sacraments though a right belonging to the Church and ordained in other places of Scripture yet is not specifyed in any of these allegations The liberty of appeales in case of oppression the power of sending Deputies unto a Synod for the decision of difficult weighty causes are ordinances of Christ and rights of the Church as hath bene shewed before yet not specifyed in any of these Scriptures alledged by him and therefore his proof for all ordinances is defective IV. For the right understanding of this sentence viz. that every Parish or every particular Church hath full or sufficient authority within it self derived immediately from Christ for the government of it self in all Ecclesiasticall causes I desire the Reader to look back unto the explication thereof by (d) Disse de Gub. Eccl. p. 14. Gersom Bucerus who labouring to make the best interpretation thereof yet shewes that it is not to be admitted without divers cautions some whereof I have expressed * P. 117. 118. before He undertakes the defence hereof against D. Downam but no further then it may be so understood and so expounded as not containing in it any denyall or impeachment of the authority and jurisdiction of Classes and Synods judging the causes of many Churches And indeed how can any Church be sayd to practise all the ordinances of Christ so long as they refuse and deny the combination of Churches or the jurisdiction of them being combined which is shewed to be one of his ordinances ARGVM II. (e) Churc plea p. 69. If Christ in Mat. 18.17 where he sayth Tell the Church doth meane a particular Congregation Then hath every particular Congregation an intire power in of it self to exercise Ecclesiasticall government and all other Gods spirituall ordinances But the first is true Therefore the second The Proposition is cleare and certaine maintained by the most Iudicious Divines c. The Assumption is proved thus That Church which Christ intendeth in Matt. 18. hath absolute power in of itself to performe all Gods ordinances But Christ intendeth in Mat. 18. a particular Congregation Therefore every particular Congregation hath absolute power in and of it self to performe all Gods ordinances c. ANSVV. I. Here is the same fault that was in the former Argument viz. of concluding beside the question This argument being granted there ariseth hence no prejudice to the authority of Classes or Synods The authority of particular Churches and the authority of Synods may well subsist together The arrowes which are shot by Mr Canne are beside the marke of the maine question II. His argument is not onely beside the mark but as an arrow shot up into the ayre and falling downe on his head againe so doth his argument returne upon himself for if a particular Church hath intire power in and of itself to performe all Gods ordinances then hath it power to unite itself with other Churches combined in Synods and to submit unto the judgement thereof according to the divine warrant ordinance Act. 15.2 c. Deut. 17.8 c. III. As before so he blindely stumbles here againe at the same stone in not discerning betwixt the Proposition and Assumption of his owne Syllogisme The Authors which he alledgeth for the maintenance of his Major proposition ought to have bene applyed to the proofe of his Assumption viz. to shew that Christ in Mat. 18.17 where he saith Tell the Church doth meane a particular Congregation for this is that which he assumes when he sayth But the first is true And all the shew of help which he hath from his Authors tends to confirme this Assumption but their testimonies are no direct proofe of his Proposition IV. Another new grosse errour in his Logicall dispute is this that whereas he goes about to prove the Assumption of his first Syllogisme by framing a second Syllogisme he doth not therein according to order conclude that which was his former Assumption whether it be understood as it is indeed or as he miscalles it but instead thereof he ridiculously repeates the Conclusion of his first Syllogisme which Conclusion is neither the Proposition nor the Assumption which he offers to prove but the Question made by him in his maine Argument And thus entangling himselfe with his owne Syllogismes Propositions and Assumptions he hath brought himself into such a maze that he knowes not where he is what he sayth nor whereof he affirmeth Let Logicians tell how oft they have seene the like in print V. Whether all his Authors doe affirme that by the Church in Mat. 18. Christ meant a particular Congregation I will not here examine I shall have further occasion in the next chapter to speak of many of them But in the meane time let it be granted not onely that they have all so affirmed but that it is the trueth Yet doe they not all affirme that onely a particular Congregation was intended by Christ Mat. 18. For both the Eldership of a particular Church and the Synod arising from the combination of many Churches are shewed unto us in Matt. 18. the one
alledged or so much as pretended for it Is this to goe unto the Law and to the Testimony V. The testimonies of men which he alledgeth are falsifyed and perverted by him D. Fulk shewes the sufficiency of those offices mentioned by him viz. of Doctours Pastours Governours c. but he (a) Disc of Eccl. Gov. p. 111. c. shewes withall expressely how these exercise authority in Synods as well as in the Elderships and particular Congregations Though D. Whitaker and Mr Parker say that the Church of God may subsist without Synods yet he corrupts and falsifyes their testimony when he makes them to say the Church may well subsist without them The Church of God may subsist and be a true Church though it want some divine ordinances Though they be not absolutely necessary to the being and subsistence of a Church yet how needfull they are to the well-being of a Church both those Authors doe shew and prove from divers grounds of Scripture noted before If the want of every ordinance of God should destroy the subsistence of a Church thē that Company of Brownists under Mr Canne wanting the ordinance of an Eldership so long a time must have perished long agoe ARGVM VIII Whatsoever Government cannot be found commanded in the written word of God ought not to have any place in the Church of God But the Government of Classes and Synods over many particular Congregations cannot be found commanded in the written word of God Therefore it ought not to have any place in the house of God The first part is grounded upon these Scriptures Esa 8.20 Mat. 28. ult c. Likewise this is the judgement of many learned men c. The second part is also as manifest for if we onee grant as all learned men have granted that the Churches of the Apostolick constitution were independent bodies and exercised Ecclesiasticall government in and of themselves then it must follow that Classicall Assemblies c. have their rise wholy from the pleasure and will of man ANSVV. The first part of this Argument being of it self plaine enough needed not such store of proof as Mr Canne brings for it The Reader may observe his notable trifling in alledging so many testimonies of Scripture and testimonies of men though some of them be carelesly misalledged for proof of that which he had no reason to imagine that it would be denyed by me The second part of this Argument is most false and he knowes it is denyed by me and yet for proof of it he brings here neither word of God nor word of man no testimony neither Divine nor humane He sayth indeed most untruely that all learned men have granted that the Churches of Apostolick constitution were independent bodies but he names not one learned man that so writes The Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament which shew a dependency of Churches in Ecclesiasticall judgements have bene noted already in those Arguments brought for the authority of Synods together with the consent of learned men such late opposites excepted as I my self first named as parties in this cause All other learned Writers doe generally reject that independency which he dreames of ARGVM IX (b) Churches plea. p. 73. That Government which meerly tendeth unto the taking away from particular Congregations their due power is unlawfull But the Government of Classes Synods as they now are doth meerly tend unto the taking away from particular Congregations their due power Therefore that Government is unlawfull The Major of this Argument may easily be proved by sundry places of Scripture viz. 1. Thes 4.6 c. the definition of justice c. the Etymologie or precise signification of the word both in Greek and Latin c. ANSVV. Here againe he playes the trifler in alledging so many Scriptures testimonies of men to prove that which of itself is cleare enough more plaine then the proofes that he brings for it In speciall that definition of justice which he brings is not sufficiently confirmed by the Etymologies which he speakes of The Greek Etymon noted out of Aristotle is not so currant but that some learned men refuse the same and (c) Avenar in praef Lex Ebr. derive the word from the Hebrew from whence the principall Etymologies of that tongue are to be taken And yet that Etymology which Aristotle brings of justice is not with Mr Canne to demonstrate an entire definition of justice but to shew in part one effect thereof and Mr Canne overspeakes himself when he sayth of the definition so much is imported in the Greek word The Latine Etymologie which Mr Canne brings viz. jus a jure as he sets it downe in his margine is more strange It is likely his Authour whom he alledgeth hath no such thing If Mr Canne should owne it or approove of it in such sort as it stands in his booke it would thereby appeare that his skill in Grammar is like unto his skill in Logick Who ever heard such an Etymology that the Nominative should be derived of the Ablative But admit there should be such a ridiculous Etymology how doth he or how can he apply this to confirme his definition of justice How doth this prove the trueth of his Major proposition What is that which he saith is imported in this Etymology And what is that precise signification which he vainely talkes of but doth not expresse But let us now heare now he seekes to prove his Minor which is most false I. CAN. The Minor is as manifest 1. By Mr Pagets owne testimony in pag. 66. where he confesseth that they have concluded among themselves in their Synods that no particular Congregation without the leave and consent of the Classis shall proceed to the election of Ministers excommunication of offendours and the like c. ANSVV. I. He doth manifestly change and alter my words for when as I had sayd that it had bene agreed in Synods touching election of Ministers excommunication and the like that the same shall not be proceeded in (d) Answ to W.B. p. 66. without advise of the Classis instead of this Mr Canne repeats it without leave and consent of the Classis Now according to the State of the Question betwixt us there is difference betwixt doing a thing without advise and without leave men aske advise of many of whom they aske no leave for doing a thing II. Had I spoken more largely of the allowance and consent of the Classes and Synods yet would not my testimony have proved his Minor viz. that their government tends to the taking away from particular Churches their due power seeing the authority and help of Classes tends to the establishment of their due power by directing and regulating the same and so preventing the undue execution of their power This order takes not away due power but hinders and corrects onely the undue exercise of their power Thus much is confessed by such as Mr Canne himself hereafter calles
Elders and Shepherds of the Church in Ierusalem did undertake the care and exercise with others authority in judging the cause of the Church of Antioch It is against sense against nature against Scripture but that the members of the body should have care one for another 1. Cor. 12.25 c. IV. The use of Classes and Synods for counsell and admonition is allowed by my opposites and yet the care and labour therein for travelling to meet in such assemblies for deliberation for disputing for convincing such as they admonish and their counsell given unto Churches for the rejecting of Hereticks and other obstinate offendours more or lesse is as great in effect as if they should give definitive sentence therein As little distraction ariseth from one work as from the other To counsell a Church to excommunicate a sinner is as great a burden and labour for a Synod as if they should pronounce the sentence themselves V. It doth least of all become Mr Canne to plead and reason on this manner If nature have ordained one to one as he argueth out of Aristotle though in his quotation he forgat to tell where then must Mr Canne be a man against nature above many other in transgressing the law and ordinance of nature How durst he take the Pastorall charge of a Church upon him and this alone without assistance of an Eldership and yet in the meane time undertake the care and charge of divers other trades as of a Printers work-house in one place of a Brandery or Aquavitae shop in another place and specially of an Alchymists laboratory in another place Is this paragon of the Separation a fit man to be an Advocate or Patron of the Churches to write a booke and intitle it the Churches plea whereas if his example were followed it would bring confusion upon all Churches and on all the Ministers thereof What Pluralist or Non-resident is there that will not thinke he hath some colour to justify himself from this practise of Mr Canne REAS. III. Is it a like thing that the Classicall power should be of Gods approving and yet he never mention it in his word This argument the Hierarchy use against Popish Offices and the Reformists against theirs Now let the discreet Reader judge if it proove not the point in hand as well Here I may not omit Zwinglius his speech speaking of Synods (p) Zwingl Art 8. expl Wee willingly beleeve sayth hee that you are a representative Church for a true Church you are not But I pray you shew us whence you fetch this name Who hath given you this name who hath given you power to make Canons impose things on mens shoulders grieve their consciences c. ANSVV. I. This Reason is in substance the same with his fift Argument before and therefore idly repeated The grounds of Classicall power are shewed (q) Chap. 2. 3. 4. before from the Scriptures and the cavills of Mr Canne against the same refuted II. Note his errour of speech in distinguishing the Hierarchy from Popish Offices by opposing them one against the other whereas according to the common acception of the word the Hierarchy doth consist in the Popish offices and the corruption of offices which he intends is but a fragment thereof and therefore ought not to carry the name rather then the whole when both are spoken of together Otherwise in proper speech the true Hierarchy imports the lawfull offices and government prescribed in the Scriptures III. That which he alledgeth out of Zwinglius touching a representative Church is to be understood of the Romish Church and of the Popish government for against them did Zwinglius then write and against them there was just cause to complaine so as he did IV. If any thinke that by representative Churches he meant all Synods whatsoever that exercise Ecclesiasticall authority in the judging of causes then against the testimony of Zwinglius we oppose the testimony of all ages and of the learned Writers therein old and new Papists and Protestants that generally are against him Mr Parker (r) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 26. p. 368 369. sayth well All ages have called the Synod a representative Church beside many other witnesses he alledgeth D. Whitaker arguing thus against the Papists (f) De Cōc qu. 5. c. 3. p. 169. The Church is represented in the Synod therefore if the Church be above Peter then is the Synod also Mr Parker argues further Except the Synod did consist of the Deputies of Churches Synods could not represent the Churches and having there brought many testimonies of Scripture to shew the power of Churches in sending their Deputies or Delegates he concludes in the words of D. Whitaker (t) Qu. 3. c. 3. p. 103. Whosoever is sent of the Church he represents the person of the Church But touching the judgment of Zwinglius more hereafter when he is againe alledged by Mr Canne REAS. IV. (v) Church plea p. 76. Whosoever shall deny our aforesayd assertion must of necessity hold two distinct formes of Church-government one wherein particular Congregations doe in and of themselves exercise all Gods ordinances the other where they stand under another Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves Now to hold this is directly all one as to hold two wayes to heaven distinct and opposite in themselves which is very scandalous in Religion and that which cannot stand with truth ANSVV. I. Whatsoever Mr Canne here affirmeth is but his bare assertion without Scripture or other proof to confirme his reason But Mr Can. is not yet come to such credit with us that his ipse dixit his bare word may goe for currant II. It is false which he sayth of holding two distinct formes of Church-government c. The particular Congregations here in these Reformed Churches doe in and of themselves exercise all Gods ordinances and yet withall stand under another Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves Synodall authority being one of Gods ordinances Though in regard of the locall and personall presence of all the members of the Church this authority is exercised out of themselves yet in regard of their confederation and combination with neighbour Churches and in regard of their Deputies Ministers and Elders or others that have place and suffrage in these Synods this authority is exercised in and of themselves And though here be another act of authority yet is there but one distinct forme of government III. It is as false which he sayth of holding two wayes to heaven and this not onely in respect of these Reformed Churches among themselves having the same government both by Elderships at home and by Synods abroad but also in respect of divers Churches having different formes of government The Church of England and of these Countries though they have a different order of Church-government yet holding together the same fundamentall trueths of the Gospell◠they both doe hold but one way to heaven and so doe both mutually
Goulartius also in his annotations thereon observeth that these Synods were kept to this end that the purity of doctrine and the discipline of the Church might be preserved entire and that the disturbers thereof might be excluded from their communion And in many other places Cyprian is so pregnant in this poynt that whosoever shall alledge him against the authority of Synods must either be a very ignorant reader of Cyprian or els a wilfull abuser of him REAS. VII Note the effect if it should be otherwise which is that every particular Congregation must hence necessarily loose her owne proper right in government so of a Mistres become a servant instead of being superiour wilfully vassall and enslave herself which thing is contrary to Gods will revealed in his word Gal. 5.1 1. Cor. 7.23 2. Tim. 1.13 Heb. 4.14 Rev. 2.25 ANSVV. I. This reason is the same for substance with his ninth Argument before and therefore it is here idly repeated II. The vassallage and slavery which he argues from Classicall government is upon a false consequence The liberty of innocent persons oppressed by wrong judgment in a particular Church is to appeale unto Classes and Synods The Democraticall government that denyes this liberty of appeale is no gracious mistresse but a Tyrannicall virago resembling the Romish Lady that by denying appeales from the Pope keeps many in bondage III. The Scriptures cited by him are all perverted and misapplyed for what force of consequence is in these reasonings viz. Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free c. Gal. 5.1 therefore stand fast against appeales from particular Congregations Be not the servants of men 1. Cor. 7.23 therefore be subject to no Ecclesiasticall government save onely to the Democracie of a particular Church Hold fast the forme of sound words c. 2. Tim. 1.13 therefore hold fast the independencie of Churches Let us hold fast our profession Heb. 4.14 therefore hold fast the single uncompounded policie Hold fast that which ye have already c. Rev. 2.25 therefore hold this fast that Classes and Synods are onely for counsell and not for authority to censure and judge What unsound inferences and applications of Scripture be these Mr Canne in his 9th Argument before (f) Churches plea p. 73. alledged also 1. Thes 4.6 3. Ioh. 9. Prov. 22.28 Deut. 19.14 together with Gal. 5.1 Mr Dav. also to like purpose (g) Apol. reply p. 237. alledgeth some of these places to wit Prov. 22.28 Gal. 5.1 3. Ioh. 9. But they prove the Question as little as the other for how vaine are these consequences Thou shalt not remove the ancient bounds Prov. 22.28 therefore all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is limited to a particular Congregation and he removes the ancient bounds that allowes the authority of Synods Or Diotrephes loved the preheminence 3. Ioh. 9. therefore Classes and Synods have no jurisdiction or power to judge and determine the matters of a particular Congregation What weight is there in such reasonings as these REAS. VIII Seeing the Apostles wheresoever they constituted any Church with doctrine immediately established in it (h) Pol. Ecc. l. 1. p. 20. Ecclesiasticall government for without this as D. Ames (i) De Cōsc l. 4. c. 24. p. 214. sayth there could have bene no coupling of the parts and members together It must needs follow that the primitive Churches were independent bodies and stood not under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves Now how Mr Paget will be able to prove a change of this government I doe not yet see especially considering that the Learned as I shewed before doe hold that there is but one certaine necessary perpetuall forme manner of ordering Churches c. ANSVV. 1. The consequence propounded in this reason is false Though the Apostles in the constitution of Churches did immediately establish Ecclesiasticall government therein yet must it not needes follow that they were independent bodies c. For proof of this consequence he brings nothing but his bare assertion neither Scripture nor testimony of any learned Writer To prove an establishment of government in the primitive Churches at first he idly and needlesly alledgeth Mr Parker and D. Ames to prove the perpetuity and unchangeablenes of that government which needed no proof he needlesly according to his manner heapes up testimonies of Calvin of P. Martyr of D. Bilson of the Churches of France of the Low-countries of Scotland and of Papists also but to help his weak unsound consequence that needed confirmation and support there is no proof nor shew of proof II. Though particular Churches in their severall assemblies be acknowledged to be distinct bodies yet in regard of the entire and full communion of Saints they are all members of one body there is but one body Eph. 4.4 And those that are members of one body are not independent The Scriptures that shew this unity and the dueties arising from thence are justly alledged and layd downe as the ground of combination and consociation of Churches And this foundation of Classicall communion being as ancient as the first constitution of Churches it appeareth hereby that the right of this confederation of churches was in them from the beginning with liberty to use and exercise the same as occasion and opportunity should permit Mr Cartwright being required to shew Scripture for the warrant of this practise of Churches answereth (k) T.C. 2. Rep. p 231. Rom. 12. 1. Cor. 12. The Scripture I prove it by is that St Paul when he teacheth that all the faithfull are members of one Mysticall body of Christ which ought to have a mutuall care one of another layd the foundations of this politie For as in the body of one particular Church every faithfull man compared with another in the same is a member one of another so in a more generall body of a whole Realme every particular Church compared with other is likewise a member of them Therefore as nature teacheth my hand to help the disorder which is in another part of my body so the Spirit of God out of his word through a fellow-feeling teacheth one Church to stretch out her hand to put away as it can the evill which it seeth approch unto another Rom. 15.14 Heb. 3.13 And therefore when the Scripture willeth that one should admonish another it is not onely a commandement to every singular man towards his fellow but also to one whole company towards another societie Mr Parker (l) See before p. 95.96 alledgeth the same ground out of Zepperus who from thence deriveth the authority of Classes and Synods in censuring and judging the causes of many Churches and citeth many such places of Scripture for proof thereof III. When the Church of Antioch brought her controversy unto the Synod at Ierusalem there was no change of government They had this right from the first though then especially it were manifested unto all for the actuall exercise thereof upon
He calles those decrees of the Councell of Basile (k) P. 1218. Catholick or universall trueths whereby it was enacted 1. That the power of a Generall Councell representing the whole Church is above the Pope and everie other person 2. That the Pope cannot dissolve a Generall Councell without their consent c. 3. That he that doth obstinately oppose the foresaid trueths is to be accounted an Heretick He relates coÌ„mends the speeches of (l) P. 1010. c. Marsilius Patavinus (m) P. 1232 c. Petrus de Alliaco and divers others shewing the power of Councels in judging and censuring the Pope the necessity of them both Provinciall and Generall for the correcting of abuses and amending of all sorts of persons and things with greater authority He approves and defends (n) P. 1341. the renowned Italian Martyr Hieronimus Savanorola for seeking that a Generall Councell might be called for reformation of the Clergie and degenerate estate of the Church c. Besides this he being in his time a principall favourer maintainer of the Discipline in the French Churches where the causes of particular Congregations were judged and determined by Synods could therefore be no favourer of the Brownists opinion which count such government to be a miserable bondage and slavery of the Churches Tilenus that is also called to be one of their Jurie against me doth most expressely give his verdict on my side against the Brownists He teacheth (o) Syntag. Disp Theol. par 2. Disp â—0 thes 1. that the fourefold power of the Church is to be exercised not onely in Presbyteries but also in Councels or Synods that (p) Thes 4. Synods according to the power granted of God unto his Church may take knowledge of Ecclesiasticall causes and by their judgements conferred together according to the word of God may define c. (q) Th. 19. give ministeriall sentence c. And further he saith (r) Th. 38. As it is not to be hoped for that the body of the Church militant on earth shall be free from divers diseases so we may not think that it can want this remedy of Synods which we therefore affirme to be not onely lawfull but also necessary Bastingius shewing how Excommunication pertaineth to the whole Church saith nothing but that which is practised both in our and other Reformed Churches of these countries especially if it be marked how he explaines himself in the leafe following where he addes that (f) Expos Catech. Qu. 85. Ecclesiasticall discipline and excommunication itself ought to be administred by them who are ordained thereunto of the Church such as are Ministers of the Word and Elders the rest of the Church consenting thereunto yet with this correction that the multitude of the people doe not rule the action but provide as watchmen that nothing be done by a few as they list themselves Besides he being a member Minister of these Churches and Regent of a Colledge in Leyden there is no reason from these his words to conclude against the authority of Synods in judging the causes of particular Congregations if they either could not agree among themselves or should agree in evill For then he should have condemned his owne estate and practise which yet cannot be inferred from this his testimony Vrfinus also though he teach that the unrepentant are to be excommunicated by the common consent of the Church c. yet doth he not thereby deny or exclude the power of Synods in judging of that which is done in particular Congregations but doth plainly give testimony with me For (t) Tom. 2. Admo Chr. de lib. Concord c. 12. col 686. having shewed the conditions and necessity of Synods he saith of them This remedie for the healing of the wounds of the Church is not to be neglected which the holy Ghost hath shewed unto us by the counsell and example of the Apostles which all reason of divine and humane right requires which being lawfully used experience hath proved to be most wholesome for the Church in many most grievous confusions of opinions Neither was this his private opinion but (v) Ibid. Tit. Col. 478. written in the name of other Divines Ministers in the jurisdiction of Prince Casimir and approved by them Piscator saith Excommunication is a decree of the Church therefore ought to be done of the Church (x) In 1. Cor. 5. Obs 1. Art 3. or of the Eldership judging in the name of the Church We grant as much or more in the practise of our Church while the Eldership never exerciseth such power alone without the knowledge and consent of the Church by propounding the same divers times unto them But it is a perverting of this testimony to gather from hence that the actions of the Church or Eldership are not subject to the judgement of Synods if they be complained of for wrong And that Piscator alloweth the authority of Synods (y) In Act. 15. Obser in V. 6. to judge the controversies of Religion and to (z) Thes Theol. Vol. 1. Loc. 23. de Eccl. th 68. 72. make decrees by gathering of voyces in order it is evident from other of his writings Calvine requiring the (a) Instit l. 4. c. 1. sec 15. cognition of the whole Church before any be excommunicate requires no more then is held and practised by us And this is no empeachment to his and our opinion with him that in case of doubt or controversy (b) Ibid. c. 9. sec 13. there is no better nor more certaine remedie then that a Synod of true Bishops meet together where the controversy may be discussed For such a definition shall have much more weight where the Pastours of Churches in common doe agree together c. And this he there confirmes both by Scripture and sundry examples of ancient Churches shewing that from the beginning it was the ordinary way of preserving unitie in the Church so often as Satan began to attempt any thing Besides this not to speak of other testimonies afforded by Calvine to this purpose when as Mr Canne (c) Ch. pl. p. 94. afterward notes the assertions of divers pleading for the Hierarchie of Bishops and oppugning Ecclesiasticall government by Classes and Synods as a weed of later growth saying that at Geneva subjecting of Churches first began And before Calvine came there everie Congregation was free in itself If these assertions be true and that none is able to disprove them as Mr Canne there supposeth how comes it that he thus perverteth Mr Calvines testimony against his profession and practise Let the Reader observe that if these assetions were sound Mr Canne might as well have written a booke to prove the miserable bondage and slavery of the Church at Geneva procured by the tyrannicall government and corrupt doctrine of Mr Calvine as he wrote the like title of an unjust complaint upon the like ground against me Paraeus
Authors more in number then those he hath specifyed and not inferiour for learning and piety unto some of those that he hath named all which in their severall writings Common places Commentaries and other Treatises have in like manner as the former described the use the necessity and the authority of Synods not onely for counsell but for judgement and decision of controversies divers of them alledging not onely examples of ancient Churches but the holy Scriptures also for the warrant of that which they teach and therefore shewing that they maintaine them lawfull jure divino and that their tenure of them is from the grant that Christ hath given unto his Church But the trueth of that assertion touching the multitude of those that consent with me will most plainly appeare when we come to speak of the publick and generall testimonies of whole Churches most solemne assemblies of learned godly men touching this controversie In the meane while let us follow Mr Canne according to his owne Method SECT IV. Touching the Testimonies of English Conformists IN the next place they proceed and in an homely phrase they say Touching the English Conformist the formablest of them are for us in this poynt And here they alledge B. Whitgift D. Bilson Whitaker Bell Willet and Taylor Touching these I answer First for B. Whitgift though he confesse that in the Apostles time the state of the Church was popular See Def. ag T. C. p. 180. 182. because the Church had interest almost in every thing yet this proves not that he thought particular Congregations to be independent and uncontrolable by the Deputies of other Churches assembled in Synods The ordinary practise of B. Whitgift in judging the causes of other Congregations shewed that he was farre from the meaning of the Brownists in this poynt His words are wrested by an unjust consequence to prove independency of Churches and the undue power of Synods For D. Bilson there is notable wrong done to him in clipping his words and defacing his testimonie by omitting that which is most materiall in this controversy For when D. Bilson had sayd (a) Perpet Gover. c. 15 p. 360. Though the Presbyters had more skill to judge yet the people had as much right to choose their Pastour if the most part of them did agree they did carrie it from the Clergie Thus farre Mr Canne reciteth his words but here in the midst of the sentence before the period be ended he breakes off and leaves out this exception that is added viz. so the persons chosen were such as the Canons did allow and the ordainers could not justly mislike In this exception D. B. acknowledgeth that there may be just cause to disanull the election of the people if it be found worthy to be misliked And his meaning is yet more evident by the story which in the sentence immediately preceding he alledgeth out of (b) Lib. 7. cap. 35. Socrates touching the election of Proclus who being chosen by the greater number was yet refused because the election was sayd to be against the Canon of translating Bishops and so the people were forced to hold their peace That which is practised in these Reformed Churches is in this poynt the very same thing that D. B. testifies of the Primitive Church for Classes and Synods doe not use to impose or choose Ministers If particular Congregations doe choose a Minister neither Classes nor Synods can disanull the election if there be no just cause of exception against the person elected And if upon just exception the election be hindred yet then also is the new election of another permitted to the free choyse of the particular Church neither doth the Classis deprive them of their just power and liberty therein That it may more plainly appeare how unjustly and unreasonably D. Bilson is alledged as agreeing with my opposites let it be further observed that in his Dispute against Beza such as approve the Discipline of these Reformed Churches he doth not as my adversaries complaine of the undue power of Synods that judge and determine the causes of particular Congregations He acknowledgeth that (c) Perpet Gover. c. 16 p. 370. the necessity and authority of Synods is not so much in question betwixt us as the persons that should assemble and moderate those meetings c. He would have (d) P. 378 c. Metropolitanes to be the Moderatours and rulers of Synods he would have (e) P. 387 c. lay-Elders thrust out from assembling with Ministers in Synods he complaines (f) P. 386 387. of the intolerable charges and expences of having frequent Synods c. Herein he differs from us and we from him But that there is a superiour Ecclesiasticall authoritie in Synods to decide the causes of particular Churches which is the poynt in question herein he agreeth with us He saith of such Synods and their power to judge as followeth (g) P. 372. Their warrant so to doe is builded on the maine grounds of all divine and humane societies strengthened by the promise of our Saviour and assured unto them by the example of the Apostles and perpetuall practise of the Church of Christ Afterwards he saith of their meetings in Synods (h) P. 374. This hath in all Ages as well before as since the great Councell of Nice bene approved and practised as the lawfullest and fittest meanes to discerne trueth from falshood to decide doubts end strifes and redresse wrongs in causes Ecclesiasticall yea when there were no beleeving Magistrates to assist the Church this was the onely way to cleanse the house of God as much as might be from the lothsome vessels of dishonour and after Christian Princes began to professe protect the trueth they never had nor can have any better or safer direction amongst men then by the Synods of wise and godly Pastours And many other things to like purpose are written by him complayning that the denyall of this order is (i) P. 376. an heathenish if not an hellish confusion c. That which they bring out of Scultingius a Papist before alledged is idle impertinent untill they heare me avouch such things as he doth for change of the order of Christ let them refraine their surmises and conjectures of imaginary arguments which they guesse that I will use Having brought such Authours against me mark how Wil. B. or Io. Ca. for him doth triumph against me before the victory in these words (k) Chu pl. p. 85. To say that this superiour power of Classes and Synods is Jure Divino I thinke he will not any more doe it there being in the Scriptures no proofe yea I may boldly say nor shew of any proofe for it I confesse indeed it is boldly spoken of him for who so bold al 's blinde B. But whether there be at least shew of proofe in the Scriptures for the superiour authority of Synods in judging the causes of particular
Congregations let us see what his owne witnesse saith D. Whitaker that is next alledged by him doth by many arguments shew the profit and necessity of Synods and to this end he citeth many (l) DeConc qu. 1. c. 3. p. 15.16 q. 2. c. 3. p. 55 56. places of Scripture both from the old new Testament he alledgeth at large (m) P. 17. c. 7 or 8 causes for which they are profitable and of great use and fruit He speaketh also of such Synods as are not onely for discussing and concluding of matters by way of counsell and advise but of those that have power to (n) P. 21. judge and condemne obstinate offenders by a publick judgement and as occasion requires to anathematise or exclude from the fellowship of the Church he maintaines that those which are lawfully called unto Synods have authority of deciding and determining controversies by (o) Ibid. q. 3. c. 3. p. 95.96 c. definitive sentence or suffrage he saith that (p) DePōtif Rom. qu. 4. p. 470. appeales are of divine and naturall right and cannot be denyed in controversies about Ecclesiasticall causes and persons And thus by the testimony of their owne witnesse my adversaries doe offend both against the law of God and the law of nature in denying appeales and in not allowing the actions and judgements of a particular Congregation to be judicially examined by a Synod or Classis The severall testimonies of D. Whitaker to this purpose are alledged (q) P. 39. 133-141 before and applyed at large to declare his judgement in this controversy Though D. Whit. doe (r) DeCōc q. 5. p. 178. grant as is here alledged against me that Ecclesiasticall authority is in the Church principally primarily and essentially c. he doth not hereby contradict himself or deny the power of Synods where Ministers doe judge by vertue of their calling and deputation from many Churches The authority of Churches is manifested in them and by their service therein The like testimony alledged from Saravia and Schola Parisienfis is (ſ) P. 170. before answered Yea the Schoole of Paris doth sufficiently (t) Schol. Paris p. 1 2. explaine this matter by a fit similitude shewing that Ecclesiasticall authority is in the Church primarily and instrumentally in the Ministers as the power of seeing is in man principally but instrumentally in the eye As man sees by his eye so the Church exerciseth Ecclesiasticall authority by the Ministers and rulers thereof and so judgeth of all crimes and offences The testimony of Bell next alledged is in like manner to be understood Whereas from (v) Regim of Chur. ch 2. sect 4. him they object that Excommunication precisely and chiefly pertaineth to the Church and that she hath authority to commit the execution thereof to some speciall persons for that purpose and chosen for that end this doth no way condemne but rather illustrate our practise agreeable thereunto And that the meaning of this Authour was not repugnant unto us it appeareth more plainely by another of his writings (x) Bells motiv l. 2. c. 4. concl 3. c. where he evidently declares his minde that Synods have power to exercise Ecclesiasticall authority and to proceed judicially with delinquents even to depose excommunicate though it were the Pope himself upon due conviction And to this end he alledges the confession of many Popish writers and farre more truely and uprightly then Mr Canne hath done in this controversie As for D. Willet if he speak but to the same effect with Bell as they say then the same answer may serve But for the place alledged Synops cont 4. qu. 4. p. 2. I finde no such matter there They alledge p. 2. when as there is no second part of that question But in the same booke he gives plaine evidence against them he acknowledgeth Synods to be (y) Synops Papi Cōt 3. qu. 1 p. 105. an wholesome meanes for the repressing and reforming both of errours in religion and corruption in manners he alledgeth the consent of antiquity to prove that our opinion is grounded upon trueth and Scripture namely that those which are lawfully called unto Synods (z) Qu. 3. p. 109.110 have determining voyces and power to give sentence and giveth instance in the Councell of Antioch where Paulus Samosatenus was condemned and cut off as an enemie to the trueth c. he avoucheth that (a) Qu. 7. p. 123. they have authority to judge examine suspend punish and depose c. And thus D. Willet fully accordeth with us in this poynt that there is a superiour power to judge the causes of particular Congregations D. Taylor next alledged affords them no help Whereas he saith that (b) Com. on Tit. 3.10 p. 712. Excommunication is the common action of the Church and not of any private person or persons we also affirme the same thing Our profession and practise alwayes hath bene never to excommunicate any without common consent of our Church but had we done unjustly at any time therein we might justly have bene subject to the censure of a Synod or Classis and yet then also the Ministers and Deputies assembled in the name of many Churches could with no reason be accounted private persons And though we think ourselves bound to ask counsell of the Classis according to the order of these Churches before we proceed to cut off any member of the Church by excommunication this proves no deprivation but a direction of our power Now whether I have just cause to blush for denying to the Churches of God that due power which the Learned of all professions doe grant unto her as Mr Canne and Will Bdoe without blushing (c) Ch. pl. p. 86. charge me let the judicious impartiall Readers judge SECT V. Touching the Testimonies of English Non-conformists VNder the title of this kinde of witnesses they alledge against me the Replyer to D. Downame Mr Parker the Authour of the English Puritanisme D. Ames Mr Baines Mr Bates Mr Fenner Mr Udall the English Church at Franck ford and Mr Hooker These are (d) Ch. pl. p. 86 c. here produced and in another (e) P. 23. place unto which he referres us for the same purpose he cites also the Protestation of the Kings Supremacic D. Fulke and our Country-men in New-England For answer hereunto First concerning some of these that seeme to be of Mr Cannes minde in denying the authority of Synods in the government of the Church observe how idlie and superfluously he alledgeth them against me when as he knowes that I my self did acknowledge and note so much before as namely the judgement of (f) Answ to W. B. p. 74. Mr Hooker (g) Ib. p. 27 D. Ames and the Author of the booke entitled English Puritanisme by whom also the Protestation of K. Supremacie is sayd to be written These I have confessed to be opposite unto me in this
hath ordained these Holy assemblies with promise that they being gathered together in the name of Christ he himself will be among them With the Synod the Pastour hath authority to determine concerning regiment of the Church Againe (d) P. 115 116. 117. Let us returne to the authority of the Synod which consisteth in deciding and determining such matters as cannot otherwise in particular Churches be concluded either because they concerne the common state of all Churches or because they lack sufficient authority in some one Church First therefore the lawfull Synod hath to consider if any controversy of doctrine doe arise that it be determined by the word of God c. Secondly it hath to determine of the use of the ceremonies not of will without reason or ground of Scripture but upon necessary causes of avoiding offence and similitude of superstition of bearing with the weak of order and comelinesse and edification So did the Synod of the Apostles and Elders command for a time abstinencie from meat offered to Idols otherwise lawfull in it selfe for offences sake c. Also for order and comelines and best edification the Synod hath to determine what shall be observed in particular charges as of the time place and forme of preaching and praying and administring of the Sacraments For who should be able to know what order comelines and edification requireth according to Gods word but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others For it is absurd that they should be taught by such in these small things as ought to learne the trueth of them in all matters c. (e) P. 118. It is out of all controversy that before there were any Christian Magistrates this authority was proper unto the Synod Which authority we know to be granted to the Church by our Saviour Christ practised by his Apostles continued by their successours three hundred yeares before there were any Christian Emperours and long time after there were Christian Emperours even as long as any puritie continued in religion untill both Emperours and Synods were thrust out of all lawfull authoritie which they ought to have in the Church by the tyrannie of Antichrist In the same learned Discourse of Ecclesiasticall Government it is further added (f) P. 122. 123. 124. The Synod hath further authority concerning Discipline to reforme and redresse by Ecclesiasticall Censure all such defaults and controversies as cannot be determined in the particular Churches as for example If the Pastour himselfe have need to be severely punished where there is but one Pastour in a Church or if Elders which should be reformers of others have notoriously misgoverned themselves or if they have beene led by affection to condemne an innocent or to justifye the ungodly in these and such like cases all contention is to be concluded by the authority of the Synod Some example we have thereof Act. 15. where those contentious Schismatiques that withstood Paul and Barnabas at Antiochia were constrained to yeeld by authority of the Councell and Paul and Barnabas restored to their credit For which causes Synodes ought oftentimes to be assembled though not generall of the whole Realme but particular of every Province or Shire as it may be most conveniently that such things as are to be reformed may be redressed with speed These and many other such like assertions in allowance of Synods and their authority hath this learned Authour whom yet they have alledged against me Had Will. Best but had so much wit or conscience as to have duely looked upon these English Authors being but small treatises and perused them diligently he might easily have learned hereby what order God requires in the Government of his Church But taking so much upon trust and presuming blindely upon the fidelity and skill of a Brownist therefore is he runne into Scandall having published many slanders against the Churches of Christ and wrested so many witnesses against their meanings In the next place the Testimony of Mr Fenner doth fitly offer itself to be examined of us for seeing he tooke upon him the Defence of the former Authour against Bridges who impugned that learned Discourse of Eccles Gov. we have reason to exspect that he also will defend the authority of Synods in like manner As for the two pages which Mr Ca. (g) Against Bridges p. 15 16. alledgeth he neither specifyeth his words neither doe I finde in either of those pages any one word against the use of Classes or Synods amōgst us but on the contrary a cleare testimony which he gives unto them For speaking there in pag. 16. of the forme of Discipline appoynted of God and of the severall points thereof particularly set downe in the word of God with other he reckoneth up these the joynt care of Elderships and Synods Afterwards he speaketh more fully in praise of this government and saith (h) Def. of Ecc. Disci ag Bridg. p. 105. The nature of this order itself which admitteth no Minister but learned nor any decision of weight but by advise of many with appointed conferences and Synods of learned men for such purposes besides the assurance of Gods favourable blessing of his owne ordinance and the experience of the Synodes of the Reformed Churches the comparison of their judgements Canons and other constitutions with the like of the other in any part beareth witnesse whether the want of learning and pietie both must needes be greater in it then in the other Whereas D. Fulk had given unto these Churches which have a Classicall and Synodall government the title and praise of (i) Learn Disc of Ecc. Gov. p. 7. rightly reformed Churches when D. Bridges was offended therewith Mr Fenner maintaines that praise to be due unto them and commends k their entire and whole obedience which they yeeld to God in receyving all the holy doctrine of our Saviour Christ both concerning things to be beleeved and also concerning the spirituall policie Discipline and order for guiding of his Church And further in the same place he repeats and undertakes to defend D. Fulkes words perswading to imbrace that most beautifull order of Ecclesiasticall regiment which God doth so manifestly blesse and prosper in our neighbours hands Hereby it may appeare how farre Mr Fenner was from that erroneous and slanderous spirit of Mr C. and W.B. And here by the example of W. Best all simple ignorant men are to be warned of publishing such false things as he hath done upon the credit of other men that are strangers from the Churches of Christ Moreover the judgement of Mr Fenner in approving this use of Synods for the government of Churches and judgement of causes may be clearly seen in sundry other testimonies which he hath given to this purpose and which I have (l) P. 84-88 before noted where among the rest when having maintained the right of Synods to be jure divino alledging many Scriptures for the warrant thereof he
Catharists were excommunicated by a Synod holden at Rome consisting of 60 Bishops with many Elders and Deacons how k L. 7. c. 29. Paulus Samosatenus was deposed and excommunicated by a Synod holden at Antioch He declares l De vita Const l. 3. c. 6 7 c. at large and celebrates the piety of Constantine the great friend maintainer of Christian religion for assembling the Nicene Synod wherein Arius was condemned And in like manner he shewes the m Ibid. l. 1. c. 44. impiety of the Emperour Licinius the enemy of God who by a mischievous devise sought to ruinate the Churches of God by depriving them of their liberty in meeting together in Synods for deciding of their controversies So expressely and clearely doth Eusebius give testimony unto Synods That which is collected out of Athanasius viz. that elections excommunications c. according to the Apostles precept ought to be done in the publick Congregation by the Ministers they taking first the peoples voyce or consent is such as I doe willingly assent unto Neither was there ever any election either of Minister Elder or Deacon nor any excommunicatiō of any offender among us but that the matter was first solemnely communicated with the Church and declared severall times in the publick Congregation the consent of the people required obtained before any such act was confirmed finished among us But what is this to the purpose Athanasius notwithstanding this doth witnesse unto us that the causes and controversies of particular Churches were in his time submitted to the censure of other Churches and to another superiour Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves This Athanasius shewes in these very places here alledged against me And in the first of them having n Tom. 1. Epist ad ubiq Orthodoxos made a lamentable narration of the miseries procured to the Church of Alexandria by the intrusion and cruelty of an Arian Bishop he then most vehemently supplicates unto those that were members of the same body with them in other Churches that as the former yeare their brethren at Rome were willing to have called a Synod but that they were hindred so they having greater occasion to vindicate the Church of God from new evills would 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by their suffrages condemne and reject the Authors of such mischiefes And more plainely in the 2d place he declares o Epist ad Solit. vitam agentes at length that in the Synod holden at Sardica where Hosius was President and whither the accusers of Athanasius were cited the cause being heard the Synod did not onely advise and counsell what was meet to be done but did give sentence touching the matters of controversy absolved Athanasius and deposed the Bishops that were found guilty such as Stephanus Menophantus Acacius Georgius Vrsacius Valens Theodorus Narcissus As for the third allegation Epist cont Nicae c. 9. Ecc. Hist it seemes to be misquoted I finde no such Title in all the works of Athanasius Instead thereof therefore let us see another testimonie of his wherein he teacheth what the government of the Church was in those times namely ruled by authoritie of Synods where the weightier causes were judged decided Of this he p Tom. 2. Epist ad Rusinian gives instances in the Synods of Alexandria Greece and Spaine where Euzoius Eudoxius and such principall offenders were deposed from their offices and other upon their repentance retained And the like Ecclesiasticall authority is in many other places throughout his writings by him commended unto us Let us heare how Mr C. proceeds I. C. To these we will adde Epiphanius Ierome Ambrose Cyrill Hillarie and Greg. Nazianzen writers in noe age Touching Ecclesiasticall Government these to this purpose speake Particular Churches may lawfully ordaine their owne Bishops without other Presbyters assisting them Epiph. cont Haer. 73. and among themselves excommunicate offenders Id. l. 1. Haeres 30. Tom. 2. Haer. 5. ANSVV. I. Here be three places at once misalledged In the two latter viz. Haer. 30. and Haer. 5. there is nothing at all spoken touching this poynt In the first of them viz. Haer. 73. he doth but catch at a shadow and pervert the words of Epiphanius and falsify them by changing some and adding other and omitting other that might give light unto the question His words upon occasion of Meletius his confession and suffering for the trueth are these There are many people of this order of this Synod which setting Bishops over themselves doe make a marvellous confession touching the faith doe not reject the word Coessentiall Yea and say they are ready if there were a perfect Synod to confesse not to deny it Here is no mention of particular Churches or Congregations nor of lawfully ordayning nor of doing this without other Presbyters assisting them But that which is recorded touching the acknowledgement of a lawfull or perfect Synod that is omitted Thus he varyeth from the Latine translation of Epiphanius the Originall Greek in divers Copies is further from the matter having this beside other differences 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which made themselves to be Bishops instead of lawfully ordaining their owne Bishops Such are the Allegations of Mr Canne II. Suppose the words Epiphanius had bene the same that Mr C. relates yet had not the authority of Synods bene any thing diminished thereby Is it not the common and ordinary practise in these Reformed Churches that where two or more Ministers are in one Congregation there the newly elected Ministers are ordained and confirmed without any other Presbyters from other Churches to assist them Yet this is no good argument to prove they want Classes and Synods And though also they doe among themselves excommunicate offenders yet this hinders not but that Classes or Synods may exercise their authority in judging or censuring such as have unjustly excommunicated any or proceeded contrary to their advise therein III. That Epiphanius did approve the authority and jurisdiction of Synods it is manifest by his practise It is q Socrat. Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 9. recorded of him that he being Bishop of Salamis or Constantia in Cyprus procured a Synod to be called in that Iland wherein the bookes of Origen were condemned a decree made that none should read his bookes IV. Epiphanius did not onely approve the lawfull authority of Synods but he went further and did maintaine the unlawfull authoritie of particular persons over divers Churches This appeareth in his r Epiph. Haer. 75. condemning of Aërius of heresie that held Bishops Presbyters to be the same by divine institution whom D. Whitaker ſ De Pont. Rom. q. 1. p. 104 105 106. doth justly defend against Bellarmine and others and shewes that Hierome and other ancient Fathers were of the same minde with Aërius therein and sayth that we are not to regard the absurd men that doe so often object Aërius unto us he sayth Epiphanius doth foolishly and childishly
answer the testimonies produced by Aërius and wonders that such a Divine that tooke upon him to refute all Heretickes did not see his owne foule errour Yea it is further t Soc. Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 11.13 recorded of Epiphanius that he disorderly intruded himself into the charge of Chrysostome contrary to the Ecclesiasticall Canons observed in those times by celebrating the Lords supper ordaining a Deacon in the Church at Constantinople And thus we see Mr Cannes witnesses are in extremity opposite unto himself Another of his witnesses is Ierome from whom he alledgeth that v Jer. ad Gal. q. 10. In every Congregation there ought to be a Senate or assembly of Elders To this I answer I. This is nothing against the authority of Synods The Reformed Churches have in every Congregation such a Senate of Elders and yet this hinders not but that they have ought to have Classes Synods also both for direction and correction of Elderships and for decision of the controversies arising in particular Churches II. Though every Congregation ought to have a Senate of Elders yet Ierome doth not avouch so much in the place alledged His words are falsifyed for in the place which they misquote ad Gal. instead of ad Alg. the words of Jerome are these x Ad Algas qu. 10. How great the traditions of the Pharisees are which at this day they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and what old wives fables I cannot expresse For neither doth the greatnes of the booke permit and many of them are so filthy that I blush to tell And yet saith he I will tell one of them to the ignominy of that envyous nation They have Rulers in their Synagogues of their wisest men deputed unto a filthy work c. What this filthy work was though Jerome expresse it yet I thinke it shame to publish And this which he saith in detestation of the Jewes without approbation of their order is all that he there saith for an assembly of Elders So vaine and insufficient are the Allegations of Mr Canne III. That Hierome allowed the authority of Synods above particular Churches it may appeare by that he sayth y Ad Euagriu ep 85. Si authoritas quaeritur orbis major est urbe If we seek for authority greater is the world then the city that is as D. Whitaker expounds the same the Churches dispersed through the world he sayth z De Pont. Rom. qu. ◠p. 9◠99. All the authority of the Church of Rome is not so great as is the authority of all Churches every where And thereby he acknowledgeth the authority of Synods arising from the deputation of many Churches to be greater then the single authority of any one particular Church Besides whereas Damasus Bishop of Rome was a zealous opposite to the Arian Macedonian and other heresies and in divers Synods furthered the censure and condemnation of such as persisted in those errours and wrote divers Synodicall Epistles which witnesse the exercise of that authority by Synods Hierome a Ad Gerontiam confesseth that in the writing of those Synodall letters he did assist and help Damasus which he could not with good conscience have done unlesse he had allowed the authority of Synods Lastly if Hierome wrote that in every particular Congregation there ought to be a Senate or assembly of Elders then is Mr Canne and his Congregation condemned by Hierome because they have now for many yeares had no Senate nor assembly of Elders to governe them Mr Canne being sole governour of them without an Eldership In the next place touching this assembly of Elders he addes that The power of choosing them is in the people And for this he alledgeth three Authours together b Ad Rust Hil. ad Cōst August Cyr. in Ioh. 20.21 Hierome Hilarie Cyrill I answer For Hierome ad Rusticum there is nothing at all spoken touching the matter but he is falsely alledged For Hilary I. He is also falsely alledged he sayth nothing touching the Senate or assembly of Elders of which Mr C. speakes II. Though he entreat Constantius the Arian Emperour who had banished many worthy Bishops that he would permit the people to heare those Teachers and Ministers of the Sacraments whom they would whom they thought good and whom they had chosen that they might offer up prayers for his safety and felicity yet doth he not hereby prejudice the authority and jurisdiction of Synods This hinders not but that Synods might censure and judge of the elections made by the people and of other controversies of particular Churches III. Hilary also c Cent. Magdeb. Cent. 4. c. 10 col 1134 1135. wrote a peculiar booke touching Synods exstant among his workes which he had translated out of Greek into Latine wherein the Acts and decrees of divers Synods that censured and condemned the Arian heresy are recorded Had he thought with my opposites that this jurisdiction of Synods had bene an usurped and unlawfull power he ought not to have given so much approbation of them in alledging their authority for defense of his opinion without some testification against their power Besides what colour of reason hath Mr C. to shew that Hilarius should vary from the judgement of Orthodox Bishops who in that age d Ib. Cent. 4. c. 7. col 519. 528 c. ordinarily used to meet together in Synods for the exercise of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction For Cyrill in Ioh. 20.21 whom he also brings to prove that the Senate or assembly of Elders ought to be chosen by the people he is in like manner abused and falsely alledged by him For I. Cyrill upon those words of Christ As the Father hath sent me so send I you sayth that Christ in those words ordained the Teachers of the world and Ministers of the divine mysteries c. That therefore Paul is true saying No man takes this honour unto himself c. Heb. 5. c. He shewes how Christ called his Disciples but hath not a word neither touching an assembly of Elders nor of their choosing by the people Such falshood and forgery there is in the Allegations of Mr C. And yet if he had spoken as much as is here pretended it had bene no empeachment unto the authority of Synods as was shewed before II. That this Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria did acknowledge the use of Synods not onely for counsell and admonition but for censure and judgement of causes it appeareth evidently by his practise while in the e Euagr. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 4. Synod holden at Ephesus in the time of Theodosius he being a principall member of that Synod did together with others give sentence against Nestorius and deposed him from his office for his obstinacy in refusing to appeare before them and for his heresy whereof he had bene convicted The next witnesse abused by him is Ambrose who is alledged to shew what the Senate or assembly of Elders is to doe viz.
Christ from having a keye of power in the judgement of Ecclesiasticall causes Had he proved that the title of the Church belongs onely to a particular Congregation in the full assembly thereof and not at all unto a Synod then had it bene something to the purpose in the meane time nothing And that the minde of Augustine was otherwise it appeares by the great approbation which he (v) Epist ad Ianuar. Ep. 118. De Bapt. cont Don. l. 2. c. 3. gives unto the use and authority of Synods as being most wholesome in the Churches of God D. Whitaker (x) DePont Rom. q. 4. p. 484. 497 alledgeth often the presence of Augustine at divers Synods And it is recorded in the Acts of the third Councell of Carthage where Augustine was both present and subscribed with the rest unto the decrees which were then agreed upon (y) Magdeb. Cent. 4. c. 9. co 866 867. that there should be kept a yearely Synod unto which they were to repaire out of divers Provinces that those which having controversies with others being called unto the yearely Synod did refuse to come should be held guilty and be excluded from the communion or excommunicated And it is (z) Ib. Col. 870 c. noted further that the like decrees were made at another Synod held at Hippo the place where Augustine lived and that the same decrees were againe confirmed by another Synod at Carthage Hence it appeares that Augustine as well as others in his time did hold that the causes of particular Congregations were to be judged decided by another Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves After Augustine he alledgeth Chrysostome whose name is also abused for confirmation of this opinion For I. Chrysostome in the place alledged viz. De Sacerd l. 3. c. 4. speakes of no such matter as he pretends In that whole third book I finde no one word against the authority of Synods And for the fourth chapter which Mr C. alledgeth there is in the best editions of Chrysostome no such chapter they are not at all distinguished into any Chapters and where there is a division of Chapters found yet there is no such matter to be found in that fourth Chapter Mr Canne it seemes never read the Authours he alledgeth for would he then have so falsely cited them II. Chrysostome is plaine for the authority of Synods For speaking of the honour due unto the Deputies or messengers of the Churches in Synods he saith the Apostle (a) In 2. Cor. 8.24 maketh his speech more terrible saying in the sight of the Churches He saith it for the glory of the Churches for their honour For if ye honour them ye shall honour the Churches which sent them c. And then he concludeth This shall be no small matter for great is the power of a Synod that is of the Churches III. When as a wrongfull sentence had bene given against Chrysostome being unjustly procured by Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria he then (b) Tom. 5. Epist ad Innocent appealed unto a Synod of many Bishops both before and after the sentence was pronounced The summe of his defence afterward was this that he was willing to be judged by a Synod And he complaines that his adversaries dealt with him contrary to the Ecclesiasticall Canons In those Canons it had bene oft decreed that there should be liberty of appeale unto Synods IV. When Bellarmine pleading for the Popes authority alledged the request of Chrysostome unto Innocentius Bishop of Rome desiring him to write for him that those things which were unjustly done against him might not prevayle c. Chamierus expounding the words of Chrysostome (c) Panstra Cath. Tom. 2. l. 13. c. 23 distinguisheth betwixt admonition and giving of sentence and shewes that Chrysostome desired an admonition should be given by Innocentius but that he exspected sentence from a Synod Chamier sayth this is confirmed to be his meaning because he appealed to the Synod c. And hereby he expressly and distinctly confesseth that Synods have jurisdiction to give sentence and not onely a liberty of admonishing V. When after this Chrysostome (d) Socr. Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 14. having bene both deposed from his place and banished out of the city was yet called back by the Emperour from his banishment and was by the people desired to enter upon his ministery againe he professed he might not doe it untill his cause was further examined he proved innocent by greater judges or in a greater judicatory (e) Edit gr R. Steph. l. 6. c. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein he acknowledged a power of Synods not onely above a particular Congregation but also of one Synod above another as of a Generall Synod above a Nationall or Provinciall c. VI. The minde of Chrysostome touching Church-government may further be knowne to us by this that he (f) In Matt. 18. will have those words Tell the Church to be understood of the Presidents or Governours of the Church And againe speaking of Priests or Bishops the Ministers of the Gospell he thus describeth their speciall power (g) De Sacerd l. 3. Col. 508. Edit Basil It is granted unto them to dispense the things that are in heaven power is given unto them which God would not have to be given either unto Angels or Arch-angels For it was not sayd unto them Whatsoever ye binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Earthly Princes have also the power of binding but of the bodies onely But that binding by the Priests whereof I speake remaineth unto the soule commeth up to the heavens so that whatsoever the Priests doe below that God ratifyeth above the Lord confirmeth the sentence of his servants What els can you say this to be but that all power of heavenly things is granted unto them of God For the sayth Whose sinnes ye retaine they are retayned What power I pray you can be greater then this one The next perverted witnesse is Basil touching whom observe I. Their threefold false allegation in citing three severall bookes of his viz. Constit Monach. l. 4. 14. 6.2 7. c. 35. whereas Basil wrote onely one booke with such a title and as for the 4th 6 t 7th here mentioned by Mr C. there be none such What grosse dealing is this II. Suppose it was the Printers fault that these bookes were thus misalledged and that it was but Mr Cannes oversight to let them passe without correction yet even for that one book of Monasticall constitutions which Basil did write therein also is nothing to be found against the authority of Synods nor any such matter as Mr C. pretends It is a great forgery and abuse of the ancient Fathers thus to pretend the vaile of their authority for covering of errour when as the places pretended have not a word sounding to such purpose III. That Basil allowed
the authority of Synods for the judgement of Ecclesiasticall causes it appeareth both by the praise which he (h) Basil Magn. Epi. 60. 78. gives unto the Nicene Synod that for the censuring of Hereticks which was an act of jurisdiction and not of admonition or counsell onely and againe in that he complaineth unto his great friend Nazianzen touching the intermission of Synodall assemblies and saith (i) Ep. 33. If we had yearely met oftner together both according to the ancient Canons and according to that care and solicitude which we owe unto the Churches certainely we had never opened a doore unto slanderers And againe writing unto Athanasius touching such meetings he calleth them (k) Eâ— 48. the way of help for troubled Churches Thus also doe the Centurists (l) Cent. 4. c. 7. col 522 understand him and alledge his testimony to shew the consociation of many Churches in Synods in that age The Author next objected is also misalledged The letter of reference in the line leades us unto a book in the margine which was not written by Socrates and what place he therefore intends in Socrates he must tell us another time In the meane time let it be remembred that this Ecclesiasticall Historiographer doth plainely and plentifully record against my opposites that the causes and controversies arising in particular Churches were judged by another superiour Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves to wit by the authority of many Churches concurring by their Deputies in Synods This he shewes in the (m) Hist Ecc. l. 1. c. 5 condemnation of Arius by the Councell of Nice in the (n) L. 2. c. 24. deprivation of Photinus by the Synod of Siâ—mium in the (o) L. 7. c. 33. deposition of Nestorius by the Councell held at Ephesus and in many other the like instances If happily he intended those places misapplyed unto Basil in the former quotation he is not thereby excused seeing in the first place viz. l. 4. c. 14. there is nothing at all spoken of this matter and in the two latter viz. l. 6. 2. 7. 35. Socrates againe declares the authority of Synods in those times Isidorus it seemes must owne the quotation Lib. de Offic. which by the marginall note is assigned to Socrates he having written two bookes concerning Ecclesiasticall Offices These Mr Canne cites at large without specifying either book or chapter But in those bookes of Isidorus as there be many things which Mr C. would not be bound to approve so there is nothing that with any shew of reason can be applyed against the authority of Classes and Synods On the contrary we may justly inferre that he did not there restraine all Ecclesiasticall power unto a particular Congregation as from many other so especially from these his words (p) De Offi. Ecc. l. 2. c. 6 Moreover that a Bishop is not ordained of one but of all the Bishops of the Provinces this is acknowledged to be appointed because of heresies lest by the tyrannicall authority of some one ordaining they should attempt any thing against the faith of the Church Therefore they all concurring he is confirmed and no lesse then three being present the rest consenting by the testimony of their letters Againe for other of his writings to shew his judgement in this poynt this Isidorus is (q) Cus de Conc. Cath. l. 2. c. 3. c. sayd to have made a collection of all the Synods that were before his time which booke is (r) Concil Tom. 2. p. 146 147. alledged in a Synodall Epistle of the Councell of Basil to prove the authority of Councels above the Pope For his practise he is (Å¿) Magdeb. Cent. â— col 261-287 513. recorded to have bene President of a Synod at Sevill in Spaine were he was Bishop and as some relate of two other at Toledo wherein appeare divers actes of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in the exercise whereof he joyned with others after the manner of Synodall proceedings Bernard is in like manner misalledged through want of attentioÌ„ diligence not onely by a wrong note of reference but by a defective mention of his writing Ad Eugen. For Bernard having written 5 bookes of Consideration Ad Eugen. and besides them more then 30 Epistles Ad Eugen. he doth not specify which of these bookes or which of these Epistles he meanes But whether we consider those bookes or Epistles we finde Bernard in extremity opposite to Mr Canne giving power not onely unto Synods as the Ancient Fathers before mentioned but even to the Pope himself to judge the causes of all Churches For living in a time of great blindenes and height of Poperie when the smoke of the bottomlesse pit had darkned the Sunne and the ayre he was led aside through ignorance to exalt Antichrist and writing unto Pope Eugenius that had bene his disciple he gives him these most ambitious titles and (t) De CoÌ„si ad Eugen. l. 2. c. 8. calles him the great Priest the supreme High Priest the Prince of Bishops the heire of the Apostles Abel in primacy Noah in government Abraham in Patriarkship Melchisedek in order Aaron in dignity Moses in authority Samuel in judgement Peter in power Christ in unction c. the onely Pastour of all flockes and of all Pastours themselves c. the Vicar of Christ c. And though otherwise he gave many lively testimonies of a godly minde that was in him yet not without cause is he (v) Whit. de Pont. Rom. q. 4. p. 425.426 taxed for blasphemy in these unrighteous titles given to the man of sinne More particularly in his first Epistle which he wrote unto Eugenius after he was created Pope upon occasion of the controversy that was betwixt the Archbishop of York the Archbishop of Canterbury he puts this Pope in minde that he (x) Bernar. ad Eugen. Epist 237. hath authority to judge the controversies that arise in other Churches and wisheth him to use the same and to give unto them according to their works that they might know there is a Prophet in Israel And writing againe (y) Ep. 238 of the same matter he calles the Archbishop of York that Idol of York in regard of his intrusion he might better have entitled Eugenius the Idoll of Rome provokes the Pope as having the fullnes of power to cast his dart to give peremptory sentence of deposition against the Arch B. and as the phrase of Bernard is to lighten or strike with the thunderbolt of his power The like exercise of power over those in other Congregations is often elswhere (z) Ad Innoc Epist 189 190. allowed by him And hereby it may appeare how grossely Mr Canne hath alledged these ancient Writers quite contrary to their meaning and Bernard in speciall that subjects Congregations not onely to Councels and Synods as the Fathers before alledged have justly done but doth unjustly subject them to one person even to the
man of sinne With these testimonies of ancient Fathers Mr Canne alledgeth for his opinion that some Councels have granted so much and Christian Emperours by their Lawes confirmed it Two of these viz. the Councell of Nice Constantinople he alledgeth at large and specifyes no Canon which he intendeth for this purpose And as for the 3d Councell of Carthage whereat Augustine was present I have shewed * Pa. 223. before that it makes directly for us That 22th Canon which he alledgeth viz. (a) Magdeb. Cent. 4. c. 9. col 868. that no Clerk be or dained without examination by Bishops and testimony of the people empeacheth not the authority of Classes and Synods but confirmeth the order established by them And that Christian Emperours have by their lawes confirmed the authority of Synods it is plaine and undenyable The (b) Sulp. Se. v S. Hist l. 2 Councell of Nice that condemned Arius was authorised by Constantine the Great The (c) Sulp. S. Hist conâ—in ex Sleyd p. 162. Councell of Constantinople that condemned Macedonius was authorised by the Emperour Theodosius the Elder The (d) P. 164. Councell of Ephesus that condemned Nestorius was authorised by Theodosius the younger The (e) P. 170. Councell of Chalcedon that condemned Eutyches was authorised by the Emperour Martianus And as it was in these first Generall Councels so may it be observed in many other Instead of the rest let the (f) Codex Canon Ecc. Univ. edit Christ Just book of Canons suffice confirmed by Iustinian the Emperour there being contained in that book many Canons which ordaine that the causes of particular Churches should be (g) Can. 5 80 83 85. judged by Synods and so decided by another superiour Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves At the end of these Canons there is added the sanction or decree of Iustinian (h) Novella consti Just Imper. 131. by which he doth not onely allow them and give force of lawes unto them but with an excessive farre greater honour then is due unto them would have the foure Oecumenicall Councels to be receaved even as the holy Scriptures Now though he offended greatly in this his esteeme of them yet this may serve to shew what little reason Mr Canne had to alledge the decrees of Councels for his opinion SECT VII Touching the Testimonies of Reformed Churches FRom ancient times they come back to the later times of Reformation and say (a) Ch. pl. p. 91. Touching Reformed Churches if we may take the Confession of their faith for testimony then surely we have their consent also with us The Churches consenting with them as they vainely imagine are these according to their order in alledging of them The Bohemian Churches Churches under the Palsgrave the Helvetian Churches the French Churches Churches of the Auspurge Confession of the Low-countries of Nasovia But the trueth is both these and other Reformed Churches doe condemne my oppisites in allowing of Synods to judge the causes of particular Congregations The Confession of the Bohemian Churches say they hath these words (b) Harm Conf. c. 14. The keyes that is Ecclesiasticall Government are given in trust and granted to the Pastours and to each severall Ecclesiasticall society that is ordinary Congregation whether they be small or great I answer I. This testimony is clipped by Mr Canne who leaves out the words of order which shew their opinion touching the originall and derivation of this power The words of this Bohemian Confession are that the keyes of the Lord or this administration and power of the keyes is granted and delivered first unto the Governours and Ministers of the Church and then unto every Christian Congregation c. Therein they doe not consent with Mr Canne but with the opinion of Mr Baines noted (c) P. 114 115. before And they doe there also apply these words unto absolution given by the Priest of the Church as they call him To this end they alledge those places Ioh. 20.23 Luk. 10.16 Their meaning is declared more fully before where they (d) Harmo Confes Art 5. de Poenit. p. 241. edit 1612. teach that the poenitent are to come unto the Priest and to confesse their sinnes unto God before him c. and to desire absolution of him by the keyes of the Church that they may obtaine remission of sinnes by such a ministery so instituted of Christ. This order seemes to agree with that forme of absolution described and appointed in the English booke of Common prayer at the visitation of the sick 11. It is acknowledged by the Ministers of the Church of the Picards so called in Bohemia and Moravia in the (e) P. 219. preface to the forementioned Confession of their fayth that their fathers had appealed unto a Synod c. where if any thing should be found dissonant from the Scriptures they were willing from the heart and lovingly to be subject and obedient to the censure and appointment of the Synod in all things This shewes their dissent from Mr Canne and his people III. The Combination of the Christian and Orthodox Churches in Bohemia and Moravia called by themselves The Vnitie of the brethren in Bohemie doth give a cleare testimony unto the trueth touching the authority of Synods for the government of particular Churches and judgement of their causes by a superiour Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves as appeareth in the booke of their Discipline where they (f) Ratio Discip ordinisq Ecc. in Unitate frat Bohem. c. 2. p. 33.34 38. professe that for weighty causes in providing for the necessities of the whole Vnitie or some Diocesse therein they use to hold Synods either Generall or Particular c. They alledge these 5 ends To confirme brotherly love and concord To strengthen them in the work of the Lord To preserve the vigour of Discipline To exclude scandalous persons out of the number of their Ministers c. To ordaine Ministers c. and for the (g) Ib. p. 41. examination of Ministers before they be confirmed The exercise of this authority is also declared in their (h) Ib. cap. 6. p. 87 88. c. Visitations of the Churches which are in their Vnitie or consociation This example of these brethren of the Vnitie is so much the more to be regarded of us in respect of the singular providence blessing of God in preserving them to this day in the midst of so many persecutions as they have endured being more ancient then other Reformed Churches having continued from the dayes of Iohn Husse and being holpen by the Waldenses that were scattered into those parts so that they (i) Ib. pref p. 2 3. were increased to almost 200 little Congregations in Bohemia Moravia about the yeare 1500 before the time of Luther Their piety love concord and zeale of religion notwithstanding some imperfections appeares by their orders to be very great in speciall their care of sanctifying the
subject unto one another and unto that which is concluded by all Yea this equality is confirmed by the Synodicall decree in this very Article Whereas there be many evidences of the Reformed Churches in France which shew what their judgement and practise is touching the subjection of particular Congregations unto a superiour Ecclesiasticall power yet instead of many one for the rest may suffice which is from the (y) Oordeel en uyrsprake met den Eed vā Approbatie vā het Synode Nation der Gereform Kerckē van Vrancrijck gehoudē tot Ales in de Cevennes besloten en̄ gearresteert den 6. Oct. 1620. Nationall Synod of Ales translated and published in divers languages containing a most pregnant testimony touching this poynt of our controversie Mr C. and W. B. doe falsely tell me of a Iurie of more then 24 men which condemne my position for an errour and untrueth but as we have seene before in the Ministers of the Palatinate so loe here againe a Jurie indeed of more then twise 24 men and of the most choyse Ministers and Elders of all the French Churches and all sworne to submit unto the resolution and sentence concluded by authority of that Synod After a proposition (z) P. 3. ◠made in this Synod by Monsr Turretin touching some meanes to hinder the Arminian Errours c. the Assembly liking wel of that motion and much commending the Synod of Dort as an effectuall remedie to purge the Church and to root out the heresies touching the poynt of praedestination c. after invocation of the name of God they agreed that the Canons of the forenamed Synod of Dort should be read in their full assembly which being done and every Article seriously weighed they were then by universall consent approved as agreeable to Gods word c. Hereupon all the Ministers and Elders deputed unto this Assembly did each of them severally sweare and protest that they consented and accorded with this doctrine and that they should maintaine and defend it with all their might unto the last breath And to (a) P. 4.5 make this concordant agreement the more authentick and to binde all the Provinces thereunto the Assembly ordained that this present Article should be printed and joyned with the Canons of the mentioned Synod and that the same should be read in the Provinciall Synods and in the Universities that there it might be approved sworne and subscribed unto by the Ministers Elders and Professours of the Universities as also by those that desired to be admitted unto the holy Ministery or unto any Academicall profession And if (b) P. 5. any man should reject either in whole or in part the doctrine contayned in the foresaid Synod and defined by the Canons thereof or should refuse to take the Oath of consent and approbation the Assembly ordained that the same should not be receaved unto any ministery in the Church or unto any office of Schoolemaister The forme of oath taken first in the Nationall Synod afterward to be taken in the Provinciall Synods was (c) P. 6. this I N. sweare and protest before God and this holy Assembly that I receave approve and embrace the whole doctrine taught and decided in the Synod of Dort as being wholy conformed unto the word of God and the Confession of our Churches I sweare and promise during my life to continue in the profession of this doctrine and to defend the same according to my utmost power that I neither in preaching nor teaching in the schooles nor in writing will ever depart from this Rule I declare also and protest that I reject and condemne the doctrine of the Arminians seeing it doth hang the election of God upon the will of man diminisheth and disannulleth the grace of God exalts man and the strength of his free will to cast him downe from above brings in againe Pelagianisme excuseth Popery and overthrowes the certainty of salvation So truely let God help me and be mercifull unto me as I doe before him sweare that which is aforesayd without any equivocation or evasion or inward mentall reservation After this followes the (d) P. 7 8 9 10 11. subscription of the names of the principall lights starres of the French Churches the Ministers and Elders deputed and sent unto that Nationall Synod from the Churches in the severall Provinces of France as of Picardie Champagne the French Iland Normandie Bretagne Dauphine Burgundie Languedoc Guienne Poictou Aniou and many others Hereby the Reader may perceave what power and authority is exercised in the Reformed Churches of France that they doe not observe their Synods for to conclude matters by way of advise and counsell onely but by their decrees and ordinances doe binde men to submit unto their sentence and judgement excluding those from the ministery professions in Universities or Schooles that refuse to consent and yeeld unto their resolutions Hereby it appeares how vainely Mr Canne alledgeth their Confessions perverteth them quite contrary to their meanings That which is alledged out of the Confession of Ausburgh comes not neere the question betwixt us For what though it be there affirmed (e) Confes August Art 14. that no man ought to teach publickly in the Church or to administer the Sacraments unlesse he be lawfully called This proves not that calling to be unlawfull which is directed by an Ecclesiasticall authority out of a particular Congregation or that Classes and Synods have no right to hinder the disordred callings of unfit persons when particular Churches doe offend therein And that the Authors of that Confession did approve of the authority of Synods for the judgement of Ecclesiasticall causes it appeareth both by (f) Syntag. Confes par 2. p. 7. their Appeale unto a generall free Christian Councell which they humbly request and seek in their preface unto the Emperour Charles the fift and afterwards againe speaking of the meanes to purge the Church from abuses they say that (g) Ib. p. 28.29 Confes August Art 21. now long agoe all good men in all nations doe desire a Synod And further This is the usuall and lawfull way to end dissensions namely to referre Ecclesiasticall controversies unto Synods This manner the Church hath observed even from the Apostles And the most excellent Emperours Constantine and Theodosius even in matters not very obscure and in absurd opinions would yet ordaine nothing without a Synod that they might preserve the liberty of the Church in the judgements of doctrines And it is most honourable for the Emperour to imitate the example of those the best Princes c. And therefore as in the times of Constantine and Theodosius particular Churches were subject unto another superiour Ecclesiasticall power that judged their causes and censured offendours so they of the Ausburg Confession desired the like of Charles the fift The publick order set forth in these Low countries is in the next place alledged against me But the (h) Art
31. Article of the Belgick Confession which is poynted at hath nothing that serves their turne against me neither doe they shew what clause therein they intend for their purpose And what seemes most to accord with their former allegations I haue answered before But for the Synods of these Countries whereas Mr C. saith (i) Ch. pl. p. 91.92 What those Synods were of whom Mr Paget speaketh in pag. 66. who decreed that particular Congregations should not practise among themselves all Gods ordinances I doe not yet know but this I know that no Reformed Church hath made this an Article of their faith And therefore it is certaine if such a thing be it was onely the invention of some particular men It is here to be observed 1. That Mr Canne falsifyeth my words that which I sayd was this (k) Answ to W.B. p. 66. When the busines is so weighty that by former generall consent of Churches testifyed by their Deputies meeting together in their Synods it hath bene agreed that the same shall not be proceeded in without advise of the Classis such as is the election of Ministers the excommunication of offenders and the like that in such cases ordinarily matters are brought unto the Classis c. Now this voluntary agreement not to proceed without advise of the Classis before matters of so great weight were determined was not to hinder particular Congregations from the practise of all Gods ordinances among them but onely to prevent and restraine abuses in the manner of doing and to direct them for the better performance thereof among themselves 11. What those Synods were wherein such agreements were made it had bene easy for Mr C. to have knowne if he had used diligence in enquiry and search for them To help him herein let him consider these (l) Kerckē-Ordeningē der Gerefo Nederlātsc Kerckē Nation Syno tot Embdē An. 1571. Art 13 14. 33 34. Nat. Syn. tot Dordr An. 1578. Art 4.8 99.100 Nat. Syn. tot Middelb An. 1581. Art 3.4 62.63 Nat. Syn. in 's Graven-Hag An. 1586. Art 3.4.5.36 47.69.70.72 Nat. Syn. tot Dordr An. 1618 1619. Art 3 4 11 12 76 77 79. plaine evidences recorded in divers Synods viz. that men shall not proceed to election or deposition of Ministers or excommunication of offenders without the advise and judgement of a Classicall assembly And besides the decrees of these Nationall Synods the like agreements and resolutions have bene made in sundry (m) Provinc Syn. tot Dordr An. 1574. Art 12. Prov. Syn. tot Middelb An. 1591. Art 3 4 9 58 68 69. Provinciall Synods so that from time to time after ripe deliberation long experience these Acts of their Synods have still bene renewed and confirmed from the beginning of their Reformation even unto this day III. Besides these generall acts and agreements of severall Synods we have their practise also for confirmation hereof to declare that the causes of particular Churches were judged by another Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves Thus it is witnessed (n) Triglād van de Moder p. 56.57 that Caspar Coolhaes was excommunicated by the Provinciall Synod of Holland holden at Haerlem Anno 1582. that the cause of Hermannus Herberts was judged and he suspended from his Ministery by a particular Synod of South-Holland holden in the Haghe Anno 1591. Novemb. 6. that Cornelius Wiggertsz was also judged and excommunicated by a particular Synod of North-Holland by reason of the errours holden by him that (o) Act. Syn. Nat. Dordr An. 1618. Ses 22. Nicolaus Grevinchovius Minister at Rotterdam was removed from his ministery by the sentence of the South-Holland Synod holden at Delph that (p) Ib. pref Adolphus Venator Minister at Alcmaer that Ioannes Valesius Ioannes Rodingenus and Isaacus Welsingius Pastours of the Church at Horne were suspended from their ministery by the North-Holland Synod and that divers others in Gelderland were in like manner censured by the Synods holden in that Province at Arnhem is also recorded in that historicall preface prefixed before the Acts of the last Nationall Synod at Dort And in the (q) Ses 22 23. booke itself it is likewise testifyed that Simon Goulartius Minister of the Gallo-Belgick or Walloens Church at Amsterdam was removed from his place by the Gallo-Belgick Synod By these and sundry other like acts and sentences that might be noted it is evident that the Synods held in these Reformed Churches are not onely for counsell and admonition but for the exercise of jurisdiction in censuring offenders judging of controversies that their meaning is perverted when their Confession of faith is objected against me That which Mr Canne (r) Ch. pl. p. 91. alledgeth from the Synod of Middelburgh An. 1581. is also mistaken by him there being no such thing found in that Synod as he mentioneth touching election done by voyces publickly in the Temple And if it had bene there yet should not that prejudice the authority of Synods or Classes in allowing or censuring such elections either before or after they were made Againe it is objected The Synod of Tilleburgh in Nasovia determined the like as Zepperus (ſ) Pol. Ecc. p. 831. writeth ANSVV. The determinations of this Synod being like unto those before mentioned are therefore directly against my opposites as the former were Zepperus in his preface to the Articles agreed upon in this Synod telles us how the Earle of Nassau having seene the Articles of the Synod held in Middelburgh Anno 1581. he took such liking thereof that in the yeare following he called the speciall Ministers of his country together unto a Synod in Tilleburgh requiring that the agreements of the aforesayd Synod might be applyed unto the use of the Churches under his dominion so farre as they well could Hereupon the principall conclusions thereof were receaved and confirmed among them and so farre as doth shew their full consent in the poynt of our controversy viz. that particular Congregations are to be subject unto an Ecclesiasticall authority of Synods and Classes Therefore it was agreed (t) Ib. p. 833 Art 4. that the calling of Ministers should be made by the judgement of the Classis c. That (v) P. 834. where divers examined of the Church or of it the Classicall assembly together were judged to be fit then the election was to be in the power of the Church and to be done by suffrages publickly in the temple and if they were equall then to use lots c. This seemeth to be the Article which Mr C. stumbled at before as if it had bene so written in the Synod of Middelb 1581. which yet doth not exclude the precedent allowance of the Classis in such elections Moreover it was there agreed (x) P. 837. Art 23. that if any complaine of wrong done in a lesser assembly or Synod he may referre the matter by appeale unto a superiour Synod (y) P. 843. Art 61.
that no man be excommunicated without the consent of a Classicall assembly (z) Art 63. that the deposition of Ministers be done by the judgement of a Classicall assembly and consent of the Magistrate These and the like Articles there concluded doe shew how farre the Nassovian Churches were from that opinion of the Brownists and some other in denying the subjection of particular Congregations unto any Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves Where could Mr C. finde more pregnant testimony against himself then in such resolutions of Reformed Churches as these be With the former Reformed Churches alledged by Mr Canne doe agree all the other so farre as I can learne by any enquiry For the Church of England B. Jewell testifveth (a) Def. of Apol. of Ch. of Engl. par 6. c. 17. div 1. 2. that we have had ere now in England Provinciall Synods and have governed our Churches by home made lawes and he maintaineth that without wayting for a Generall Councell it was rather thought good to doe that which both rightly might be done and hath many a time bene done as well of other good men as also of many Catholick Bishops that is to remedie our Churches by a Provinciall Synod And besides other examples there is a (b) Syntag. Confes p. 125 136 speciall monument recording the Acts and Articles agreed upon in the Synod holden at London Anno D. 1562. and againe of another Synod Anno 1571. confirming the Articles of the former Synod ratifyed by the approbation of Qu. Elizabeth to be observed through the whole Kingdome c Now howsoever there be great difference in divers Churches touching the manner of celebrating these Synods yet herein which is the poynt of our present controversy they doe all agree viz. that there is a superiour Ecclesiasticall authority of Synods to judge and determine the affaires of particular Congregations The testimony of the Church of Scotland for the authority of Presbyteries and Synods in judging the causes of particular Congregations is most cleare In the admission of Ministers to their offices there was (c) First book of Discipline p. 29. ed. 1621 required not onely the consent of the people and Church whereunto they should be appoynted but also approbation of the learned Ministers appointed for their examination Touching all sorts of Synods among them it was concluded that (d) Sec. b. of Discip ch 7. p. 80. they have power to execute Ecclesiasticall discipline and punishment upon all transgressours and proud contemners of the good order and policie of the Kirke and so the whole Discipline is in their hands Touching Provinciall Synods which they call the lawfull conventions of the Pastors Doctors and other Elders of a Province gathered for the common affaires of the Kirkes thereof c. they (e) Ib. p. 81. say Thir assemblies are institute for weightie matters to be intreated by mutuall consent and assistance of the brethren within that Province as need requires This Assembly hath power to handle order and redresse all things committed or done amisse in the particular assemblies It hath power to depose the office-bearers of that Province for good and just causes deserving deprivation And generally thir Assemblies have the whole power of the particular Elderships whereof they are collected Besides these Canons and rules of their Discipline there be also divers Actes of their Generall Assemblies prefixed before the foresayd First and Second bookes of their Discipline which by many instances doe shew how that power of Synods was exercised and put in practise in the Church of Scotland For example we read (f) P. 14. Edinb Iul. 5. 1570. that there was an Excommunication directed against Patrik called B of Murray to be executed by M. Robert Pont Commissioner their with the assistance of the Ministers of Edinburgh We finde there in another Assembly (g) P. 15. Edinb Aug. 6. 1573. that Alexander Gordoun B. of Galloway being accused of divers offences it was concluded that he should make publick repentance in Sackcloth three severall Sundaies first in the Kirk of Edinburgh secondly in Halyrudhous thirdly in the Queenes Colledge under the paine of Excommunication We finde in another Assembly (h) P. 16. Edinb Mar. 6. 1573. that the B. of Dunkell was ordained to confesse his fault publickly in the Kirk of Dunkell for not exequuting the sentence of the Kirk against the Earle of Athol For the confirmation of this Synodall authority there is added in the same place an Act of Parliament (i) P. 19. 20 c. The 12 Parl. at Edinb Iun. 5. 1592. prefixed also before the sayd bookes of their Discipline having this Title Ratification of the liberty of the true Kirk of generall and Synodall Assemblies of Presbyteries of Discipline c. The Confession of fayth made by the Church of Scotland both for the Doctrine and for the Discipline thereof is yet further confirmed unto us both by generall Subscription and by a most Solemne Oath The formall words of that Subscription and Oath are thus recorded unto us (k) Syntag. Confes p. 158 160. We beleeve with our hearts confesse with our mouth subscribe with our hands c. promising and swearing by that great name of the Lord our God that we will continue in the Doctrine Discipline of this Church and that we will defend the same according to our calling and power all the dayes of our life under paine of all the curses contained in the law danger of body and soule in the day of that dreadfull judgement of God Hereunto is annexed in the same place the Mandate of the Kings Majestie whereby he enjoyneth all Commissioners and Ministers of the Word throughout his kingdome that they require this confession of all their Parishioners c. And so farre as I can learne even unto this day there is still observed this substantiall and maine poynt of Discipline namely a power in Synodall assemblies to judge the controversies that doe arise in particular Congregations Here Mr Canne instead of a Iurie of 24 men to condemne my position for an errour and untrueth as he (l) Ch. pl. p. 83. speakes may see a Iurie of more then thrice 24 Congregations in Scotland maintayning my position and condemning his errour by their example The Reformed Churches in Savoy as that of Geneva (m) Kerckel Ordon der gemeēte van Geneven p. 9 10 c. and the Churches in the villages thereabout standing under the jurisdiction of the Magistrates in Geneva were combined together for their mutuall guidance and the Ministers of those Churches meeting weekly together were subject to the censure of such Ecclesiasticall assemblies and the affaires of those Churches judged therein The knowledge of this is so common a thing that in appearance hereupon grew the reproach reported by Mr Canne himself that (n) Ch. pl. p. 94. at Geneva subjecting of Churches to this order first began The Evangelicall Churches in the greater
that if his order of Synods may be refused by such as deserve Ecclesiasticall censures that then a doore should be opened to all heresies sects all the judgements of the Church whereunto Christ sendeth us should be subverted c. The Divines of Embden (e) Ibid. p. 1â—7 accord with the rest and besides other reasons for confirmation of Synodall Authority in the judgement of Ecclesiasticall causes they alledge that very place of Scripture Act. 20.28 which my opposites pervert to a contrary end against me Neither have they onely in generall shewed what the authority of Synods is and also what this Synod may doe but the Synod goes further and proceeds unto the exercise of this power and pronounceth sentence against those that persisted in their errours In the Copie of that Sentence (f) Act. Syn. Nat. Dordr Sess 138. p. 280. there be divers acts of their power to be observed in the severall expressions formes of speech used therein as for example This Synod of Dort doth seriously instantly and according to the authority which it hath by the word of God over all the members of their Churches in the name of Christ require exhort admonish enjoyne all every one of the Pastours in the Churches of the United Provinces Doctours Rectours Masters in the Universities Schooles c. The Synod after invocation of the holy name of God being in conscience well assured of their authority from the word of God following the steps of Ancient late Synods c. (g) P. 281. Doth interdict the persons cited unto this Synod from all Ecclesiasticall charge and deposeth them from their offices and also judgeth them unworthy of Academicall functions untill by earnest repentance c. For the rest whose cognition is not come to this Nationall Synod it committeth unto Provinciall Synods Classes Presbyteries according to the order receaved that with all care they procure c. That they diligently take heed unto themselves that they admit not any man to the holy ministery which refuseth to subscribe unto the doctrine declared in these Synodicall constitutions and to teach the same that they also retaine no man by whose manifest dissension c. This judgement Sentence of the Synod was afterward in most full ample manner (h) Ibid. p. 282. approved confirmed by the Illustrious Lords the States Generall of the United Provinces acknowledging also the businesse of this Synod to be agreat holy work such as heretofore the Reformed Churches never saw c. Besides this Sentence pronounced against those twelve or thirteen of the Remonstrants that by authority of the Synod were (i) Ibid. p. 16 17. cited to appeare before them there is also another speciall sentence (k) P. 204 205. of suspension from their function concluded pronounced against Everhardus Vosculius and Iohannes Schotlerius Ministers at Campen because of their contumacy in not appearing before the Synod being lawfully cited thereunto Moreover it is memorable that the members of this Synod the Deputies of severall Churches did all every one of them take a most solemne oath in testimony of the good conscience which they had in the exercise of this authority The forme of the Oath was (l) Act. Syn. Nat. Dordr Sess 23. p. 61. as followeth I doe promise before God whom I beleeve and reverence as the present searcher of the reines and hearts that in this whole Synodall action wherein shal be undertaken an examination judgement decision both touching the five knowne Articles and the difficulties thence arising and also touching all other matters of doctrine I will not take any humane writings but onely the word of God for the certaine undoubted rule of faith and that in this whole cause I shall propound nothing to my self but the glory of God the peace of his Church and in speciall the conservation of the purity of doctrine So let my Saviour Jesus Christ be mercifull unto me whom I most earnestly beseech that he would continually assist me in this purpose with the grace of his Spirit This oath being first taken by the President of the Synod all the other Professours Pastours Elders of the Netherlands deputed unto the Synod and then all the Divines of other nations standing up in order did with a loud voyce every one of them declare that they did holily promise and sweare before God the same thing and testifyed that they came with such minde unto the Synod had hitherto sit downe therein and would hereafter by the grace of God continue Having now such a cloud of witnesses consenting with me I have reason in this place againe to put Mr Canne in minde of his vaine boasting (m) Ch. pl. p. 83. touching a Iurie of more then 24. men condemning me of errour Here may he see a Jurie of more then thrice 24 sworne men and of the most excellent servants of God in so many Reformed Churches and Universities the lights of Christendome the flower of the Churches and the select crowne of learned men as they of Geneva doe (n) Act. Syn. Nat. Dordr Sess 3. p. 12. stile them all testifying both by word and practise against him and against the opinion of Mr Dav. touching the jurisdiction of Synods A Supplement annexed by the Publisher for answer unto that vvhich follovveth in Mr Cannes booke THus farre good Reader the Authour hath travelled through those tedious wayes which Mr C. though with lesse trouble yet with more prejudice to his owne cause hath first opened unto him The summe of all is that wading through those streames of Arguments and Reasons wich Mr C. had let out upon him he hath found such as were of any depth to runne another way the other too shallow to hinder the passage of trueth in this controversie And marching through those severall rankes files of learned Authours which Mr C. had mustered brought into the field for his defence and assistance in this conflict he hath found them all excepting those that were to be excepted to be friends instead of enemies testifying plainely in their owne words in the words of sundry others with them that against their wills they were forced to appeare under his banners And therefore in the same order that he marshalled them against the Authority of Synods they now stand in aray against the Independency of Churches There remained yet one part of Mr Can. opposition in this cause to be encountred wherein he pretends to disappoint and conquer such forces as might seeme to be used in defence of that Classicall and Synodall government which he hath hitherto oppugned To this end he (a) Chur. plea p. 92. undertakes to answer certaine Reasons or Objections picked out of divers passages in the Authours (b) Answ to W.B. c first booke supposing by this meanes to have fully acquitted himself in this Dispute Now though there be nothing in these his Answers for
from their Ministers but concerning particular Congregations and their subjection to Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves Though Mr C. and some others that now strive for the Independencie Churches doe also affect a popular way of government in the Church opposing not onely the power of Classicall Presbyteries but also of particular Elderships yet Popularity doth not necessarily follow upon Independency neither have they alwayes both the same Patrons Mr Iacob though he pleaded for a single uncompounded policie in opposition to Synodall authority yet he utterly disliked those popular circumstances held by the Separation as hath been noted (y) Pag. 176. before Againe the Anabaptists though they maintaine and practise those popular wayes of judging causes among them and (z) Protoc Embd. Act. 101. n. 1. q. 7. Cl. Cl. Bekent p. 218. Cloppenb Cancker der Weder-doop p. 535. oppose the Elderships of the Reformed Churches as exercising an undue power in deciding matters apart from the Congregation yet they allow and practise divers things contrary to the nature of Independencie so as Mr C. pleades for it seeing 1. They have (a) Faukel Babel der Weder-doop pag. 166 167 190. their Bishops as they call them distinct from their other Preachers by them termed Vermaenders that is Admonishers and by some of them (b) Protoc Embd. Act. 78. n. 4. Act. 80. n. 2. held to be Deacons these acknowledge themselves (c) Gesprec toâ— Zierickz p. 21. to be inferiour to their Bishops in the ministery The Bishops belong to some more eminent Congregations of that Sect doe at certaine times visit the other lesser Congregations and administer the Sacraments among them 2. The Anabaptists (d) Protoc Embd. Act. 99. n. 1. Fauk Babel der Wederd D a. p. 215. use to excommunicate whole Congregations at once when having been of the same profession with them they witnesse their dissent from them in such matters as for which particular persons are excommunicated by them 3. The causes that cannot be determined in their particular Congregations are by them sometimes (e) Babel der Wederd C4 a. C6 b. referred to the judgement of Arbiters men of severall Congregations chosen by both parties with promise to stand to their sentence sometimes also to the meetings of the Officers of sundry Churches This shewes that though they plead for Popularitie yet they doe not simply allow of Independencie 11. Suppose that consideration had been alledged by the Authour against Popular government also as justly it might in regard of the manifold disorders confusion and dissipation of Churches which it is knowne to bring with it yet this answer cannot proove it to be insufficient because it runnes upon a twofold false supposition 1. That this appertaines to the due liberty of the people to have their judgement sought unto for the determining of all controversies that arise in the Church 2. That this liberty is acknowledged to have been taken from them as if they had been once in full possession of it or that this is the maine reason for denying that pretended liberty to the people because of their infirmities or miscarriages in the use of it These things as they are untrue in themselves so they are unjustly obtruded upon the Defendant who had given no occasion to such pretences We maintaine on the other side that this is no part of the peoples priviledge because it is not due unto them by any divine warrant and herein we are further confirmed seeing such an order is in outward appearance and according to undenyable experience in the Anabaptists Brownists others attended with manifold disorders confusion dissipation of Churches 111. Though it were granted that the people have beene oftentimes wiser in their choyce sounder in the faith then their Ministers which yet three of those places (f) Act. 3.26 Zozo l. 7. c. 7. Theod. l. 2. c. 7. here alledged doe not proove there being nothing in them to that purpose for which they are cited yet that is not enough to disprove the foresaid assertion unlesse he could shew that ordinarily they are so qualifyed indued with such abilities as are requisite for the orderly exercise of judiciary power in the Congregation This is not onely contrary to experience but also to the revealed will wisedome of God in dispensing his gifts severally unto the members of the mysticall body of his Church appovnting some to be of meaner use and in subjection to others 1. Cor. 12 14-31 Heb. 13.17 We must either straiten the limits of the Church further then Christ himself hath allowed us by shutting the weak feeble out of his fold or else acknowledge that all the members are not fit to be used in the judiciall trying determining of causes THe next thing that Mr C. (g) Chur. pl. p. 94. pretends to answer is touching the Antiquity of Classicall and Synodall government from those words of the Authour that the power which the Classis exerciseth is ancient c. that he names it the old beaten path c. The Authour indeed had used these words upon just occasion not as any reason or argument to justify the lawfulnes of this power as Mr C. seemes to insinuate but to declare the trueth in the matter of fact rather then in the controversie of right and this may easily appeare to those that looke upon the places (h) Pag. 72. 105. alledged out of the Authours book When an unjust complaint was made that he had subjected the Church under an undue power of the Classis that he brought it under c. he answereth That power which the Classis exerciseth is ancient the same power which they had long before I either knew them or they me c. Againe when there was mention made of those of his side he answered For my part I abhorre this siding I desire to walk in the old beaten path of that discipline and government practised by these Reformed Churches and established in their Classes and Synods c. Was not here just cause to use these words to this purpose for which they are applyed He speakes chiefly of the antiquity of this government in regard of the state of that particular Church of those with which it is combined concerning which Mr C. himself cannot deny but that he hath spoken the trueth But suppose it were uttered in generall with reference unto the joynt consent of the Churches in all ages giving testimony unto the exercise of this power might not this be a weighty profitable consideration to be commended unto the serious thoughts of those that offer to oppose it Let us heare what Mr C. saith to this I. C. ANSVV. I. Sundry errours are as ancient as the Apostles time c. REPL. 1. This doth not prejudice the constant practise of this or any other trueth nor the regard that is to be given unto the custome of the Churches of God according to the direction
(l) Isa 56.10.11 unlearned unable to preach in the ministery 2. Is it not by the negligence of Prelates that there are soe many negligent Ministers suffering their gifts to decay by seldome preaching 3. Is it not from their qualifications and dispensations there are soe many Nonresidents Pluralists as that other Schollers of better desert do want encouragmēt 4. Doeth not the Parliament well enough know understand who are the Seekers of the subversion of the lawes and of introducing an arbitrary government XIV REMONS is subscribed by a numerous sort of the Nobles Baronets Knights Esquires Divines Gentlemen Freeholders others inhabitants of Cheshire ANIMADV This is indeed the sad consequent of Prelacy in Cheshire Ah alas that * Cheshire the cheife shire Cheshire not long agone reputed deservedly esteemed for the (m) Prov. 12.26 profession power of religion more excellent then their neighbors should (n) Ier. 2.21 now turne to a degenerate plant of a strange vine to the Lord Especially the Ministery that had their spiritually glorious * Exercises at Northwich Namptwich Knutesford Macclesseild Bowden Frodsham Budworth Torperley Tarvin Ince Motterum c. monethly Exercises solemne assemblies besides their blessed Sabbaths frequented by sundry of the renowned Gentry very many wel-disposed people wherby (o) 1. Tim. 3.13 they purchased to themselves a good degree in Christianity great boldnes in the faith which is in Christ Iesus But yet it may be thought in a charitable construction some excuse of the greatnes of their error that either the most of thē subscribed the Remonstrance (p) 2. Sam. 15.11 in their simplicity not knowing wherto it tended or els in an inconsiderate hast being * The letters sent to the severall Hundreds required a hasty dispatch urged to doe quickly what they did sith dispatch was the life of the busines noe copies permitted to be taken However it s not to be doubted but that (q) Reve. 2.1 He that walketh amidst the golden candlesticks (r) Reve. 3.4 doeth graciously take knowledge of many names in Cheshire (ſ) 1. King 19.18 it may be 7000 that as (t) Hos 11.12 Iuda doe yet rule with God and are faithfull with the Saints Right honorable there is no feare of your abundant wisdomes in discerning of these greivous Prelaticall maladies nor of your compassionate faithfulnes in applying seasōable remedies sith all mē must needs acknowledge that its (v) 1. King 10.6.7 a true report they have heard of your acts wisdome exceeding the fame thereof (x) Luk. 1.68 Blessed be the Lord God of England that hath visited and redeemed his people (y) Psal 118.2 Let the Churches of the Saints in England Scotland Ireland now say his mercy endureth for ever Let the Non-conformists (z) Psal 83.3 Gods hidden ones in those lands now say his mercy endureth for ever Yee (a) Iudg. 6.12.14 mighty men of valour the Lord hath beene with you hitherto (b) 1. Sam. 17.36 subduing the Lyon the Beare even the High Commission court Starre chamber that did prey upon the flock Goe on in this your might to save from that uncircumcised Philistin the oppressing Hierarchie And let it be (c) 1. Sam. 25.31 noe offence of heart to your Honors to (d) 2. Pet. 1.12 be stirred up to goe forward making the word of God the (e) Psal 119.24 man of your counsell And for your better helpe and (f) Act. 8.31 guidance may it please your Honors to make use of the labors of godly-learned Interpreters that have beene the excellent lights of the Reformed Churches both * Calvin Beza G. Bucer Didoclavius c. abroad also in * Cartwright Traverse Vdal Parker Bayne c. England observing withall the Apostolicall advertisment touching (g) 1. Cor. 11.16 the Custome of the Churches of Christ and their (h) Colos 2.5 comly order even of the purest * Scots French Dutch c. reformed Churches from all Antichristianisme both in doctrine discipline These Reformed Churches have in their citties townes and villages (i) 1. Tim. 4.14 Presbyteries (k) 1. Tim. 5.17 consisting of teaching ruling Elders chosen by the plurality of their voices consented unto by the Congregation approved by the Magistrates and Classis These (l) Act. 20.17.28 Elders doe take heed to the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made them Overseers They ordaine Officers admit to the Sacraments admonish and censure offenders according to (m) Math. 18.17 Christs rule of discipline and they signify to the Congregation what belongeth to thē to take knowledge of either to consent unto the same or except against it as just cause shall require And in case some difficulty doe appeare in the affaires of the Church that cannot be decided well by the Presbytery thē they have a liberty are wont to appeale (n) Act. 15.2 seeke helpe assistance from the Classis consisting of neighbour Presbyteries called by some also Presbyteries with which they are combined in an equall power authority noe One exercising any prelaticall preeminence And if the matter controverted cannot satisfactorily be determined by the Classis thē there is a referēce to the Provinciall Synod consisting of the Deputies chosē by the severall Classes of equall power authority And if yet agreement be not made then the matter is to be brought to a Nationall Synod cōsisting of Deputies sent frō the Provinciall Synods In their severall Presbyteries Classes Synods Provinciall Nationall they have Presidents and Scribes chosen from amongst themselves for the more orderly menaging of their Sessions And in Synods some cheife Magistrats are present to see order observed This way of Christ walked in by the Reformed Churches is the way of peace liberty edificatiō though carped at by some (o) Iude vers 8.16 that speake evill of what they neither know nor understand And for the more cleere pregnant demonstratiō hereof the following treatise touching the power of Elderships Classes Synods may be of singular use written by an (p) Math. 13.52 able judicious pious Divine instructed to the Kingdome of heaven having beene well studied and diligently exercised in the doctrine practise of discipline above 30 yeeres together whilst he was Pastor of the English reformed Church in Amsterdam where was speciall occasion (q) Matth. 25.20 to put forth his talent by reason of the cheifest of the Separatists that sojourned there at the same time And albeit the Author lived not to finish review his paines yet through divine providence a Timothy (r) 1. Cor. 4.17 who knew his waies trained up in the Scriptures other good learning in Schooles and Vniversity and for present (ſ) 2. Tim. 2.15 a workman that needeth not to be ashamed hath brought the (t) 2. Tim. 4.13
parchments he left behinde him to publick use for the common benefit of the English nation in a time of need calling for helpe (v) 2. Sam. 15.34 counsel to defeate the dangerous projects of all Achitophels Right honorable ye are as (x) 2. Sam. 14.17 Angels of God to discerne good bad to speake comfortable words to your afflicted banished Countreymen Yee are the great Counsellers Iudges and State-physitians of England Now (y) Isa 9.6 the Wonderfull Counseller the mighty God the everlasting Father the Prince of peace furnish your Honors more more with the (z) Isa 11.2 Spirit of wisdome understanding the Spirit of Counsell and might the Spirit of knowledge of the feare of the Lord (a) Psal 20.4 fulfill all your counsells which are for the (b) 1. Cor. 10.31 glory of God for the (c) 1. Pet. 2.17 honor of our gracious King Charles and for the true (d) Iob 22.30 welfare of England Scotland Ireland even soe prayeth Your Honors most humble advertiser and devoted observer THOMAS PAGET The Publisher to the Christian Reader THere are two staves wherewith the Lord Christ the great Shepherd of his sheep doth usually feed his flock Doctrine and Discipline By the one he maketh them to lie downe in greene pastures and leadeth them beside the still waters replenishing their soules with the food of life by the other he guideth them and ordereth them in their going out and comming in for their further peace and safety and both his rodde and his staffe doe comfort them If either of these be wanting the flock is endangered if God in his just judgement cause one of them to faile the other presently comes to be in jeopardy Wofull experience hath taught that where the reignes of Discipline are slackned or ill guided there the soundnes of Doctrine doth hardly subsist long and where the trueth of Doctrine is assaulted there the course of Discipline is not free from injurious attempts Though Doctrine justly challenge the first place yet seeing Discipline also to speak properly is a part of Doctrine being onely the practise of divine trueth revealed concerning the guidance of the Church hence it may not without cause share in the arguments alledged for the necessity and benefit of the other They both being so neerly allyed and joyntly requisite to the welfare of Gods Church the Enemy ever envying the prosperity and plotting the ruine thereof where he cannot prevayle against the one he sets on work his mischievous devices against the other When he cannot hinder the growth of good corne and sound trueths by sowing tares then he makes so much the more furious onsets upon the fences and hedges of due order and government And if his designes may be effected in the one he findes a readyer way to the other But he that hath bruised Satans head is not ignorant of his devices nor slow to resist him in his enterprises Christ doth graciously provide for the safety of his flock against both kindes of evills by such instruments as he is wont to rayse for the explaining and vindicating the trueth of those lawes which he hath given both to direct and maintaine his people in the obedience of his will and to stop the mouth of all iniquity oppugning the same His goodnes therefore is to be acknowledged in whatsoever helps to this purpose are affoorded unto us And that thou mayest the better be provoked hereunto Christian Reader concerning the Treatise now presented unto thee take a brief survey at thy first entrance of somewhat may further fit thee unto a more judicious and profitable perusall of the work it self The maine errours touching the exercise of Church-government may be reduced unto these two extremes whereby men swarve from that middle and safe way prescribed by Christ the onely Prince and Lawgiver of his Church Some ambitious of preeminence making themselves lords over Gods heritage have brought in and seek to maintaine a Tyrannicall kinde of government in the Church by ingrossing all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction into their owne hands as the Popes and Popish Bishops Against these Vsurpers many Worthies have stood up and done valiantly in their Writings whereof divers remaine yet unanswered Others have erroneously fallen into a contrary extreme while opposing Hierarchicall Tyranny they have become pleaders for a meere Democracy and not contēt to reject Provinciall Diocesan Bishops they have impugned the lawfull combination of Churches in Provinciall and Classicall Synods Against this twofold errour the ensuing Treatise is directed The former part thereof was written long agone about the yeare 1618 upon the occasion noted in the Introduction And though it was but a beginning of a larger writing neither finished nor polished for publick view yet considering how little there is extant in this kinde how usefull it may be for these times and what affinity it hath with the other controversy touching Classes and Synods by how much the opposers of such joynt Presbyteries doe seldome allow the due power of particular Elderships I thought good to prefixe it before the other in such wise as it doth now come foorth The second and maine part of this Treatise discusseth at large and more fully then any other yet seene the question concerning the due power of Classicall Synodall Assemblies A controversy in a manner unknowne to former ages and for the present scarcely heard of among the Reformed Churches in other nations For though the positive trueth thereof be manifest from the testimonies of Orthodox Writers of all times and places yet hitherto it hath not beene shewed that ever any Authours of note I meane either of former ages or other nations have maintained the assertions here opposed viz. that the power of Classes Synods is an undue power and that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction must be confined within the bounds of a particular Congregation H. Barrow those of that Sect are noted to be the first that in such sort have opposed this kinde of government The Arminians indeed have spoken much against the jurisdiction deciding sentence of Synods * Censur Confes Remonstr p. 322.326.328 Apol. Remonstr f. 6. 282-290 but upon other grounds to wit so farre as it taketh away that liberty of Prophecy which they plead for and describe to be in effect an unlimited licentiousnes of venting and maintaining almost any thing in matters of religion They doe so contradict the power of Synods that withall they overthrow all Ecclesiasticall judgment and censure at least in matters of heresie false doctrine as well in a particular Congregation as elswhere Herein they differ from the Patrons of Independencie here disputed against These therefore though they be not all Brownists yet they must not take it ill to see this errour in the following Treatise sometimes branded with the mark of Brownisme especially when the Authour deales with Mr Canne a knowne Separatist and hitherto the busiest Disputer for
H. Ia. against whom he disputed by writing about the subject you speake of The author resteth fully perswaded of that he hath written yet referreth againe as he did before his doings to censure and that by you Mr Ames and Mr Parker or either of you to alter c. soe be that the adversarie he answered Afterwards he explained himself more fully on this manner Had my beloved altered what he deemed untrue or insufficient he had done but what I desired and would have bene well pleased with soe he that it had not weakned the answer But to come to the particulars 1. Concerning the Synods both their institution and power what it is belongeth to another question neither conceive I how ought from that assertion in the Reply which you except against can be drawne to prejudice the judgment or practise of the Churches governed by Synods for I conceive not so of their Synods that they robbe the particular Churches whereof Elders there sit to determine of causes of the power of government by their Presbyteries Nay rather seeing their Synods have their power by and from the deputation which the Elders there assembled have from the particular Churches if I be not deceyved it will follow that the power of government originally resteth in them and not in the Synods c. Observe in these passages of Mr Sh. 's letters besides what I intended and mentioned before 1. His judgment set downe here more plainly then in any place of his book touching the power of Synods in the determining of causes agreeable unto that which the Authour maintaineth in this Treatise considering what he saith in his (a) Pag. 89. 90. 203. answer to the objections alledged out of Mr Parker 2. The difference then acknowledged betwixt Mr Iacob and other Non-conformists concerning the authority of Synods which Mr D. would seeme to excuse (b) Apol. repl p. 236. by some words of Mr I. wherein he speakes not directly touching this poynt in controversy 3. The Authours care to maintaine the due power of Classes and Synods even in those times when there could be no suspicion of his owne advantage or private ingagement therein wherewith his Opposites doe unjustly (c) Apol. repl p. 61 63 232 235. Chur. pl. p. 11. 41. 100. upbraid him faining it to be the cause of his late pleading for them Moreover whereas the Authour hath taken the liberty upon occasion to witnesse his dissent from D. Ames touching certaine particulars in this controversy he hath done no more then D. A. was wont to allow unto all ingenuous Readers of his writings and in speciall unto the Authour When he put forth his first Dispute against Grevinchovius which he inscribed unto our Authour in his (d) De Armin sentēt Discept scholast An. 1613. Praef. ad I. P. Ex memet ipso judicium faciens tibi vir amicissime sicut affirmāti facile credo sic ut postulanti nunc tandē cedam non aegre quidē adducor c. Ibid. p. 57. Vito doctissimo D.P. Hoc quidem recte judicas judiciosissime vir c. Epistles printed with it where he calles him a most loving most learned and most judicious man he wrote unto him withall in his private letter As I leave it to you to print mine or not to print so also to blotte out or alter what you see amisse To like purpose he wrote unto him concerning his Reply to D. Morton When his booke called the Marrow of Divinity first came forth he sent him a Copie with this expresse condition that he should write unto him his animadversions upon it And in like manner on the other side when the Author was to publish his Arrow against the Separation of the Brownists he sent the severall parcels first to D. Ames to be perused by him who answered sometime on this wise For this part of your writing unto Mr Ainsw I finde nothing in it but good Of another part he saith In it I finde much good paines and as usefull as the subject would permit no defect of any moment c. And againe I have perused all the rest of the sheets and finde nothing which I can mend c. Your paines have been very great in this businesse I pray God the fruit may answer thereunto Such was the judgement of these godly learned and famous men touching the Authour and his sufficiencie for businesses of this kinde I have set downe nothing here but what I have to shew in black and white as the Author of the Preface to D. Ames his last booke (e) Fresh suit praef p. G. 1. b. saith upon somewhat the like occasion To come neerer unto the work in hand the occasion of this writing touching Classes and Synods cannot but be accounted grievous unto such as have hearts to be affected with the dissensions of brethren But bitter roots doe many times yeeld sweet and wholesome fruits God hath here also many wayes ordered for good that which in itself was and tended to evill I need not inlarge about that whereof they that are desirous may easily be informed from what hath been heretofore published In a word Complaints were made by those whom it least beseemed These being divulged first in written copies and afterwards in print gave just occasion unto as publick an Answer Unto this Answer hath been returned a twofold Reply the one called Apologeticall by him that had holpen to complaine the other entitled The Churches plea for her right by a knowne Schismatick standing in opposition to all the Reformed Churches and in his behalfe who refused to joyne as a member unto his Church when he schismed from that whereof he was a member when the complaints were framed These Replyes undertake to handle besides matters of fact these two poynts that were at the same time opposed to wit the due power of Classes and Synods and the lawfulnes of baptising infants whose parents are no members of a particular Congregation The former of these is sufficiently maintained in the ensuing Treatise For the other though the Author have not gone so farre in it as in this yet he hath layd such a foundation as upon which it will not be difficult to build what may satisfy for the clearing of that controversie Whereof more hereafter as conveniency and publick benefit shall require Touching personall concernment though I acknowledge my self doubly and trebly bound to vindicate the Authors reputation at whose feet I have been brought up and from whom I have received farre more then by such or better meanes I am ever able to requite and though it were easy to shew how his opposites have offended in many untrueths touching matters of fact and vaine pretences of meeknes in the midst of great bitternes c. yet I am resolved to passe by and to bury these things in silence unlesse further cause be given for the publishing of them And hereunto as I have been advised by others so I have the rather
yeelded considering as they also alledged that the benefit to be expected from dealing in these matters would be but of a narrow extent reaching onely to the satisfaction of a few and little concerning the maine cause that the Authours good name and blessed remembrance is so deeply ingraven in the hearts of those that are acquainted with his wayes and writings that no envie nor obloquie shall ever be able to rase it out Againe they that will but compare the Answer and Replyes together and distinguish betwixt plaine dealing and groundlesse surmises evidence of trueth and uncharitable insinuations shall hardly need any further help for their satisfaction specially if they be mindfull of the Rule 1. Tim. 5.19 from which these opposites have too too frequently swarved and in which respect Mr D. had just cause to intreat his Reader (f) Apol. repl praef neer the end to suspend his censure concerning what he hath said c. Moreover that plausible and colourable name of the Church used by the Replyers when they spake of a few dissenting from the Authour is now further manifested to be inconsistent with those passages whereunto in such sort it was applyed forasmuch as they that then complained doe now quietly enjoy themselves and communion with the Church in the continued observation of the same orders that were practised before except onely W. B. the foreman of the Complaynants now a professed Arminian And of those that once joyned with him some before others since the Authours death have plainly signifyed their better respects unto him and given free and full testimony of his well deservings even of that Church both for Doctrine and Discipline To returne unto his Defence here published the greater part of it is in way of answer to Mr C. who hath been the forwardest and largest in this part of the plea touching Classes and Synods It seemes also that he hath not been a little confident of his paines about this work by the reiterated editions and sundry shapes into which this his writing touching Independent government hath been cast The (g) Printed in the yeare 1635. first edition which the Authour here deales with was seconded with another into which he hath taken onely that which concernes this controversie adorning it with this new and faire title (h) In the y. 1641. Syons Prerogative Royall And this hath been answered (i) Disput Theol. de Unione Ecclesiarum carumque Regimine in Classibus Synodis par post Ultraj 1641. by the famous and truely excellent Divine of these countries D. Voctius A third edition it seemes hath been put forth with some additions against the Presbyteries of particular Churches under another title viz. The Presbyteriall Government examined And this also hath been examined and answered by the Authour of the (k) Edinb 1641. Assertion of the Government of the Church of Scotland c. in the Postscript thereunto annexed Thus the same writing hath met with severall Refutations whereof though this be the last in birth yet it was the first in conception And here the Authour as he tooke more time so he hath more closely followed his opposite being better acquainted with his condition and courses hath more neerly applyed his answers unto him for further conviction However * August de Trin. l. 1. c. 3. it may be profitable to behold severall learned men avouching and pleading for the same trueth and many blowes may beat downe an errour that could not be felld at once But it may seeme strange that Mr Cannes writings being such as the severall Refuters have observed them to be should yet have the honour of three severall Refutations See afterw p. 145 146. c. Who ever saw such grosse Logicall mistakes in one that makes such a flourish with Syllogisticall reasonings Who ever saw in a serious writing such abundance of quotations so generally perverted or so little to the purpose He vainely alledgeth above an 100 testimonies of Authours old and new to prove that which was never denyed by those whom he opposeth And yet on the other side who so confident of his owne cause amidst such barrenes of proofe where there was need of it either from Scripture or approved Authours Let those that seem to hold with him in this controversie judge whether Mr C. be not in these respects a Disputer one of a thousand as his phrase is (l) Ch. pl. p. 15. elswhere to another purpose How comes it then to passe that they that have been induced to write in defence of Presbyteriall and Classicall government have had no other matter to work upon but what was affoorded by Mr C. or that the cause of Independencie which makes so great a noyse among some yeelds yet so little to be seen for the maintenance of it May not we justly doubt concerning others that seem to favour this way that their judgements are not setled in this poynt by how much they are so slow to professe what they hold and upon what grounds If they agree with Mr D. and Mr C. and their grounds pretences be the same with theirs they may here receive satisfaction But some happily will think the Authour hath been needlesly curious in noting the manifold grosse faylings of Mr C. both in his Reasonings and Quotations For answer hereunto besides that for the most part they be such as in this thorough kinde of refuting used by the Authour could not be passed over with silence it appeares that Mr C. stands in need of being told of these faults for in his latter edition of the same things I finde not any of these foule mistakes amended Herein onely he hath somewhat corrected himself that what he had before (m) Chur. plea p. 74 76. asscribed to Mr Paget now he attributes it (n) Syons prer roy p. 16 21. to the Presbyterian governours and such as stand for Presbyteriall government hereby acknowledging that what he had before called (o) Ch. pl. p. 71. Mr Pagets new doctrine (p) Ibid. p. 77. Mr Pagets lately-devised Tenets (q) Ibid. p. 81. Mr Pagets new opinion was neither his device nor sole opinion but common with him to at least all that allow of the government of the Church of Scotland from whom that Mr C. might professe his dissent he hath put in the words Presbyterie and Presbyterian with Classis and Classicall seeing the Presbyteries in Scotland are in effect the same with the Classis and Classicall seeing the Presbyteries in Sctoland are in effect the same with the Classes in these countries For the publishing of this Treatise I had more need to plead excuse for not setting it forth before according to their judgement who have frequently called upon me and encouraged me unto the finishing of this taske rather then to provide against their displeasure who are apt to censure as unseasonable what in this kinde is unwelcome unto them But for the seasonablenes of it let the
then without great presumptiō faine them to be sayd at another time place having no warrant of Scripture for the same I know indeed that (r) R. Solomon Iarchi on Gen. 12.1 some of your Rabbines who doe so often mislead you doe write that this call was from Charran but their authority is too light to rest upon it They will have Nun the last letter of the word (f) In Gen. 11.32 Charran to be written with the head of it downward and the lowest part of it upward contrary to the order to shew (t) R. Sol. ibid. that the wrath of God burned untill Abram One of your authors according to his Cabalisticall art (v) Baal hatturim on Gen. 12.1 tels us that the numerall letters of the word arecha used in the call of Abram Gen. 12.1 doe yeeld the same number that begnananim doth which signifyeth by the clouds to teach us that the clouds went before him shewed him the way in his journey And the inversion of this Nun haphueah is as well as worthy to be observed for matter of meditation instruction as are the great little letters which you (x) Annot. on Gen. 23.2 34.31 Lev. 1.1 mention for like use You tell us in the same place that the Hebrew doctours expound the name Charran by Charon aph that is wrathfull anger R. Menachem on Gen. 12. as if he were now to depart from the place of wrath c. but if you had alledged the place more plainly fully the vanity of that Rabbine would thereby have appeared while he saith that (y) R. Menachem on Gen. 12.4 whē Abram went to give his influence or abundance unto the higher land Lot went with him for that land was to receive from them both and the word Lot is from Levatin which signifyeth curses and this at his going from Charan the word charon signifyeth anger This is the vaine conceit contained in the allegation which you send us unto compare with so many places of Scripture And suppose Charan be denominate of anger yet this will not prove that the calling Gen. 12.1 was from Charan Againe it appeares to be the opinion of other (z) Chazkuni com on Gen. 12.1 Aben Ezra on Gen. 11. 12.1 Rabbines that this calling of Abram Gen. 12.1 was from Vr of the Chaldees before he came to Charan And besides these the judgement of learned (a) Merc. on Gen. 12. Trem. Iun. annot ibid. Calv. Musc com ibid. Christians is herein against you and more to be respected then the Iewish doctours whom you so much follow 3. Besides other things how grosse is that errour when you write (b) Annot. on Gen. 12.5 that the land of Canaan is a country in Asia the lesse c. It appeareth not by the Scriptures that Abram ever came into Asia the lesse And had he gone thither to seek Canaan he should never have found that land unto which he was called of God This your errour of misplacing Canaan is reproved not onely by the generall testimony of the cheefest (c) Ptol. Geogr. lib. 5. c. 2. Asiae tab 1. Strab. Geogr. l. 12. Plin. Hist nat l. 5. c. 27 Solin Polyh c. 43. Geographers but also by the evidence of the holy Scriptures which doe oftē plainly distinguish these countries make it very manifest that Canaan is not a country in Asia the lesse as you say Act. 2.9 16.6 20.16.1 Pet. 1.1 Touching your allegation of Gen. 13.6 7 8. we read there of the riches of Abram and Lot of the strife betwixt their servants of the Cananites and Perizzites dwelling in the land of Abrams care to avoyd strife but how you will conclude your Separation from hence together with the peoples power in excommunications who can imagine or comprehend it we would faine see what face of an argument you can paynt out unto us from this Allegation And as for Exo. 5.3 where Moses Aaron tell Pharaoh how the God of the Hebrewes met them how they desire to goe three dayes journey into the wildernes to doe sacrifice and of the danger of pestilence or sword to come upon them if they did it not by what consequence will you maintaine your Separation from hence and by what second consequence will you then demonstrate the peoples authority from this Separation here implyed as you write These things doe yet lye hid wrapt up in darknes that men cannot discerne what you meane thereby It is a strange folly in matters of so great controversy so barely to alledge such a number of Scriptures which seeme not so much as to looke towards the poynt of the question in hand and this your fault is so much the greater in that yon can finde time leasure to note and publish so many other idle and unproffitable things as when in the explication of this verse you set downe those dotages of Maimony about the Pestilence Deber which have no weight in them no ground or colour of trueth Why did you not rather manifest your Separation from hence if it be here taught as you say for the clearing of your cause plucking others out of the darknes shadow of death wherein according to your profession they do remaine CHAP. IIII. Whether the people be bound to be present at the proceedings against offendours A Nother errour concerning the government of the Church is this that you hold the people bound to be present at the conviction of sinners triall of causes Though Mr Iohnson (a) Advertis of Mr Clyft p. 41.42 left it free for any of the people to come if they would yet you (b) Animadv p. 42.43 hold not that sufficient unlesse they be bound to come to heare the proceedings Against the liberty of being absent or present you alledge many things and plead as followeth H. AINSVV. Is not this to divide the body when the head must be present the shoulders with the other parts and members may be absent ANSVV. It is no division in the body mysticall when the head labours for the good of the body though some members thereof be absent no more then there is a division or disunion among the friends that consult for the comfort of one another though not present no more then there is betwixt the States of these lands the people thereof when the States meet apart to determine some things without the people no more then there was a division when the Elders at Ierusalem met apart without the people Act. 21 18-25 H. AINSVV. The Apostle writing to the Church of Corinth how to doe when they came together for the Lords supper 1. Cor. 11.18 33. writeth also to them how when they were gathered together they should deliver the wicked unto Satan 1. Cor. 5.4 5. We finde no difference but they were bound to come to the one as to the other And if they answer they are bound
to assemble for to excommunicate him but not to heare him by the word convinced in the triall of his cause they may as well teach the people they are bound to come to eat the bread and wine in the Lords supper but not bound to heare the word teaching preparing them hereunto ANSVV. 1. In coming to the Lords supper every man is bound unto a speciall particular examination preparation of himself by his owne knowledge to convince judge himself 1. Cor. 11.28 31. but in coming to the excommunication of offendours a man may lawfully content himself with the testimony of others touching their conviction and so rest in the judgment of the Church Deut. 19.15 16 17. ch 17 8-13 neither doth the Scripture in any place require more of us 2. A man may be fitted prepared unto the Lords supper though he doe not heare the word of God taught and preached at the same time when he comes thereunto True faith repentance make men worthy lawfull communicants able to discerne the body of the Lord though by some meanes they be hindred from hearing the Word immediately before 1. Cor. 3.21 22. Ioh. 6.40 And therefore to follow you in your owne comparison as a man may lawfully come to the Lords supper though he have not heard the word before so may he lawfully come to the excommunication of a sinner and consent thereunto though he have not bene present at his conviction before but onely heare it testifyed by others 3. If you finde no difference but that men are alike bound to come to heare the examination conviction of offendours to come to the Lords supper why doe you not then censure those among you that after your Sermon ended doe depart when you enter upon these convictions disputations continuing sometimes untill eight nine or tenne a clock in the night as well as those that after Sermō should depart refuse to eat the Lords supper with you Doth not your owne conscience and practise reprove you in this poynt H. AINSVV. We doe so understand Gods law that when it commandeth us any thing it doth also command us to use all meanes for the right holy performance of it and all will be little enough ANSVV. Thus doe we also understand the Law but the Question is whether all the meanes for the right and holy performance of this judgement of excommunication cannot be used unlesse all the members of the Church be present at the conviction of the excommunicate The reader is to consider whether this be justly proved by you H. AINSVV. The people therefore that were bound to stone an Idolater in Israel were bound by that Law Thou shalt not slay the innocent Exod. 23.7 to looke that he were duely convicted of the crime ANSVV. But could not the people know that an Idolater were duely convicted unlesse they themselves were all present at his examination conviction By this kinde of reasoning 1. You condemne the just lawfull warre undertaken against the enimies of Church Common-wealth you might as well say that because no souldier may slay the innocent therefore every particular souldier is bound to be present in the assembly of the Rulers where the cause of the warre is tryed and there to heare the examinations convictions of the wrong-doers But how was this possible in Israel where so many hundred thousands were sometimes assembled together unto the warre 2. Chron. 13.2 3. c. or how should it now possibly be observed in our times how should private souldiers with good conscience goe into the field unlesse they may rest in the testimony of their Governours touching the cause of the warre 2. By that commandement Thou shalt not slay the innocent Exod. 23.7 those also are condemned that suffer the innocent to be slaine having authority power in their hands to hinder the same thus according to your reasoning the King or other supreme Magistrates of any country that should suffer any person to be slaine or punished within their dominions should be bound to be present at their examination conviction in like manner contrary to the liberty that God hath given unto Princes in appointing sending Governours for the punishment of evill doers 1. Pet. 2.13 14. And divers other the like unreasonable consequences would follow upon this manner of arguing H. AINSVV. And now by this law Be not partaker of other mens sinnes Keep thy selfe pure 1. Tim. 5.22 every soule that is bound to cast out a man condemned for heresy or other sinne is also bound to see him convicted lest Diotrephes cause to cast out faithfull brethren 3. Ioh. 9 10. ANSVV. 1. The errour of this collection applyed to the Question in hand appeareth by your owne practise when those members of your Church who having bene sick or absent while any person is condemned for heresy or other sinne doe yet upon the testimony of the Church reject him as an excommunicate and cast him out of their society Here you allow a rejection of offendours by such as have not bene present to see their conviction 11. Your errour in this allegation may likewise appeare in this that those who are excommunicate by one true Church are also to be rejected by other true Churches that have not bene present to see the conviction of such persons Luk. 10.16 Matt. 18.18 Ioh. 20.23 1. Cor. 5.3 2. Cor. 2.10 This shewes that a man may keep himselfe pure resting in the testimony of others and that the place 1. Tim. 5.22 is not to be applyed against them that doe upon the witnesse of a Church reject offendours 111. As for Diotrephes causing to cast out faithfull brethrē 1. There is no appearance in the text alledged 3. Ioh. 9 10. that this was done for want of the peoples presence his love of preheminence his tyranny might be exercised in their presence as well as in their absence 2. The reader is here to mark the contradiction of H. Barrow unto you and his further errour who will not have this casting out of the faithful by Diotrephes to be understood of excommunication (c) H. Barr. Refut of Giff. p. 165. nor to be meant of the abuse of any censure of the Church c. 3. For rash excommunications actuall casting out of brethren name any true Church where ever this sinne hath prevayled so notoriously as among yourselves and the Anabaptists where the popular order hath bene most in use If you looke upon all the Reformed Churches their practise where the people are not bound to be present at the conviction and examination of offendours I thinke your owne heart will tell you your mouth will acknowledge that the like rash unjust excommunications have not bene executed among them as among yourselves other Sects of Separatists that use the same manner of proceeding which you doe H. AINSVV. He that stands out to excommunication will commonly plead his cause
bound to study all the week to take paines to prepare himself for the ministery of the word and Sacraments but did onely speak the same without labour going before then could not the double honour maintenance mentioned 1. Tim. 5 be due unto him Where there is no speciall work there is no speciall maintenance And therefore while you doe not require double labour of the Elders in trying cases but doe binde the people even to the same labour of enquiring examining trying matters how can you require double honour such speciall maintenance for them But after this generall evasion you proceed unto some more particular answers say there in your Animadversion H. AINSVV. First they restrain things too much when they say between brother brother for what if it be a publick case of heresy oridolatry as that mentioned Deut. 13.12 13 14. c. will they say women children servants were then or are now bound to leave their callings come together to try out the matter Hereunto I reply I. They restrain things no otherwise then Christ himself doth when speaking generally of the sundry sorts of sinne he also notes them to be between brother brother saying If thy brother finne against thee Matt. 18.15 Even to publick sinnes of heresy and idolatry as that in Deut. 13. though immediately they are committed against God yet as they are scandals and occasions of falling unto others so are they cases between man man brother brother to be censured judged by them Deut. 7.4 13.5 6 13. II. If they restrain things too much then doe they no wrong unto you but unto themselves then is there more force in the matter then their words doe make shew of For if it be unmeet to binde all the members of the Church to heare cases dayly between brother brother even in a stricter sense as you would have their words to sound how much more inconvenient shall it be when by a larger bond they shal be required to heare all cases of sinne both betweē brother brother between the Lord and our brethren III. What sense or reason have you to make this question Will they say c. whereas it is not they but you which say plead by all this your arguing that women children servants are bound to leave their callings come together to try out these controversies H. AINSVV. Secondly many controversies between neighbours are for civill things of this life such are (g) Luk. 12.14 not Church matters nor there to be heard but by (h) Rom. 13. Magistrates or arbiters chosen 1. Cor. 6.4 5. REPL. I. Even the controversies about Civill things of this life are Church-matters there to be judged seing all sinnes are there to be judged Matt. 18 15-17 1. Cor. 5.11 2. Cor. 10.4 5 6. If you could prove that men did never make false deceitfull bargaines nor use false weights nor any kinde of extortion oppression coosenage c. then might you exclude controversies for Civill things from the judgement of the Church And the controversies about these things being prosequuted before the Church cannot but require a greater time for the examination of them then the callings workes of men women children servants can well afford so that the force of the argument by this exception is not diminished but further manifested hereby II. For one the same sinne God hath appointed two judgements one Civill another Ecclesiasticall as for example if a man should refuse to divide the inheritance with his brother this man by the Magistrates might be forced thereunto and this judgement is a Civill administration And this is that which our Saviour remooves from himself Luk. 12.13 14. Againe the same man for his deceit covetousnes sinfull oppression of his brother used in this controversy for Civill things of this life might justly be censured by the Church excluded from the same which is an Ecclesiasticall judgement and administration You cannot shew any place of Scripture that denyes this judgement unto the Church Moreover our Saviour at that time was none of the ordinary Iudges no not in Ecclesiasticall causes He did not in his life time erect another judicatory besides that which was already thē established among the Iewes and therefore did not use to excommunicate any or cast them out of the Synagogue And if Christ did not now ordinarily give sentence neither in Civill nor Ecclesiasticall judgements how farre is this his example from proving that controversies for Civill things are to be remooved from the Church III. As for Rom. 13. shewing that controversies for Civill things are to be judged by Magistrates this is not contrary to any thing in the argument neither doth it weaken the same The causes of Murder Adultery Theft Coosenage Slander as they are to be judged by the Magistrate so by the Church also And if all the members thereof men women children servants be bound unto the labour of trying and examining such causes why have they not maintenance for the same as well as either Magistrates or Ecclesiasticall Elders IV. As for matters referred unto Arbiters seeing they are oftentimes matters of sinne of wrong injury 1. Cor. 6.7 8. subject in that respect unto Ecclesiasticall censures this course of deciding controversies doth as wel serve for the ease help of the Elders saves them a labour as well as the people And therefore the consideration hereof doth help to shew that there is still no reason why Elders should have speciall maintenance when their ease excuse from labouring is as much as any others H. AINSVV. Thirdly for doubtfull cases Ecclesiasticall people are to inquire the law (i) Mal. 2.7 at the Priests mouth and to ask counsell of their Elders severally or joyntly who are to have their meetings apart for such other like ends Act. 21.18 so many things may be composed without trouble of the Church REPL. 1. The people are to ask counsell of one another also as well as of their Elders for in the multitude of counsellers is health Prov. 11.14 and all the brethren are to instruct guide and support one another Rom. 2 17-20 15.14 Heb. 3.13 and by your owne confession they are to be used not onely in private but in (k) Animadv p. 40. publick consultations also Yea beside this you acknowledge further that (l) Ibid. p. 39 41. the greatest Errours Heresies Schismes evils have both arisen bene continued by the Elders that sometimes they are blinde guides and without understanding and oftentimes they differ in counsell among themselves and thus in doubtfull cases men become more doubtfull by their counsell and so have the more need to consult among themselves If therefore this duety of giving counsell doe lye upon the people and they be bound unto it this work alone being common to others with the Elders could not shew the double honour maintenance
due unto them unlesse some other study and work together with the labour of hearing examining and judging of causes did require the same II. As for Mal. 2.7 the knowledge in the Priests lips there spoken of was that which he principally manifested in his office of publick preaching the law of God Deut. 33.10 Lev. 10.11 in which office the Elders doe not succeed them and so have no speciall maintenance due in that regard Againe the knowledge in the Priests lips appeared secondarily in judiciall causes which they heard examined judged Deut. 17.8 9-12 2 Chron. 19.8 Zech. 3.7 This power you give unto the people now as well as unto the Elders who therefore by your doctrine deserve no more maintenance for the same then doe the people in this regard III. Though we grant that Elders are to have their ordinary meetings apart for the Church-affaires yet doth not your allegation from Act. 21.18 prove the same for that meeting being upon extraordinary occasion to entertaine the Apostle Paul and those that were with him who being new come to Ierusalem they came together to salute embrace one another to heare tidings of the successe of the Gospel to rejoyce together in the Lord vers 19. and then consulted further of such things as tended to the edification of the Church vers 20. c. You might as well conclude that strangers of other Congregations should be present in the ordinary assembly of the Elders because we doe here read of some such who being in Pauls company were now also present at this speciall meeting of the Elders in Ierusalem Act. 21.15 16 17 18. H. AINSVV. Fourthly when apparant sinners so convicted by witnesses are to be judged by the Church there is no time more fit then the Sabbath day wherein all men are board to leave their owne works Exo. 20.10 tend to the Lords of which sort this is REPL. I. Though I doe not hold it simply unlawfull to judge causes on the Sabbath day yet that this day is the fittest your allegation from Exod. 20. shewes it not Men may then leave their owne works tend to the Lords though they heare no controversies pleaded yea much more fitly comfortably and fruitfully may they attend upon the publick administration of the Word Prayer Sacraments and sanctify themselves thereunto in private both by dueties of preparatiō before and by dueties of meditation repetition conference c. afterward if the mindes of Minister people be not distracted or hindred by other controversies and contentions Psal 26.6 Matt. 5.8 Exo. 19.10 30 18-21 Act. 17.11 Psal 119.11 c. That there hath bene such a disturbance and hindrance among you it is testifyed not onely by strangers which sometimes hearing you doe complaine hereof but also by your owne Ministers as Mr Iohnson Mr Clyfton and your owne people both such as have left you and even such as still remaine with you II. As Ecclesiasticall judgements are the Lords works so are Civill judgements also which the Magistrates sitting on the Lords throne in stead of the Lord their God doe administer execute in his name 2. Chron. 19.6 9.8 And by this reasoning you might make the Sabbath to be the fittest day for them also H. AINSVV. Or if that day suffice not they may take any other for them convenient for c. REPL. You doe hereby yeeld unto us that you have walked in an uncleane way and that you have according to your owne doctrine an uncleane and polluted people for seeing as Mr Iohnson confesseth witnesseth (m) Treat on Matt. 18. p. 17. your wonted manner hath bene to heare matters on the week day at which time there was seldome half the Church together if now according to (n) Anim. adv p. 42. your former arguing from 1. Tim. 5.22 men cannot keep themselves pure from partaking with other mens sinnes unlesse they see heare the conviction of those whom they doe reject then hath half your Church together bene defiled many times while they have consented to the excommunication of such at the hearing and examination of whose cause they have not bene present H. AINSVV. For unto publick affaires the Church is to be assembled 1. Cor. 5.4 Act. 14.27 15.4 30. 21 18-22 REPL. This your generall and indefinite speech doth admit many exceptions for I. Even the Elders when they have their meetings apart as you grant unto them doe consider together of the publick affaires and there you see then that the Church is not alwayes to be assembled unto publick busines II. If the whole Church and all the members thereof men women children and servants must assemble to heare the proceedings against them whom they are to avoyd reject according to your plea and this also on the week dayes though it should be day after day as may come to passe in great Congregations and when many cases are to be heard c. as was (o) R Clyfr Advert p. 42. before objected unto you what reason is there that the Elders should have speciall maintenance in respect of this work where all the members of the Church are bound to attend upon the work as well as they To this you say nothing III. Even unto the publick administration of the word and prayer you doe not binde your people on the week day but leave it free for them to come or not to come unto the same And shall the hearing of examinations proceedings against particular men have more honour then the word preached Yea which is much more by this your opinion and reasoning you doe more binde your people to be present at controversies even on the week day then to heare the word and prayer even on the Lords day for to be absent from judiciall proceedings on the week day doth not onely require acknowledgment of a fault as doth the absence from publick worship on the Lords day but by your doctrin it doth also require a reversing repeating of the proceedings or else a refusall to allow the same in not rebuking or rejecting them who are publickly censured rebuked or excommunicated by the Church IV. As in respect of the ease commodity of the Church the hearing of some publick affaires is to be committed to the Eldership as hath bene shewed before so also for the avoyding of scandall offence for example the examination of each particular act and circumstance serving for the conviction of offendours in some uncleane filthy sinnes and the open repetition naming hereof before the whole Congregation men women young old your owne people strangers that come to heare cannot but be very offensive so is found to be for it is a shame even to speak of the things which are done of many in secret Eph. 5.12 And even shame it self as it seemes hath forced you sometimes to leave this your practise which you so earnestly plead for As heretofore in the case
he carryed from the Consistory to the Classis are of the same nature with those causes between blood blood between law commandement statutes judgements which were deferred to the Levites the Priests c. ANSVV. I. It is here also to be noted how instead of disproving that which I sayd and instead of shewing any dissimilitude of the question brought unto the Classis from those brought unto the judicatories Deut. 17.2 Chron. 19. he leaves his accusation without proof II. As for the proof he requires it is most plaine and evident from the places alledged for in them it is manifest that about whatsoever cause there was any strife or contention in Israel it might be brought unto the judicatories there mentioned All Ecclesiasticall affaires all matters of the Lord were to be brought unto the Ecclesiasticall Senate over which Amariah was President All Civill affaires all matters of the King were to be brought unto the Civill judgement over which Zebadiah was President 2. Chron. 19.11 And what controversy can there be in any Church or Estate that may not be reduced to one of these Iunius in his exposition of these places (Å¿) Anal. Expl. Annot on Deut. 17.8 2. Chron. 19.8 11. plainely distinguisheth these causes questions on this manner Againe whereas 2. Chron. 19. vers 10. there is expresse and generall mention of any cause whatsoever about which there might be controversy between Law Commandement Statutes Iudgements I would demand of Mr Dav. what cause can be excepted or exempted from these judicatories Was there ever any controversy or any contention in any Church which hath not reference to some Law or Commandement And seeing Mr Dav. himself in these disputes pretends the Law and Commandement against us doe not these questions therefore being of such nature belong unto such judicatories Seeing judicatories were therefore originally instituted to take away strife dissention as in Civill causes Deut. 1.12 so also in Ecclesiastical Deut. 17.2 Chron. 19. and withall seeing the causes in question c. have bene speciall meanes and causes of discord among us why should not these matters be brought unto these judicatories for tryall and judgement as well as others And therefore whether those Scriptures above mentioned have bene by me misapplyed or not I leave to the consideration of them that are able to judge CHAP. III. The second Argument taken from the words of Christ Matth. 18 15-20 THe second Argument is taken from that Rule of Discipline delivered by Christ unto his Disciples for the government of his Church in the New Testament Mat. 18.15 16 17 18 19 20. From this rule we may reason divers wayes and chiefly thus If this Rule of Christ be the same that was prescribed unto Israel of old and be translated from the Jewes Synagogues unto the Christian Churches then are not these Churches independent then are they not single uncompounded policies then is not all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction limited within the compasse of particular Congregations then cannot appeales unto superiour judicatories be justly denyed But the first is true Therefore the second also The Assumption of this Argument is denyed by many kindes of opposites H. Barrow cryes out against it (a) Refut of Giff. p. 76. Is it likely or possible that our Saviour Christ would fetch his patterne for the Elders of his Church the execution of these high judgements from that corrupt degenerate Synedrion of the Iewes which by the institution of God was merely Civill and not ordained for causes Ecclesiasticall as appeareth Exod. 18. Num. 11. Deut. 1. the Priests bearing the charge having the deciding of all Ecclesiasticall causes Num. 18. Deut. 17. But this Councell of theirs was now mixed of the Elders of the people and the Priests handled all causes both Civill Ecclesiasticall indifferently Matt. 26.3 Act. 4.5 How unjustly and ungodly they dealt may appeare by their handling our Saviour and his Apostles from time to time Now as their is no likenes to collect these surmises from that place so is there no one circumstance in that Scripture to lead thereunto Mr Ainsworth would perswade that (b) Animadv p. 18. Christs doctrine in Matt. 18.18 is a new rule which Israel had not and thinks it would be good for men to yeeld unto this perswasion Mr Smith that declined unto Anabaptisme speaking of the order observed in the old Testament sayth (c) Parall Cens Observ Sect. 8. p. 75. The Lord did not then require men to proceed with their brethren in three degrees of admonition and so to bring them to the acknowledgment of their sinne and repentance That is the Lords dispensation for the new Testament But the Lords order for those times was 1. reproof for sinne Lev. 19.17 2. The partie reprooved was to offer a sacrifice which if he did he was cleansed from his sinne visiblie Levit. 4.23 3. If the wilfully refused to hearken he was to be promoted to the Magistrate and put to death for his presumption Numb 15.30 31. Deut. 17.12 This was the Lords oecconmie for those times when this order was violated then all communion was defiled whiles it was observed all was well in the visible communion Let any man declare the contrary if he be able Thus he challenged all men in the confidence of this opinion that Christ gave a new rule Mr Iacob speaking of this rule Mat. 18. sayth (d) Attest c. 8. p. 278.279 The Iewish Church-government cannot be here alluded unto much lesse required to be kept practised by Christians Concerning which together with all other Iewish ordinances the Apostle teacheth and confirmeth unto us that all those old things are passed away and that all things of such nature under the Gospell are made new 2. Cor. 5.17 and that the same things are shaken and changed and remaine not now unto us Heb. 12.27 NOw on the contrary to shew the trueth of the Assumption against these and the like denyals thereof and to prove that Christ gave no new Rule but the very same for substance which was given formerly to the Jewes let us consider it in the severall parts thereof so by induction from them demonstrate that which is affirmed by us _____ In that Rule of Christ Mat. 18 15-20 we have described to us 1. Three degrees of admonition 2. A censure upon contempt of admonition 3. A confirmation of that censure The first degree of admonition is most private betwixt the person admonishing and the person offending alone vers 15. This is no new commandement but taught of old both generally in the equity of the Law to love our neighbour as ourselves Lev. 19.18 and more specially to shew this love by admonition in the rebuke of sinne Lev. 19.17 and that with secrecy Prov. 11.13 25.9 And further as Christ describes the person offending by the name of a brother to shew in what loving manner this duety was to be performed to him
this Church that when any man had done any thing that they held for a fault that then the same was punished censured by the Elders of the Church according to the quality of the fault as it may appeare in S. Matthew ch 5.22 c. A little after he addes And if the fault were judged very great then the sentence of Excommunication was awarded by the same Elders as appeareth in S. Iohn cha 9.22 And this was the cause why our Saviour Christ spake so shortly of this matter in the 18. of S. Matthew without noting the circumstances more at large for that he spake of a thing which was well knowne and used amongst the Jewes whom he spake unto To the same purpose he writes in his answer to the Rhemists where speaking of the Governours of the Church which were set over every severall assembly in the time of the Law he saith (r) Confut. of Rhem. transl on Mat. 18.18 Those governing Elders are divers times in the story of the Gospell made mention of under the title of the Rulers of the Synagogue And this manner of government because it was to be translated unto the Church of Christ under the Gospell our Saviour by the order at that present used amongst the Jewes declared what after should be done in his Church Neither doth he speak these things touching the Elderships of particular Congregations onely but applyes the same unto Classicall Synodall Presbyteries also and doth allow of appeales unto them and thereby acknowledgeth a dependency of Churches mutually one upon another It is to be observed here sayth he (ſ) First Reply to D. Whitg p. 187. that both in this part of the Discipline viz. touching excommunication and also in all other parts of it as I have shewed as in harder and difficulter causes things were referred unto the Synods Provinciall Nationall or Generall as the case required so if the Elders of any Church shall determine any thing contrary to the word of God or inconveniently in any matter that falleth into their determination the parties which are greeved may have recourse for remedy unto the Elders and Pastours of divers Churches that is to say unto Synods of Shires or Dioceses or Provinces or Nations of as great or of as small compasse as shall be thought convenient by the Church according to the difficulty or weight of the matters which are in controversy Which meetings ought to be as often as can be conveniently not onely for the decision of such difficulties which the severall Presbyteries cannot so well judge of but also to the end that commō counsell might be takē for the best remedy of the vices or incommodities which either the Churches be in or in danger to be in And as those things which cannot be decided by the Eldership of the Churches are to be reserved unto the knowledge of some Synod of a Shire or Diocese so those which for their hardnes cannot be there decided must be brought into the Synodes of larger compasse as I shave shewed to have bene done in the Apostles times and in the Churches which followed them long after And thus it appeares that according to the order and practise of the Jewes under the Law he allowes and maintaines a liberty of appeales for parties greeved and a superiour judicatory above particular Churches an use of Synods not onely for counsell but for decision of controversies for censuring of offenders even unto excommunication according to divers instances thereof given by him in the precedent pages of which more is to be sayd hereafter Mr Traverse agreeth fully with the former and witnesseth plainly that the Rule of Christ Mat. 18. is no new rule but taken from the Jewish Policie and this both in respect of the persons judging called the Church and in respect of the censure sentence of excommunication there described For the first he sayth speaking of the assembly of Elders (t) Eccles Discipl p. 87. edit 1617. In Mat. 18. our Saviour calleth them by the name of the Church because they rule and governe Church matters under the name and authority of the Church So likewise the name of all the Assembly by Moses is given to the Elders of the Jewes that is to say unto certaine chosen picked out men who were assigned by all the Congregation to the government of the affaires Thus plainly it is taken in Numb 8. where the Lord appointeth the Congregation shall lay hands upon the Levites but I think no man will say this is to be understood of all the congregation that so many thousands should lay their hands upon them as are rehearsed then to have bene in the host of Israel but the Elders and Princes onely as Aben Ezra doth rightly interpret it Which is to be noted the rather because some will have the word of our Saviour to be expounded of all the Church whereas according to the manner of speaking which the Hebrewes use the Consistory or Councell of the Church is called the Church Where also it is to be observed that together with the name the thing it self is translated from the Jewes unto us that looke what a Councell the Jewes used for the government of the Church we ought to understand by this name that such a one is appoynted by our Saviour to be used in the Church Therefore in the same place he attributeth to this Councell the chief government of all Church matters that all such things as cannot otherwise be agreed and ended be at the last brought unto them and ended by their authority judgement As for the second the censures of the Church having spoken before of Suspension and proceeding to speak of Excommunication he saith (v) Ibid. p. 92. This part of Ecclesiasticall censure as also the first were translated unto us from the Jewes for the Church of Christ in all this matter of Discipline hath received all her lawes decrees from the Jewes for as it hath bene shewed before it is plaine manifest that our Saviour in Mat. 18.17 alluded to the manner of the Jewes because that otherwise his speech should have bene very obscure and such as no man had bene able to understand But this appeareth most manifestly by the excommunication of the blind man in the 9. of Iohn c. And further that which he sayth concerning the government of a particular Church he extends also unto the (x) Ibid. p. 98. Synods for the governing of more Churches of which there shall be more occasion to speake againe hereafter Mr Fenner in his Counterpoyson touching the certaine forme of Ecclesiasticall government declares himself to be of the same minde viz. that the Rule of Christ Mat. 18. is no new rule when as he writes (y) Part of a Register p. 479. Our Saviour Christ in setting downe the Ecclesiasticall Presbyterie speaketh according to the Iewes for otherwise the Apostles could not have understood him when he sayd Tell the Congregation or
as concerned in common the state of their Church So did the Apostles and Apostolike men provide against schismes and heresies Their wisedome reached not unto the policie of one chiefe judge Thus D. Rainolds doth many wayes acknowledge the authority of Synods he calleth that power which they have the chieftie of judgement he avoucheth that they have it by divine right that the wisedome of God hath committed it unto them he pleadeth from the forenamed warrant Act. 15. he extendeth this power unto matters both of Doctrine and Discipline the testimonies which in his margine he alledgeth out of the Ecclesiasticall history to shew that the like assemblies were kept in succeeding times are such as speak of their excommunicating wicked Hereticks viz. Euseb hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 14. c. l. 7. c. 26 28. c. whereby it appeares that he allowed unto Synods not onely counsell or admonition but a power of exercising Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction censure Those Councels mentioned and poynted at by him for instances of this chieftie of judgement were such as did not onely admonish but also determine and judge of causes The Synod of (h) Barthol Carranza Summa Concil p. â—3 c. Ancyra in Galatia made most severe Ecclesiasticall lawes for the excluding of such as did fall in time of persecution The Synod of (i) Magdeb. Cent. 4. c. 3. col 111. c. 6. col 463 Gangris in Paphlagonia exercised Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in deposing Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia for his errours and the like might be noted for the rest Whatsoever particular errours were in any of these yet the authority and jurisdiction it self is approved of him as proceeding from the wisedome of God declared in this place Act. 15. D. Whitaker in his disputation against Bellarmine touching Councels layes downe this Text Act. 15.6 for a ground of that which he takes occasion to intreat of and (k) De Concil Qu. 1. c. 1. p 1 3 4 c. often repeats that text applying it to each of the questions which he discusseth And whereas our Opposites doe grant a lawfull use of Synods for counsell but not to judge nor to give judiciall sentence for the deciding of causes D. Whitak describing the State of the Question betwixt us and the Papists touching the persons that are to be called to a Synod shewes that (l) Ibid. qu. 3. c. 1. p. 79. the Papists will have onely the Bishops or greater Prelates to be allowed for judges and the Presbyters or inferiour Clergie to be onely inquisitors disputers or consulters to give counsell but not to have suffrages in giving definitive sentences This is the opinion of the (m) Bellar. Tom. 2. Contr. 1. de Concil l. 1. c. 15. Romish Church Now D. Whit. in the refutation of the Papists doth as wel refute the Brownists and other opposites while he proves (n) De Concil qu. 3. c. 3. that all who have a lawfull deputation and calling are to be allowed for judges and not for counsellers onely and that their suffrage is not onely for consultation but for decision as is hereafter shewed more at large Observe onely at this time that the first argument in that dispute is taken from this very place Act. 15. G. Bucerus pleads from this same ground of Scripture and writes (o) Dissert de Gub. Ecc. p. 65. that not onely severall particular Churches had their proper distinct Presbyteries but that the history of the Apostles witnesseth that when greater controversies did arise which could not be ended in lesser Colleges then more Churches under the new Testament did runne unto a Generall Synod Act. 15. And what power they were wont to exercise therein he shewes by a distinction of persons comming to the Synod As D. Whit. refuting the popish distinction of greater and lesser Clergie shewes that there was a right and power of suffrages judgement in the Synod so Bucerus (p) Ibid. p. 107. 108. c. confirming the distinction of Iunius viz. that some persons came to the Synods as Delegates sent from the Churches which therefore did give definitive sentence of matters propounded that others comming without such deputation and commission might give their advise and counsell but without suffrages doth hereby acknowledge a power of jurisdiction in the Synod by those that were peculiarly called to be judges therein Zepperus (q) Polit. Eccl. l. 3. c. 8. de Syn. p. 713. 714. 715. c. alledging Act. 15. for a patterne of Synods declares that after the Apostles the primitive Church in the new Testament being most studious of this consociation or combination in Synods did not onely communicate by letters but meeting together in Nationall or Generall Councels did heare the causes of Hereticks others that appeared before them so convinced condemned and excommunicated them sent their decrees unto all Churches with the names heresies of those that were excommunicate c. Thus did he acknowledge the right of Synods not onely for counsell admonition but also for jurisdiction in censuring Piscator (r) Thes Theolog. vol. 1. Loc. 23. p. 361-364 writing of Councels and Synods and of the seven questions concerning them doth seven times alledge this place Act. 15. for a ground of direction in each of them And for the authority of Synods he plainly expresseth his meaning when speaking of the government of the Church in generall he sayth * Thes 62 63. it consisteth chiefly in Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and againe distinguishing this jurisdiction into two parts he sayth that the one part consisteth in the power of making lawes potissimum spectatur in Conciliis that is it is chiefly seen in Synods Bucanus (f) Loc. CoÌ„ Loc. 43. qu. 21 22 25 27. writes much to the same purpose and asscribeth unto Synods authority of making lawes of deciding controversies and this from the example of that Synod Act. 15. often mentioned by him Mr Fenner (t) S. Theol. l. 7. c. 7. p. 278-281 briefly and methodically describing the nature of Synods the kindes the use authority of them doth derive their authority from this ground Act. 15. which even in that short description is more then tenne times alledged by him Many other such Testimonies might be produced to shew the consent of judicious and learned Divines in this poynt of which somewhat more is to be sayd when I come to give answer touching that multitude of Authors which Mr Canne alledgeth against me Let us now heare what my Opposites say concerning this Example Mr Dav. his Exceptions touching Act. 15. answered I. DAV * Apol reply p. 254. 255. This Text Act. 15. is alledged by Bellarmine to prove the binding force of the decrees of Councills and by the Answerer to shew the authority of the Classis whereunto Iunius giveth 2 answers also 1. Non sequitur ex particulari si custodienda fuerint decreta Concilii Apostolici ergo omnium servari oportere It
it followeth hence from the consideration of that which is here confessed to be done by each kinde of person here mentioned that the use of Synods is not onely for counsell or admonition but also to give sentence and to make decrees which are acts of authority and power The errour of Bellarmine and the Papists is (c) De Con. cil l. 1. c. 15. 16. that onely Majores Praelati the greater sort of Prelates such as are their Bishops and Archbishops and by priviledge or custome Cardinals Abbots and Generals of Orders have jus suffragii decisivi that is authority to give definitive sentence that Presbyters Elders and other Doctours or learned men in the Synod have onely suffragium consultivum a voyce in consultation liberty to give counsell to deliberate and dispute but not to give definitive sentence in the deciding of any matter Thus they take away the right and power of judging from one half or more of those persons that are to appeare in Synods The errour of the Brownists and other our Opposites is that all the persons in the Synod have onely suffragium consultivum onely power to deliberate to advise and give counsell that all jurisdiction is limited unto a particular Church and so they destroy wholly the authority of Synods which the Papists doe in part The Papists deprive one half of the persons of their power and these deprive all the persons of their power But now in this case Mr Canne by his confession refutes both these errours granting jurisdiction a power of giving sentence and making decrees unto the people as well as others Thus is he condemned out of his owne mouth Thus is he condemned by those whom he alledgeth when D. Whitaker sayth of Act. 15. (d) De Cōc qu. 3. c. 3. p. 97. In hoc ergo Concilio quivis laicus Presbyter definitivum suffragium habuit non minus quam Petrus that is In this Synod every lay-man and Elder had a definitive voyce as well as Peter Thence it followes that there was an authority and jurisdiction in the Synod it was not onely for advise and counsell He saith againe (e) Ibid. c. 2. p. 85. The end of Synods is to decide controversies to prescribe Canons to correct abuses to set Churches in order c. What plainer evidence of their power can we seek for This same authority of Synods is in like manner proved by that which (f) Pol. Eccl. lib. 3. p. 108 126. 334. Mr Parker to like purpose witnesseth together with D. Whitak and others II. Mr Canne here doth yet blame our practise in depriving the Church of her right and the people of their interest and is so eager in seeking to blame the manner of our keeping Synods that unawares he hath yeelded us the matter itself about which we dispute viz. an authority of giving sentence and not onely a giving of counsell by Synods His reprehension is that Mr Paget and others doe otherwise practise But who be those others beside me Why did he not name them as well as me Are they any other then all the knowne Reformed and Orthodox Churches in Europe He might well think that if he had mentioned these the very naming of them and my following of their practise would have bene not so great a blame unto me as an occasion of making himself suspected and condemned for his unjust opposing of them That it may the better appeare how unjustly he blameth our practise let us examine more particularly what he hath sayd and withall set downe some observations whereby the peoples right in Synods may the better be discerned I. To shew the peoples interest he alledgeth Act. 15.12 22. where there is mention made of the multitude that was present and of the whole Church sending messengers c. But by the multitude we may understand not the whole number of the Church at Ierusalem which consisted of many thousands but rather the multitude of such speciall persons as were met in the Synod So Beza interpreteth it (g) Annot. maj in N.T. in Act. 15.12 Multitudinis autem nomine intellige non totam Ecclesiam c. By the name of the multitude understand not the whole Church which was not yet wholy adjoyned but the whole company of the Apostles and Elders as appeareth before from the 6 verse c. Piscator likewise (h) Schol. in Act. 15.12 approves this interpretation and addes some further light unto it from the reference of the Greek article though he also give liberty for another interpretation So for that phrase the whole Church mentioned vers 22. Iunius (i) Animad in Contr. 4. de Conc. l. 1. c. 15. n. 19. c. 16. n. 1. expounds the same of the Elders and Deacons or the whole Clerus or Clergy serving that Church these saith he are designed by the common name of the Church Calvine also (k) Cōmen in Act. 15.6 writes to the same purpose Luke saith not that the whole Church was gathered together but those that were men of learning and judgement and which by vertue of their office were lawfull judges of this cause It may be indeed that the disputation was before the people but lest any man should think that the common people were promiscuously admitted to handle the cause Luke expressely nameth the Apostles and Elders as more sit to take cognition thereof II. We grant that besides Ministers and Elders other members of the Church may have suffrages or voyces and give sentence in Synods as well as those that are Officers alwayes provided that they be lawfully deputed and sent thereunto Thus D. Whitaker explaines himself touching his allowance of lay-men to have voyces in Synods and sayth (l) De Conc. qu. 3. c. 2. p. 92. Every man ought not to be admitted into the Synod nor to speak therein but he that shall be chosen of the Church and designed thereunto Againe he saith (m) Ibid. c. 3. p. 103. Not onely Bishops are to be chosen of the Church to be sent unto Synods but other godly prudent learned men which happily can dispute more skilfully and inquire into controversies better then the Bishops Whosoever is sent of the Church he represents the Church And so (n) p. 97. 98. 104. oft in other places Iunius in like manner (o) Animadv de Cōc l. 1. c. 15. n. 4. c. 16. n 1. n. 10. requires of such as have voyce in Synods that they be furnished with gifts and calling whether Officers or any others And this also is the practise of the Reformed Churches in these parts where upon occasion divers times some such are deputed and sent unto Synods which have no Ecclesiasticall office and even in the Nationall Synod at Dort divers other members of the Church which were neither Ministers nor Elders were sent thither allowed to be Delegates were to have not onely deliberative but also definitive voyces as well as any other
able to resolve the controversie True it is the Hierarchie (d) D. Whit. g. T. C. 3. deny this of whose opinion Mr Paget must either be or els the Classes as they now rule must fall to the ground for any relief that this Scripture Act. 15. will yeeld unto them ANSVV. 1. Had Mr Canne well understood the state of the question or what he saith and whereof he affirmes he might easily have knowne that we are of the same minde with Mr Parker in this that as Antioch so every other particular Church hath like authority to end their owne controversies if they finde themselves able This condition concealed by Mr Canne is foure or five times repeated by Mr Parker in the (e) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 20. p. 301 302. place alledged speaking of Antioch and other particular Churches with these expresse words si modo possit si modo vires suppetivissent c. if they could if they had ability if they found not themselves too weak in case of impotency c. Mr Canne hiding these conditions from the eyes of his Readers doth hereby hood-wink them and keeps them in darknes from seeing the right meaning of Mr Parker 11. Besides the case of impotency alledged by Mr Parker there was another reason why this controversy at Antioch was to be brought unto a Synod viz. because it was causa communis a common cause that concerned both many other Churches in regard of the matter and in speciall the Church of Ierusalem because the authours of this controversy were not members of the Church of Antioch but came from Iudaea and from them of Ierusalem Act. 15.1 24. and therefore that Church of Ierusalem had more right and authority to judge of them then they of Antioch had 111. Whereas he would have it to be well observed that the Church of Antioch sent to them of Ierusalem not as being a dependent body standing under another Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves the right and well observing hereof stands in this that we acknowledge particular Churches to be dependent bodies not by way of subjection unto any one supposed to have more authority then the rest but so dependent that every one is equally and mutually subject to one another as occasion requireth The Churches of Ierusalem of Antioch of Samaria and others were all of equall authority and yet each standing under the authority of a Synod compounded of them all and this appeareth by the instance of this controversy referred here to the decision of the Synod at Ierusalem IV. For the testimony of D. Whitaker (f) Conc. qu. 1. c. 1. that the Church of Antioch sent not to Ierusalem as being bound in duety thereto 1. It is misalledged by him for in the Chapter mentioned by him there are no such words to be found the words are indeed Mr Parkers and not of another as he sayth poynting at D. Whit. in his margine He jumbles testimonies together that which one sayth he sets downe in anothers name and followes the mistake that is in Mr Parkers (g) Pa. 314. book through the Printers or Writers fault And though in the (h) De Cōc Qu. 1. c. 2. p. 6. Chapter following D. Whit. sayth of Ierusalem that there was as it were a certaine castle of Religion and the head of the Church yet the other words are none of his So licentious and negligent is Mr C. in his quotations 2. For the thing it self though in the combination of Churches into Synods they are not limited and simply bound in duety ex obligato as Mr Parker sayth to any one Church more then another yet this freeth them not from their duety of uniting themselves to some Classes or Synods even as particular persons though they be not simply bound to one Congregation more then another but may use a Christian liberty therein yet are they bound in duety to joyne themselves as members to some Chuch and further where no absolute necessity is imposed yet godly wisedome teacheth men a duety in respect of circumstances and accidentall occasions to make choyse of one Church rather then another V. He alledgeth D. Whitg so defectively that no man by his quotation can tell how to finde his words But whereas he sayth of the Hierarchy that I must either be of their opinion or els the Classes as they now rule must fall to the ground for any relief c. this consequence remaines to be declared and proved by him I. CAN. VI. When the Hierarchie alledge Act. 15. to proove their Diocesan and Provinciall Synods lawfull marke how they are answered by the Reformists (i) Park Polit Ecc. l. 3. c. 20. p. 315 316. The particular acts of the Apostles in cases alike must alike be observed If this reason be effectuall as indeed it is against them then it is no lesse effectuall against the Classes Now I have in part already shewed how quite contrary their doings are unto the Example in Act. 15. unto which this further may be added that the matter carried from Antioch to Ierusalem was agreed upon by the whole Church Pag. 338. and sent thither by their mutuall desire and consent And hence our Divines teach that the power of bringing things from one Congregation to another belongeth not to any one Officer but to the whole Church If this be true by what word of God then doth Mr Paget by his * Thus he is accused by our Elders in the records of our Church Oct. 6. 1631. owne authoritie and without the consent of the Consistory or any one of them carry matters to the Classis and there he and they together undoe all that which the Elders with the Churches consent had before joyntly concluded ANSVV. 1. That the particular acts of the Apostles in cases alike must alike be observed I doe willingly grant and thereupon ground our Argument for the authority of Synods To this end it is alledged of Mr Parker in this very place which Mr C. doth cite viz. to shew how controversies are to be brought from particular Churches not to one person to a Bishop or Arch-Bishop as the Hierachy would have it but unto a Synod according to the example in Act. 15. How Mr Canne doth imagine that this should be effectuall against Classes he neither declareth neither can I conjecture II. Whereas he addeth that the matter carried from Antioch to Ierusalem was agreed upon by the whole Church c. I argue thence if a whole Church sometime be so offended and troubled by false teachers that they hold it needfull to seek help of a Synod it is lesse marvell that sometimes one or two should be driven to seek such help Had there bene but one person in Antioch troubled and unsatisfyed in conscience about that poynt of justification and salvation by the works of the Law who could have forbidden him to seek help of the Synod either by way of counsell or judgement when he could not finde it
His affirmation is (v) Poli. Eccl l. 3. c. 12. p. 77. that the superiorit of jurisdiction is retained in every Church so that neither the Pastour in the Prime Church nor the Praesident in the Combined Church nor yet any Bishop is above the Church but under the power of every Church This distinction of the Church is more plainly declared by him afterward where he saith (x) Ibid. c. 13. p. 117. Est itaque visibilis Ecclesia duplex Prima et Orta Prima est collectio singulorum fidelium in unam Congregationem et generali nomine Ecclesia dicitur Orta est collectio combinatio Ecclesiarum primarum plurium in unum coetum appellatur Synodus that is The visible Church is of two sorts The Prime and the Combined Church The Prime Church is a collection of severall faithfull persons into one Congregation and is called by a generall name the Church The Combined Church is a collection of more prime Churches into one company is called a Synod Now the jurisdiction which he speakes of he makes common to both and expressely applyes it to both to the combined Church or Synod as well as to the particular or prime Church And further that in the 12. chapter he spake generally of both these kindes of Churches he manifests in the first words of the 13. chapter where he begins thus (y) Ibidē Hitherto we have spoken of the Church in generall so farre as it is the subject of Ecclesiasticall politie now let us come to the divers kindes thereof II. Notwithstanding the superiority of the Church yet Mr Par. (z) Ibid. p. 77. acknowledgeth the authority of the Pastour to be very great as having it immediately from Christ and not onely the authority but also the exercise of the same authority and jurisdiction in which respect he saith he is superiour not to men onely but to the Angels themselves Gal. 1.8 as being in Christs stead 2. Cor. 5.19 20. so long as he useth this authority lawfully And repeating the same againe he proceeds further when he saith that if he doe not lawfully exercise his authority in the administration of the Word and Sacraments then he ceaseth to be a Pastour (a) Ibid. p. 88. quo casu solo eum suae Ecclesiae subjectum esse dicimus in which case alone we say that he is subject unto his Church If in this case alone which I durst not have sayd then in other cases the authority of many Pastours Elders especially meeting together in a Synod may exercise an authority superiour unto one particular Church I. DAV And in cap. 18.13 making a comparison between a particular Church and Churches combined in Synods and Classes he affirmeth that the difference between them is not in the intensive consideration of their power which the Congregation hath in reference to the Keyes within it selfe but in the extensive power onely wherein the Synod hath a power extended to more objects viz. to many Churches in things common whereas the power of a particular Church is confined and limited within its owne compasse ANSVV. In this 13. chap. for that number of 18. seemes to be mistaken Mr Parker doth againe give divers pregnant testimonies for the authority and jurisdiction of Synods I. In the place alledged his words are these (b) Pol. Eccl l. 2. c. 13. p. 121. I distinguish touching the power of the keyes which is intensive or extensive No prime Church no not the least of them doth want the intensive power but it wants that extensive which a Synod hath seeing the power thereof is extended to many Churches whereas the power of the prime or particular Church is not extended beyond her owne bounds The power of the keyes is a power of jurisdiction an Ecclesiasticall power of binding and loosing whether intensive or extensive this power he confesseth to be in a Synod and therefore the use of Synods is not onely for counsell or admonition but for jurisdiction also in the judgement of causes Whereas according to Mr D. his allegation the difference betwixt the power of a particular Church and of a Synod is in the extensive power onely therefore the Synod is also of greater power and jurisdiction in extension unto many Churches II. In comparing the power of a particular Church with a Synod he sayth expressely (c) Ibid. p. 129. Major quidem potestas est Synodi quam unius alicujus Ecclesiae primae parochialis Greater is the power of a Synod then of any one prime or parishionall Church But if Synods could onely counsell and admonish a particular Church besides that could censure and use Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction then should a particular Church have greater power then a Synod and not onely greater intensive power but as great extensive seeing a particular Church yea or a particular person may give counsell or admonition either to a Synod or to many Churches as occasion shall require It is true indeed which Mr P. saith that all the parishionall Churches are greater then their Synods seeing by a new Synod they may abrogate that which was ordained amisse by their Deputies without their consent sentence and will This he proves by many arguments and this we willingly consent unto this is the practise of all the Reformed Churches But this is sufficient for the question in hand that a Synod hath the power of the keyes and jurisdiction and greater authority then any one Church III. This is another conclusion of Mr Parkers (d) Ibid. p. 120. We say there is one forme of government instituted of Christ in all Churches both prime and combined so that we may not dreame there is in the prime Church a different forme from that which is in the combined Church neither may we imagine that in the combined Church there is another different from that by which the prime Church is governed If this assertion be true then Mr Dav. and those of his minde do dreame when they imagine so different a forme of government to be instituted in the particular Churches and Synods which he calles the combined Churches that one sort of them should onely give counsell admonition the other exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction censure I. DAV (e) Apol. reply p. 241.242 The same authour in the 20 chapter speaking of the summity or supremacy of the power of particular Congregations propoundeth the due limits of it wherein he conceiveth it is to be understood and bounded as that the power of particular Churches is chief 1. in its owne matters not in things common to many Churches 2. in case it be able to transact its owne matters within it selfe as if a doubt or controversy arise the Church hath power to terminate it if it can as the Church of Antioch first disputed the matter among themselves and laboured to compose the difference within themselves but finding not a want of right to end it among themselves but need of more
he spake of jurisdiction because counsell alone is not sufficient to end controversies unlesse there be authority and jurisdiction exercised withall And further whereas D. Bilson had sayd that Synods have had more power then Elderships Mr Parker assenteth saying (h) Pa. 303 So truely it ought to have bene done that they should onely have more but this more serveth not your purpose but contradicteth it for if they have had onely more it followeth that the Elderships alwayes ought to have had some power though lesse Thus expressely he acknowledgeth a power of jurisdiction in Synods as well as in Elderships and many the like assertions if need were might further be noted out of the same chapter Hereby it appeares how vaine it is which Mr D. saith that in the 3 last limitations other Churches doe concurr in way of counsell and declaration of their judgment as if that were all they did as if the Synod consisting of those Churches did not give definitive sentence of causes brought unto them And hereby it may withall appeare how the judgement of Mr Parker doth agree with the practise of the Reformed Churches which doe exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in their Synods according to those 4 limitations specifyed by him There is no matter determined by them and judged in their Synods but it may be reduced to one of these 4 heads it is either a common cause or a case of impotency where there is need of help or an unlawfull administration in some or at least a presumption of evill dealing I. DAV (i) Apol. reply p. 242. Thus have we examined his owne witnesses and finde them to be wholly for us in this cause ANSVV. Whether the forenamed witnesses Mr Cartwr Mr Fenner and Mr Parker be wholly for Mr Dav. and those of his opinion let the Reader judge His examination of Mr Par. inspeciall is done by the halves but before we come to speak of other pregnant testimonies which Mr P. hath given touching the authority and power of Synods omitted by Mr D. we will first examine another allegation which he had set downe before (k) Ibid. p. 226.227 where he labours to prove that the lawfull combination of particular Churches in Classes Synods is by way of counsell or brotherly direction and not otherwise I. DAV The reasons whereby it may be proved are weighty Mr Parker hath saved me the labour of this taske by laying downe six Arguments for the proofe of this in those his learned and elaborate treatises concerning Ecclesiasticall policy as 1. From the ground of this combination of Churches De Eccl. pol. l. 3. c. 2â— p. 329. which is love not obedience 2. From the forme of it which is communion and consociation c. 3. From the matter of it which are Churches who are aequall among themselves as members in the body which have a vicissitude of offices mutually to be performed among themselves 4. From the object of it which is res communis that which concerneth all the Churches in common 5. From the outward manner of proceeding which is collatione consiliorum by conference and communication of counsells 6. From the end of this combination which is not to receive the mandates of other Churches but their consent counsell and approbation ANSVV. In generall it is to be observed 1. That the scope of Mr Parker in this chapter is to shew in what manner many Churches are combined together in Synods namely as equals in a mutuall fellowship and not with subjection to any one Church above the rest This he propounds in the beginning as the state of the question when he savth (l) Pol. Eccl. lib. 3. c. 22. p. 327. The Hierarchy will have this combination to be subordinate and joyned with subjection unto their Hierarchy against the common opinion of all Protestants which affirme no consociation to be lawfull but that which is mutuall such as is wont to be among equalls He thought not therefore of this new found out combination by such as maintaine the single uncompounded policie but of such as is commonly received by all Protestants His arguments are all directed against the Popish and Hierarchicall combination which we also disallow with him This he repeats againe for conclusion after his six arguments saying (m) Ibid. p. 336. By all which it is plenteously demonstrated that the combination of Churches is not Hierarchicall with subjection unto any one among the rest but rather Aristocraticall wherein equalls are joyned together Neither could he call the government of Churches by Synods Aristocraticall if they did onely direct by way of counsell seeing an Aristocracy is such a government as exerciseth jurisdiction in the judgement of causes II. If Mr Parkers meaning had bene otherwise viz. that Classicall and Synodall combinations had no authority nor jurisdiction or that no Churches ought to be subject unto the same then had all his 6 arguments bene of no force neither could they proove any such matter We may see it plainly in the example of the prime or particular Churches where in the combination of many members together though the ground of it be love though the forme of it be communion though the matter of it be brethren which are equall among themselves though the object of it be res communis that which concerneth all in common though the end of it be not to receive the mandates of any one member but the consent of many yet doth it not follow hence but that such a Church and society hath power of censure and jurisdiction and that the members thereof are to be subject unto such a combination And thus also may particular Churches submit themselves to many combined together in a Synod III. If Mr Parker did not meane thus but simply denyed all jurisdiction of Synods subjection of Churches unto them then should he be contradictory to himself in that which he had so expressely and so often acknowledged in other places before as that Greater is the power of a Synod then of any one prime or particular Church and that the Church that erreth and offendeth is subject to no one Church as to a Diocesan but to many assembled together in a lawfull Synod Moreover to come more particularly to each of his 6 Arguments there is something to be observed in his reasoning in every one of them that may shew unto us how he acknowledged the jurisdiction of Synods I. The first Argument (n) P. 329. taken from the ground of love and mutuall help is that which he saith is proved by Zepperus l. 3. c. 7. mistaken for c. 8. who in the same chapter pag. 715. describes the authority of Synods in the exercise of Discipline and the greatest censures thereof even unto excommunication therefore not for counsell onely Againe all those places of Scripture Num. 32.6 17. Eccl. 4.9 Rom. 12.13 Phil. 2.4 1. Thes 5.11 14. Heb. 10.24 13.3 1. Cor. 10.33 which he together with Zepperus doth
judgement belongs unto men but of inquisition discretion consultation and that therefore that whole distinction betwixt persons defining and consulting is vaine yet it is manifest and undenyable that in the censuring of Hereticks that erre in matters of faith there is an Ecclesiasticall judgement belonging unto men and a definitive sentence to be pronounced against such The matters of faith are as little to be subjected or submitted unto the judgement of a particular Congregation as unto the judgement of Synods and yet Hereticks are not to be exempted from the judgement and censure of either of them D. Am. himself in the same place doth plainly acknowledge this distinction betwixt consultation and definitive suffrage when he saith (b) Ibidē Bene consulere majoris est virtutis quam ex aliorum consilio bene definire quamvis hoc sit majoris potestatis To consult well is a matter of greater vertue then from other mens counsell to define well although this be a matter of greater authority Seeing therefore he confesseth that to have a definitive voyce is a matter of greater authority then to counsell and advise and seeing withall that this power of suffrages and definitive voyces belongs unto the Deputies of Churches in Synods and that by his confession it is evident that herein he asscribes more power unto Synods then he did in that book of English Puritanisme Againe in the question whether a Generall Councell be above the Pope or the Pope above the Councell although D. Am. in handling the same doth not so fully and directly speak against Bellarmine as D. Whitaker D. Rainolds Iunius Sibrandus Lubbertus Chamierus and other of our Divines which maintaine that the Pope may be justly condemned deposed and Excommunicated by a Generall Synod yet doth he (c) Ibid. de Conc. c. 7. acknowledge the Councell or Synod to be above the Pope in the very proposition of the question and after takes upon him the defence of the Arguments commonly used by Protestant Divines for the proofe thereof Would he have spoken plainly according to the positions set downe in that booke of Engl. Puritan according to Mr Dav. his opinion that limiteth all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction unto a particular Congregation onely he should then have sayd that as the Pope hath no power over a Generall Councell so neither hath the Synod any authority over the Pope either to depose excommunicate or any way to censure him but might onely counsell and advise him c. he should as well have refuted the Protestants for giving too much power to the Synod as the Papists for giving too much power to the Pope Now this he hath not done but hath set down his minde in such manner that neither the Papists against whom he disputed nor the Protestants whose receyved opinion he seemed to maintaine could easily observe any difference in him from our common tenent VI. In another booke after this he acknowledgeth (d) Cas Consc l. 4. c. 29. q 9. th 23. that it belongeth unto Classes and Synods when any difficulty is to declare by common counsell and to decree who ought to be excommunicated Now to decree an excommunication is an act of power whereby judiciall sentences are determined and in all propriety of speech doth containe more in it then a bare counsell or admonition and therefore herein he doth apparantly give unto Synods more authority then onely to counsell and advise And thus D. Burges had reason to understand this speech of D. Am. which he alledgeth and approveth and agreeably thereunto professeth that God hath established the use of Ecclesiasticall Synods for Church affaires as well as the gathering of Churches (e) Rejoyn p. 206. D. A. did either acknowledge the authority of Synods in this sentence or els was too blame for deceyving his Reader with ambiguity of speech VII In his (f) Fresh suit ag Cerem p. 90.91 last booke which he wrote immediately before his death when he speakes of representative Churches though he dissalow that kinde of Synod or Convocation which is sometimes kept in England in respect of Hierarchicall Officers and in respect of their imposing humane ceremonies yet doth he not condemne the Synodall assemblies of Scotland before Perth nor the Reformed Churches of France which have their association and combination without any Hierarchy And yet it is undenyable most certaine that those Synods of Scotland and France have used Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in censuring of notorious offendours and were not onely for counsell and advise as is further manifested hereafter Had he dealt plainly and answered his opposite fully he should have condemned the Assemblies of Scotland for that jurisdiction which according to Mr Dav. his opinion and that booke of Engl. Purit they unjustly usurped Yea further he doth justify those Synods for when as D. Burges (g) Rejoyn p. 206. had spoken of such Ecclesiasticall Synods as have jurisdiction and authority of censure as appeares by his opposing of them unto other Synods which the Separatists and Mr Iacob doe allow which have no power to controle but by way of brotherly admonition D. Am. in his reply unto that place confesseth that D. Burges did speak of (h) Fresh suit p. 183. right Ecclesiasticall Synods and for the other Synods of Mr Iacob the Separatists the same that Mr Dav. allowes he passeth away from them and sayth not a word in their defence which yet had bene most pertinent unto the question VIII As for those places in particular which Mr Dav. alledgeth out of D. Ames his Cases of Conscience for the (i) Cas cōsc l. 4. c. 24. q. 4. first of them though it be sayd there that the power of remooving scandals and excluding the wicked for the right thereof and in respect of the first act cannot be separated from a true Church because it flowes immediately necessarily from the essence thereof c. this is not against us for 1. When Synods judge the causes of particular Churches they doe not take away their power but onely restraine and correct the abuse of their power the authority of particular Churches is not separated from them but the corruption or fault that appeareth in the exercise of their authority They are still permitted to use their authority and judgement in censures elections c. when the Synod perceives that they doe not goe astray therein 2. Though there be a streame of authority flowing immediately from the prime Churches this hinders not but helps and furthers the authority of Synods unto which that power by delegation is immediately derived And therefore as there is a fountaine of authority springing out of a particular Congregation so there is a Sea of authority in the Synod where the waters of so many fountaines and the authority of so many Churches doth concurre and meet together As for that other place Cas Consc l. 4. c. 25. it is answered hereafter in the Allegation that is taken from D.
part deny the authority of particular Elderships as we see in the Brownists and therefore after private admonitions doe in a popular order referre the judgement even of lesser matters unto the publick examination and decision of the whole Church assembled together not permitting the same to the judgement of the Eldership Mr Baynes doth also impugne this practise For he speaking of the rule of Discipline Matt. 18. where Christ doth manifestly suppose the power of jurisdiction to be in many yet after some other observations touching the meaning of the word Church he further explaineth himself when he addeth these notes and sayth (a) Dioces tryall p. 80. Thirdly as Christ doth speak it of any ordinary particular Church indistinctly so he doth by the name of Church not understand essentially all the Congregation For then Christ should give not some but all the members of the Church to be governours of it Fourthly Christ speaketh it of such a Church to whom we may ordinarily and orderlie complaine now this we cannot to the whole multitude Fiftly this Church he speaketh of he doth presuppose it as the ordinarie executioner of all discipline and censure But the multitude have not this execution ordinarie as all but Morellius and such Democraticall spirits doe affirme And the reason ratifying the sentence of the Church doth shew that often the number of it is but small For where two or three are gathered together in my name c. whereas the Church or congregations essentiallie taken for teachers and people are incomparably great Againe shewing on the other side that Christ by the Church doth not meane the chief Pastour who is virtually as the whole Church and that the word Church doth ever signify a company and never is found to note out one person after other reasons he pleades from the example and practise in the old Testament saying (b) Ibid. p. 81. The Church in the old Testament never noteth the high Priest virtuallie but an assembly of Priests sitting together as judges in the causes of God Wherefore as Christ doth indistinctlie presuppose everie particular Church So he doth here onely presuppose the joynt authoritie and joynt execution of a representative Church a Presbyterie of Elders who were Pastors and Governours And thus he concludes from Mat. 18. that there is a representative Church of one particular Congregation as before from Act. 15. he acknowledged a representative Church in the Synod for many Churches VI. Whereas Mr Dav. alledgeth out of Mr Parker that the power Ecclesiasticall do the essentially and primarily reside in the Church it self as in its proper subject although this be no ground for the refutation of that power and jurisdiction belonging to Synods as I have shewed (c) P. 89.90 before yet even this ground also is denyed by Mr Baynes who goes not so farre as Mr Parker (d) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 8. p. 28. c. touching the derivation of all Ecclesiasticall authority from a particular Church as from the fountaine but doth in some part oppose that opinion especially in respect of that influence of authority per intuitum viz. that which is in Ministers called immediately of Christ as the Apostles were yet in respect of the end and the whole is sayd to be from the Church mediately c. And therefore though Mr Parker was farre from the opinion of Mr Dav. yet was Mr Baynes farre further from it His judgement herein as being worthy the consideration of the Readers I have thought meet to set downe the more fully And first speaking by occasion of the power of jurisdiction in the Church he sayth (e) Dioc. tryal p. 69. Christ hath committed it originaliter exercitative to the representative Church that they might Aristocratically administer it And afterwards coming to intreat of the third maine question in his booke (f) Ibid. p. 98. Whether Christ did immediately commit ordinarie power Ecclesiasticall and the exercise of it to any one singular person or to a united multitude of Presbyters he there sets downe his judgment more largely in divers conclusions (g) P. 83.84 on this manner Conclus 3. Ordinarie power with the execution thereof was not given to the communitie of the Church or to the whole multitude of the faithfull so that they were the immediate and first receptacle receiving it from Christ and virtually deriving it to others This I set downe against the Divines of Constance our prime Divines as Luther and Melancthon and the Sorbonists who doe maintaine it at this day Yea this seemeth to have been Tertullians errour for in his booke depudicitia he maketh Christ to haue left all Christians with like power but the Church for her honour did dispose it as we see The proportion of a politick body and naturall deceived them while they will apply all that is in these to Christs mysticall body not remembring that analogon is not in omni simile for then should it be the same with the analogatum True it is all civill power is in the body politick the collections of subjects then in a King from them And all the power of hearing seeing they are in the whole man which doth produce them effectually though formally and instrumentally they are in the eare and eye But the reason of this is because these powers are naturall and what ever is naturall doth first agree to the communitie or totum and afterward to a particular person and part but all that is in this body cannot hold in Christs mysticall body In a politick body power is first in the communitie in the King from them but all Ecclesiasticall power is first in our King before any in the Church from him But to whom should he first commit this power but to his Queene Answ Considering this power is not any Lordly power but a power of doing service to the Church for Christ his sake therefore it is fit it should be committed to some persons and not to the whole communitie which are the Queen of Christ For it is not fit a King should commit power to his Queene to serve herself properly but to have persons who in regard of this relation should stand distinguished from her Secondly in naturall bodies the power of seeing is first immediately in the man from the man in the eye and particular members In the mysticall body the faith of a beleever is not first immediately in all then in the beleever but first of all and immediately in the personall beleever for whose good it serveth more properly then for the whole every man being to live by his owne faith The power of Priesthood was not first in the Church of Israel so derived to the Priest but immediately from Christ seated in Aaron and his sonnes Object Yea they were given the Church intuitu ejusdem tanquam finis totius Answ I but this is not enough that power may be sayd to be immediately received by the Church as the first
judgement touching this controversy is the same with that which I have here noted out of his writings and for the substance of the matter no other then that which I maintaine throughout this discourse SECT VIII Touching the English Church at Franckford in Q. Maries time IO. DAV (i) Apol. reply p. 243. A discourse of the troubles in the Engl. Chur. at Franckf Art 62. Art 67. And to conclude thus it was ordered in the English Church at Franckford among the exiles in those Marian dayes that if all the Ministers and Seniors be suspected or found parties if any appeale be made from them that then such appeale be made to the body of the Congregation c. and that the body of the Congregation may appoint so many of the Congregation to heare and determine the said matter or matters as it shall seeme good to the Congregation Againe If any controversy be about the doubtfull meaning of any word or words in the Discipline that first it be referred to the Ministers or Seniors and if they cannot agree thereupon then the thing be referred to the whole Congregation ANSVV. I. It is to be observed that these two Articles of Discipline being alledged against me by (k) Churches plea p. 36. Mr Canne as well as by Mr Dav. there is this difference betwixt them that Mr Canne addes more words then he should and Mr Daven omits some words that should have been added That which Mr Canne addes is against himselfe and serves to condemne the practise of the Brownists when he faith of the Ministers and Seniors that they have authority to heare determine c. That which Mr Dav. omits and refuseth to expresse serveth to reproove such as complaine unjustly of excepting against the Elders judgement For when that 62d Article speakes of appeale to be made unto the body of the Congregation the Ministers Seniors parties excepted this latter clause shewes there is just cause of excepting against the Elders judgement sometimes and that they are to be refused as incompetent judges being parties This brief clause being of speciall use in our controversy ought not to have bene omitted by Mr Dav. II. That which they alledge for appeale unto the body of the Congregation doth not overthrow the authority of Synods This granting one kinde of appeale doth not exclude or deny another Seeing particular Congregations are subject to errour and many of them dayly doe erre why should not appeale be granted from them unto Classes and Synods especially where there is no Magistrate that can or will judge of such errours III. This appeale made unto the body of the Congregation was not usually permitted but extraordinarily in cases of speciall necessity when the Ministers and Seniors were not able to end the controversies brought unto them the expresse words of the Article are (l) â—isc of troubl in Engl Ch. at Franckf art 57. in case they cannot end them then afterwards to be referred to the whole Congregation Their ordinary practise was otherwise as appeares in other Articles of their Discipline where it is plainly ordained (m) Ibid. art 59. that the Ministers and Seniors shall have authority to heare and determine on the behalf of the whole Church all offences determinable by the Congregation committed by any person in the Congregation unlesse the partie called before them have just occasion to take exception to the sayd Ministers and Seniors or to appeale from them as not competent judges And afterwards againe there is another strict and severe decree (n) Art 63. If any person doe unjustly take exceptions to any of the Ministers or appeale from the whole ministery that then such persons beside the punishment for the principall cause shall also be punished as a contemner of the Ministery and a disturber of the Church This order as it serves to condemne the practise of the Brownists as tending to the disturbance of the Church while they give no power of judging and deciding causes unto the Eldership so it serves for the reproofe both of them and Mr Davenp in denying the authority of Synods for if the Church may in ordinary cases commit their authority unto an Eldership not deprive themselves of their right then why may they not doe so likewise unto Classes and Synods IIII. This English Church at Franckford did commit and delegate the power of judging controversies not onely to their Elders but upon occasion even unto other particular and private members of the Church which had no Ecclesiasticall office and this in divers degrees as 1. In case some of the Eldership though the lesser part were excepted against as parties 2. When the greater part were excepted against 3. When all the Ministers and Seniors were suspected c. Thus they did erect as it were three severall sorts of Classes or Synods within themselves for the judicature of such causes as could not be ended by the Eldership Thus they ordained in these three severall Articles of their Discipline which follow Of the first sort (o) Art 60. Item if any have just occasion to take exception to some of the Ministers and Seniors and not to the more part that then those of the Ministers and Seniors to whom the exception is made in this case shall not be judges but in this case for the time removed from the ministery and that the rest of the Ministers and Seniors to whom no exception shall be made with as many of the Congregation joyned to them as they be in number which shall be excepted shall be arbiters and judges in the sayd causes and that the sayd persons so to be joyned to the Ministers and Seniors shall be appoynted by the Congregation the Ministers and Seniors not excepted giving their voyces as others of the Congregation Of the second sort (p) Art 61. Item if exception be taken to the more part of the Ministers and Seniors that then the Church shall appoynt six moe to be judges with the rest of the Ministers against whom exception is not made the same rest of the Ministers having their voyces in the election of the six as other members of the Church Of the third sort (q) Art 62. Item if all the Ministers and Seniors be suspected or found parties or if any appeale be made from them that then such appeale be made to the body of the Congregation the Ministers Seniors and parties excepted And that the body of the Congregation may appoint so many of the Congregation to heare and determine the sayd matter or matters as it shall seeme good to the Congregation Now as in all these CoÌ„missions the Church did not loose her authority but did rather exercise the same herein this very act of delegation being a testimony of her power so in like manner if the example of this Church alledged against me may be followed of us other Churches may also send their Deputies and Delegates unto Classes Synods for the judgement
keyes binding and loosing When Bellarmine sends us unto Damascene who sayth touching the controversies in the Church To determine and decree of these things it belongeth not to Kings but to Synods For where two or three saith the Lord are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them Christ hath not given unto Kings the power of binding and loosing but unto the Apostles and their successours to Pastours and Teachers Junius answereth (p) Ibid. in c. 8. n. 6. These things certainly are true and nothing for that famous principality of the Romane Bishop c. We also affirme the same thing as before cap. 3. nota 9. c. 10. Another evident affirmation touching the jurisdiction and power of Synods When Bellarmine saith that Prosper doth no otherwise proove the Pelagians to be Hereticks but because they were condemned of the Romane Bishops Innocentius Zozimus Bonifacius Celestine Junius answereth (q) N. 14. No otherwise It is false for Pelagius was first condemned by the Synod of Carthage and of Milevis but when he went beyond sea to Rome where he so craftily infinuated himself that there was great feare lest he should inflict a soarer wound upon the Church at Rome the Africane Bishops did prudently and religiously certify Innocentius by two letters both concerning the sentence of their Synods and concerning the imminent perill of the Romane Church unlesse according to the example of them in Africa they did provide for the publick safety c. Another example of Synodicall jurisdiction allowed by Junius AGaine in his disputations against Bellarmine de Pontifice Romano Junius doth often allow the authority and jurisdiction of Synods and shewes his judgement that Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited to a particular Congregation When Bellarmine speaking of a certaine decree made in a Synod of Africa mentioned by Cyprian sayth it was ordained thereby that a cause should first be judged where the crime was committed that it did not forbid but that it might be judged againe in another place Junius answereth (r) Animadv in Bell. contr 3. de Pont. Rom. l. ◠c. 23. n. 3. Certainly this is not forbidden For it is of common right But that which is of common equity in case of appeale to have a cause judged againe by another judicatory is denyed by my opposites in allowing no such Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction Whereas Bellarmine condemneth the Magdeburgenses as being altogether absurd and ridiculous for their denyall of appeales Junius denyes the fact and saith (ſ) N. 5. his reasoning is inconsequent that all appeales should be altogether forbidden because the appeales to them beyond the sea were forbidden When Calvine alledgeth a certaine Canon of the Synod held at Milevis in Africa to refute the ambitious usurpation of the Pope and manifests thereby the jurisdiction of Synods in the judgement of causes because it was decreed that appeales should be made to the Africane Synods and not to the Bishop of Rome Junius (t) Ibid. in c. 24. n 2. c. maintaines this allegation and vindicates it against the exceptions of Bellarmine And he (v) N. 11. alledgeth further to this purpose the epistle which the Councell of Africa wrote unto Pope Celestine in these words After due salutation officiously premised we earnestly desire that hereafter you would not admit unto your audience those that come from hence and that you would not receive into your communion those that are excommunicated of us c. This request Junius calles a modest and brotherly prohibition to wit that the Pope should not receive appeales from them But if there were no superiour Ecclesiasticall power to judge the controversies of a particular Congregation then might these Africane Synods have bene accused of usurpation over particular Churches as transgressing the bounds of modesty and of their calling for exercising the power of the keyes in excommunicating some as well as the Pope for his usurped authority of the keyes in receiving appeales from the Synods Then had both the allegation of Calvine and the defence of Junius bene partiall and unjust condemning that in the Pope which they allowed in Synods When Bellarmine acknowledgeth that the Pope is bound to keep the Ecclesiasticall lawes made by Synods but quoad directionem non quoad coactionem according to the distinction of Lawyers touching the Prince meaning that the Pope may use their direction but is not under their correction or constraint which is indeed the same thing in effect which my opposites affirme of particular Churches that they are bound to use the counsell and direction of Synods but are not subject to their censure nor under their jurisdiction Junius (x) Ibid. in c. 27. n. 6. denyes this distinction for though saith he we should grant that it take place in foro soli in civill courts to wit for the judging of Princes yet is it of no force in foro coeli et conscientiae in Ecclesiasticall judicatories because the reason of them is not alike c. And in the next animadversion (y) N. 7. speaking still of those lawes canons made by Synods he affirmeth that as every other Bishop so the Pope also is subject unto them according to the order of the Church When Bellarmine sayth the Councell or Synod of the Greekes could not make a law for the Latines c. Junius (z) N. 16. See also n. 33. denyes the same and gives a reason because that Synod was Oecumenicall or universall Therein he acknowledgeth that they had a greater authority then onely to admonish or counsell Againe when Bellarmine answering the argument of Nilus saith that the Pope is not subject to Canōs viz. of Synods c. that he is subject to Christ not to the Fathers that he doth not contemne the Fathers nor their Canons but useth them for direction though he cannot be compelled by them c. Junius (a) N. 40. opposeth him further saith (b) N. 42. that he ought to be subject both to Christ and to the fathers by Christ who hath so prescribed 1. Cor. 14.29 32. and addeth further (c) N. 46. If he cannot be compelled by the Canons that he is therefore rightly called by the Spirit of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that wicked one or lawlesse person 2. Thes 2. Whereas some now adayes beginne to speak evill of the jurisdiction of Classes and Synods as of an Antichristian authority Junius is so farre opposite unto them that he accounts the Pope even in this regard to be Antichrist and the Man of Sinne because he refuseth to be subject unto the authority of Synods in their canons and decrees Moreover in comparing of the Civill and Ecclesiasticall estate Junius sayth (d) Ibid. in c. 29. n. 27. Kings have their authority in Civill matters Rom. 13. and the Synod in Ecclesiasticall matters above the Pope as it was defined in the Councell of Constance and Basel And their authority is so
certaine as it is certaine that he which by force repelleth force is armed with publick authority He distinguisheth their jurisdiction in respect of the causes judged by them and repeats this their authority againe in the (e) N. 28. next animadversion And though these two kindes of government Civill and Ecclesiasticall doe use a different manner of compulsion he sayth (f) N. 29. Nihil refert nos de rei substantia agimus coactionem uterque habet sed hic spiritualem ille temporalem c. It skilleth not we intreat of the substance of the matter both of them have a coactive power or a compulsion but the one spirituall the other temporall c. A most evident assertion of Synodall jurisdiction and that they are not to direct onely by way of counsell but to correct also by way of censure To these I might adde many other testimonies of Iunius but these evidences already cited may be sufficient to shew that he was not of this strange opinion touching the independency of Churches and that Mr Daven therefore hath abused his Readers and sought to blinde their eyes when for the credit of his cause he would have it thought that Iunius was of his minde while he professeth that he doth fully agree with him SECT X. His pretence of agreement with Dr Whitaker examined M R Dav. to colour his opinion as if it were no singular conceit of Mr Iacob and some few others makes mention of the Centuriatours as if they were of the same minde yet he alledgeth not their words to prove the same But instead of others he chooseth out Dr Whitaker as if he had bene a favourer of this opinion which it is likely that he never heard of and sayth (g) Apol. reply p. 237. 238. Whit. de Cōci quest 5. Argum. To these I may adde those who have handled the controversies concerning the necessity and authority of Councills amongst whom I will instance in Dr Whitaker who speaking of the fullnes of that delegated power which Christ hath given to the Church not to the Pope which he applyeth to the Keyes in binding and loosing shutting and opening retaining and remitting finnes sayth that this power belongeth primarily principally and essentially to the Church but to the severall Bishops onely accidentally secundarily and lesse principally and explaineth himself by a rule in Philosophy which is that when any power is in two in one necessarily essentially in another contingently and accidentally it is more principally in him in whom it is necessarily and essentially then in him whose it is onely contingently and accidentally As the heat is more principally in the fire then in the water because it is in the water by reason of the fire So sayth he seeing this jurisdiction and fullnes of power is given to the Church necessarily and primarily but to the Pope onely secundarily and by the Church it is manifest that it is more in the Church then in the Pope What that learned wrighter sayth of the Churches power in comparison with the Pope holds in all other parallell instances ANSVV. First had Mr Dav. repeated this Argument of D. Whitaker fully and justly as it is set downe by himself then might the Reader have seen therein a plaine evident testimony for the authority of Synods but divers things being omitted in the beginning middle and end of it thereby the trueth is obscured and hidden from his Readers In the beginning of it D. Whitaker propounds it thus If the fullnes of power be in the Church not in the Pope then it is evident that it hath more authority then the Pope but the first is true therefore the second also Now by the Church in this place he meaneth the Generall Synod or Councell as appeares by the title of this Question noted in the beginning of it viz. (h) DeConcil Qu. 5. c. 1. with c. 3. Arg. 5. Whether the Synod be above the Pope and if he had not so meant it this his Argument had bene beside the Question And therefore while D. Whitaker here directly concludeth a fullnes of power in Synods and as he further calles it in this same place that highest authority and jurisdiction which Christ hath left unto his Church it is manifest hereby that he did not hold them to be onely for counsell admonition and so was farre from limiting all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction unto a particular Congregation In the middle in the confirmation of this Argument D. Whit. saith For if all this power were in the Pope or in any one man principally and essentially then he dying it should perish and so the Church should altogether loose it But it is not lost though the Pope dye a thousand times but it remaineth with the Church without which the Pope though living could have no part of this authority Now to argue on this manner against the authority we asscribe unto Synods by comparing them with particular Churches as he doth against the Pope compared with Synods would be inconsequent unequall and no parallel instance because the title of the Church is no where given unto the Pope or unto any one person as it is unto an assembly of Ministers Governours or Deputies of Churches met together in the name of Christ in Synods because though we asscribe unto Synods some jurisdiction yet we doe not say that all power is in them originally and so to be derived unto others as is sayd of the Pope and consequently because there is no such danger that the power of the Church should be lost and perish by the death of such as are members of the Synod as might be by the death of the Pope if all power were primarily and essentially in him alone And therefore it is a vaine assertion of Mr Dav. touching this argument of D. Whit. viz What that learned wrighter sayth of the Churches power in comparison with the Pope holds in all other parallell instances In the end of this Argument prosequuted by D. Whitak he concludeth thus Wherefore seeing it is certaine that this power is given unto the Church primarily and not unto the Pope but secondarily and by accident and seeing the Church is represented in the Synod it is of necessity that the Synod must be above the Pope And thus most evidently he grants unto the Synod as being a representative Church a power jurisdiction above the Pope a power which consists in binding and loosing shutting opening retaining and remitting of sinnes as himself here explaines it and so is directly contrary to them which allow no more unto Synods but counsell and admonition Why did Mr Davenp omit and refuse to name the Synod which D. Whit. so expressely mentioneth applying yeelding unto the Synod that power which he there pleades for Secondly as for that similitude of fire and water though it be granted that heat is more principally in the fire then in the water because it is in the water by reason of the
Monothelite This was more then counsell or admonition He shewes in the same place that many lawes were made concerning Bishops both of the Apostles and of Synods which doe certainly binde all Bishops When Bellarmine answereth that the Pope is bound by Ecclesiasticall lawes in respect of direction not of coaction which distinction is in effect the same which our opposites use now viz. that Synods may binde or be respected for their counsell not for their jurisdiction Chamierus replyeth againe and pleades that the Bishop of Rome is subject unto those lawes not onely for their direction but for their coaction or constraint viz. in regard of Ecclesiasticall censures He sayth further Even as particular Synods doe binde all the Bishops within their owne jurisdiction so Vniversal Synods have power over all the Bishops of the whole world Againe because particular Synods doe binde all the Bishops of their owne Province therefore the Bishop of Rome is subject unto the lawes not onely of an universall but also of his owne particular Synod Moreover he instanceth in divers particular lawes which the sixt Synod prescribed unto the Church of Rome by name touching the permission of marriage fasting c. Moreover when Bellarmine and P. Auratus doe plead for the Popes supremacy as being necessary to the unity of faith and the unity of the Church c. Chamierus answereth (h) Lib. 9. c. 13. Of old when many heresies sprung up they never ran unto any one man by whose authority questions might be decided When disputation was raysed against Paul and Barnabas touching Mosaicall ordinances the Apostles called a Synod Act. 15. which remedy the Church thence-forth used most diligently as often as either heresies or schismes did break the unity thereof He alledgeth divers examples thereof in speciall of Constantine and Innocentius in the question about Chrysostome And speaking of such Synods as used not onely counsell but jurisdiction in censuring the guilty such as was the Councell of Nice he sheweth thence they found no other remedy fit enough to preserve Ecclesiasticall unity in faith love except a Generall Synod He sayth againe We understand that the best and most certaine meanes of nourishing unity is a Synod not one Monarch And among others he alledgeth Aegidius Viterbiensis who disputed on this manner Paul the glory of the Apostles when he would shew the chief poynt of our salvation sayth Without faith we can by no meanes please God but without Synods faith cannot stand therefore without a Synod we cannot be safe And afterwards Whatsoever hath bene done in the Church worthy of praise worthy of honour from the age of Melchiades either to resist the enimy or to settle the Commonwealth that all sprung from Synods and is againe to be referred unto Synods And many other things he there bringeth to maintaine the authority of Synods without any shew that he ever light upon this dreame that they were onely for counsell To conclude whereas Chamierus was translated out of this life before he had fully finished that great work of his Panstratia Catholica and therefore for the finishing of it there is added unto his 4th Tome a Supplement by Alstedius in that Supplement there is also a plaine confession touching the authority of Synods Therein Alstedius treading in the steps of Junius and D. Whitaker (i) De Cōc c. 1. sect 6. doth acknowledge that the originall of Synods is from divine right alledging Deut. 17. Act. 1. ch 15. Mat. 18. Repeating the causes wherefore Synods are to be called he doth not limit them to be for counsell onely but that (k) Cap. 4. sect 2. as malefactours in Civill judgements are tryed accused condemned so in the Church obstinate Hereticks are by publick judgement to be condemned and excommunicated He allowes unto those that are lawfully called unto Synods (l) C. 5. s 2. to have right of giving definitive sentence and of determining matters according to the Scriptures He maintaines that Synods have authority over the Pope and that (m) C. 10. s 21. he is bound to subject himself unto their judgement discretive and coactive not onely to their counsell but to their censure And if these did not suffice there are yet many other cleare testimonies which Alstedius there gives touching the jurisdiction of Synods CHAP. VI. An answer to Mr Cannes Arguments FRom the Allegations of Mr Dav. we come now to the Argumentations of Mr Canne and his client against the authority of Classes and Synods and here first we will examine and consider their Syllogismes and Logicall formes of reasoning ARGVM I. (a) Churches plea p. 68. If those Churches planted by the Apostolique institution had power fully in themselves immediately from Christ to practise all his ordinances Then have all Churches the like power now But the first is true Therefore the second The Proposition is cleare certaine by these Scriptures 1. Cor. 5.2 3. Act. 14.23 1. Cor. 16.2 Col. 2.5 2. Thes 3.14 The Assumption is acknowledged by sundry of our best Divines c. ANSVV. I. The first maine fault in this Argument common to many that follow is that herein is committed a foule fallacy ab ignoratione Elenchi that is to say the Conclusion is beside the Question This whole argument being granted yet the authority of Synods remaines still firme and unshaken thereby When or where did I ever affirme that the Churches now have not the like power to practise all the ordinances of Christ as fully as those Churches planted by Apostolick institution The testimonies of learned men here alledged by him to prove that the ancient and first institutions are to be preferred before later inventions I doe willingly assent unto But what can he conclude hence Though Christ have committed power unto a particular Church doth it therefore follow that if such abuse their power and goe astray either wholy or the greater part of it there is then no Ecclesiasticall authority above them to censure them or to restraine them from proceeding in evill This consequence which had bene to the purpose he offers not to prove It was confessed (b) Chap. 5. sect 1. p. 81. before b◠Mr Cartwright one of his owne witnesses here alledged by him that if any Church should desire or choose or consent upon by the most part some that is unmeet either for doctrine or manners then the Ministers and Elders of other Churches round about should advertise first and afterwards as occasion should serve sharply severely charge that they forbeare such election or if it be made that they confirme it not by suffering him to exercise any ministery II. A second extraordinary and grosse errour is to be observed in his Logick while in the prosequution of his Argument he not knowing which is the Major or which is the Minor proposition in his owne Syllogisme that which should be for the proofe of his Minor proposition that he applyes for proofe of the Major that which
for the judging of lesser causes without bringing them to the whole Congregation the other for the deciding of weightier matters which neither Eldership nor Congregation can so well end And this is acknowledged by sundry of his Witnesses whose names he abuseth in this controversy Mr Parker touching Mat. 18. sayth (f) Pol. Eccl. l. 3. c. 15. p. 160. The Church of the faythfull is intended of Christ not as it is simply considered as we sayd before but as it exerciseth Discipline according to an Aristocraticall temperament in the Eldership For we doe think that the Church mentioned in the first place in those words Tell the Church doth precisely signify the Aristocraticall part that is the Eldership but that which is mentioned in the latter place in these words If he heare not the Church if as Downame teacheth it include the Church excommunicating for contempt and not onely decreeing or examining then it doth also comprehend the Democraticall part of the Church forasmuch as the consent of the people is necessary unto excommunication And a little before he sayth (g) Ibid. p. 159. Almost all interpreters doe agree that those words in vers 19. If two or three doe containe an amplification from the lesse to the greater from a lesse company to a greater so that it is most plaine that under the name of the Church he included as well the greater company as that which consists of two or three How Mr Parker proved the Synod also from Mat. 18. is shewed (h) See Ch. 3. p. 45. 49. before where D. Whitaker Mr Cartwright and others also teach the same thing ARGVM III. (i) Church plea. p. 70. Whatsoever was commanded to the 7 Churches to be practised by each of them apart in and for themselves that no Church of God must now omit But Ecclesiasticall government was commanded to the 7 Churches to be practised by each of them apart in and for themselves Therefore no Churches of God must omit the practise of Ecclesiasticall government apart in and for themselves The Proposition cannot be doubted of For as Chytraeus c. The Assumption is proved clearly in chap. 2. vers 2 14 20. c. Moreover Mr Perkins c. ANSVV. I. This Argument for the forme of it is a misshapen Syllogisme and that in a double respect both because the Minor terminus is superfluously put into the Major Proposition and because the same terminus is confusedly joyned with the Praedicate in the Minor proposition when it should have bene placed with the Subject therein But this is one of the least faults in Mr Cannes reasonings II. For the matter of it this Argument doth also come short of the mark reacheth not home to the question And that which he concludes being well understood may be safely granted of us That which Mr Canne alledgeth from Chytraeus Bullinger Brightman Perkins for the proof of his Proposition Assumption I doe willingly assent unto and it was but an idle labour to bring them for proof of that which is not denyed There be no Churches here among us which refuse to practise Ecclesiasticall government apart in for themselves This they practise after a double manner 1. There be many rebukes and censures against sinne administred in them without the knowledge of Classis or Synod apart in and for themselves 2. When as more hard weighty causes are brought unto the Deputies of other Churches assembled in Classes for their advise and judgement even then also when upon their consideration matters are cleared and there remaineth no scruple they are then remitted againe and referred unto the particular Churches so that the Eldership with consent of the Congregation proceedeth therein as they finde cause according to the repentance or obstinacy of the persons with whom they have to deale And so the sentence is both determined and executed apart in for themselves without the Classis But if by government to be practised apart in and for themselves he meane such a solitary and separate government as refuseth combination with other neighbour Churches such as admitteth no liberty of appeale in case of greatest wrong such as excepteth a particular Congregation from the censure of all other Churches though it should erre never so perniciously and in summe such a government apart as denyeth all authority and jurisdiction of Classes and Synods then is his Assumption most false and all that he alledgeth for proofe thereof helpes him nothing for 1. Though the Angel of the Church of Ephesus be commended for not bearing with the wicked c. and the Angel of the Church of Pergamus and Thyatira be reprehended for suffering divers enormities Rev. 2.2.14.20 by what good consequence can these examples overthrow the authority of Synods There might be occasion at this day to write unto some Ministers standing under the Classes and Synods in these Reformed Churches and some of them might justly be commended for their zeale in not bearing with the wicked others might justly be reprehended for their negligence in tolerating of such as offend now Mr Canne according to this reasoning might as well conclude against experience against the knowne trueth that these Ministers doe not stand under any Classicall government 2. The praise or dispraise which is given to the Angels of severall Churches apart doth not so much serve to argue an independency or disunion in government in these Churches but the very * Rev. 1.16.20 2.1 3.1 forme of the vision in the union of these Starres of the Churches in Christs right hand doth rather argue a consociation of them for their mutuall help in the government of his Church They appeare not scattered in the Firmament but gathered and drawne together What is a Classis or Synod but as a Constellation of so many Starres of the Churches combined together which by their conjunction together doe yeeld both a greater light of direction and a stronger influence of authority for the confirmation of the trueth and conviction of errour And as for the testimony of Mr Perkins though he acknowledge (k) Vpō Rev. 2.20 3.7 God hath given to every Church power and authority to preach the Word administer the Sacraments represse evill men c. yet doth he not thereby exempt those Churches from the censure of others if they be found to pervert the word corrupt the Sacraments and judge unrighteously It is not probable that such a conceit did ever enter into Mr Perkins head neither can it be collected from his words ARCVM IV. If the Church of Corinth had power and authority within herself to exercise Ecclesiasticall government yea and did it I meane the Ministery and the rest of the Church there Then ought not particular Congregations now to stand under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves But the first is true Therefore the second The first part is unquestionably certain and of this judgement was D. Willet c. ANSVV. That which
he so boldly affirmeth to be unquestionably certain viz. that which is indeed the first part of this Argument is on the contrary most certainly false This consequence of his Major proposition remaines to be proved Scripture he alledgeth none at all and for those eleven Authors mentioned by him there is not one of them that confirmes his consequence Why did he not expresse their words apply them to his purpose enforce thē against us if he thought they would have served his turne It is sayd to have bene a stratageme of theeves that to affright men they have taken many hats and set them upon stakes afarre of that passengers imagining them to be men partakers with those theeves that came unto them might the sooner yeeld Thus doth Mr Canne who sets downe the names of many Authors and their writings in his marginall quotations as if they were of his minde or partakers of his cause when as there is no such matter to be found in them Let us heare how he proceeds I. CAN. Againe whereas the Papists and Hierarchy do say much after Mr Pagets new doctrine that the Church of Corinth had not sole and alone authority in itself to exercise Ecclesiasticall government our writers viz. (l) Ref. Rhem. 1. Cor. 5.4 Mr Cartwright (m) Pol. Eccl l. 3. c. 4. p. 17. 18. c. Mr Parker others refute them and prove the contrary by many reasons ANSVV. That which he saith here of sole and alone authority c. is more then he propounded in his Syllogisme I acknowledge that the Church of Corinth did exercise Ecclesiasticall government within herself and I affirme as much for our owne and other particular Congregations here and Mr Canne with as good reason might argue that we doe not stand under Classes and Synods if there were any soundnes in his Syllogisme My opinion touching the Church of Corinth may be discerned sufficiently by that which I noted touching the 7 Churches in answer to his former argument And as for Mr Cartwright and Mr Parker whom he specially alledgeth they help him not at all I acknowledge Mr Parker doth justly oppose them that held the Church of Corinth did not excommunicate the incestuous person but Apostle alone But I doe more fully assent unto Mr Cartwright who differing something from Mr Parker and refuting the Rhemists most effectually by many reasons doth yet withall shew that the authority and power both of the Apostle and of the Church did concurre in this excommunication Whereas the Rhemists would have the Corinthians to be onely witnesses Mr Cartwright in his third reason against them sayth (n) Conf. of Rhem. upon 1. Cor. 5.4 If the Church were assembled onely to beare witnesse and not to have authority in this case it followeth that Paules spirit was there also onely to look on and beare witnesse considering that the personall presence of the Church and the Apostles spirituall presence are associated in this affaire of the Church Thus he joyneth both together and so afterwards againe reasoning from those words Do not you judge of those that are within 1. Cor. 5.12 he sayth thereupon that the Apostle giveth more unto the Church in excommunication then to be witnesses and lookers on For he useth the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 5.3.12 word to declare the Churches interest that he used before to note his owne If then you will say that the Churches judgement in excommunication is but to beare witnesse it followeth that the Apostles then and consequently their successours now are onely to beare witnesse of the excommunication Hereunto commeth also that the release of this censure is asscribed in the same word of forgivenes or absolutiō unto the Church as unto Paul 2. Cor. 2.10 Now to have the same word in the same verse and the same cause to be understood diversly and referred to Paul to have the proper signification of remitting but referred to the Church to signify a witnessing of remission needeth more learning for the defence of it then falleth unto the Iesuites capacity Thus he shewes that neither the sole authority of the Church on the one side nor the sole authority of Paul on the other side did determine this busines Againe had there a dangerous contention risen in Corinth which by their sole authority they could not end what should have hindred them from following the example of the Church at Antioch in seeking help both by counsell and authority of other Churches for the judgement thereof I. CAN. The latter part is proved before in the Minors of the 1. and 3. arguments ANSVV. It it manifest that he did not know the Minor from the Major in some of his former Syllogismes and so in this place it appeares he doth not discerne the first from the latter part of his argument But what he objected before is already answered it is vaine helples for him to rely upon his former poofes ARGVM V. (o) Churc plea. p. 71. Such actions the Church may lawfully doe wherein no Law of God is broken But there is no Law of God broken when particular Congregations doe in among themselves exercise all Gods ordinances Therefore they may lawfully doe it The proof of the Proposition doth arise from the definition of sinne which as (p) Cōt Fan. l. 22. c. 27. Augustine and (q) Lib. de Paradis c. 8. Ambrose truely define it is either a deed or word or thought against some Divine Law (r) Lib. 2. dist 35. Lombard (ſ) Th. 12. q. 71. Aquinas and other Schoolemen as they are called agree hereto The Assumption is manifest in our first Argument the first part of it ANSVV. This Argument toucheth not the question we grant his Conclusion that particular Congregations may in among themselves exercise all Gods ordinances and among the rest this ordinance of combining themselves in Synods for the decision of their controversies This may be sayd as well to be in among themselves as the use of Synods for counsell which my opposites allow for an ordinance of God And as particular Churches may refuse the counsell of Synods if it be unlawfull so ought they to disobey the sentences and decrees of Synods if they determine any thing contrary to the word of God His Proposition being so manifest it was needles to bring proof for it But the definition of sinne which he brings needlesly is insufficient because it comprehends not all sinne under it There is an originall corruption and depravation of nature which is Sinne considered distinctly apart beside thoughts words or deeds The Law requireth integrity of nature and all disconformity with that Law is sinne though not yet come so farre as thoughts Deut. 6. with 1. Iohn 3.4 The saying of Augustine is to be taken rather for a distribution then for a definition and for a distribution not simply of Sinne but onely of Actuall sinnes as they are either thoughts words or
deeds Ambrose is ill joyned with Austine seeing in the place alledged he hath not the same but another more large definition containing under it Originall sinne also when he sayth (t) Tom. 4. lib. de Paradiso c. 8. What is sinne but a praevarication against the Law of God c. This praevarication is as well in the nature and disposition of man as in actuall sinnes The judgement of Aquinas and such Popish Schoolemen is not to be much esteemed in this poynt while they teach that originall corruption in those that are baptised justifyed is not properly any sinne at all therefore are rejected herein of all Orthodox Divines ARGVM VI. If the Apostle gave commandement unto the Eldership of Ephesus for the whole administration of all Ordinances in that Church Then may the Eldership of every particular Congregation administer among themselves all Gods ordinances But the first is true Therefore the second The Major is proved two wayes 1. By Scripture Act. 20. vers 17.28.2 By the testimony of the learned Whitaker c. The Minor is undenyable For as Mr Brightman sayth there was one forme c. ANSVV. I. Mr Canne here againe wanders from the question goes about to prove that which I never denyed viz. that the Eldership of every particular Church may administer all Gods ordinances among themselves Even those solemne acts of communion with other Churches both in things spirituall and corporall being the ordinances of God are to be performed by the direction of the Eldership This hinders not but that any Eldership or Church it self being found in errour or other unfaithfull dealing may be subject to the censure of many Churches united in their Synods II. If it belong to the Eldership of every particular Church to administer all Gods ordinances then how can the ordinances of God be duely administred in that Church of the Brownists whereof Mr Canne is Bishop alone where there is no Eldership where there is neither teaching nor ruling Elder beside himself Seeing there is no Ruler in his owne Company but himself he denyes all other rule over him by Synods doth he not make himself a kinde of Ecclesiasticall Monarch or sole Governour of the Separation III. Mr Canne doth here againe bewray his notorious ignorance of Logick whereof he professeth so great skill in the framing of so many Syllogismes and yet like the children that know not the right hand from the left cannot discerne betwixt the Major and the Minor of his Syllogismes This appeareth here when he calles that his Major which he proves by Act. 20.17.28 and by the testimony of D. Whitaker viz. that the Apostle gave commandement unto the Eldership of Ephesus c. which is his Assumption or Minor and againe by calling that his Minor for which he cites Mr Brightman and other treatises which serve to prove one forme of Church-government common to all Churches as any Logician that lookes upon his Argument may easily discerne When he propounded Simple or Categovicall Syllogismes then was he not so deceyved in his guessing at a Major or Minor But so oft as he useth any Hypotheticall Syllogisme so oft he is as a man wandring in a wood or wildernes And the reason hereof seemes to be this whereas in a Hypotheticall Syllogisme the Antecedent of the Major is assumed usually in the Minor and that which is but a part of the Major comes to be the whole Minor he mistaking a part for the whole doth therefore call that which is onely the Antecedent of the Major by the name of the whole Major Proposition when as indeed it is the whole Minor Proposition and so to be called Had not W. Best bene a Simplician as the Brownist noted him to be he would never have placed his confidence in the skill of this simple Logician nor rested under the shadow of his Syllogismes ARGVM VII (v) Churc plea. p. 72. Such Offices and callings without which the Church of God is complete and perfect for Government are superfluous and humane But the Church of God may be complete and perfect for Government without Classicall and Synodicall Offices and callings Therefore these Offices and callings are superfluous humane This Argument the Protestants have used against the Pope the Reformists against Bishops Arch-Bishops Chancellours c. Now the same is every-way as firme good against Synods and Classes for without them the Church of God is fully brought to complete perfection and unity D. Fulke (x) Learn Disc Eccl. Gov. p. 10.11 confidently affirmeth so much That which D. Whitaker (y) De Cōc qu. 1. p. 22.23 writes of Generall Councills is by Mr Parker (z) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. p. 133. applyed and rightly unto particular Synods The Church of God sayth he can wel subsist without them for she was sometimes without them besides we are not bound by any speciall commandement of God to have them ANSVV. I. This Argument concludes nothing against us neither toucheth it the Question When did I ever speake of any Synodicall offices And what are those Offices that here he intends The members of Classes and Synods are no other then the ordinary Officers or Deputies of particular Churches considering together and determining so as they judge best for the edification of their flockes II. If he imagine or conceive that the Praesident which propoundeth matters in Synods or the Scribe that recordeth them be distinct Synodicall Officers he might as well think and we might as well say that the Brownists also had other distinct Ecclesiasticall Offices besides Pastours Teachers or Elders namely Praesidents and Scribes because heretofore in the dayes of Mr Iohnson and Mr Ainsworth they with their Elders did by course propoūd matters in their Church had also a Scribe to write downe their speciall businesses now in Mr Cannes time when they have no Eldership if he alone propound matters and keep record of them in writing it may then be sayd that he hath two or three Ecclesiasticall offices as well as so many Mechanicall trades III. If propounding of matters as the Praesident and writing them as the Scribe doe constitute new offices then many other members of the Brownists Church may be reputed for Ecclesiasticall Officers for Praesidents and Scribes For Mr Canne being now their onely Governour if it fall out that any among them shall make complaint against his doctrine or practise then those members of the Church that shall propound the same to the Church and moderate the action or keep record thereof in writing in behalf of the Church he being unfit to doe it himself in his owne cause must then be accounted new Officers Praesidents Scribes of the Church IV. That which he sayth of Classes and Synods that without them the Church of God is fully brought to complete perfection and unity comparing them to Lordly Prelates Chancellours c. it is utterly false He onely affirmes it and no word of Scripture is
acknowledge one another to be in that way IV. This company of Brownists whereof Mr Canne is the sole Governour was formerly governed by an Eldership and now since their division they have no Eldership to rule them Whether it be because they thinke they have none among them fit to be Elders or whether they doe wilfully refuse such as they cannot deny to be fit or whether there be any other cause I leave it to themselves Alwayes this we know that there be some Churches in remote countries that want the benefit of Classicall government because there be no other neighbour Churches neere unto them with whom they may combine themselves for their mutuall guidance and edification But now if the want of an Eldership among the Brownists such as they once had doe not warrant us to say that they hold two distinct formes of Church-government to be lawfull one with an Eldership another without an Eldership consequently that they hold two wayes unto heaven then much lesse can the want of a Synod in respect of the different consideration of the times places occasions and oportunities of severall Churches be any warrant for Mr Canne to object unto us two formes of government or two wayes to heaven c. REAS. V. Let it be observed that for this reason among others the Learned (x) Whit. Cont. 4. qu. 4. Chamier l. 6. cōject 2. say the Pope is Antichrist viz. because he will have men to appeale from their owne Churches unto him and to stand under his sentence and decree And doe not the Classicall assemblies and Synods take upon them an authority much like to it in subjecting many Congregations to them requiring appeales to be made to them and that the Judicatory as Mr Pagets * In his Letter c. phrase is belongeth to them as if their power above all Churches ANSVV. I. Let it be observed how Mr Canne speaking here against appeales made unto Classes and Synods brings no Scripture no word of God to condemne them but onely the testimonies of men he needed not to have reserved hereafter a peculiar Section onely for humane testimonies when he uses them so oft before II. Let it be observed how notably he abuseth even these testimonies also against the meaning of his Authors D. Whitaker (y) DePont Rom. qu. 4. p. 470. pleads for appeales as being both of divine and naturall right Chamier whom Mr Canne doth misquote without the title of the book alledged sayth that appeales (z) Panstrat Catho tom 2. l. 13. c. 17 are of common equity and truely without them the Church could hardly or not at all subsist speaking of appeales unto Synods That which learned and orthodox Writers blame in appeales made unto the Pope is this that they are made unto one man and not unto a Synod asscribing unto him infallibility of judgement giving him power over Churches that are not combined with the Church of Rome and in speciall for this that the Pope allowes no appeales to be made from him unto a Synod This is the Antichristian pride that they condemne in the Pope And herein the Church of the Brownists doth plainly resemble the Pope seeing their Congregation also their Democraticall judicatory allowes no appeale to be made from them unto Classes or Synods unto any Ecclesiasticall judges besides themselves These are two of the most monstrous propositions of the Papists touching the Popes authority viz. that (a) Bellarm. de Conc. l. 2. c. 17. 18. the Pope is above a Generall Synod and acknowledgeth no judgement on earth above him and againe that the Pope cannot commit the coactive judgement over him neither unto a Synod nor unto any man but onely the discretive this discretive judgement they expound to be such a kinde of arbitrement as doth not binde him further then it pleaseth him Now so farre as concernes Ecclesiasticall judgement the Brownists and the maintainers of the single uncompounded policie doe likewise hold that there is no judgement on earth above their particular Congregation and that they may not commit any controversy of theirs unto the censure and decision of any Synod What stronger reason could Mr C. have alledged against himself to shew their unlawfull government then this their denyall of appeales III. Let it be observed how foolishly Mr Canne cavills at my speech touching Classicall assemblies and Synods when he relates it thus the judicatory as Mr Pagets phrase is belongeth unto them for this relation is false that was not my phrase but I sayd the judicature did belong unto them It was the simplicity of his informer or of some ignorant scribe that put judicatory for judicature as may appeare by the writing I made which is yet to be seene Note Mr C. his rashnes in receyving such things REAS. VI. What more meet and reasonable then that every mans case be there heard and determined where the fault was committed So sayth (b) Cypr. li. 1. Epist 3. Cyprian It is not fit that they over whom the Holy Ghost hath made us overseers should goe too fro He speaketh of carying matters away from their owne Church unto others ANSVV. I. Though it be meet and reasonable that every mans cause be first there heard where the fault was committed yet is it as reasonable that if either an unjust sentence be there given the innocent may in the second place have liberty of appeale from their oppressours or if the case be difficult and weighty that the matter be at first brought unto Classicall assemblies according to the order of Reformed Churches II. For confirmation of this reason he brings no word of God but onely the testimonie of Cyprian which also according to his manner he doth most palpably abuse For Cyprian doth not simply blame those that appealed unto Synods but onely such as did inordinately run too and fro such as were not content with the Synods in Africa but sayled over the sea unto the Church of Rome Of such he there speakes And even in the same Epistle Cyprian shēwes both the use of Synods allowed in the Churches of Africa and the authority of Synods in censuring offendours He there gives (c) Lib. 1. e. 3. § 11.12 instances of Privatus condemned in an assembly of 99 Bishops of Foelix of Iovinus Maximus excluded from the communion of the Church by a Synod of Repostus also censured in like manner Their Synods were not onely for counsell but exercise a jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall And as they exercised the power of the keyes in binding obstinate sinners so also loosing and absolving those that repented as appeares in (d) Lib. 1. Ep. 2. § 1. another Epistle going immediately before this alledged and written by the Synod itself In the inscription of that Epistle are prefixed the names of Cyprian Liberalis Caldonius Nicomedes and Caecilius c. as being speciall members of that Synod and writing joyntly together that Synodicall Epistle (e) Ibid. n. 6.
By this time I suppose saith he the indifferent Reader perceiveth that the Scriptures are every way for us and against Mr Paget in this controversy betwixt us Now hee should doe well seeing we dispute about a matter of faith appertaining to life and salvation to rest in them as the onely touch stone for triall of all truth But then further to make way for his new troupes legions of Humane Testimonies against me and because this doth not well suit with his profession that pretends so much warrant of Scripture and to rely onely upon it therefore he seeks to take occasion from my words thereby to excuse his vaine oftentation in alledging so many Writers and saith Notwithstanding considering he makes so much a doe about the multitude of learned and godly Ministers being of the same judgement and practise with him according as Festus knowing Paul to have appealed unto Caesar did reasonably resolve saying Unto Caesar shalt thou goe so I am well contented to heare what reverend and judicious Authors doe say herein And if Mr Paget will stand unto their Testimonies I doubt not but to make it manifest that as the Scriptures so they are also with us c. Hereunto I answer 1. In all my former Answer I have not alledged against them the testimony of any one Author neither have I framed any argument drawne from their words The words of my writing which he alledgeth are onely a part of an answer unto a slanderous accusation both of me and the Classis in a matter of fact wherein I shew how unconscionably and without proof they wrong both me and a multitude of learned and godly Ministers being of the same judgement and practise I desire the Reader to looke upon the (b) Answ to W.B. p. 73. place and to judge thereof II. Whereas he thereupon brings forth an Army of Papists and Lutheranes Ancient fathers and later Writers Conformists Non-conformists c. though it be with lesse reason then Festus sent Paul to Caesar seeing I made no such appeale as Paul did unto Caesar yet I am content to follow him and to heare what his Authors doe say and to shew both how idly and needlesly he alledgeth many of them to prove that which is not denyed and also how he perverts and falsifyes their meanings alledging them for that which is contrary both to their words and practise The severall Bands of that Army which Mr Canne mustereth against us are these as he reckoneth them (c) Churc plea p. 78. The Allegations of the Learned which I purpose here to set downe shall be taken 1. From Papists 2. Lutherians 3. Calvinists 4. English Conformists 5. The Non-Conformists 6. Ancient Writers And lastly the Confession of Reformed Churches SECTION I. Touching the Testimonies of Papists HAving promised to produce the Testimonies of Reverend and judicious Authors as he calles them he brings in the Papists and drawes out the Popish band in the first place against me When Mr Spr. once heretofore had propounded divers Confiderations unto them of the Separation and among other things the testimony and approbation given to the Church of England by sundry learned men as Bucer Martyr Fagius Alasco Knox Calvine Beza c. Mr Ainsworth answers (d) Counterp p. 19. Though you come against us with horsmen and charets yet we will remember the name of the Lord our God c. That which David speakes of his refuge against the forces of the Heathenish Princes Psal 20.7 he applyes against these Worthies which were indeed the horsemen and charets of Israel 2. King 2.12 13.14 But that might I much more justly apply unto Mr Canne that alledgeth against me and so unjustly such a company of Romanists the horsmen and charets of Antichrist the Locusts like horses prepared unto the battell Rev. 9.7 And here first of all let it be considered what open wrong he doth unto the Papists Bellarmine the Rhemists c. in faining that they will not allow that government now which they acknowledge to have bene used of old while he saith Howsoever Romes-Champions will have none now to meddle with Church-government but Priests Bishops Prelates c. yet they doe acknowledge that in the primitive Church according to the precept of Christ in Mat. 18. offenders after the first and second admonition were brought to the whole Congregation c. This which he faineth to be granted by them touching a diversity of Government in respect of times cannot be justly affirmed For Bellarmine in the place (e) DeVerbo Dei l. 3. c. 5. alledged by him pleads for the same Government to be used now which he shewes to have bene ordained and confirmed by Christ and his Apostles and to that end he alledgeth 8 or 9 places of Scripture out of the new Testament as grounds of the same Government And in the (f) Ibid. c. 5 Chapter following he laboureth to prove that the same Government hath bene still retained and practised ever since from the first age of the primitive Church unto this present The Rhemists also (g) Rhem. on Mat. 18.17 1. Cor. 5. derive the government which they now stand for from the institution of Christ and practise of the primitive Church And therefore it is untrue which he sayth viz. that the Papists acknowledge a difference betwixt the government instituted at the first and that which is now maintained by them To prove this generall assertion he alledgeth a particular testimony of Scultingius But that which is sayd of one cannot be asscribed unto all in such generall termes as he hath done saying of Romes-Champions they doe acknowledge that which Scultingius sayth whereas we see that the chief of them avouch the contrary This testimony of Scultingius as it is absurdly fathered upon the Papists in generall so it is unjustly applyed against us Though in the primitive Church offenders being impenitent were excommunicated with consent and approbation of all by the Minister and though this testify the power of the Church for which cause it is alledged by Mr Parker from whom it seemes Mr Canne hath taken this testimony at second hand together with his observation upon it touching the force of trueth in a Papist yet this proves not that the Church was not subject to the censure of a superiour judicatory if they did abuse their power Mr Parker drawes no such consequence from this testimony to exclude the authority of Synods There is nothing sayd by Scultingius here but it hath alwayes bene observed in our Church Offenders are not excommunicated as being impenitent before they have bene denounced as this Authors phrase is or complained of by giving notice of their estate unto the whole Church before whom also the sentence of excommunication is pronounced and this our manner was allowed by Mr Park being sometime one of us as I shewed (h) P. 105. before As for Saravia and Schola Parisiensis whom he alledgeth together in the next place
It is a most false consequence to inferre that because all Bishops are equall in power therefore Synods have no power to judge and as false it is to inferre that because the Keyes were given to all the Apostles therefore there is no Ecclesiasticall power to judge the actions of a particular Congregation In summe Mr Canne doth most ignorantly and grosly abuse all these Papists against their words their writings and their continuall profession and practise For though there be this maine difference betwixt the Papists that some of them doe asscribe the greatest authority unto the Church that is unto a Generall Synod or Councell maintayning that they have infallibility of judgement above the Pope power to depose the Pope others of thē asscribing more authority and infallibility of judgement unto the Pope rather then unto the Church or a Generall Councell representing the same yet doe they all agree in this that there is a superiour power above particular Congregations to judge the same The University of Paris and the Doctours of Sorbon have in speciall manner from time to time maintayned the authority of a Generall Councell above the Pope they (p) De Eccl. Polit. Pot. pag. 1. c. edit 1612. Paris bring many arguments from Scripture and other reasons to prove the same They alledge the sentence of Pope (q) Ibid. p. 16. Zozimus confessing himself to be inferiour unto the Councell They avouch that (r) Ibid. p. 19. the frequent edebrating of Synods is simply and absolutely necessary for the better and more holy guiding of the Church Whereas a certaine Frier Ioannes Sarrazin had by word and writing under his hand preferred the authority of the Pope above the Synods they (ſ) Ibid. p. 46-56 record at large and publish in print a most solemne decree made by the Theologicall faculty of that University whereby he was appointed to revoke his opinion and a forme of recantation was prescribed according to which he confessed his fault acknowledged the power of Synods above the Pope The (t) Acts Monum p. 546 547. An. D. 1414. c. Councell of Constance did not onely exercise Ecclesiasticall authority in condemning of Iohn Husse and Hierome of Prage but also decreeing the authority of Synods and Councells to be above the Pope did actually depose divers Popes as Iohn the 23th and Benedict who was likewise excommunicate by them even as the Councell held at (v) An. D. 1083. Act. Mon. p. 164. Brixia had in former time by their sentence condemned Pope Hildebrand and judged him to be deposed So in like manner did the Clouncell held at (x) Ibid. p. 632.634 Bafile depose Pope Eugenius put another in his place By all which it is evident what the Papists then judged of the authority and power of Synods As all these so the other faction of Papists and the Iesuites in speciall that maintaine the authority of the Pope to be above all Synods Councells whatsoever that their decrees are not of force unlesse they be approved by the Pope these doe evidently teach that the affaires and controversies of particular Congregations are subject to the judgement of superiour judicatories out of themselves This is to be observed in Bellarmine throughout his writings where he shewes (y) Tom. 2. Contr. 1. de Concil l. 1. c. 9 10 11. l. 2. c. 2. c. the causes the necessity and the authority of Generall and Provinciall Synods the (z) Tom. 2. Contr. 2. l. 1. de Cler. c. 7 8 9 10. 14. c. power of elections and the distinction of a Bishop from a Presbyter The same is maintayned by him in his (a) Tom. 3. Contr. 4. de Indul. l. 1. c. 11.14 l. 2. c. 1 c. treatise of Pardons or Indulgencies plenary or for a certaine number of dayes for the living or for the dead And the like is to be found in (b) Tom. 3. Contr. 5. de Sacr. Ord. l. 1. c. 11. Tom. 1. Contr. 1. de Verbo Dei l. 3. c. 3 c. Tom 1. Contr. 3. de Sum. Pont. l. 4. c. 1 2 3 c. sundry other of his writings And to these might be added more then an hundred of other witnesses of the Romish Church acknowledging that there is a due and lawfull power of Synods and of other judges to decide the causes controversies of particular Churches Instead of many other the Councell of Trent called by (c) Concil Trid. Bul. Indict p. 8. Pope Paulus the third continued by (d) Bul. Resumpr p. 66.67 Pope Iulius the third and confirmed by (e) Bul. Confirm p. 243 c. Pope Pius the fourth together with the consideration of many conclusions and decrees made in severall Sessions of that Councell doe give plenteous testimony hereof throughout that whole book of their Acts. Onely to conclude this Section let it be remembred how of old in our owne countrie the like testimony hath bene given to shew the authority of Synods We read (f) Act. Mon. p. 112. col 2. art 7. of a Provinciall Synod at Thetford in the time of Theodore Archbishop of Canterbury Anno D. 680. where it was ordained that Provinciall Synods should be kept within the Realme at least once a yeare Another Synod (g) Ibid. p. 155. was held at Winchester Anno D. 1070. where Stigandus Archbishop of Canterbury was deposed for receyving his pall from Benedict the fift And another (h) P. 157. was after held at London where many decrees were made in the time of Lanfranck the Archbishop c. This being the continuall and universall practise of the Papists what sense was there in Mr Canne to alledge their testimonies in such a poynt wherein they are so full and pregnant against him It is the fault of Papists that they give too much authority unto Synods and it is as grosse a fault of these my opposites to pervert their testimonies contrary to their meaning practise further then their words will beare SECT II. Touching the Testimonies of Lutheranes IN their first allegation taken from Lutheranes they say It is affirmed by the Centuries of Meydenburg that from Christs ascension unto Trajans time which is about a 100 yeares every particular Church was governed by the Bishops Elders and Deacons of the same Cent. 1. c. 4. To this I answer This allegation comes short of the question in hand and is therefore insufficient and perverted to prove that the Churches then did not stand under any other Ecclesiasticall authority for it is not affirmed by them of Meydenburgh in their Centuries that the Churches were governed by them alone or that there were no Synods in those times to judge of the actions of Bishops Elders and Deacons in cases of controversy which could not be well ended in particular Churches but the contrary is expressely taught by the same (i) Magdeb. Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 9. de
ministery of the Word and Sacraments unto the whole Church but not so that everie one rashly and of his owne accord should take unto himself and exercise that ministery without a lawfull calling but that after immediate calling hath ceased God sends the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments by the calling and election of the Church if it be performed according to the direction of his word so that the chiefe power of the Word and Sacraments is in God secondly that the ministery is in the Church as by which God doth mediately call choose and send Ministers thirdly in those who are lawfully chosen and called of God by the Church as in the Ministers to whom is commanded the exercise or administration of the ministery of the Word and Sacraments Not to speake of some difference which the Reader may easily perceive betwixt Mr Cannes allegation and his Authors words there is nothing here sayd that doth any way prejudice the jurisdiction of Synods neither can he from hence inferre any thing against us Moreover if that distinctiō be considered according to the meaning of the Authors from whence it is taken it doth flatly contradict the opinion and practise of Mr Canne and others of the Separation who will have not onely the power but also the execution or administration of it to be in the people promiscuously when all causes must be brought to the body of the Congregation there to be heard and determined Thus Mr Parker (d) Pol. Eccl l. 3. p. 26. opposeth this distinction unto the Democratie or popular government of Morellius whom Mr Iacob in this respect parallels with them of the Separation as was noted (e) P. 176. before These maintaine that the people are to exercise their power in judging of causes which the sayd Authors both Chemnitius and Mr Parker conceive to be derived into the Aristocraticall part or Officers of the Church for the ordinary exercise of it she still retaining her interest therein so farre that in matters of speciall moment nothing be concluded without her knowledge and consent That moderating and guiding of the action which Mr Canne and those of his minde reserve onely unto the Officers of the Church in which respect he doth here call them Guides cannot make that difference betwixt the judiciall exercising of power as it is in the Officers and the first receyving of that power which is sayd to be in the whole Church by those that maintaine that distinction In a word they say that the exercise of this power doth not ordinarily belong unto the people he saith that it doth Such is the agreemēt betwixt Mr Canne and his witnesses Melanchthon whom he alledgeth for the same purpose with Chemnitius as Mr Parker had done (f) Ubi supra p. 26. before hath not any thing in the place mentioned that sounds that way He speakes there Loc. Theol. de Regno Christi onely of the spirituall kingdome of Christ against the Jewes and some sorts of Anabaptists Neverthelesse seeing he was one of speciall eminency among those with whom he is here joyned it may be usefull to observe how Mr Canne is condemned by this witnesse also whom he hath sought to produce against us in this controversy touching the authority of Synods Among other Articles propounded unto the Protestants to ensnare them this being also questioned Whether the holy Oecumenicall and receyved Synods have erred Melanchthon answers (g) Respōs ad Artic. Bavar Art 7. By this generall demand they seek to kindle hatred against us as if we seemed to reprehend all Synods all things that have been acted in Synods But we professe openly that there ought to be judgements in the Church and we affirme that there have been many godly Synods and profitable unto the Church and we doe greatly wish now in these dissentions that the judgement of the Church might be rightly settled If he had bene of Mr Cann minde he should have answered farre otherwise viz. that all those Synods erred that exercised any Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction that they were to be blamed for the making of all those Actes wherein such authority and power was implyed such as were generally all the Actes of the Synods of Antioch Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon Gangra c. which as he saith in the same place their Churches doe imbrace he should have sayd also according to Mr Cannes principles that though there may and ought to be judgements that is Ecclesiasticall sentences and censures in particular Congregations that yet they ought not to be in Synods or Assemblies of Ministers of severall Congregations that these have no such power to judge that no such determinations are to be desired But Melanchthon we see declares himself to be an opposite unto such conceits and lest we should thinke that by the judgements of the Church he meant not such as are exercised in Synods or that by judgements he understood rather acts of consultation inquisition deliberatiō then of determination and pronouncing of sentences heare how he explaines himself elswhere saying (h) Enarr Symb. Nic. Tom. 1. f. 391. There are in the Church judgements concerning doctrine which are called Synods And againe Synods are ordinary judgements which are pronounced against the unwilling as they use to say And the Church is commanded to make a lawfull inquiry which being done if sentence be rightly pronounced obedience is to be yeelded And if any doe not obey he is justly punished He hath also upon other occasions given plaine and pregnant testimonies of his judgement in this particular among the rest that especially is worthy our observation which he writes in a certaine Disputation concerning Synods it being one of those Disputations which Luther by a preface thereunto prefixed hath commended unto the Readers for which cause it seemes they are also inserted among Luthers workes as being in speciall manner approoved by him (i) Luth. Tom. 1. f. 444 445. There Melanthon intending to speak of Synods reasoneth thus It is most true and most agreeable unto the nature of men that which Plato sayth that the best state of a Common-wealth is that which is the meane betwixt Tyrannie and Democratie or popular government This is to be framed and maintained as in all government so especially in the Church Both these Tyrannie and Democratie are to be avoyded and detested in the Church as most noysome plagues It is Tyrannie to constraine men to approve of manifest impietie to obey contrary to the cleare word of God c. Againe Democratie also must be removed from the Church that is the common people without difference are not to have licence or power granted unto them to alter doctrines or to give sentence concerning doctrines for the Multitude also as Herodotus sayth is a most cruell Tyrant But a middle state is to be sought that is Aristocratie ought to be established wherein by proportion the authority of the learnedest and best men may be the greatest This Aristocratie Paul
requireth 1. Cor. 14. Gal. 2. and it is most gravely written unto the Romanes that every one must know the measure of his owne faith Rom. 12. Therefore that tyrannicall speech is to be hissed at which takes away this proportion in the Church and asscribes unto the Pope an unbounded Tyrannie viz. which affirmes that greater is the authority of the Pope then of the whole Councell beside c. In the choyse of judges the best way is to follow that meane betwixt Tyrannie and Democratie namely to choose the best and the learnedest When by the consent of both parties good and learned judges are chosen and matters have bene examined in order it is meet there should be an obeying of their judgment for every one ought to know the measure of his owne faith Thus Melanthon hath fully declared himself in this controversy touching the ground of Synodall government together with the power and use of the same yet for further satisfaction it may be observed how that in another place he applyes that which is here spoken against Democratie or popular order unto that part thereof which Mr Canne so much pleades for concerning election unto Church-offices when he sayth (k) Ibid. f. 442. According to ancient custome the Church did choose that is these to whom the Church hath committed this businesse the judgement and approbation of the Bishop ordaining did also concurre Contrary to divine right and to the ancient Church is that Democratie where the people doe snatch unto themselves the election without the judgement approbation of Pastours By Pastours he meanes doubtles the Ministers of other Congregations seeing he speakes of them in the plurall number and seeing it were unreasonable to thinke that in such cases people should neglect the counsell and consent of the Ministers of their owne Church He doth therefore by this plaine testimony justifye our course in the calling of Ministers by how much we doe not proceed therein without taking along with us the advise and approbation of the Classis that is of the Pastours of neighbour Churches Forasmuch as we may easily discerne from that which hath bene hitherto sayd in this Section what the judgement of the chiefe of the Lutheranes is in this controversy and what small credit is to be given unto Mr Cannes allegations and affirmations touching the consent of others with him in these matters of difference betwixt us it may suffice to have examined the testimonies of these Authors whose words he hath set downe and for the rest to judge of them according to the profession of their esteeme of those already mentioned which are of chiefe note among them and according to the publick Confessions of their Churches of which we are to speak (l) Sect. 7. hereafter as also according to their generall practise Concerning this it is testifyed by some of them here named not to speak of other evidences that they are so farre from including all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction within the bounds of a particular Church that their Churches are governed by Ecclesiasticall Senates or Consistories as they call them which are gathered out of three rankes of persons Poluticall Ecclesiasticall and Popular or Oeconomicall that these Ecclesiasticall Consistories are appointed and directed by the authority of the chief Magistrate that by these the Magistratâ— doth exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and call Ministers that the election of a Bishop or Superintendent which of old was performed by all the Bishops of the Province in which a new Bishop was to be chosen is now in well ordered Churches rightly performed in the Consistorie where some principall Divines together with Politicall men doe choose a Superintendent who is confirmed by the assent and approbation of the chiefe Magistrate These are the assertions of Mylius Rungius Osiander and others as they are cited and approved by (m) Dise Theol. de Potest Ecc. th 7.10.17.18 arg 10. c. Vestringius one of the same profession Though these Authors doe not accord with us in divers of the foresaid expressions yet Mr Canne had lesse cause to boast of their consent with him seeing they agree in this that their particular Churches are not independent bodies but stand under Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves holding that their Churches in this respect are well ordered What trueth is there then in Mr Cannes words when speaking of these men he saith they consent with us fully As for his jesting at the particular Churches such as all the Reformed Churches are in giving them a title of noun-adjectives that cannot stand without Classes and Synods it may be demanded of him whether among all the Orthodoxe Churches in Europe at this day there was ever heard of such a staggering noun-substantive rent with so many scandalous Schismes as is that Anti-Synodall Church of the Separation whereof Mr Canne calles himself the Pastour Let those that are wise consider of it SECT III. Touching the Testimonies of Calvinists THus Mr C. and W.B. doe though as they say for distinction sake yet unjustly call those Authours whom here they alledge as if there were no other fit and convenient speech to describe Godly and learned Ministers of whom I spake but the name of Calvinists Though it be lawfull to denominate men of their errours and Schismes wherein they stand against the Churches of God and to call such Sectaries by names taken from them that have bene their chief ringleaders as the Brownists of Browne and the Nicolaitans of Nicholas Rev. 2.15 yet is there no warrant so to stile those whom we doe not charge with the like errours and offences Mr Canne (a) Chu pl. p. 81. after an idle and impertinent declaration of his owne surmise and imagination that these Authors as he is perswaded doe not teach the doctrine maintained by me and after an unjust imputation which he implyes as if I should say that the whole Church Officers and brethren wants authority to performe in and for it self all Church-services he comes to name his Authors and alledges the words of foure of them and telles that the rest doe agree with them His Authors are these P. Martyr Iunius Musculus Viret Bullinger Danaeus Gualter Sybrandus D. Mornaeus Morell Tilenus Bastingius Vrsinus Piscator Calvine Paraeus Keckerman Hemmingius Tossanus Polanus Hyperius Praedirius Munster Oecolompadius Beza Bucer Having cited these witnesses to appeare for him he then beginnes to insult and glory saying (b) Chu pl. p. 83. And now Mr Paget what thinke you of these men were they not learned and godly Ministers Reverend and judicious Divines Are they not authentick witnesses If you confesse it then marke what followes viz. your position that particular Congregations must stand under other Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves is hence condemned by a jurie of more then 24 men of your owne choosing for an errour and untruth The reason is because these affirme I say all of them that every particular Eldership with the Churches consent may
Virell neither of them can be justly alledged for his witnesses in this cause For Viret he is (k) Beza in vita Calv. Calv. Epist 25 39.54 .c recorded to have bene a speciall assistant unto Calvine in the work of the Lord for the settling of that forme of Discipline by which the power of an Ecclesiasticall Judicatorie over divers particular Congregations was established at Geneva That weed of Ecclesiasticall government by Classes and Synods as Mr Canne here (l) Ch. pl. p. 94. calles it was planted by the hand of Viret as well as of Calvine And then what reason is there to judge but that Viret did esteeme it a plant of the heavenly Father not to be rooted out of the gardē of his Church seeing he joyned with him in that work For Virell he writes touching the outward calling of Ministers in the (m) Groūds of Relig. b. 3. c. 1. p. 2. 7 708 edit 12. place alledged that it is the lawfull choyse of a visible Church met together in the name of Christ that there be three things required thereunto first that there be a search and tryall both of the conversation and learning of him that is to be chosen c. Another is this that men come not to it by any corruptiō of gifts but that it be free so as they that have the power to chose should have onely the glory of God and the edification of his Church before their eyes Thirdly that he which is chosen have a Church appointed unto him for the execution of his office whose duety it is to looke unto it diligently carefully And more then this he saith not that can with any colour be thought to looke towards this cōtroversy And in all this what one word hath he against the authority of Synods Nay it is the work of Classes and Synods to see that all things here required be accordingly performed in particular Churches and if any of these be omitted to correct and reforme the same Bullinger next alledged though he say that the Church hath power to elect ordaine fit Ministers yet he was not of Mr Cannes minde to thinke that the Church looseth her right and is bereaved of her due power when it is not exercised by herself alone or in that popular way which he requireth for even in the place (n) Decad. 5. Ser. 4. which Mr Canne hath cited he saith It skilleth not much whether fit Ministers be ordained by grave men chosen by the Church or by the whole Church itself and that either by votes or by lots or in any other convenient and holy manner For godlinesse doth not contend about these things so that all be done holily and according to order And afterwards againe he speakes to the same purpose It is well knowne that true Churches have the right of ordaining Pastours whether it be done by the votes of the whole Church or by the lawfull judgement of them that be chosen by the Church It appeares by these the following words that he alludes unto the practise of the Helvetian Churches concerning which we are to make further mention (o) Sect. 7. hereafter when we come to speak of their Confession Touching the Ecclesiasticall power of Synods Bullinger declares his judgement also in this same booke when (p) Decad. 5. Ser. 1. speaking of the power of the Church in judging of doctrines he gives instance in the gathering of a Synod which saith he the Church of God doth according to the power receyved from the Lord even as we read in the Actes of the Apostles that the Apostles of the Lord have done c. Againe he (q) Decad. 5. Serm. 10. cites and approves the decree of Justinian the Emperour for the yearely celebrating of Synods where matters arising might be examined and by due correction healed He urgeth this decree against the Bishops and warnes the Magistrates to take heed they doe not connive at the others negligence to the destruction of the whole Church and of all the Ministers of Christ. Behold here the difference betwixt Bullinger and Mr Canne that which the one holds to be the soveraigne remedy to preserve the safety of Churches of the ministery the other rejects as an unprofitable weed and that which tends to the undoing and (r) Ch. pl. p. 74. spoyling of Churches Danaeus his testimony is likewise unjustly alledged against us seeing he speakes not in the palce mentioned of the point in controversy betwixt us viz. the authority of Classes Synods or the totall excluding of the same in those things which belong unto elections Onely he doth there (ſ) In. 1. Tim. 5.22 reproove the grosse errour of those that in regard of such popular circumstances as Mr Canne seemes most to plead for doe bring as he saith a very great confusion into the Church by asscribing unto the people more then is due unto them while he shewes that the electing and presenting of the person that is to be called unto any Ecclesiasticall office whereby he understands the first taking notice of him the examining of his life doctrine and the publishing or propounding of him unto the whole Church that this belongs unto the Presbytery and that the approving and accepting of the person so examined and propounded doth belong unto the people they also having a convenient time allowed unto them that if there be just cause they may testify their dislike and bring in their exceptions against him This is the course there described and maintained by Danaeus and the same with that which is practised in our Church And thus the Witnesses produced against us doe still declare their consent with us As for the authority of Synods and the divine right by which it is due unto them Danaeus gives his verdict when in the exposition of the fourth commandement having spoken of the jurisdiction and power of the Church he saith (r) Ethic. Christ Lib. 2. cap. 10. Here comes in the Question concerning Synods which if they be right and keep themselves within their owne bounds their authority is ordained by this Commandement Gualter in the (v) Homil. in Act. 13.2 first place alledged having spoken of the due suffrages or voices of the Church in elections to prevent such a construction as Mr Canne seemes to make of his words addes presently This place doth clearly teach that some parts are committed to the Church in this businesse And againe he saith there that the election of Ministers doth in some part belong to the Church c. He doth not therefore exclude that part which herein we asscribe unto the Classis by proceeding with their advise and consent In the other (x) Ibid. in cap. 14.23 place for Mr Cannes marginall quotation 13.22 seemes to be misprinted he saith that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be understood not onely the gathering of voices but also imposition of hands and in his opinion the latter acception
on 1. Cor. 5.5 doth thus interpret the words Let such a one be delivered to Satan to wit by the Church or by the Pastours and Elders of the Church which are the mouth of the Church For by these the Church speaketh and dealeth Without this order there would be confusion if in a publick action every one might speake and deale which undoubtedly the Apostle would not bring in This we grant and it is not against us but against the confused practise of the Brownists But for the poynt in hand that Classes and Synods have power to judge of the actions of particular Congregations Paraeus is a plaine witnesse for us in (d) Colleg. Theol. Decur Coll. 9. Disp 8. Auccar 1. Co. 10. Disp 22. th 1-10 Disp 24. th 9. other of his writings And againe speaking of a lawfull Synod and the authority thereof in deciding of controversies in the Church he saith that therein (e) Eirenic cap. 5. men renowmed in regard of their learning understanding and piety whether they be of the Laity or Clergy have not onely a voice of delibertion and counsell but also of judgement and power of defining And hereunto accordes his (f) Act. Sym. Nar. Dordr Ses 98. Epistle written unto the Nationall Synod holden last at Dort wherein excusing his absence that he could not come in respect of his age as he much desired yet he shewes his approbation of such a meeting as being the ordinary medicine for healing the wounds of the Church and rejoyceth greatly in the spirit for the benefit exspected from that Synod which judged censured the errours of particular men in divers Churches What reason then had Mr Canne thus to abuse the words of Paraeus against his meaning and publick profession Keckerman also agreeth with the former witnesses touching the poynt in controversy For in the book alledged by Mr Canne when as the parts of the government of the Church are there described he shewes that (g) System Theo. l. 3. c. 6. p. 401.402 the convocation of Synods belongeth unto Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and is contained under the same Hemmingius though more sound and moderate then other Lutheranes yet being a disciple and follower of Melancthon there was no reason why he should not have bene joyned with his Master in the foregoing ranke of Testimonies if Mr Canne had either knowne his Authour or regarded the order which he had set downe to himself But for his judgement touching the jurisdiction of Synods he hath witnessed his consent with the Writers mentioned both in this the former Section and testifyed against Mr Canne in this cause For speaking of that part of Ecclesiasticall Discipline unto which he referres the deposition and excommunication of Ministers he commends the order of the ancient Church where he saith (h) Enchir. Theo. Clas 3. c. 11. the execution of this discipline was chiefly committed to the Bishops who therefore sometimes twise sometimes oftner in the yeare called Provinciall Synods where the matter was handled not by the censure of one Bishop but by the sentence of the whole Clergy assembled Tossanus mentioned in the next place hath plainely declared himself to be of the same minde with us in allowing Synodall and Classicall assemblies to judge determine the causes of particular Churches and persons He (i) Pastor Evang. p. 61 edit 1603. maintaines against Thyraeus that which he had formerly written in these words In controversies of religion we appeale from Luther and from the censures and judgements of private men unto the judgement of the Catholick Church and of a Synod He proves this to be sound and orthodoxe from the Apostles referring the decision of the controversie concerning Iustification and the Ceremonies of the Law unto the Councell at Ierusalem Act. 15. Speaking of somewhat that was wanting in most of the German Churches about the ordaining of Ministers he saith that (k) P. 40. godly Pastours and Overseers doe dayly bewaile the scarsitie of faithfull labourers and that the Presbyteries and well ordered Ecclesiasticall Senates doe indeavour that both in Synods and yearely visitations and in Classicall meetings the failings of Ministers may be amended according to their power In which words he hath reference unto the practise of the Churches in the Palatinate concerning which we are to speake (l) Sect. 7. hereafter where he joyned with them in the exercise of the sayd government being (m) D. Toss Vita p. 38. at Neustadt a moderator of the Ecclesiasticall counsels of the Consistory and sometime also President of a Synod and afterwards at Heidelberg (n) Ib. P. 44. a member of the Ecclesiasticall Senate How unjustly therefore untruely hath Mr Canne dealt with Tossanus and his readers in reckoning him among those who as he saith (o) Ch. pl. p. 83. have condemned for an errour untrueth that position touching particular Congregations standing under other Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves As for Polanus to grant Mr Canne that he was of the same minde with the former Authours touching the Churches power in excommunicating though so much can hardly be manifested out of the (p) Synt. Theol. l. 7. c. 18. place alledged yet what is that to our question The Churches power in excommuncating doth not exclude the authority of Synods in judging of a particular Congregation Polanus speaking of Synods expressely confesseth that (q) Ib. c. 14 the liberty or power of those Ecclesiasticall assemblies is a right given of God unto his Church c. that An Ecclesiasticall Synod is a publick assemblie of godly men lawfully sent and gathered together from divers Churches also of divers Provinces that they may handle and determine according to the power that is granted unto them of God touching holy affaires c. He alledgeth sundry Scriptures and examples of the Ancient Churches for declaration hereof And againe in the same place he notes it for a condition of a lawfull Synod that those which are chosen and deputed of the Churches may have a deliberative or consulting and also a deciding voyce or giving of sentence c. When he requires another condition of a lawfull Synod that every one may have free accesse and recesse yet he addes this withall that whosoever is convicted of heresy or any crime and remaineth obstinate should undergoe Ecclesiasticall censure that is deposition from his Ecclesiasticall office or Suspension or Excommunication And to like purpose he writes in (r) Ib. c. 16. Syllo Thes Theol. par 1 de Concil other places This being the judgement of Polanus touching the authority of Synods how uncircumspect was W. Best his abettour to call for a Iurie of such Divines as have given such pregnant sentence and so peremptory verdict against them Hyperius next alledged though he deny not the power of particular Congregations yet in his writings it is evident that he holdes the power of Synods consisting of the Deputies of many Churches to be a
superiour power above one particular Church and that they may judge of the affaires thereof and of the persons therein either Ministers or people This he declares at large in a peculiar treatise touching yearely Synods (f) DeSyno Annuis Opusc Theol. p. 768-870 Bas 1570. wherein after he had shewed the necessity and use of Synods by many divine and humane testimonies he then describes their power not for counsell onely as the Brownists and my opposites doe but for the exercise of all kinde of Ecclesiasticall censures as Rebukes of offenders Suspension Excommunication and Deposition or deportment of Officers from their ministery Of all the men of the Iurie before mentioned there is none that gives a more full and cleare verdict against Mr Canne then this Hyperius doth Oecolompadius another of his Authors hath declared his judgement touching Synods and the authority exercised in them to be such as argues his thstimony alledged by Mr Canne to be perverted while it is produced against the same For in his answer to Luther inserted among the workes of Zuinglius (t) Tom. 2. fol. 491. he doth highly commend the Councell of Nice and specially for decreeing that none should afterwards attempt to adde any new articles unto that Confessiō of faith which they had set downe Which Nestorius being found guilty of Oecolompadius approves of that Act of the Councell of Ephesus whereby he was excommunicated saying For which cause being condemned of the crime of heresie he was by common consent shut out of the Church which was sensible of peace restored unto her by this meanes Hereby it appeareth that the acknowledged Ecclesiasticall jurisdictiō censure to be a power due unto Synods and that which may lawfully be exercised by them Beza next alledged upon 2. Thes 3.14 though he there call Excommunication an Ecclesiasticall judgement yet doth he not thereby infringe the authority of Classes and Synods neither can any such thing by any just consequence be gathered from his Annotations on that place But on the other side he shewes (v) Epist 83. De Ministr gradib c. 23 p. 155. c. 24. p. 176. 177. elswhere that Synods have their Ecclesiasticall judgements grounded upon the word of God and a profitable use in the Church of God and that the fanaticall opinion of Morellius much like unto the Brownists hath bene worthily condemned in many Synods And according to his writing so was his practise both at Geneva where he was one of them that had their voyce in the government of that Church by a joynt Presbytery or Classis and in France where he himself was President of that famous (x) Harmo Confes p. 112. edit 1612. Synod at Rochell where the Confession of their faith was subscribed by divers Princes and many Ministers and Elders assembled together And therefore if Mr Canne and W. Best their accusation of me were sound and just they might as well complaine of Beza for bringing the Churches of God into miserable slavery and bondage by his tyrannicall government and corrupt doctrine Bucer last alledged accordes with the foregoing Authors and his words in commendation of Synods may serve to close up this kinde of Testimonies being an advise unto King Edward the Sixt for the constant celebrating of them In his Admonition given to the King for the restitution of the Kingdome of Christ in his dominions amidst other wholesome counsels out of the word of God he saith (y) De Regno Christi Lib. 2. c. 12. It shall be the duety of the Bishops of each Province to celebrate two Synods every yeare as it is ordained by so many Canons and Lawes of godly Emperours At which Synods must be assembled and heard not onely the Bishops of the Cities but also inferiour Bishops and other Presbyters and Deacons that are endued with a larger measure of knowledge and zeale for the kingdome of Christ that so the more effectually both the faults crept into the Church may becorrected and the pietie of all repaired He had also spoken before of other inferiour and more frequent assemblies like unto our Classes requiring that all the Ministers within the compasse of about 20 Parishes should often meet together for their mutuall assistance in removing offences advancing the kingdome of Christ Touching Synods he speakes also in (z) De vi usu S. Min. tit de Disci Cler. Opuse f. 582. another place to the same purpose approving the ancient constitution whereby it was ordained that the Bishops of every Province should assemble together with the Presbyters and Deacons as often as the need of the Churches should require but without faile twise in the yeare that they might inquire concerning the doctrine and discipline of Christ how it were administred and did flourish in severall Churches that where any default was discovered they might correct it and where they found things in good state they might confirme and promote the same By that correction spoken of here and in the former testimonie he understands not onely counsell and admonition but the judiciall exercise of authority in Ecclesiasticall censures For he doth plainly distinguish betwixt admonition and correction when in the following words concerning Metropolitanes he saith If any thing were done amisse by the Ministers of the Churches or by the common people which by their admonitions they could not amend that then for the correcting of it they should call a Synod of Bishops for there was no power of judgement allowed unto them which by their owne authority they might exercise in the Churches c. Thus Bucerus also as well as the former hath condemned Mr Cannes position viz. that particular Congregations must not stand under other Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves And these are all the Authors here alledged by Mr Canne except onely Morell Praedirius and Munster either not seen at all nor to be procured for the present as the two former or not seen to touch this controversie in the writings at hand as the latter Having now heard what these chosen men of the Iurie all nominated by W. B. his Advocate have testifyed concerning Classes or Synods let the Reader judge whether they have given verdict for or against Synods whether every one of these Authors alledged had not just cause if they were living to complaine of great abuse done to them in perverting their testimonies and making false consequences from their words contrary to their meaning And forasmuch as all these witnesses here examined are so farre from testifying ought against us that they have on the other side witnessed the trueth of that which we maintained against Mr Canne hence it is evident that I had just cause to say that which he would seeme to disprove by alledging these Authors against me viz. that there were a multitude of learned and godly Ministers of the same judgement and practise with me For further proofe whereof it were easy if need were to produce another Iurie of approved
of that order which for election of Church-officers is practised at Geneva saying (q) Ibid. p. 105. that it is religiously and prudently observed Mr Canne might there have seen himself condemned under the name of Morellius even by this Replyer also as well as by Beza seeing it is as true of him as of the other that which is there sayd that he hath presumed by word and writing to reprehend that order c. our course being in substance the same and opposed by Mr C. in like manner as theirs was by Morellius Againe in the (r) P. 106. next page the sayd Authour doth expressely reject and detest that popular government practised among the Brownists and pleaded for by Mr Canne when having sayd that the peoples consent is not to be neglected in causes of greatest moment according to that which we teach and practise he addes withall Notwithstanding a meere Democracie wherein all matters are handled of all aequato jure by an equall right we doe no lesse detest then that usurped Monarchie of Lordly Prelates which other reformed Churches have abolished And afterwards (Å¿) P. 113. when he allowes a preheminence for orders sake unto some one to be the mouth of the rest in executing that which was by the whole Presbytery decreed and then explaines that one to be the President of the Presbyters that is to say in each Congregation the Pastor and in a Synod or assembly of the Pastors and Presbyters of many Churches that one which with the consent and choyse of his brethren moderates the action there is no reason why we should not hence conclude his approbation of Synods such as are and have bene celebrated in well ordered Churches even such as doe not onely advise but also decree what is meet as he had sayd of the Presbyterie in generall As for the other places alledged out of this Authour I referre the Reader unto that which I have sayd (r) P. 116.117 before touching the same in my answer to Mr Davenport Mr Parker next alledged speakes downe right in this thing saith Mr Canne The words cited out of Mr Parker are these All Ecclesiasticall power is alwayes in the whole Congregation from hence it flowes as from the fountaine and to the same it returneth as to the Sea For answer hereunto 1. This Testimony here alledged by Mr C. is not onely cited amisse viz. Pol. Eccl. l. 3. c. 6. instead of c. 8. p. 28. and some words also unjustly added by him unto the testimony to make it seeme more full for his purpose but being taken as he sets it downe it doth not infringe the authority of Classes and Synods For though all Ecclesiasticall authority be sayd to flow from the Church as from a fountaine this hinders not but rather shewes how power may be and is derived unto Classes when particular Churches as fountaines doe by deputation and delegation send forth a streame of authority and power in Classicall and Synodall Assemblies in such manner as Mr Parker himself doth afterward (v) Pol. Eccl l. 3 c. 13. c. 23 24 25 c. often shew unto his Reader II. For the downe-right speech of Mr Parker wherein Mr Canne glorieth I desire the Readers that understand to review those passages which I have (x) P. 89-105 before noted at large out of Mr Parkers booke them that are able to looke upon those places in the booke itself and then to judge whether Mr Canne be not either very blinde in alledging the testimonies of learned men when he knowes not what they say or els very impudent and dishonest in corrupting and perverting their testimonies contrary to their meaning As for Mr Baines he is confusedly alledged viz. Dioces Tryall Conclus 4. for whereas in that booke there is often mention of Conclus 4. who can tell what place he meanes The trueth is that none of those fourth Conclusions in any part of his booke doe by any word empeach the authority of Classes or Synods But on the contrary in that his writing he gives plaine and evident testimonies of his agreement with us as I have (y) P. 111-116 already sufficiently declared Come we now to the testimony (z) Chu pl. p. 23. alledged in the name of D. Fulke whom Mr Canne praiseth to be a man famous and of rare learning They object unto me that he saith (a) Learned Discours of Eccl. Gov. p. 84. There ought to be in every Church an Eldership which ought to have the hearing examination and determining of all matters pertayning to the Discipline Government of that Congregation Hereunto I answer that such authority is to be exercised by the Eldership yet so as that the judgement and consent of the Congregation in weightier matters be not excluded and so also that the judgement of the Classis or Synod be not refused or denyed This Author will have the Eldership to determine all matters if they be able to doe it so he expounds himself shewing afterward that there be divers matters which the Eldership is not able by themselves to finish without help of a Synod And because Mr Canne in the margine of his booke sets his marke over against this place desiring us to Note this so I desire both him and others to note wel what this Author writes concerning the authoriy necessity and use of Synods I am glad to heare Mr C. to give so great commendation unto this indeed Learned Author who is so pregnant a witnesse for me and for Synods against the Brownists This is that which he (b) Ibid. p. 82.83 saith Seeing our Saviour Christ promised his presence and authoritie to every Church indifferently Matt. 18.19.20 None may challenge any such prerogative afore other but as the Churches are limited out for order and conveniencie so is every one of them of like authority in itself but because they make all but one Church and one body of Christ therefore there is but one authority in them to determine of matters concerning them all By which there appeareth to be a double authority of the Pastor one with the severall Congregation in which he is Pastour the other with the whole Synod or assembly whereof he is a member and both these authorities we finde sufficiently authorised in the Scripture c. Againe (c) Ibid. p. 111. 112. There is a double authority of the Pastour the one joyned with the Elders of the Church whereof he is Pastour the other with the Synod or holy assembly whereof he is a member There ariseth oftentimes in the Church divers Controversies which cannot otherwise be expressed pertayning to the state of the whole Church then by a generall assemblie of all the Pastours of that Church which is called a Synod or Generall Councell Also there be divers cases wherein the severall Churches are driven to pray the ayde of the Synod where matters cannot be determined among themselves For this cause the Holy Ghost
at Frankford for whereas G. Iohnson in a peculiar (y) Disc of troub in the banish English Church at Amsterd p. 21-73 treatise which he wrote against his brother Franc. Iohnson and that Church of the Brownists whereof he was Pastour hath compared the troubles of these two Churches together in the first part of this treatise which is entitled The agreement between the banished English Church at Frankford in Q. Maries dayes and some troubles in the banished English Church at Amsterdam in Q. Elizabeths dayes he brings more then an 100 severall instances to shew that where any disorder scandall or offence was in the English Church at Frankford the like evills scandals and offences were also to be found and observed in the English Church of the Separatists in Amsterdam And in the second part of this treatise entitled (z) Ibid. p. 73-93 Differences between the Pastor Elders people in the troubles at Frankford in Q. Maries dayes and the Pastor Elders and people in the troubles at Amsterdam in Q. Elizabeths dayes he brings more then 20 severall instances to shew that the English Church of the Separation was worse then the other and that where divers good orders and practises were in the English Church at Frankford the same were wanting in the Church of the Brownists at Amsterdam And in particular let this be observed that concerning the English Church at Frankford G. Iohnson (a) P. 74. alledgeth that there was agreement among them that the matter should be decided by learned men But concerning those at Amsterdam he saith These differ farre from them herein they will not consent hereunto they will not be persuaded or intreated to let the Reformed Churches heare try judge and end the controversy between them and us For proof hereof he notes in his margine This is witnessed by the testimony of the Dutch Preachers given to the Pastors father Now instead of pleading from the orders of that Church at Frankford it had bene fitter for Mr Canne to have taken warning from these unparalleld offences of his predecessours not to maintaine the like disorders or els to have answered these parallels and censures of G. Iohnson and so to have removed if he could the scandall and blame which hath so long lien upon his fellowes for not answering this book HAving considered the particular testimonies of Non-conformists and how they have bene perverted by Mr Canne in applying them against the authority of Synods it shall not be amisse to adde yet further a threefold Testimony to manifest this poynt more clearly and fully and so to conclude this Section namely by the Petitions of Non-conformists to Qu. Elizabeth and to the Parliament the opposition of the Prelates to the Non-conformists the scorne of the Brownists against Non-conformists First when as the Ministers have made request unto Q. Elizabeth for reformation of things amisse shewing how controversies may be compounded they say (b) Petit. to the Q. most excel Maj. p. 3. that a free Nationall or Provinciall Councell at home were much to be wished c. And in a treatise annexed thereunto entitled Opinions of such as sue for Reformation among other things which they hold sue for this is one (c) Ibid. § 19. p 57. That if any dissention grow or cause of grievance be given in any particular Church by the Minister or Officers the partie grieved might appeale to a particular Synod from the particular Synod to a Provinciall Synod from a Provinciall Synod to a Nationall Synod Which Synods should be appointed at set times the more particular the Synod is the more often for the time to be moderated by some fit man changeably by election that might write speak and pray in the behalfe and at the direction of the rest c. And a little after againe (d) § 21. they doe professe and protest that they can and will avow this Reformation which they desire to be most agreeable to the Scriptures to have the testimonie of the best most learned men that have bene since the Apostles c. If Mr Ca. will not winke with his eyes he may here see what reformation hath bene sought and held needfull and that Iure Divino In like manner Mr Travers testifieth of these conferences or Classes Synods (e) Eccles Disc p. 98. with p 103. 104. reprin 1617. that nothing could be more profitable then these Assemblies being so used as they are appointed to be used by the word of God and used by other purer and better reformed Churches c. and concludes that his treatise of Discipline with an humble supplication unto Qu. Elizabeth of happy memory for the establishing of such a Discipline in her dominions To like purpose doe they write which were the Authours of the Admonition to the Parliament holden in the 13. year of Q. Eliz. begun Anno 1570 and ended 1571. They (f) Admon to Parl. p. 51 52. ed. 1617 describing the platforme of 2 Church reformed and presenting their desire to the consideration of the Parliament doe therein commend the use of Conferences and of Synods Provinciall Nationall and Generall for determining the weighty causes which could not be ended in particular Churches And they require that men should stand unto these determinations unlesse they can be shewed to be contrary to the Scriptures Secondly such as have bene speciall maintayners of the Prelacie doe confesse and testify that the Ministers which sought for reformation did therein seek for government of the Church by Classes and Synods and that not for counsell onely but to judge the causes of particular Churches and to censure such persons as were found guilty It is by one of them manifested in a speciall (g) Danger Positio for Presbyteri Governm l. 3. c. 2-15 Record that when divers Ministers not conforming were cast into prison and some of them brought into the Starre-Chamber and examined upon their oathes they declared the earnest endeavours of many Ministers for the obtayning of Classes And there among such as gave pregnant testimonie in allowance of Classicall government are nominated these following Mr Chark Mr Travers Mr Gardiner Mr Barber Mr Chester Mr Crook Mr Egerton Mr Field Mr Wilcox Mr Standen Mr Iackson Mr Bonham Mr Crane Mr Sâ—inctloe Mr Edwards Mr Cholmeley Mr Wright Mr Gifford Mr Gelibrand Mr West Mr Browne Mr Knewstubs Mr Wight Mr Walker Mr Cartwright Mr Fen Mr Oxenbridge Mr Perkins Mr Allen Mr Dike Mr Culverwell c. And about Northampton-shire alone are (h) Ib. p. 77 recorded more then 20 of this minde About Northampton Mr Snape Mr Penrie Mr Sibthorp Mr Edwards Mr Litlâ—ton Mr Bradshaw Mr Larke Mr Fleshware Mr Spicer c. About Daventrie Mr Barbon Mr Rogers Mr King Mr Smart Mr Sharp Mr Promdlos Mr Elliston c. About Kettring Mr Stone Mr Williamson Mr Fawsbrook Mr Patinson Mr Massey c. The lawes rules and order both in Classes and in Synods described in
England And these Ministers when they are come over are esteemed receaved as Angels in hell and shine as bright starres in these smoky Egyptian fornaces wherein the miserable people of the land are kept in most hard servitude c. These skornfull and reproachfull speeches of H. Barow doe sufficiently testify what the Brownists of old thought of the Dutch Classes and Synods and what they thought of such Ministers in England as desired a Reformation and therein a Classicall government Though H. Barow according to his manner doe overlash and utter much falshood yet he is not guilty of so great fallhood as Mr Canne in denying what the Ministers and forward professours in England as he calles thē did heretofore seek and sue for It is certaine and evident that the Non-conformists have (r) Demōst of Disc c. ◠pr. 3. p. 24 25. Mr Travers of Ecc. Disc p. 19. 20. Admon to Parl. p. 15. edit 1617. held that unto the just calling of a Minister there is required the calling of a particular and certaine Church where he is to administer Yea so much is also confessed touching them by the (ſ) Dang pos l. 3. of Engl. Scoti c. 3. p. 46. c. 14. p. 114. 115. Prelatists when by them it is recorded as a decree of the Synodicall Discipline that none should take upon him an uncertaine and vague ministery though it be offered unto him but such as be called to the ministery by some certaine Church c. And againe that none is to be accounted a full Minister untill some particular Congregation had chosen him c. For though as in these Churches after due examination approbation by a Classis men are allowed to preach and to exercise their gifts occasionally yet are not such esteemed Ministers untill they be called by some Church and confirmed therein But H. Bar. as in divers other things so in this speakes slanderously of the Classes and of the Ministers approoving them when as he saith (t) Discov p 175. Both sides both Bishops and this new Classis take upon them to make Ministers without the people without any charge place or office certaine Though the falshood of H. Bar. be manifest herein yet Mr Canne goes a degree beyond him when he shames not to deny the approbation which the Nonconformists have given to the Dutch Classes and Synods which H. Bar. could not deny for the fact though he impugne them as erring therein Let the Reader now observe here the palpable untrueth of Mr C. of W.B. in their Apish imitation of my words which they so falsely apply against me saying (v) Chu pl. p. 88 89. As Herod to kill one infant spared not to kill a multitude of other infants so he that he might undermine us and blow us up into the ayre he cared not nor spared not with the gunpowder of his fiery contention and reproaches to blow up with us a multitude of Godly and learned Ministers being of the same judgement with us I desire the Readers to looke upon my former (x) Answ to W.B. p. 71 72 73. 18 29.30 c. writing and then to judge whether I had not just cause to complaine of their wounding the Classis through my sides and of their reproaching the Ministers of these Reformed Churches under my name in regard of their consent and practise agreeable to mine I desire that the testimonies confessions and petitions of the ancient Non-conformists above mentioned in allowance of a Classicall Synodall government may be duely pondered then let any indifferent Reader judge whether I undermine them and blow them up into the ayre c. while I confirme their testimonies both by word and practise But these opposites Mr Canne and his client have so little conscience of trueth that they have not cared to utter the grossest falshood so that they might but contradict me Let them remember Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord. Prov. 12.22 SECT VI. Touching the Testimonies of Ancient fathers Councels and Emperours THe Advocate of W.B. not contēt with the testimonies of men in later times leades us back to the testimony of Antiquity and to the Ages long before And though he (a) Ch. pl. p. 89. confesse he had done it already in mentioning some testimonies of the most ancient times yet notwithstanding to shew that he stands not for any Novelty he professeth againe he will shew that the best approved Authors after the Apostles are directly with them in this thing c. Those which he alledgeth are these Ignatius Tertullian Origen Cyprian Eusebius Athanasius Epiphanius Ierome Ambrose Cyrill Hilarie Greg. Nazianzen Augustine Chrysostome Basill Socrates Isidorus Bernard And with these he also makes mention of some Councells and Christian Emperours For answer hereunto First in generall it is to be observed that the thing which he here pretends to prove viz. that everie particular visible Church of Christ hath power to exercise Ecclesiasticall government and all other Gods spirituall ordinances in and for itself immediately from Christ this comes short of the question betwixt us For this being granted it doth not follow hereupon that the power of Classes and Synods is an undue power or that particular Churches may not therefore stand under the authority of another superiour Ecclesiasticall judicatory out of themselves This their inference will never be made good from such a ground This beggerly consequence I have oft (b) P. 145 146 149. c. refuted before To come more particularly unto the testimonies of these Authours which he promiseth to set downe according to the times in which they lived And to beginne first with Ignatius from him he alledgeth that it was then the manner of visible Churches (c) Ad Philadelph ad Magnes ad Trall to come together in one place to worship God having Bishops Elders and Deacons unto their Officers whom the people freely chose by voyces or lifting up of hands I answer 1. All that is here sayd being granted it followes not that they were independent and refused to submit their controversies to the judgement of other Churches assembled in Synods Ignatius being Minister of the Church of Antiochia in Syria which had of old submitted their controversy to the Synod held at Ierusalem Act. 15. what reason is there to thinke they forgot their old practise approved by the Apostles themselves 11. Though it be probable and we injudgement of charity are bound to thinke that the Officers Bishops Elders and Deacons of this Church were chosen with the free consent of the people according to the direction of the Apostles yet is not so much specifyed in any of those three Epistles here mentioned in the margine and therefore are they vainely alledged for the proof thereof III. Ignatius labouring for the peace and establishment of the Church of Antiochia after his death desired the Church of Philadelphia (d) Epist ad Philadel p. 76. edit Paris 1562.
f Amb. Offi. l. 1. c. 1 These with spirituall bridles order men c. I answer I. In the place alledged there is not a word to be found either touching a Senate of Elders or touching spirituall bridles or any thing to like purpose II. If a Senate of Elders be spirituall bridles then the Brownists with Mr C. that now want such a Senate are an unbridled company wanting order c. III. What though an assembly of Elders order men with spirituall bridles Is there therefore no other spirituall bridle in the authority of Synods What consequence is this IV. That Ambrose did allow the authority and jurisdiction of Synods it appeares both by his practise he g Theod. Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 9. himself being present with Damasus Britto Valerian and other Bishops at the Synod holden at Rome for the censure of Apollinaris and Timotheus his disciple and by his h Amb. Tom. 3. epi. l. 10. ep 78. ad Theoph. exhortation given unto Theophilus and others to judge the cause of Euagrius and Flavianus being deputed thereunto by the Synod of Capua and againe by his i Ib. Epi. 79. ad Theoph Anys exhortation given unto Theophilus Anysius that they being chosen by the same Synod of Capua would give sentence touching Bonosus and his accusers forasmuch as the Synod had givē this authority unto them and they did now supply the place thereof With Ambrose he joynes k In orat fun de patr Nazianzen to testify also that a Senate or assembly of Elders doe with spirituall bridles order men But in the place alledged I finde no such testimony as is mentioned and therefore the three first answers made before unto the testimony from Ambrose may also serve for Nazianzen And further that Gregory Nazianzen did not limit all Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction unto a particular Congregation onely it may appeare if we observe I. How l Soc. Hist Ecc. l. 4. c. 21. Sozom. Hist Ecc. l. 6. c. 17. he himself was made Bishop of Constantinople by the suffrages of many Bishops met together which is a further degree of Ecclesiasticall authority then that which is exercised in the Classes or Synods of these countries II. How he pleadeth (m) Nazian Epist 1. ad Clidon from a Synodall law touching the receyving of those that were fallen III. How he alloweth the order of convocating and assembling neighbour Bishops about the creating of a new Bishop affirming this to be (n) Epi. 30. ad Caesariē right and according to the Ecclesiasticall law IV. How he in his counsell and exhortation unto the Synod at Constantinope (o) Theod. Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 8. asscribes unto them authority and power for his owne dimission and translation for the setting of another unblameable Bishop in his place and thereby withall for the deposition and abdication of Maximus which was accordingly performed That which might with more colour be objected out of Nazianzen against the use of Synods and which is also alledged both by Mr Canne and by Mr Davenp though not directly against the authority of Synods is yet so brought in by the way as might cause a simple Reader to stumble thereat The words of Nazianzen as Mr Canne (p) Ch. pl. p. 93. alledgeth them are these (q) Ep. 42. ad Procop. I am minded saith he to shunne all assemblies of Bishops because I never saw any good event in any Councell that did not rather increase then diminish our evills Their contention and ambition passeth my speech ANSVV. I. Observe how Mr C. mistranslateth those words of Nazianzē 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he rendreth as signifying passeth my speech whereas they signify prevayled more then reason as (r) Apo. tep p. 225. Mr Dav. doth rightly translate them But it is no wonder that Mr Canne should mistake that which some more learned have done before Grosser faults are more common with him II. As for the testimony of Nazianzen the answer of D. Whitaker may give sufficient satisfaction who sayth (ſ) De Cōc qu. 1. c. 3. p. 13.14 15. It may seeme strange that Nazianzen denyes he had seene a good issue of any Synod For in those two Synods viz. of Nice and Constantinople which had beene mentioned before trueth got the victory and heresy was put downe And though it be certaine that Arianisme was encreased and grew strong and troubled the Church after the Synod of Nice more then before yet that is not to be imputed to the Synod but to the contention and ambition of men For as our corrupt nature doth more vehemently resist the knowne law of God and rusheth headlong unto sinne so falshood opposed itself more boldly unto the trueth then explained and openly defended whereupon after that Synod which none excelled greater incōmodities did arise from the wickedness of men c. When Nazianz. saw so wicked dispositions of men he was wholly turned from Councels Although without doubt he disallowed not the thing itself but the wicked indeavours of men Now if any will reason after this manner The issue of Synods is not good or more evils follow thence therefore Synods are to be avoyded that man shall dispute deceitfully from a wrong cause from accident and from the fallacy of consequent But Nazianzen was to be pardoned because he lived in the worst and most turbulent times of the Church when by meanes of Valens the Emperour that degenerated from the Catholick faith Hereticks did more prevayle c. Againe he opposeth Augustine unto Nazianzene and sayth It is most true which Augustine sayth Epist 118. that the authority of Synods in the Church of God is most wholesome which certainly he would not have sayd if he had bene of the same minde with Nazianzen And further he opposeth unto the speech of Nazianz. the testimony of Christ saying Christ himself pronounceth and promiseth Matt. 18.20 Where two or three are assembled together in his name there he will be in the midst of them In which words he signifyeth that the assemblies and Synods of godly and religious men undertaken and appoynted for godly causes are not displeasing unto him III. The testimony of Nazianzen is as much against the opinion of Mr Can and Mr Dav. as against that which we hold touching Classes and Synods For seeing they allow such meetings for counsell and admonition though not for exercise of any jurisdiction and seeing the testimony of Naziā doth extend itself to all kinde of assemblies of Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether for counsell or censure without exception of one sort more then another therefore he no more condemneth our Synods then those which my opposites allow Augustine his next witnesse is in like manner perverted as the former Though he in the place (t) DeDoct Chr. l. 1. c. 17. objected doe write that the keyes were given to the Church yet doth he not thereby exclude Synods gathered together in the name of
and lesser Poland in Lithuania Russia and Samogitia have likewise shewed their consent with us in this poynt of subjecting particular Churches under the Ecclesiasticall authority of Synods and have witnessed the same in divers solemne assemblies They professe (o) Syntag. Confes par 2. p. 294. Syn. Posna 1570. Art 19 that when controversies arise which cannot be compounded among themselves the judgement and decree of a generall Synod of all their Churches is then to be required and to be submitted unto They agreed (p) Ib. p. 300 303. Syn. Crac. Xans Wlodisl that divers kindes of Synods were to be held among them some greater some lesse that their Synodicall constitutions were to be put in execution that the violatours thereof were to be subject unto the censures of deposition and excommunication c. They ordained (q) P. 320-326 Syn. Toru 1591 Art 2 3 7.14 17. that every Evangelicall Minister was not onely to have and to read the Canons of their Synods but also to carrie himself and to governe the Church committed unto him according to the prescript thereof and that under paine of Ecclesiasticall censure that the censure of excoÌ„mâ—â—â—â—ation was to be administred publickly either in the Congregation or in the Synod c. Moreover it is worthy to be remembred how the Churches of the Netherlands even at that time when they were scattered abroad in High-dutchland and Eastfriestand in that time of most bloody persecution under the government of Duke d' Alva did then in their banishment and with danger of their lives at home combine themselves in Classes for their mutuall guidance and submitted themselves unto the judgement of such assemblies The distribution of these Churches into severall Classes (r) Synod Embd. An. 1571. Art 10.11 recorded publickly as followeth I. Classis The two Churches at Franckford the Church at Schoenau at Heydelbergh at Franckendael at S. Lambert II. Class The two Churches at Collen the 2 Churches at Aken the Church at Maestricht at Limburgh at Nuys in Gulick-land III. Class The Church of Wesel of Embrick of Rees of Goch of Gennep and other in Cleveland IV. Class The Church of Embden with strangers of Brabant Holland West-Friestland V. Class The 2 Churches at Antwerp the Church at ' sHertoghen-bosch at Breda at Brussel and others in Brabant VI. Class The Church at Gant at Ronsen at Oudenard at Comen and others in East and West-Flanders VII Class The Church of Doornick of Ryssel of Atrecht of Armentiers of Valencienne and other Churches of Walloens VIII Class The Church of Amsterdam of Delph other Churches of Holland of Over-Yssel of West-Friesland The faithfull Ministers and people of these primitive Reformed Churches the Martyrs witnesses of Christ like the woman that fled into the wildernes from the rage of the Dragon have given speciall testimony unto this Classicall government whereunto they submitted themselves even in those hard times when it was difficult dangerous for them to meet together As the Dutch Churches practised among themselves of old so they in the fore-mentioned Synod by common advise agreed (Å¿) Synod Embd. art 12. to exhort the English that they would combine their Churches into a Classis And accordingly this order of government was approved by them as appeares in that booke of their Discipline framed for the use of the English Churches in these countries where it is sayd in the end (t) Forme of Comm. prayer Administr c. printed at Middleb 1602 the 4. edit This may be sufficient for particular Congregations for the visitation whereof and decision of causes which cannot be ended among them and such like Meetings Conferences Synods of Minister and Elders chosen by particular Churches and meetings are to be held as the Ministers for time and place and other circumstances shall think meet With (v) Ibid. p. D 7. b. 8. a b. F 3. a. consent and allowance of these Ministers of such Classes or Conferences together with consent of the Eldership were the Pastours and Teachers of particular Congregations to be elected and then the names of such being signifyed to the Congregation for inquiry after their fitnes warning was given that if within twenty dayes no just exception were taken then their silence should be accounted as the free consent of the Congregation c. To conclude beside the testimony of Reformed Churches severally apart it shall not be amisse to behold the Harmony of their joynt consent in the Deputies of the sayd Churches assembled together in the Nationall Synod of Dort then which it is rightly judged that (x) Molin Anat. Armin praef A 3. there hath not bene for many ages past any Synod more renowmed or more holy or more profitable to the Church When as the Remonstrants upon pretence of partiality schisme in their judges sought to decline the Authority sentence of this Synod the Divines of other nations deputed from severall Churches have given such judgment thereof as shewes a plaine condemnation of my opposites opinion The judgement of the Divines of Great Brittaine who alledged the perpetuall practise of all Churches was this that (y) Act. Syn. Nat. Dordr Sess 29. p. 97. the highest power of determining controversies in every Church is in the Nationall Synod lawfully called together framed c. The judgement of Divines out of the Palatinate was like unto the former They (z) Ibid. p. 98. alledge the practise of the Church both in the old new Testament for confirmation thereof and shew their owne practise to have bene such that some authors of novelties being admonished first of their Classis and then of the Ecclesiasticall Senate and being refractory were then dismissed that is deposed from their places The Divines of Hassia agree with the former and upon the like grounds They (a) Ibid. p. 100. shew the practise of their owne Churches that for the repressing of the errour of the Vbiquitarians divers Nationall Synods had bene held by authority of the foure brethren Princes of Hassia and that since againe the Prince Maurice Landgrave af Hassia had called another generall Synod of Hassia wherein the former Synodicall decrees were confirmed sentence pronounced against such as maintained contrary errours The Divines of Switzerland or Helvetia consent hereunto and (b) Ibid. p. 102. alledge the perpetuall practise of ancient later Churches together with the practise of those in Berne in the cause of Huberus in their owne countrey and testify that by such meanes peace was obtained The Divines of Geneva also (c) Ibid. p. 102. 103. avouch that in the Church the supreme power of judgement is in a Synod lawfully called c. That God hath established this order sanctifyed it by the example of the Apostles and all ages of the Church according to the saying of Christ Tell the Church c. The Divines of Breme (d) Ibid. p. 104. maintaine the same thing and hold
which an intelligent Reader might not easily satisfy himself from what hath beene sayd already in the foregoing Treatise yet lest Mr C. should plead there was ought left untouched that with any shew of reason required an answer for their help to whom such directions may be usefull I have here briefly noted what he hath sayd and to what purpose The Reasons or Objections which in this latter part of his booke he assayeth to answer are 1. Concerning the evill consequents of Independency 2. The ancient exercise of the power used in Synodall combinations 3. The liberty freedome hence arising unto Churches the members thereof 4. The determinations of Synods and consent of Reformed Churches in this matter 5. The Authours alledging the former practise of the Church where he was Minister In the sixt place he mentioneth some objections of which he (c) Church pl. p. 100. saith he will not stand to make any particular answer thereto but referreth us in generall to the writings of others which whosoever shall compare with the Authours words against which they are applyed and duely weigh the severall circumstances on both sides may easily discerne that this his generall answer needs no reply In the end lest we should doubt with what affection all the rest was written he graceth his booke with this Conclusion and disireth it may be noted when out of the abundance of his charity he saith Mr Paget would faine have the Classicall Discipline advanced that hee by it might have worldly credit also These are his last words ushered with others of the same stamp that hee seeks to disgrace Christs government to have his owne honoured embraced c. A vile slander not worthy to be answered For the other objections which Mr Canne pretends to answer it is to be observed that the Authour in his former writing hath not framed any Reasons for proofe of this poynt in controversie as he hath often (d) Pag. 40 73. 168. before noted in this Treatise It was not his purpose at that time to propound any Argument first or last but being the Defendant or partie accused to wait for the Arguments of his Accusers And so much was also signifyed in his (e) Answ to W. B. p. 71. 88. other booke which Mr C. had read and from whence those Reasons or pretences as he calles them are taken unto which here he shapes his Answers Yet notwithstanding he will take no notice of this but runnes into two contrary extremes before he affirmed that he brought no proofes because he had none to bring intimating (f) Chur. pl. p. 15. 16. that he hath not left this point unprooved out of forgetfulnes but rather of meere poverty as not having any authenticall records c. Here againe he makes him to bring Reasons Arguments when as he professed that at that time he intended to bring none not out of forgetfulnes or want of ability for he had sayd in the place before mentioned that he had to this purpose in his Sermons divers times alledged sundry evidences grounds of holy Scripture c. And Mr C. knew that he was able to produce such evidences by the occasionall mentioning of those two places Deut. 17. Act. 15. which he hath also undertaken to answer Come we now to the particulars THe first pretended Reason is set downe by Mr C. in these words If particular Congregations should not stand under any other Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves manifold disorders confusion and dissipation of Churches would follow Thus he perverts the Authours words which were not set downe by way of Argument but meerly as a declaration of his judgement touching the benefit of Classes and Synods against the contrary accusation of his opposites His words are these (g) Answ to W. B. Pref. That single uncompounded policie as Mr Iacob calles it whereby particular Congregations are made to be independent not standing under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves that I conceive to bring with it manifold disorders confusion and dissipation of Churches That which the Authour thus set downe as his owne opinion which he held concerning the safety of this government for the maintaining of order setled peace in Churches that Mr C. transformes into an Argument calles it his first reason The Authour had just cause to mention that consideration in such manner as he did to shew the importance of this point in controversie by which he there also hoped that others would be warned to take heed what new formes of Churches and Church-government they frame unto themselves or commend unto others Experience hath taught not once nor twice that in the matter of framing Churches for want of taking such advice some have become like Vtopian Commonwealths men going to work according to their owne Idaeas they have begun a work which they were not able to finish not unlike unto that builder of whom our Saviour speakes Luk. 14.28 29 30. And therefore as before more briefly so now (h) Pag. 32 33. at his entrance into a more full and professed handling of this question the Authour hath hereby declared of what importance this controversy is and given instance in the disorders confusions and dissipations which have happened unto that Church of the Brownists at Amsterdam the rather because of their neglect and contempt of such remedies as from Classicall and Synodall government might have been afforded unto them If those that pretend such accurate exercise of Discipline have fallen into so great and manifold scandals such rash and offensive excommunications schismes depositions as are there mentioned how can it be expected that others in outward appearance more unable to mannage such a kinde of government should be free from running into the like or greater offences If some few single Churches within a few yeares have bewrayed to their losse and shame the great want of a combined government for the establishment of peace and order among them how many instances and examples of the same kinde might we looke for in processe of time where many Churches together should be erected according to this modell of Independent politie To this purpose the Authour hath applyed that observation touching these evill consequents of Independency not by way of argument as Mr C. hath set it downe If he had intended to propound an Argument he would have framed it after another manner for the aggravation of their errour as thus for example That independency of Churches which not being prescribed of God doth occasion manifold disorders c. that is so much the more to be avoyded But such is that Independency which is required of these Opposites Ergo. Or thus That Independency of Churches which not by accident onely but in the very nature thereof is a proper cause of manifold disorders is to be condemned But such is that Independency taught by these Opposites Ergo. The Argument thus propounded and understood principally
that it is not capable of them Yet that they of Geneva doe allow the use of Classes and Synods Mr Parker hath there manifested from their writings and the confessions of their adversaries and it doth also appeare by their practise while their joynt Presbyterie doth not greatly differ from a Classis But to speake properly it is not a Classis and to speak truely they are not the first that have approved and practised such kinde of combined government But lest Mr C. should seeme to urge us with the testimonies of these Authours behold what proofes he addes to this purpose I. C. Touching these Assertions I cannot see how Mr Paget or any other is able to disproove them It is acknowledged on all sides that in the first hundred yeares after the Apostles Ministers and Brethren of sundry Congregations met sometimes to conferre mutually together of common Church-affaires yet so as every particular Congregation had alwayes as the Centuries (v) Cent. l. 2. c. 4. p. 391. write power and authority in themselves to chuse their Officers reject Heretickes excommunicate offenders and the like ANSVV. 1. There is nothing here sayd to proove the foresaid assertions but what is grounded upon a false supposition which the Authour-hath before (x) Pag. 30.156 157 164 c. often discovered viz. that particular Congregations have not still their power authority in elections and censures when they are combined with others subject to the power belonging to such combinations for their direction correction in case they offend Mr C. leaving this without proofe the assertions which he offers to maintaine are in like manner left without defence for ought he hath here sayd II. The Magdeburgenses never understood that the consociation of Churches in such sort as it is maintained by the Defendant is inconsistent with that power which they have in themselves as hath been shewed (y) P. 173.174 175. before out of other places of the same Authours according to which the place here quoted must be explained where they speak onely of the Apostles times and of particular Congregations considered in themselves without excluding their confederacy with others for their mutuall help in iudging and deciding of causes I. C. So againe for a hundred yeares next after we read in Eusebius (z) L. 3. c. 22. L. 5. c. 16. L. 3. c. 19. Iraeneus (a) L. 3. c. 1.2.3 Nicephorus (b) L. 4. c. 23. and others that neighbour Ministers came often together when there was any dangerous errour broched or weighty points to be determined serving for generall good but this they did of liberty not of duety partly to preserve mutuall society as Zipperus (c) L. 3. c. 7. sayth partly that they might hereby be the more able to resist adversaries as Mr Parker (d) Eccl. Pol. p. 329 330. sayth ANSVV. His quotations here as they use to be are either misprinted or impertinent howbeit the things themselves for which they are alledged may easily be granted But the question is whether the Synods or meetings of Ministers held in that age did not exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in determining of weighty points and deciding of controversies If so be they did which cannot be denyed seeing as hath been (e) Prof. Leyd Censur Confes Remonstr Pref. § 14. Vedel de Arcan Armin l. 2. c. 6. p. 186. noted against the Arminians such a deciding of Ecclesiasticall controversies was used in all the Synods of the ancient Orthodox Church then it must needs follow that those times have given testimony unto such Synods as are here maintained But to avoyd this Conclusion Mr C. puts in this shift which we must take upon his owne credit saying this they did of liberty not of duety But to what purpose is this evasion 1. The opposing of dangerous errours the preserving of mutuall society and seeking help for the resisting of adversaries the things here spoken of are necessary dueties and therefore to be done of duety and not of liberty See before p. 78. Men are bound to the performance itself though there may be liberty used in the choyce of the circumstances 11. Mr Parker saith expressely in the very place here cited by Mr C. that (f) De Pol. Eccl. l. 3. p. 329. the ground of the combination of Churches is the duety of maintaining mutuall society c. and that bond of mutuall help which Moses mentioneth Num. 32.6 where the Reubenites and Gadites are urged to their duety not left to their liberty In the next place he telles us his opinion touching the limits of Synodall actions to wit that (g) Ch. pl. p. 95. Ecclesiasticall Officers may conclude what they judge meet good but not make a Church-act or sentence unlesse the Church first know it give their free consent unto it As if to any effectuall purpose weighty points could be determined mutuall society preserved and adversaries resisted when dangerous errours are broched which are the reasons he himself hath allowed for assembling in Synods while every Church is left free to itself to approve or reject what is so concluded His reason is because the power authoritie to make Church-acts is in the body of the Congregation The proofe hereof as it is understood applyed by him is yet to be expected _____ Comming downe to the next hundred yeares he seemes to acknowledge the practise of those times to be against him but to excuse the matter he alledgeth Casaubon D. Whitaker Mornaeus Brightman yea and Cyprian Eusebius and Ambrose testifying that in those times men began to devise a new order and manner of governing Churches c. Observe here a notable fallacy in his insinuating that to be the cause of such speeches which indeed was not It is true that these and other Authours have complained of changes and corruptions crept into the Church in those times but not because of Synodall authority then exercised nay this hath ever been accounted the happines of those times that the Churches had more liberty to assemble in Synods then they could have before in the times of persecution under Heathen Emperours Constantine is every where commended for his religious respect unto the welfare of the Church in assembling the Synod of Nice On the other side the wickednes of Licinius is noted by his forbidding the use of such Assemblies Though Episcopall dignity grew to a greater height in those times then before yet Synodall jurisdiction was the same that had been used formerly save onely that the favour of the Emperours publick liberty and the increase of offences together with the inlargement of the Churches are (h) Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 10. c. 3. Iun. Animadv in Bellarm. de Concil l. 1. c. 10. n. 2. Camerar Hist Syn. Nic. p. 212. edit Niceph observed to have made the Assemblies more generall and frequent then in former ages And therefore whatsoever Mr C. affirme there is no reason why we should dissent from
times speak And for the delay occasioned partly by the difficulty of the work and partly by other distractions want of necessary helps for dispatch the book itself unto those that are not unacquainted with businesses of this nature will give reasonable satisfaction That which thou here seest touching Classes and Synods was written by the Authour in the latter dayes of his pilgrimage amidst sundry bodily weaknesses other necessary imployments There are now three yeares expired since he rested from this other his labours having served the will of God in his owne age entred into the joy of his Lord. Being warned some time before by a messenger of death to desist from the pursuit of this work he gave way that in convenient time as I was able I should husband these his notes for publick use It were to have been wished that his owne eye hand might have prevented the charge of an executour herein So shouldest thou have had this work farre more compleat and refined then now can be expected But the Almighty infinite in understanding to whom belong the issues of life and death hath ordered otherwise who will say unto him What doest thou According to the trust therefore committed unto me I doe now at length set foorth this monument of his godly painfull labours touching this weighty point of Church-government I have forborne as much as might be to interpose my rude pencill in this master-piece The liberty allowed unto me for the persiting of what was wanting I have used no further then was requisite for the coupling of the parts together out of severall papers written at severall times for the filling up of a few gaps specially in Ch. 7. having had the opportunity to meet with some bookes which the Authour wanted I have withall added a small Supplement for answer unto what remained in Mr Cannes book touching this poynt according to the first edition the same which the Authour onely saw followed in this his Defence And thus I have also cast my mite into this Treasury before I opened it for publick benefit If my coine be not currant let not that prejudice the rich supply that may be had out of the Authours store the value whereof will sufficiently discover itself unto them that with understanding unpartiall mindes receive it Howbeit thou art allowed desired according to the Authours meaning to bring it to the touchstone of trueth to the Law to the Testimony According this word try the reasons on both sides and hold fast that which is good Farewell from DORT Where a most pregnant effectuall testimonie hath been given for the needfull authority of Synods with which testimony the Authour hath closed his writing touching this subject Where this his Treatise now comes to light which we hope may prove usefull to direct unto the like remedy where the like case may require it He that hath the Starres in his right hand so guide the beames of this Candle now set upon the Candlestick that it may give light unto all that are in the house that the darke corners of errour may be further disclosed the lustre of his owne Ordinances becomes more apparent With this suit I againe take leave requesting thee to joyne therein with him that desires to be Thine in trueth R. PAGET THE FIRST PART OF THIS TREATISE Touching The Povver of a particular Eldership CHAP. 1. The occasion of this vvriting and the State of the Question WHereas Mr Ainsworth was desired by the Authour (a) Arrow ag Separ f. 2. v. to set down his reasons concerning whatsoever he thought might be a just cause of refusing communion with that partâ—â—ular Congregation whereof he was a Minister Mr Ainsw in his answer among the rest hath (b) Ibid. pag. 5. these words Other things there are wherein you know we differ from you c. Your Eldership sitteth judgeth matters apart from the Congregation c. Concerning which particular the Authour thus (c) Ibid. p. 33. replyed Though our Eldership for the examination of parties witnesses and for their consultations thereabout do sit apart as is meet yet do we not exclude or debarre any from hearing seeing the conviction of any sinne that is either publique of it self or persisted in when they desire the same yea we our selves have oft desired their presence to behold the convictions admonitions rebukes of offenders And further before any sentence be given for the cutting off of any offender we do first propound the matter unto the whole Church requiring their prayers advise and consent without which never yet any judgment of excommunication hath bene executed against any amongst us and this also is propounded unto them by divers degrees long oft before any pronouncing of sentence that so our brethren may have sufficient time both to informe themselves of the matter and to deliberate ripely thereof c. Mr Ainsworth in his next having (d) Ibid p. 317. sayd I put you in minde that you have not as yet alledged any one word of God for your Consistory c. the Authour puts him in minde of his owne allowing the same by communicating therewith in some measure whereof he had bene told (e) Ibid. p. 32. before whereunto he answered not a word and addes (f) Ibid p. 330. further Seeing you have not yet answered neither the (g) Exp. of Matt. 18. first nor the (h) Christian plea. last booke of Mr Iohnson wherein he hath written against your popular government what meane you to call for more if more be requisite you may see that I promised you in my former (i) Arrow ag Sep p. 33. writing that when I should receive any arguments from you to prove your refusall of communion upon these grounds that I would then give further answer unto you The errours which you have published in your Animadversion for the maintenance of your popular order and the enormities which in that order are committed by you in your unlawfull excommunications censures are so many that they require a distinct treatise for the refutation thereof of which I purpose to say more hereafter as occasion is given c. Hereupon and about the same time was written that which followes though not happily all that was intended By that which is sayd it may appeare that the Question is not whether the power of the keyes be given to the Church or whether the power of excommunication be in the body of the Church or whether Church-government ought to be with the peoples free consent c. All this may be granted and yet the point in controversy remaine undecided But the difference is about the execution judiciall exercising of this power Whether every offence to be judged or cause to be determined ought to be brought to the multitude or body of the Congregation and they to give their voyces therein together with the Officers of
the Church or whether the Officers being chosen with the publick knowledge and free consent of the Church have not by vertue of their calling power to heare judge matters to rebuke and censure offenders without the advise of the multitude yet so that in matters of greater importance more publick concernmēt as admissions excommunications absolutions of members elections depositions of Officers c. the case be made knowne unto determined with the free consent of the people according to the practise above-written The former of these is denyed the latter affirmed maintained in the ensuing discourse CHAP. II. Arguments to prove the power of the Eldership injudging ending some cause vvithout the knovvledge of the Congregation 1. THe titles given by the holy Ghost to Ecclesiasticall Offices Officers are such as import a power of judging causes being such titles as doe expresse declare the power of judgement which was in the Rulers of Israel both Civill Ecclesiasticall as for example 1. A Guide or Leader 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the title given to Ecclesiasticall Officers Heb. 13.7 17 24. is the same that in the Greek translation of the Old Testament agreeable to the Originall is given to Civill Rulers Iosh 13.21 Deut. 1.13 Mica 3.9 11.2 Chro. 5.1 Ezek. 44.3 45.7 Dan. 3.2 as also in the New Testament Act. 7.10 Besides it is the same with another word so often given unto Civill Rulers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 2.6 27.2 Act. 23.24 26 33. 1. Pet. 2.14 c. And so is this word also used by other humane writers abundantly 2. A Bishop or Overseer the title given by the H. Ghost unto Ecclesiasticall Officers to describe their authority power Act. 20.28 Phil. 1.1 1. Tim. 3.2 Tit. 1.7 is the same word that is given to expresse the power of Civill Magistrates in the Greek translation of the Old Testament Num. 31.14 Iudg. 9.28 2. Kin. 11.15 and very often in other Writers 3. An Elder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nafi the title which the Scripture useth to denote shew the office of Ecclesiasticall Elders Act. 14.23 15.2 4. 20.17 1. Tim. 5.17 Tit. 1.5 1. Pet. 5.1 is the same word which is likewise given to Civill Rulers Elders in the gate Iudg. 8.14 Ruth 4.2 3. c. 2. Sam. 5.3 1. Chron. 11.3 4. A Prince or Ruler being the title of Civill Governours in the Common-wealth to signify their authority Num. 7.2 Gen. 25.16 34.2 Levit. 4.22 Rom. 13.3 1. Cor. 2.6 is also given to Ecclesiasticall Rulers to note their office and authority as Act. 23.5 with Exod. 22.28 Mat. 9.18 Luk. 8.41 Ioh. 3.1 Num. 3.24 30 32 35. And hereby it may appeare how untrue it is which Mr Robinson writes concerning the difference betwixt Civill Officers Church-governours when having mentioned some of the titles given to Magistrates he saith (a) Justifie of Sep. p. 135. Ecclesiasticall Officers are not capable of these the like titles which can neither be given without flattery unto them nor received by them without arrogancy And yet the very first of the titles wherein he gives instance is that title which here I shew to be given to Ecclesiasticall Rulers as well as to Civill 5. The title of Heads Rosch wherein Mr Robinson (b) Justific ibid. instanceth in the second place that it may not be given to Ecclesiasticall Officers is yet if we will regard what the Scripture affirmeth given to them as well as to Civill Rulers As it is given to Magistrates in Deut. 1.15 the place alledged by Mr Robinson so is it also given to Ministers in 1. Chron. 15.12 23.24 24.4 26.10 12. 2. Chron. 19.11 Ezra 8.1 17. Nehem. 12.12 22 23 24. 6. The title of Governours or Governments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Greekes are (c) Steph. Thes ling. Gr. noted to use to expresse the power of Civill Magistrates thereby by a Metaphor from pilots out of Xenophon Aristotle Plato Cicero c. is the same that the holy Ghost also useth to signify unto us thereby the authority of Church-governours in guiding the ship of Christs Church 1. Cor. 12.28 7. The title of Rulers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which H. Stephanus (d) The saur l. Gr. shewes to be used by Thucydides Demosthenes Herodotus Plato Plutarch others for the Rulers of Cities of Armies Kingdomes is that same which the Scripture useth to describe unto us those Officers that beare rule in the Church which is the City of the living God and his spirituall Kingdome Rom. 12.8 1. Thes 5.12 1. Tim. 5.17 8 The title of (e) Elohim Gods which is so often used to expresse the dignity and authority of Civill Governours Psal 82.1 Exo. 21.6 22.8 1. Sam. 2.25 c. is also given to Ecclesiasticall Officers to declare signify the authority that they have Though Mr Robinson (f) Justif of Sep. p. 135. denyes this title also unto them yet if we diligently weigh what the Scripture saith we may well discerne that this title is also given to Church-governours Ministers for 1. The description of those persons to whom this title is given is that they are such to vvhom the vvord of God comes such as the Father hath sanctifyed sent Joh. 10.35 36. and therefore according to the exposition of our Saviour seeing the word of God is come unto Ecclesiasticall Ministers Rulers giving them thereby a commission to administer in his name seeing such are sanctifyed sent of God we may hereby see how this title belongs unto them 2. By the exposition application of the Apostle those who in Moses are called Gods Rulers Exod. 22.28 are shewed to be Ecclesiasticall Rulers Act. 23.5 And howsoever some differ about this title yet are there of the learnedest that doe (g) Iun. Trem. Annot on Ex. 22.28 Iun. anal expl Ex. 22 28. Ioan. Rainol Cens lib. Apocr tom 1. prael 6. so interpret these places viz. of such as have either Civill or Ecclesiasticall administration committed unto them And if we come unto those Authors that are so much honoured by you they will also confirme the same The (h) Onkelos Targum on Exo. 4.16 7.1 Chaldee Paraphrast upon those places where this title of God is given to Moses translateth it Rab a Master or Doctour which is such a word as is given unto Ecclesiasticall Ministers Others (i) Aben Ezra com on Exo. 22.28 of the learnedest Iew-doctours doe expound that title of the Priests Levites so apply it to Church-governours Another (k) Baal hatturim on Exo. 22.28 Cabalist often alledged in your Annotations doth shew these Gods mentioned in Exo. 22. to be all kinde of Rulers over the people by his Gematria because the numerall letters of the words Elohim venasi yeeld the same number with these hu dajan vecol shehu signifying Iudges of
of more Churches of this frame seated together where the disorders ensuing would be more apparent and the neglect of the remedy more culpable hath sufficient grounds both of Scripture and Reason to uphold it First there being required a communion betwixt Churches as well as betwixt members of one Church as hath been noted (i) Pag. 109. before and seeing God is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the author of confusion or of unquietnesse but of peace and will have all things done decently in order specially in the Churches of the Saints 1. Cor. 14.33 40. hence we may conclude that such formes of government as doe unavoydably tend to disunion and disorder are not the Ordinances of God Secondly the principles of nature common equity as they may be read in the practise of all times and places doe teach that no humane societies can subsist together without these bonds of combination confederacy whereby it comes to passe that families unite themselves and grow together into greater Corporations Cities Provinces Commonwealths and Kingdomes for their mutuall peace and safety in the way of government The subordination of Courts in Civill government while they are framed according to an Aristocraticall temper is not repugnant unto the nature of Ecclesiasticall politie These things thus premised and applyed unto Classicall and Synodall combinations it may hereby appeare how Mr C. hath played the trifler in so many idle and impertinent answers which he hath made unto his owne frame of reason obtruded upon the Defendant But for further satisfaction behold the substance of his Answers I. C. ANSVV. I. When God hath established an order for the administration of his owne house what presumption of man dares change it Thinkes he that he is wiser then the Almighty c. REPL. I. This answer saith nothing to any part of the proposed argument even as he himself hath framed it unlesse it be a denyall of the Conclusion For of changing an order that God hath established there was no mention nor colour of any such meaning in the Authors words which he undertakes to refute Onely the question is whether Independency be that forme of administration which God hath appointed unto his Churches This Mr C. with vehement asseverations affirmes and complaines of them that deny it If this reasoning were good he might easily beat downe all objections that are made against his Tenet II. Observe with what insolent language he inveigheth against those that oppose his opinion as if they did set themselves poynt blanck against that which they saw to be the ordinance of God Did he thinke the Authour or others of his minde meant to plead in such manner for their judgement practise touching Classes and Synods Sure Mr C. knew it to be otherwise at least by those places of Scripture which he saw mentioned in their defence But herein also he shewes himself to be a disciple and follower of H. Barrow who for the same thing reproaching the Reformists sayth (k) Discov p. 189. 190. they would bring in a new adulterate forged government in shew or rather in despite of Christs blessed government which they in the pride rashnes ignorance and sensualitie of their fleshly hearts most miserably innovate corrupt and pervert c. Mr C. doth here in like manner multiply words to the same purpose I. C. ANSVV. II. Be it well considered that God alwayes abhorreth all good intentes of men that are contrary to the good pleasure of his will revealed in his word c. REPL. I. There is no mention made of any intentes in the supposed Reason it is onely sayd that Independency will be attended with disorders and confusion c. Mr C. therefore disputes with his owne intentes in these his impertinent answers II. How can God be sayd to abhorre good intentes Or how can those be sayd to be good intentes that are contrary to the revealed will of God III. Intention notes the purpose of the will with reference both unto the end at which it aimes and the meanes by which it endeavours to attaine that end If both these be good lawfull the intention also is absolutely good Yet if the end be good though the meanes be unwarrantable the intention is not presently abhorred but sometime commended of God himself as in David when he purposed to build an house for the Name of the Lord 1. King 8.18 with 2. Sam. 7.7 But in this case on their part that maintaine Classicall and Synodall combinations not onely the end they aime at to wit peace order and the establishment of Churches but the meanes also or the practise of such combinations is allowed by the word of God neither doth Mr C. proove ought to the contrary I. C. ANSVV. III. This objection taken up here by Mr Paget is the very same which the Papists and those that way affected use c. REPL. I. If Papists use the very same objection that is if from the same Premisses they make the same Conclusion rejecting Independency Anti-Synodall courses because of the confusions and disorders which doe follow the same then herein they are no Papists forasmuch as Protestants have reasoned in like manner as may be seen in sundry Testimonies before (l) Ch. 7. Sect. 2-7 alledged II. When Papists dispute against any lawfull forme of government with the same argument which we use against that which is unlawfull this can no more prejudice our reasoning then it doth Mr Cannes while both he they reason against lawfull Synods as taking away that right and power which they pretend to be due unto others he asscribing that to the body of the Congregation which they doe (m) Bellar. de Rom. Pont l. 4. c. 1. de Verb. Dei l. 3. c. 5. to the Pope viz. the supreme Ecclesiasticall judgement of all controversies and both pleading from the same grounds of Scripture Math. 16 18 c. Men may use the like arguments yet their conclusions be farre unlike contradictory I. C. ANSVV. IV. If particular Congregations must loose their right and power because of the offences which some men have committed in the exercise thereof Then surely by the same reason if Mr Pagets reasoning be worth any thing ought Classes and Synods to lay downe that superiour authority which they have taken over many Churches because they in many things many times have offended in and about the execution REPL. I. The reason here mentioned by Mr C. is a meere fiction and forgerie of his owne The Author never reasoned on this manner he never sayd never thought to say that particular Congregations must loose their right power c. There is no shadow of any such thing in those words which Mr C. hath here set downe for himself to answer II. Particular Congregations doe still retaine their due right power even while they are subordinate unto the superiour authority of Classes and Synods as hath been often shewed