3. This therefore is that which he opposeth namely that there was a Deviation in various degrees and falling of from the Original Institution Order and Rule of the Church until it issued in a fatal Apostasie This is that which on the present Occasion must be further spoken unto For if this be not true I confess there is an end of this contest and we must all acquiesce in the State Rule and Order that was in the Church of Rome before the Reformation But we may observe something yet farther in the Vindication and Confirmation of this Truth which I acknowledge to be the Foundation of all that we plead for in point of Church Reformation As 1. That the Reasons and Arguings of the Doctor in this Matter the Necessity of his Cause compelling him thereunto are the same with those of the Papists about the Apostacy of their Church in Faith Order and Worship wherewith they are charged namely when where how was this Alteration made who made opposition unto it and the like When these Enquiries are multiplyed by the Papists as unto the whole Causes between them and us he knows well enough how to give satisfactory Answers unto them and so might do in this particular unto himself also but I shall endeavour to ease him of that trouble at present Only I must say that it is fallen out somewhat unexpectedly that the Ruins of the principle Bulwark of the Papacy which hath been effectually demolished by the Writings of Protestants of all sorts should be endeavoured to be repaired by a Person justly made eminent by his Defence of the Protestant Religion against those of the Church of Rome 2. But it may be pleaded that although the Churches following the first Ages did insensibly degenerate from the Purity and simplicity of Gospel Faith and Worship yet they neither did nor could do so from an Adherence unto and abiding in their Original constitution or from the due Observation of Church Order Rule and Discipline least of all could this happen in the Case of Diocesan Episcopacy I Answer 1. That as unto the Original of any thing that looks like Diocesan Episcopacy or the Pastoral Relation of one Person of a distinct order from Presbiters unto many particular compleat Churches with Officers of their own with Power and Jurisdiction in them and over them unto the Abridgement of the exercise of that Right and Power unto their own Edification which every true Church is entrusted withal by Jesus Christ it is very uncertain and was introduced by insensible Degrees according unto the effectual working of the Mistery of Iniquity Some say that there were two distinct Orders namely those of Bishops and Presbyters instituted at first in all Churches planted by the Apostles But as the contrary may be evidently proved so a supposition of it would no way promote the cause of Diocesan Episcopacy until those who plead for it have demonstrated the State of the Churches wherein they were placed to be of the same nature with those now called Diocesan Wherefore this Hypothesis begins generally to be deserted as it seems to be by this Author Others suppose that immediately upon or at or after the Decease of the Apostles this new Order of Bishops was appointed to succeed the Apostles in the Government of the Churches that were then gathered or planted But how when or by whom by what Authority Apostolical and Divine or Ecclesiastical only and humane none can declare seeing there is not the least footstep of any such thing either in the Scripture or in the Records that remain of the primitive Churches Others think this new Order of Officers took its occasional Rise from the Practice of the Presbyters of the Church at Alexandria who chose out one among themselves constantly to preside in the Rule of the Church and in all matters of Order unto whom they ascribed some kind of Preheminence and Dignity peculiarly appropriating unto him the namâ— of Bishop And if this be true as unto matter of Fact I reckon it unto the Beginnings of those less harmful Deviations from their Original Constitution which I assigned unto Primitive Churches But many Additions must be made hereunto before it will help the Cause of Diocesan Episcopacy What other occasions hereof were given or taken what Advantages were made use of to promote this Alteration shall be touched upon afterwards 2. Why may not the Churches be supposed to have departed from their original Constitution Order and Rule as well as from their first Faith and Worship which they did gradually in many successive Ages until both were utterly corrupted The Causes Occasions and Temptations leading unto the former are to the full as pregnant as those leading unto the latter For 1. There was no vicious corrupt disposition of Mind that began more early to work in Church Officers nor did more grow and thrive in the Minds of many then Ambition with desire of Preheminence Dignity and Rule It is not to be supposed that Diotrephes was alone in his Desire of â—reheminence nor in the irregular actings of his unduly â—ssumed Authority However we have one signal Instance in him of the Deviation that was in the Church with him from the Rule of its Original Constitution For he prevailed so far therein as by his own single Episcopal Power to reject the Authority of the Apostles and to cast them out of the Church who complyed not with his humour How effectually the same Ambition wrought afterwards in many others possessing the same Place in their Churches with Diotrephes is sufficiently evident in all Ecclesiastical Histories It is far from being the only Instance of the Corruption of Church Order and Rule by the Influence of this Ambition yet it is one that is pregnant which is given us by Amâ—rose for saith he Ecclesia ut Synagoga Seniores habuâ—â— quorum sine consilio nihil agebatur in Ecclesia quod qua neglâ—gentia obsoleverit nescio nisi forte doctorum desidia aut magis superbia dum soli volunt aliquid videri In 1. ad Timoth. cap. 5. It seems there was some alteration in Church Rule and Order in his Time whose Beginning and Progress he could not well discover and trace but knew well enough that so it was then come to pass And if he who lived so near the Times wherein such Alterations were made could not yet discover their first Insinuation nor their subtle Progress it is unreasonable to exact a strict account of us in things of the same nature who live so many Ages after their first Introduction But this he judgeth that it was the Pride or Ambition of the Doctors of the Church which introduced that Alteration in its Order Whereas therefore we see in the Event that all Deviations from the Original Constitution of Churches all Alterations in their Rule and Order did issue in a compliance with the Ambition of Church Rulers as it did in the Papal Church and this Ambition was signally noted
and Interest of the Papal See having no bottom for or supportment of their Church state and Order but Regal Favour and mutable Laws there have on such Causes and Reasons which I shall not mention ensued such Emulations of the Nobility and Gentry and such contempts of the Commonâ—People as leave it questionable Whether their Adherence unto the Government be not more burdensome and dangerous unto it than were their antient Contests and Oppositions CHAP. VII No other Church-state of Divine Institution IT may be it will be generally granted I am sure it cannot be modestly denied that particular Churches or Congregations are of a Divine original Institution as also that the Primitive Churches continued long in that Form or Order But it will be farther pleaded that granting or supposing this Divine Institution of particular Churches yet there may be Churches of another Form and Order also as Diocesan or National that we are obliged to submit unto For although the Apostles appointed that there should be Bishops or Elders ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in every City and Town where Christian Religion was received and Clemens affirmeth that they did themselves constitute Bishops and Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Regions or Villages and Cities yet there was another Form afterwards introduced Theodoret Bishop of Cyprus affirms that there were eight hundred Churches committed to his care Epist. 113. whereof many were in Towns and Cities having no Bishop of their own The whole Country of Scythia though there were in it many Cities Villages and Fortresses yet had but one Bishop whose Residence was at Tomis all other Churches being under him as Zozomen declares lib. 6. cap. 20. So it is at this day in divers Provinces belonging of old unto the Greek-Church as in Moldavia and Walachia where they have one whom they call the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Leader or Ruler that presides over all the Churches in the Nation And this Oâ—der of things that there should not be a Bishop in smaller Churches was first confirmed in the sixth Canon of the Council of Sardis in the Year 347. In Answer hereunto I shall do these two things First I shall shew that there is no Church Order State or Church-Form of Divine Institution that doth any way impede take away or overthrow the Liberty Power and Order of particular Congregations such as we have described Secondly I shall enquire into the causes of Churches of another State or Order as the Power of Magistrates and Rulers or their own choice and consent 1. There is no Form Order or Church state Divinely Instituted that should annul the Institution of particular Congregations or abridge them of their Liberties or deprive them of the Power committed unto them It is such a Church-state alone that we are now concerned to enquire after Whatever of that kinde either is or may be imagined that entrenches not on the State Liberty and Power of particular Congregations is not of our present Consideration Men may frame and order what they please and what advantage they make thereby shall not be envied unto them whilst they injure not any of the Institutions of Christ. But 1. These Churches as they are Churches are meet and able to attain the Ends of Churches To say they are Churches and yet have not in themselves Power to attain the ends of Churches is to speak contradictions or to grant and deny the same thing in the same breath For a Church is nothing but such a Society as hath Power Ability and Fitness to attain those ends for which Christ hath ordained Churches That which hath so is a Church and that which hath not so is none Men may if they please deny them to be Churches but then I know not where they will finde any that are so For instance suppose men should deny all the Parochial Churches in England to be such Churches as are intrusted with Church-Power and Administrations what Church in the first Instance could they require our Communion withal Will they say it is with the National or Diocesan Churches neither of these do or can as such administer Sacred Ordinances A man cannot Preach nor hear the Word but in a particular Assembly The Lord's Supper cannot be Administred but in a particular Congregation nor any presential local Communion of Believers among themselves like that described by the Apostle 1 Cor. chap. 12. and chap. 14. be otherwise attained No Communion is firstly and immediately required or can be required with Diocesan Churches as such Wherefore it is Parochial particular Churches that we are required to hold Communion with We say therefore these Parochial Churches are either really and truely so endued with Church-Power and Liberty or they are not If they are or are acknowledged so to be we have herein obtained what we plead for if they are not then are we required to joyn in Church Communion with those Societies that are not Churches and if we refrain so doing we are charged with Schism which is to turn Religion into Ridicule For 2. It is utterly forreign to the Scripture and a Monster unto Antiquity I mean that which is pure and regardable in this Cause that there should be Churches with a part half more or less of Church-Power and not the whole neither in Right nor Exercise or that there should be Church-Officers Elders Presbyters or Bishops that should have a partiary Power half or a third part or less of that which entirely belongeth unto the Office they hold Let one Testimony be given out of the Scripture or that Antiquity which we appeal unto unto this purpose and we shall cease our Plea But this is that which our Understandings are set on rack withal every day There is a National Church that is entrusted with Supreme Church-Power in the Nation whereof it is Here at the entrance we fall into a double disquietment For 1. we know not as yet what this National Church is here or in France nor of what Persons it doth consist 2. We know not whether this National Church have all the Power that Christ hath given unto the Church or that there is a Reserve for some Addition from beyond Sea if things were well accommodated Then that there are Diocesan Churches whose Original with the Causes and Occasions of their Bounds Limits Power and manner of Administrations I think God alone knows perfectly we do but guess for there is not one word mentioned of any of their concernments in the Scripture And we know that these Churches cannot be said to have all the Power that Christ hath entrusted his Church withal because there is another Church unto which they are in subjection and on which they do depend but it seems they have the next degree of Power unto that which is uppermost But whatever their Power be it is so administred by Chancellors Commissaries Officials in such ways and for such ends that I shall believe a dissent from them and it
person of an Apostolical Spirit consonant unto the stile and writings of the Apostles themselves a precious Jewel and just Representation of the state and order of the Church in those days And sundry things we may observe from it 1. There is nothing in it that gives the least intimation of any other Church-State but that which was Congregational although there were the highest causes and Reasons for him so to do had there been any such Churches then in being The case he had in hand was that of Ecclesiastical Sedition or Schism in the Church of Corinth the Church or Body of the Brethren having unjustly deposed their Elders as it should seem all of them Giving advice herein unto the whole Church using all sorts of Arguments to convince them of their sin directing all probable means for their Cure he never once sends them to the Bishop or Church of Rome as the Head of Vnity unto all Churches makes no mention of any Metropolitical or Diocesan Church and its Rule or of any single Bishop and his Authority No one of any such Order doth he either commend or condemn or once address himself unto with either Admonitions Exhortations Encouragements or Directions He only handles the cause by the Rule of the Scripture as it was stated between the Church itself and its Elders I take it for granted that if there were any Church at Corinth consisting of many Congregations in the City and about it or comprehensive as some say of the whole Region of Achaia that there was a single Officer or Bishop over that whole Church But none such is here mentioned If there were any such he was either Deposed by the people or he was not If he were Deposed he was only one of the Presbyters for they were only Presbyters that were Deposed If he were not why is he not once called on to discharge his duty in curing of that Schism or blamed for his neglect Certainly there was never greater Prevarication used by any man in any cause than is by Clemens in this if the state of the Church its Rule and Order were such as some now pretend For he neither lets the people know wherein their sin and Schism did lye namely in a Separation from their Bishop nor doth once mention the only proper cure and remedy of all their Evils But he knew their state and order too well to insist on things that were not then in rerum natura and wherein they were not concerned 2. This Epistle is written as unto the whole Church at Corinth so in the name of the whole Church of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church of God which dwelleth or sojourneth as a stranger at Rome in the City of Rome to the Church of God that dwelleth or sojourneth at Corinth For although that Church was then in disorder under no certain Rule having cast off all their Elders c. yet the Church of Rome not only allows it to be a sister-Church but salutes the Brethren of it in the following words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called and sanctified through the will of God by our Lord Jesus Christ. The Churches of Christ were not so ready in those days to condemn the persons nor to judge the Church-state and condition of others on every miscarriage real or supposed as some have been and are in these latter Ages 2. This Address being from the body of the Church at Rome unto that at Corinth without the least mention of the Officers of them in particular it is evident that the Churches themselves that is the whole entire Community of them had Communion with one another as they were sister-Churches and that they had themselves the transaction of all Affairs wherein they were concerned as they had in the days of the Apostles Acts 15.1 2 3. It was the Brethren of the Church at Antioch who determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others should go up to Hierusalem to consult the Apostles and Elders See also Chap. 21.22 This they did not nor ought to do without the Presence Guidance Conduct and consent of their Elders or Rulers where they had any But this they were not excluded from And that Church the whole Body or fraternity whereof doth advise and consult in those things wherein they are concerned on the account of their Communion with other Churches is a Congregational Church and no other It was the Church who sent this Epistle unto the Corinthians Claudius Ephebus Valerius Bibo Fortunatus are named as their Messengers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that are sent by us our Messengers our Apostles in these matters Such as the Churches made use of on all such occasions in the Apostles days 2 Cor. 8.23 And the persons whom they sent were only Members of the Church and not Officers nor do we any where hear of them under that Character Now they could not be sent in the name of the Church but by its consent nor could the Church consent without its Assembling together This was the state and order of the first Churches in that Communion which was amongst them according to the mind of Christ they had a singular concern in the welfare and prosperity of each other and were solicitous about them in their trials Hence those who were planted at a greater distance than would allow frequent personal converse with their respective Members did on all occasions send Messengers unto one another sometimes meerly to visit them in love and sometimes to give or take Advice But these things as indeed almost all others that bâ—long unto the Communion of Churches either in themselves or with one another are either utterly lost and buryed or kept above ground in a pretence of Episcopal Authority Churches themselves being wholly excluded from any concernment in them But as the Advice of the Church of Rome was desired in this case by the whole Church of Corinth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so it was given by the Body of the Church itself and sent by Messengers of their own 3. The description given of the state ways and walking of the Church of Corinth that is that whole Fraternity of the Church which fell afterwards into that disorder which is reproved before their fall is such as that it bespeaks their walking together in one and the same society and is sufficient to make any good man desire that he might see Churches yet in the world unto whom or the generality of whose Members that Description might be honestly and justly accommodated One Character which is given of them I shall mention only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a full or plentiful effusion of the Holy Ghost upon you all so that being full or filled with an holy will holiness of will and a good readiness of mind with a pious devout confidence you stretched out your hands in Prayers to Almighty God supplicating his clemency or Mercy for the pardon of your involuntary sins sins fallen into by infirmity or
the surprizals of Temptations not consented to not delighted or continued in your labour or contention of spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Apostle speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 2.1 was night and day in your Prayers for the whole Brotherhood that is especially of their own Church itself that the number of Gods Elect might be saved in mercy through a good Conscience towards him This was their state this was their Liturgie this their practice 1. There was on all the Members of the Church a plentiful effusion of the Holy Spirit in his Gifts and Graces wherein it may be respect is had unto what was affirmed by the Apostle before of the same Church 1 Cor. 1.4 5 6 7. the same Grace being yet continued unto them 2. By vertue of this Effusion of the Spirit on all of them their Wills and Affections being sanctifyed their minds were enabled to pour forth fervent prayers unto God 3. They were not such as lived in any open sin or any secret sin known to be so but were only subject unto involuntary surprizals whose pardon they continually prayed for 4. Their love and sense of duty stirred them up to labour mightily in their Prayers with fervency and constancy for the Salvation of the whole Fraternity of Elect Believers whether throughout the world or more especialâ—y those in and of their own Church He that should ascribe these things unto any of those Churches which now in the world claim to be so only would quickly find himself at a loss for the proof of what he asserts Did we all sedulously endeavour to reduce and restore Churches unto their primitive state and frame it would bring more glory to God than all our contentions about Rule and Domination 4. It is certain that the Church of Corinth was fallen into a sinful excess in the Deposition and Rejection of their Elders whom the Church at Rome judged to have presided among them laudably and unblameably as unto their whole walk and work amongst them And this they did by the suggestion of two or three envious discontented persons and as it is probable from some digressions in the Epistle tainted with those Errors which had formerly infested that Church as the denial of the Resurrection of the flesh which is therefore here reflected on But in the whole Epistle the Church is nowhere reproved for assuming an Authority unto themselves which did not belong unto them It seems what Cyprian afterwards affirmed was then acknowledged namely that the right of choosing the worthy and of rejecting the unworthy was in the Body of the People But they are severely reproved for the abuse of their Liberty and Power For they had exercised them on ill grounds by ill means for ill ends and in a most unjust cause He therefore exhorts the Body of the Church to return unto their duty in the Restauration of their Elders and then prescribes unto them who were the first occasion of Schism that every one would subject themselves unto the restored Presbyter and say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will do the things appointed or commanded by the Multitude the Church in the generality of its Members The Plebs the Multitude the Body of the fraternity in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as they were often called in the Scripture Act. 4.32 Chap. 6.2 5. Chap. 15.12 30. had then Right and Power to appoint things that were to be done in the Church for Order and Peace I do not say they had it without or in distinction from their Officers Rulers and Guides but in a concurrence with them and subordination to them whence the Acts concluded on may be esteemed and are the Acts of the whole Church This order can be observed or this can fall out only in a Congregational Church all whose Members do meet together for the discharge of their Duties and Exercise of their Discipline And if no more may be considered in it but the miscarriage of the people without any respect to their Right and Power yet such Churches as wherein 't is impossible that that should fall out in them as did so fall out in that Church are not of the same kind or order with it But for the sake of them who may endeavour to reduce any Church-state into its Primitive Constitution that they may be cautioned against that great Evil which this Church in the exercise of their supposed liberty fâ—ll into I cannot but transcribe a few of those excellent words which are used plentifully with cogent Reasons in this Epistle against it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is shameful beloved exceeding shameful which is reported of you that the most firm and antient Church of the Corinthians should for the sake of one or two persons seditiously tumultuate against their Elders And herein he proceeds to declare the dreadful scandal that ensued thereon both among Believers and Infidels The Instruction also which he adds hereunto is worthy the remembrance of all Church Members 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is blessed Advice for all Church-Members that he gives Let a man be faithful let him be powerful in knowledge or the Declaration of it let him be wise to judge the Words or Doctrines let him be chast or pure in his works the greater he seems to be the more humble he ought to be that so the Church may have no trouble by him nor his Gifts But to return 5. Having occasion to mention the Officers of the Church he nameth only the two ranks of Bishops and Deacons as the Apostle also doth Phil. 1.1 speaking of the Apostles he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preaching the word through Regions and Cities they appointed the first fruits as the House of Stephan as was the first fruits of Achaia who therefore addicted themselves to the Ministry of the Saints 1 Cor. 16.15 or the first Converts to the Faith after a Spiritual Trial of them as unto their fitness for their work to be Bishops and Deacons of them that should afterwards believe Where there were as yet but a few converted the Apostle gathered them into Church-order and so soon as they found any fit among them appointed and ordained them to be Bishops and Deacons so that provision might be made for the guidance and conduct of them that should be converted and added unto them after they were left by the Apostles These Bishops he affirms to be and have been the Presbyters or Elders of the Church even the same with those deposed by the Corinthians in the same manner as the Apostle doth Act. 20.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It is no small sin in us to reject or cast off them who have offered the Gifts or discharged the Duties of Episcopacy holily and without blame Blessed are the Elders who went before namely as he expresseth it because they are freed from that amotion from their Office which those Elders now amongst them had undergone after they had
Orthodox themselves but only as they were carried on unto a total Renunciation of all Communion whatever but only that which was enclosed unto their own Party 2. To Evidence that we give the least countenance unto the antient Schismes or do contract the Guilt with the Authors of them the thing aimed at there are three things incumbent on him to prove 1. That our Parochial Churches from whom we do refrain actual presential Communion in all Ordinances where it is required by Law which cannot be many and but one at one time do succeed into the room of that Church in a Separation from which those Schismes did consist For we pass no Judgement on any other Church but what concerns our selves as unto present Duty though that in a Nation may be extended unto many or all of the same sort But these Schismes consisted in a professed Separation from the whole Catholick Church that is all Christians in the World who joyned not with them in their Opinions and Practises and from the whole Church state then passant and allowed But our Author knows full well that there are others who long before our Parochial Churches do lay claim unto the absolute enclosure of this Church state unto themselves and thereon condemn both him and us and all the Protestants in the World of the same Schisme that those of old were guilty of especially they make a continual Clamour about the Novatians and Donatists I know that he is able to dispossess the Church of Rome from that Usurpation of the State and Rights of the antient Catholick Church from whence those Separations were made and it hath been sufficiently done by others But so soon as we have cast that out of Possession to bring in our Parochial Assemblies into the room of it and to press the Guilt of Separation from them with the same Reasons and Arguments as we were all of us but newly pressed withal by the Romanists namely that hereby we give countenance unto them yea do the same things with them who made Schismes in Separating from the Catholick Church of old is somewhat severe and unequal Wherefore unless the Church from which they separated which was the whole Catholick Church in the World not agreeing and acting with them and those Parochial Assemblies from whose Communion we refrain are the same and of the same consideration nothing can be argued from those ancient Schismes against us nor is any countenance given by us unto them For if it be asked of us whether it be free or lawful for Believers to joyn in Society and full Communion with other Churches besides those that are of our way and especial Communion we freely answer that we no way doubt of it nor do judge them for their so doing 2. It must be proved unto the End proposed that the Occasions and Reasons of their Separation of old were the same or of the same nature only with those which we plead for our refraining Communion from Parochial Assemblies Now though the Dr. here makes a flourish with some Expressions about Zeal Discipline Purity of the Church Edification which he will not find in any of their Pretences yet in truth there is not one thing alledged wherein there is a Coincidence between the Occasions and Reasons pleaded by them and ours It is known that the principal thing in general which we insist upon is the unwarrantable Imposition of unscriptural Termes and Conditions of Communion upon us was there any such thing pleaded by them that made the Schismes of Old indeed they were all of them imposers and separated from the Church because they would not submit unto their Impositions Some Bishops or some that would have been Bishops but could not entertaining some new Conceit of their own which they would have imposed on all others being not submitted unto therein were the Causes of all those Schismes which were justly esteemed Criminal So was it with the Novatians and Donatists in an especial manner Even the great Tertullian though no Bishop left the Communion of the Church on this Ground For because they would not admit of the strict Observance of some Austere Severities in Fasting Abstinence from sundry Meates and Watching with the like which he esteemed necessary though no way warranted by Scripture Rule or Example he utterly renounced their Communion and countenanced himself by adhering unto the Dotages of Montanus It is true some of them contended for a Severity of Discipline in the Church but they did it not upon any pretence of the Neglect of it in them unto whom the Administration of it was committed but for the want of establishing a false Principle Rule or Erronious Doctrine which they advanced namely that the most sincere penitents were never more to be admitted into Ecclesiastical Communion whereby they did not establish but overthrow one of the Principal ends of Church Discipline They did not therefore press for the Power or the Vse of the Keys as is pretended but advanced a false Doctrine in prejudice both unto the Power and Use of them They pretended indeed unto the Purity of the Church not that there were none impure wicked and hypocritical among them but that none might be admitted who had once fallen though really made pure by sincere Repentance This was their Zeal for Purity If a Man were overtaken if they could catch him in such a fault as by the Rules of the passaint Discipline he was to be cast out of the Church there they had him safe for ever No Evidence of the most sincere Repentance could prevail for a Readmission into the Church And because other Churches would admit them they renounced all Communion with them as no Churches of Christ. Are these our Principles are these our Practices do we give any countenance unto them by any thing we say or do I somewhat wonder that the Dr. from some general Expressions and casting their Pretences under new Appearances should seem to think that there is the least Coincidence between what they insisted on and what we plead in our own Defence He may see now more fully what are the Reasons of our Practise and I hope thereon will be of another Mind not as unto our Cause in general which I am far enough from the expectation of but as unto this invidious Charge of giving Countenance unto the Schismes condemned of old in the Church And we shall see immediately what were the Occasions of those Schismes which we are as remote from giving countenance unto as unto the Principles and Reasons which they pleaded in their own Justification 3. It ought also to be proved that the Separation which is charged on us is of the same nature with that charged on them of old for otherwise we cannot be said to give any Countenance unto what they did For it is known they so separated from all other Churches in the World as to confine the Church of Christ unto their own Party to condemn all others and to
the Discharge of his Duty as it fell out also with Chrysostome Nevertheless he abode firmly and tenaciously in the Communion of the Church but was at length cast out as farre as it appears by him for the honest discharge of his Duty whereon he gathered a great Party unto himself But Theodoret and others affirm him to have been the Author of the impious heresie of the Anthropomorphitae his principal followers being those Monks of Egypt which afterwards made such Tumults in defence of that foolish Imagination and that this was the Cause why he was cast out of the Church and set up a Party of the same Opinion with him lib. 4. cap. 10. Yea he also ascribes unto him some foolish Opinions of the Manichees What is our concernment in these things I cannot imagine Eustathius the Bishop of Sebastia in Armenia and his Followers are also instanced in as Orthodox Schismaticks and as such were condemned in a Council at Gongrae in Paphlagonia But indeed before that Council Eustathius had been condemned by his own Father Eulanius and other Bishops at Caesarea in Cappadocia And he was so for sundry foolish Opinions and evil Practises whereby he deserved to be so dealt withal It doth not unto me appear certainly whether he fell into those Opinions before his Rejection at Caesarea where he was principally it not only charged with his undecent and fantastical habit and Garments Wherefore at the Council of Gangrae he was not admitted to make any Apology for himself nor could be heard because he had innovated many things after his Deposition at Caesarea such as forbidding of Marriage shaving of Women denying the lawfulness of Priests keeping their Wives who were married before their Ordination getting away Servants from their Masters and the like Socrat. Hist. lib. 2. chap. 3. These were his Pretences of Sanctity and Purity as the Dr. acknowledgeth and I appeal unto his Ingenuity and candour whether any Countenance be given unto such Opinions and Practises thereon by any thing we say or do This Instance and some others of an alike Nature the Doctor affirmes that he produced in his Sermon but that they were gently passed over by my self and Mr. B. I confess I took no notice of them because I was satisfied that the cause under Consideration was no way concerned in them And the Dr. might to as Good Purpose have instanced in forty other Schismes made for the most Part by the Ambition of Bishops in the Churches of Alexandria Antioch Constantinople Rome and sundry other places yea in that made by Epiphanius himself at Constantinople upon as weighty a Cause as that of those who contended about and strove for and against the driving of sheep over the Bridge where there were none present The story of the Luciferians is not worth repeating In short Lucifer the Bishop of Caralli in Sardinia being angry that Paulinus whom he had ordained Bishop at Antioch was not received fell into great dissention with Eusebius Bishop of Vercells in Italy who had been his Companion in Banishment because he approved not what he had done at Antioch And continuing to contend for his own Bishop it occasioned a great Division among the People whereon he went home to his own Place leaving behind him a few followers who wrangled for a time about the Ordination of Bishops by Arians by whose means Lucifer had been banished and so after a while disappeared I had almost missed the Instance of the Donatists But the story of them is so well known that it will not bear the Repetition For although there be no mention of them in Socrates or Zozoman nor the History of Theodoret yet all things that concerned them are so fully declared in the Writings of Austin and Optatus against them as there needs no other account of them And this Instance of an Heretical Schisme is that which the Papists vehemently urge against the Church of England itself and all other Protestants Here their Weapon is borrowed for a little while to give a wound unto our Cause but in vain Yet I know full well that it is easier for some men on their Principles to flourish with this Weapon against us than to defend themselves against it in the hands of the Papists In breif these Donatists were upon the matter of the same Opinion with the Novatians and as these grounded their dissension on the receiving those into the Church who had fallen and sacrificed under Decius so did these on a pretence of severity against those who had been Traditors under Maximinus Upon this Pretence improved by many false Allegations Donatus and those that followed him rejected Cecilianus who was lawfully chosen and ordained Bishop of Carthage setting up one Majorinus in opposition unto him Not succeeding herein on this foolish unproved Pretence that Cecilianus had been ordained by Traditor they rejected the Communion of all the Churches in the World confined the whole Church of Christ unto their own Party denied Salvation unto any other rebaptized all that came unto them from other Churches and together with a great number of Bishops that joyned with them fell into most extravagant Exorbitances Upon the Consideration of these Schismes the Dr. concludes that on these Grounds there hath scarce been any considerable Schisme in the Christian Church but may be justified upon Dr. O' s Reasons for Seperation from our Church Concerning which I must take the Liberty to say that I do not remember that ever I read in any Learned Author an Inference made or Conclusion asserted that had so little countenance given unto it by the Premises whence it is inferred as there is into this by the Instances before insisted on whence it is pretended to be educed All that is of Argument in this story is this that there were of old some Bishops with one or two who would have been Bishops and could not who to exalt and countenance themselves against those who were preferred to Bishopricks before them and above them invented and maintained false doctrinal Principles the confession whereof they would have imposed on other Churches and because they were not admitted they separated at once from all other Churches in the World but their own condemning them as no Churches as not having the Sacraments or means of Salvation for which they were condemned as Schismaticks therefore those who own not Subjection to Diocesan Bishops by vertue of any Institution or Command of Christ who refrain Communion from Parochial Assemblies because they cannot without Sin to themselves comply with all things imposed on them in the Worship of God and Ecclesiastical Rule without judging their state or the Salvation of their Members are in like manner as they guilty of Schisme But we have fixed grounds whereon to Try Examine Judge and Condemne all Schismes that are justly so called all such as those before mentioned If Separations arise and proceed from Principles of false Doctrine and Errors like those of the Novatians and Donatists if
they are occasioned by Ambition and desire of Preheminence like those that fell out among the Bishops of those days when their Parishes and claimes were not regulated by the Civil Power as now they are If they do so from a Desire to impose Principles and Practises not warranted in the Scripture on others as it was with Tertullian If for slight Reasons they rend and destroy that Church state and order which themselves approve of as it was with all the antient Schismaticks who were Bishops or would feign to have been if those that make them or follow in them deny Salvation unto all that joyn not with them and condemn all other Churches as being without Gods Covenant and the Sacraments as did the Donatists and those do who deny these things unto all Churches who have not Diocesan Bishops if there be not a sufficient justifiable Cause pleaded for it that those who make such a separation cannot abide in the Communion which they forsake without wounding their own Consciences and do give Evidences of their abiding in the Exercise of Love towards all the true Disciples of Christ we are satisfied that we have a Rule infallibly directing us to make a Judgment concerning it Our Author adds Sect. 26. p. 197. Another Argument against this course of separation is that these Grounds will make separation endless which is to suppose all the Exhortations of the Scripture to Peace and Vnity among Christians useless But why so Is there nothing in the Authority of Christ and the sence of the Account which is to be given unto him nothing in the Rule of the Word nothing in the works of the Ministry and exercise of Gospel Discipline to keep professed Disciples of Christ unto their Duty and within the bounds of order Divinely prescribed unto them unless they are fettered and staked down with humane Laws and Constitutions Herein I confess I differ and shall do so whilst I am in this World from our Reverend Author and others To say as he doth upon a supposition of the taking away of humane Impositions Laws and Canons that there are no bounds set unto separation but what the fancies of men will dictate unto them is dishonourable unto the Gospel and somewhat more To suppose that the Authority of Christ the Rule of the Word and the Work of the Ministry are not sufficient to prescribe bounds unto separation efficaciously affecting the Consciences of Beleivers or that any other bounds can be assigned as obligatory unto their Consciences is what cannot be admitted The Lord Christ hath commanded Love and Vnion among his Disciples he hath ordained order and Communion in his Churches he hath given unto them and limited their Power he hath prescribed Rules whereby they and all their Members ought to walk he hath forbidden all Schismes and Divisions he hath appointed and limited all necessary separations and hath truly given all the bounds unto it that the Consciences of men are or can be affected withal But then it is said if this be all separation will be endless if such a separation be intended as is an unlawful Schisme I say it may be it will even as Persecution and other evils sins and wickednesses will be notwithstanding his severe Prohibition of them What he hath done is the only means to preserve his own Disciples from all sinful separation and is sufficient thereunto Herein lyeth the Original mistake in this matter we have lost the Apprehension that the Authority of Christ in the Rule of his Word and Works of his Spirit is every way sufficient for the Guiding Governing and Preserving of his Disciples in the Church Order by him prescribed and the observance of the Duties by him commanded It hath been greatly lost in the World for many Ages and therefore instead of Faithful Ministerial Endeavours to enforce a sence of it on the Consciences of all Christians they have been let loose from it through a confidence in other devises to keep them unto their Duty and Order And if these devises be they Ecclesiastical Canons or Civil Penalties be not enforced on them all the World is made to beleive that they are left unto the dictates of their own fancies and Imaginations as if they had no concern in Christ or his Authority in this matter But for my part I shall never desire nor endeavour to keep any from Schisme or separation but by the ways and means of Christs appointment and by a sense of his Authority on their own Consciences The remainder of his Discourse on this Head consists in a lepid Dramâ—tical Oration framed and feigned for one of his Opposers wherein he makes him undertake the patronage of Schism before Cyprian and Austiâ— The Learned Person intended is very well able to defend and vindicate himself which I suppose also he will do In the mean time I cannot but say two things 1. That the Imposition on him of extenuating the Guilt of any real Schism is that which none of his Words do give the least countenance unto 2. That the Doctors attempt in his feigned Oration to accommodate his Principles or Ours unto the case of the Donatists for their Justification the weakness whereof is evident to every one who knows any thing of the case of the Donatists is such an instance of the Power of Interest a design to maintain a Cause causelessly undertaken by all manner of Artifices and Pretences prevailing in the minds of men otherwise Wise and Sober as is to be lamented We come at length in the 5th place Sect 28. p. 209. unto that which is indeed of more importance duly to be considered then all that went before For as our Author observes it is that wherein the Consciences of men are concerned This Argument therefore he takes from the Obligation which lyes upon all Christians to preserve the Peace and Vnity of the Church For the confirmation of this Argument and the Application of it unto the case of them who refrain from total Communion with our Parocâ—ial Assemblies which alone is the case in hand he lays down sundry suppositions which I shall consider in their Order although they may be all granted without any disadvantage unto our Cause But they will be so the better when they are rightly stated 1. His first supposition is that Christians are under the strictest Obligations to preserve the Peace and Vnity of the Church This being the foundation of all that follows it must be rightly stated And to that end three things may be enquired into 1. What is that Church whose Peace and Unity we are obliged to preserve For there are those who lay the firmest claim unto the Name Power and Priviledges of the Church with whom we are obliged to have neither Peace nor Vnity in the Worship of God 2. What is that Peace and Vnity which we are so obliged to preserve 3. By what means they are to be preserved 1. We are obliged to follow Peace with all men to seek Peace
is the matter of Fact that the Apostles appointed onely particular Congregations and that therefore they did not oblige the Christians about in a Province or Diocess to be of that Church which was first erected in any Town or City but they founded new Churches with new Officers of their own in all places where there were a sufficient number of Believers to make up such a Church And this I prove from the instance of the Church of Hierusalem which was first planted but quickly after there were Churches gathered and settled in Judea Gallilee and Samaria They planted Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Cities and Villages as Clemens speaks But what saith he is this to the proof of the Congregational way this it is namely That the Churches instituted by the Apostles were all of them Congregational not Diocesan Provincial or National but saith he the thing I desired was that when the Christians in one City multiplyed into more Congregations they would prove that they did make new and distinct Churches He may desire it of them who grant that the Christians did multiply in one City into more Congregations then one which I deny untill the end of the second Century although they might and did occasionally meet especially in times of Persecution in distinct Assemblies Neither will their multiplication into more Congregations without distinct Officers at all help the cause he pleadeth for for his Diocesan Church consisteth of many distinct Churches with their distinct Officers Order and Power as he afterwards describes our Parishes to do under one Bishop Yet such is his apprehension of the Justice of his cause that what hath been pleaded twenty times against it namely That speaking of one City the Scripture still calls it the Church of that place but speaking of a Province as Judea Galilee Samaria Galatia Macedonia it speaks of the Churches of them which evidently proves that it knows nothing of a Diocesan Provincial or National Church he produceth in the justification of it because he saith that it is evident theâ—ne that there was but one Church in one City which was never denyed There were indeed then many Bishops in one Church Phil. 1.1 Acts 20.28 And afterwards when one Church had one Bishop only yet there were two Bishops in one City which requires two Churches as Epiphanus affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haeres 68. S. 6. For Alexandria never had two Bishops as other Cities had Whether he intend two Bishops in one Church or two Churches in one City all is one to our purpose But the Dr. I presume makes this observation rather artificially to prevent an Objection against his main Hypothesis then with any design to strengthen it thereby For he cannot but know how frequently it is pleaded in opposition unto any National Church State as unto its mention in the Scripture For he that shall speak of the Churches in Essex Suffolk Hartfordshire and so of other Counties without the least intimation of any general Church unto which they should belong would be judged to speak rather the Independent then the Episcopal Dialect But saith he p. 236. I cannot but wonder what Dr. O. means when after he hath produced the Evidence of distinct Churches in the same Province he calls this plain Scripture Evidence and practise for the erecting particular distinct Congregations who denies that I say then it is incumbent on him to prove if he do any thing in this cause that they erected Churches of another sort kind and order also But saith he I see nothing like a proof of distinct Churches in the same City which was the thing to be proved but because it could not be proved was prudently let alone But this was not the thing to be proved nor did I propose it to confirmation nor assert it but have proved the contrary unto the end of the second Century This only I assert that every Church in one City was only one Church and nothing is offered by the Doctor to the contrary yea he affirms the same But saith he sect 6. p. 237. Dr. O. saith That the Christians of one City might not exceed the bounds of a particular Church or Congregation no although they had a multiplication of Bishops or Elders in them and occasional distinct Assemblies for some Acts of Divine Worship But then saith he The notion of a Church is not limited in the Scripture to a single Congregation Why so for saith he if occasional Assemblies be allowed for some Acts of Worship why not for others I say because they belong unto the whole Church or are Acts of Communion in the whole Church Assembled and so cannot be observed in occasional meetings do this saith the Apostle when you come together in one place And if saith he the number of Elders be unlimited then every of those may attend the occasional distinct Assemblies for Worship and yet altogether make up the Body of one Church and so say I they may and yet be one Church still joyning together in all Acts of Communion that are proper and peculiar unto the Church For as the meetings intended were occasional so also was the attendance of the Elders unto them as they found occasion for the Edification of the whole Church It may be the Dr. is not so well acquainted with the Principles and Practise of the Congregational way and therefore thinks that these things are contrary unto them But those of that way do maintain that there ought to be in every particular Congregation unto the compleatness of it many Elders or Overseers that the number of them ought to be encreased as the encrease of the Church makes it necessary for their Edification that the members of such a Church may and ought to meet occasionally in distinct Assemblies especially in the time of Persecution for Prayer Preaching of the Word and mutual Exhortation so when Peter was in Prison after the Death of James many met together in the House of Mary to Pray Acts 12.12 Which was not a meeting of the whole Church And that there were such private meetings of the Members of the same Church in times of Persecution among the Primitive Churches may be proved by a Multiplication of instances but still they continued one Church and joyned together in all Acts of Church Communion properly so called especially if it were possible every Lords-day as Justin Martyr declares that the Church did in his time For all the Christians saith he then in the City and Villages about gathered together in one place for the Ends mentioned But still these distinct occasional Assemblies did not constitute any distinct Societies or Corporations as the distinct Companies do in a City But saith he grant one single Bishop over all these Elders and they make up that representation of a Church which we have from the best and purest Antiquity I say we would quickly grant it could we see any warrant for it or if he could prove that so it was
from the beginning However this is no part of our present contest namely whether some while after the days of the Apostles in Churches that were greatly encreased and many Elders in them there was not one chosen as at Alexandria by those Elders themselves to preside among them who in a peculiar manner was called a Bishop But if I mistake not that alone which would advantage his cause is to prove that there were in one City or any where else many not occasional Assemblies of Christians or Church Members but many stated fixed Churches with Officers of their own peculiarly related unto them entrusted with Church Power and Priviledges at least as much as he afterwards pleads to be in our Parochial Churches all under the Government of one single Bishop making up a new Church state beyond that of particular Congregations by their Relation unto him as their common Pastor This I take it is that which should have been prov'd All the difficulty wherewith our assertion is accompanyed ariseth from the multiplication of Believers and the encrease of Churches in the Apostles time or presently after For this seems to be so great as that those in one City could not continue in one Church notwithstanding the advantages of occasional Assemblies The Church of Jerusalem had 5000 in it at the same time the word grew and prevailed at Ephesus and other places whereto I shall briefly answer as hastning unto a close of this unpleasing labour I say therefore 1. Whatever difficulty may seem to be in this matter yet in point of Fact so it was there was no Church before the end of the second Century of any other species nature or kind but a particular Congregational Church only as hath been proved before let any one instance be produced of a Church of one denomination National Provincial or Diocesan or of any other kind then that which is Congregational and I will give over this contest But when a matter of Fact is certain it is too late to enquire how it might be And on this occasion I shall add that if in that space of time namely before the end of the second Century any proof or undoubted Testimony can be produced of the Imposition of the necessary use of Liturgies or of stated Ceremonies of the practise of Church discipline consistent with that now in use in the Church of England it will go a great way in the determination of the whole Controversie between us 2. The admirable prevalency of the Gospel in those days consisted principally in its spreading it self all the World over and planting seminaries for farther conversions in all Nations It did indeed prevail more in some Cities and Towns then in others in some places many were converted in others the tender of it was utterly rejected how be it it prevailed not unto the gathering of such great numbers into any Church solely as might destroy or be inconsistent with its Congregational Institution For not all not it may be half not sometimes a third Part of them who made some Profession of the Truth and attended unto the Preaching of the Word and many of whom underwent Martyrdom were admitted as compleat Members of the Church unto all the parts of its Communion Hence there were many who upon a general account were esteemed Christians and that justly where the Churches were but small 3. It doth not appear that in the next Age after the Apostles the Churches were any where so increased in number as to bear the least Proportion with the Inhaâ—itants of the Cities and Towns wherein they were The Church of Smyrna in the dayes of Polyicarpus may justly be esteemed one of the greatest in those dayes both from the Eminency of the Place and Person who was justly accounted the great Instructer of all Asia as they called him when he was carried unto the Stake But this Church giveth such an Account of it self in its Epistle unto the Churches of Pontus about the Martyrdom of Polycarpus as manifest the Church there to have been a very small number in Comparison of the multitude of the other Inhabitants so as that it was scarcely known who or what they were Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 15. So in the Excellent Epistle of the Churches of Vienna and Lyons unto the Churches of Asia and Phrygia concerning the Persecutions that befell them as they declare themselves to have been particular Churches onely so they make it evident that they bore in number no proportion unto the Inhabitants of the places where they were who could scarce discover them by the most diligent search Euseb. lib. 5. cap 1. 4. As for the Church of Hierusalem in particular notwithstanding the great number of its original Converts who probably were many of them strangers occasionally present at the Feast of Pentecost and there instructed in the knowledge of the Truth that they might in the several Countries whither they immediately returned be instruments of the propagation of the Gospel it is Certain that many years after it consisted of no greater Multitude then could come together in one place to the Mannagement of Church Affairs Acts 15.20 21. Nor is it likely that Pella an obscure place whose name probably had never been known but on this occasion was like to receive any great Multitudes nor doth Epiphanius say as our Authour pretends that they spread themselves from thence to Coelosyria and Decapolis and Basanitis For he affirmes expresly that all the Disciples which went from Hierusalem dwelt at Pella Only he says that from thence the Sect of the Nazarenes took its original which spread it self afterwards in Coelosyria Decapolis and Basanitis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking of that Sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They dwelled all at Pella Sect. 7. p. 239. He quotes another saying of mine namely that I cannot discern the least necessity of any positive Rule or Direction in this Matter seeing the Nature of the thing and the duty of Man doth indispensibly require it And hereon he Attempts to make advantage in opposition unto another saying as he supposeth of mine Namely that the Institution of Churches and the Rules for their disposal and Government throughout the World are the same stated and unalterable from whence he makes many inferences to countenance him in his Charge of Schisme But why should we contend fruitlesly about these things had he been pleased to read a little farther on the same page he would have seen that I affirm the Institution itself to be a plain Command which considering the Nature of the duties required of men in Church Relation is sufficient to oblige them thereunto without any new Revelation unto that purpose which renders all his Queries Exceptions and Inferences of no use For I do not speak in that place of the Original Institution of Churches whose Laws and Rules are Universal and Vnalterable but our actual gathering into particular Churches for which I say the necessity of Duty is our Warrant and the
second Century of any one Person who had the care of more Churches than one committed unto him or did take the charge of them on himself But whereas this change did fall out and appears evidently so to have done in the fourth Century we may briefly enquire into the Causes and Occasions of it Churches were originally planted in Cities and Townes for the most part not absolutely for the Word was preached and Churches gathered by the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Clemens testifieth In such Cities there was but one Church whereunto all Beleivers did belong I mention this the rather because our present Author who is pleased frequently to mistake my Words and Principles affirms that the thing which I should have proved is that there were more Churches at first planted in one City than one I know not why I should be obliged to do so because I never said so I do believe indeed that there may be more particular Churches than one in one City and that sometimes it is better that it should be so then that all Beleivers in the same City should be kept up unto one Congregation to the Obstruction of their Edification But that there were originally or in the days of the Apostles more Churches than one in any one City or Town I do wholly deny though I grant at the same time there were Churches in Villages also as will appear afterwards But though there was one Church only in one Town or City yet all the Believers that belonged unto that Church did not live in that City but sundry of them in the Fields and Villages about So Justin Martyr tells us that on the first day of the week when the Church had its solemn Assemblies all the Members of it in the City and out of the Country the Fields and Villages about met together in the same place In process of time these Believers in the Country did greatly encrease by the means of the Ministry of the City-Church which diligently attended unto the Conversion of all sorts of men with some extraordinary helps besides But hereon the Example of the Apostles was overseen For on this account of the Conversion of many unto the Faith in the Towns and Villages of any Province they erected and planted new Churches among them not obliging them all unto that first Church from whence the Word went forth for their Conversion But those who succeeded them being hindred by many Reasons which may be easily recounted from Thoughts of the Multiplication of Churches chose rather to give the Beleivers scattered up and down in the Countrey occasional Assistance by Presbyters of their own than to dispose them into a Chrch State and Order But after a while their Number greatly encreasing they were necessitated to supply them with a constant Ministâ—y in several Parcels or Divisions The Ministers or Elders thus disposed amongst them for their Edification in the Administration of the Ordinances of the Gospel did still relate unto and depend upon that City first Church from whence they came But the Numbers of Beleivers dayly encreasing and a Succession of Presbyters in their distinct Assemblies being found necessary they came to be called Churches though continuing in dependance both for a supply of Officers and for Rule on the first or City Church whereunto they esteemed themselves to belong This was the way and manner of the Multiplication of Christian Assemblies throughout the Roman Empire And hereby all the Bishops of the first Churches became by common consent to have a distinction from and Preheminence above the Presbyters that were fixed in the Country and a Rule over those Assemblies or Churches themselves And therefore when they met together in the Council of Nice among the first things they decreed one was to confirm unto the Bishops of the great Cities that Power over the Neighbouring Churches which they had enjoyned from this occasional Rise and Constitution of them Hereby was a Difference and Distinction between Bishops and Presbiters between Mother and Dependant Churches introduced equally almost in all places without taking any notice of the departure which was therein from the Primitive Pattern and Institution But these things fell out long after the Days of the Apostles namely in the third and fourth Centuries there being no mention of them before But Secondly There was another Occasion of this Alteration which took place before that insisted on For in many of those City Churches especially when the number of Beleivers much encreased there were many Bishops or Elders who had the Rule of them in common This is plain in the Scripture and in the ensuing Records of Church Affairs And they had all the same Office the same Power and were of the same Order But after a while to preserve Order and Decency among themselves and in all their proceedings they chose one from among them who should preside in all Church Affairs for Orders sake unto whom after a season the name of Bishop began to be appropriated Whether the Rule they proceeded by herein was to choose them unto this Dignity who had been first converted unto the Faith or first called and ordained to be Presbyters or had respect unto the Gifts and Graces of those whom they chose is not certain But this way began in those Churches wherein some extraordinary Officer Apostle or Evangelist had long resided It cannot therefore be doubted but they had some Design to represent hereby somewhat of the Dignity of such an Officer and a Resemblance of the continuance of his Presence among them And this I suppose fell out early in the Churches though without Ground or Warrant And the Principal Pastors of other Churches which had not any great Number of Elders in them yet quickly assumed unto themselves the Dignity which the others had attained Justin Martyr in the Account he gives of the Church its Order Rule Worship and Discipline in his Days mentions one singular Person in one Church whom he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who presided in all the Affairs of the Church and himself administred all the sacred Ordinances every Lords Day unto the whole Body of the Church gathered and met out of the City and the Villages about This was the Bishop and if any one desired this Office he desired a good work as the Apostle speaks Whatever Accessions were made unto the Church these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were either the first converted to the Faith or the first ordained Presbyters or obtained their Preheminence non pretio sed Testimonio as Tertullian speaks upon the account of their Eminency in Gifts and Holiness were yet quickly sensible of their own Dignity and Praelation and by all means sought the enlargement of it supposing that it belonged unto the Honour and Order of the Church it self Under this State of things the Churches encreasing every day in Number and Wealth growing insensibly more and more indies magis magisque decrescente disciplina into a form and
was that the Scripture the Word of God is a perfect Rule of Faith and Religious Worship so as that nothing ought to be admitted which is repugnant unto it in its general Rule or especial Prohibitions nothing imposed that is not prescribed therein but that every one is at liberty to refuse and reject any thing of that kind This they all contended for and confirmed their Assertion by the express Testimonies of the Writers of the Primitive Churches To prove this to have been their Principle in their Separation from the Church of Rome were to light as they say a Candle in the Sun It were easie to fill up a Volume with Testimonies of it After a while this Principle began to be weakned when the Interest of men made them except from this Rule things of outward Order with some Rites and Ceremonies the ordaining whereof they pleaded to be left unto Churches as they saw Good Hereby this Principle I say was greatly weakened For no certain bounds could ever be assigned unto those things that are exempted from the Regulation of the Scripture And the same Plea might be mannaged for many of the Popish Orders and Ceremonies that were rejected as forcibly as for them that were retained And whereas all the Reformed Churches agreed to abide by this Principle in Matters of Faith there fell out an admirable Harmony in their confessions thereof But leaving the Necessity of attending unto this Rule in the Matter of Order Ceremonies Rites and Modes of Worship with the state of Churches in their Rule and Polity those Differences and Divisions ensued amongst them which continue unto this day But this Perswasion in some places made a farther Progress namely that it was lawful to impose on the Consciences and Practises of men such things in Religious Worship provided that they concerned outward Order Rites Rule and Ceremonies as are no where prescribed in the Scripture and that on severe Penalties Ecclesiastical and Civil This almost utterly destroyed the great fundamental Principle of the Reformation whereon the first Reformers justified their Separation from the Church of Rome For whereas it is supposed the Right of them who are to be the imposers to determine what doth belong unto the Heads mentioned they might under that pretence impose what they pleased and refuse those whom they imposed them on the Protection of the aforesaid Principle namely that nothing ought to be so imposed that is not prescribed in the Scripture This hath proved the Rise of all endless Differences and Schismes amongst us nor will they be healed until all Christians are restored unto their Liberty of being obliged in the things of God only unto the Authority of the Scripture The Words of Mr. Chillingsworth unto this purpose are Emphatical which I shall therefore transcribe though that be a thing which I am very averse from Require saith he of Christians only to believe Christ and to call no man Master but him only let those leave claiming of Infallibity who have no Right unto it and let them that in their Words disclaim it disclaim it likewise in their Actions In a word take away Tyranny which is the Devils Instrument to support Errors and Superstitions and Impieties in the several Parts of the World which could not otherwise long withstand the Power of Truth I say take away Tyranny and restore Christians to their just and full Liberty of captivating their understandings to the Scripture only that universal Liberty thus moderated may quickly reduce Christendom to Truth and Vnity Part 1. chap. 4. Sect. 16. This fundamental Principle of the first Reformation we do not only firmly adhere unto rejecting all those Opinions and Practises whereby its force is weakened and impaired but also do willingly suffer the things that do befal us in giving our Testimony thereunto Neither will there ever be Peace among the Churches of Christ in this World until it be admitted in its whole Latitude especially in that Part thereof wherein it excludes all Impositions of things not prescribed in the Scripture For there are but few Persons who are capable of the subtilty of those Reasonings which are applied to weaken this Principle in its whole extent All men can easily see this that the sufficiency of the Scripture in general as unto all the ends of Religion is the only Foundation they have to rest and build upon They do see actually that where Men go about to prescribe things to be observed in Divine Worship not appointed in the Scripture that no two Churches have agreed therein but endless contentions have ensued that No man can give an Instance in particular of any thing that is necessary unto the Rule of the Church or the Observance of the commands of Christ in the Worship of God that is not contained in the Scripture and hereon are ready to resolve to call no man Master but Christ and to admit of nothing in Religion but what is warranted by his Word Secondly The second Principle of the Reformation whereon the Reformers justified their Separation from the Church of Rome was this That Christian People were not tyed up unto blind Obedience unto Church Guides but were not only at Liberty but also obliged to judge for themselves as unto all things that they were to believe and practise in Religion and the Worship of God They knew that the whole Fabrick of the Papacy did stand on this Basis or Dunghil that the Mistery of Iniquity was cemented by this Device namely that the People were ignorant and to be kept in Ignorance being obliged in all things unto an implicite Obedience unto their pretended Guides And that they might not be capable of nor fit for any other condition they took from them the only means of their Instruction unto their Duty and the Knowledge of it that is the Use of the Holy Scripture But the first Reformers did not only vindicate their Right unto the Use of the Scripture itself but insisted on it as a Principle of the Reformation and without which they could never have carried on their Work that they were in all concernments of Religion to judge for themselves And Multitudes of them quickly manifested how meet and worthy they were to have this Right restored unto them in laying down their Lives for the Truth suffering as Martyrs under the Power of their Bishops This Principle of the Reformation in like manner is in no small degree weakened by many and so the Cause of it Dr. Still himself pag. 127 128. denies unto the People all Liberty or Ability to choose their own Pastors to judge what is meet for their own Edification what is Heresie or a pernitioâ—â— Error and what is not or any thing of the like nature This is almost the same with that of the Pharisees concerning them who admired and followed the Doctrine of our Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joh. 7.49 This Rabble which knows not the Law Yet was it this People whom the Apostles directed
distributed the Faithful at Rome into distinct Titles or Parishes with distinct Presbyters of their own For it is apparent that in those days wherein Persecution was at its height the Meetings of Believers were occasional with respect unto their Security oft-times by Night sometimes in Caves under the Earth or in deserted Burial places at best in private Houses And they had for what they did the Example of the Apostolical Churches Acts 1.13 14. Acts 2.46 chap. 4.24 31. chap. 12.12 chap. 18.7 chap. 20.8 chap. 21.18 Instances of such Meetings may be multiplyed especially in the Church of Rome And to manifest that they took this course upon Necessity when Peace begun to be restored at any time unto them they designed Temples that might receive the whole Multitude of the Church together The Distribution mentioned into Titles and Parishes began a long time after and in very few places within 300 years In this State it is easie to conceive what Alterations might fall out in some Churches from their Primitive Order especially how the People might desert their Diligence and Duty in attending unto all the concerns of the Church And if those things which the Apostles wrote unto them in their Epistles the Instructions Directions and Commands how in all things they should act and deport themselves in the Church be esteemed to be Obligatory in all Ages I cannot see how after the second Century they were much complyed withal unless it were in the single Instance of choosing their own Officers or Rulers But Secondly After these there ensued greater Occasions of greater Variations from the Primitive Institution and Order of the Churches on the Part of the People For 1. Such Numbers of them were received into a Relation unto particular Churches as was inconsistent with the Ends of their Institution and the Observance of the Communion required in them as will afterwards appear And the Reliefes that were invented for this Inconveniency in distinct Conventions supplyed with the Administration of the Word and Sacrament from the first Church or by stated Titles did alter the State of the Church Among those Multitudes which were added unto the Churches especially in the fourth Century many if not the most did come short inexpressibly in Knowledge Gifts Grace Holiness and uprightness of Conversation of the Primitive Christians as the Writers of that Age complain And being hereby uncapable of walking according unto the Order Rule and Discipline of the Apostolical Churches there seemed to be a Necessity of another Rule of other ways and means for their Government without their own concurrence or consent then what was at first appointed which were gradually introduced Whence the original of a Multitude of those Canons which were arbitrarily invented afterwards for their Rule and Government is to be derived And it may be made to appear that the Accommodation of the Rule yea and of the Worship of the Church in the several Ages of it unto the Ignorance Manners and Inclinations of the People who were then easily won unto the outward Profession of Christian Religion was one means of the Ruine of them both until they issued in downright Tyranny and Idolatry But much more of the cause of the Deviation of the Churches from their Primitive Rule and Order is to be ascribed unto the Ambition and Love of Preheminence in many of the Clergy or Rulers of the Churches But this is no Place nor Season to manifest this by Instances besides it hath been done by others I shall therefore enquire only into one or two things in particular which are of principal consideration in the Declension of the Churches from their Primitive Institution Order and Rule And 1. It is evident that there was an Alteration made in the state of the Church as to its Officers For it issued at last in Popes Patriarchs Cardinals Metropolitan and Diocesan Bishops who were utterly forreign unto the State and Order of the Primitive Churches and that for some Ages Nor were these Officers introduced into the Church at one or in one Age nor with the Powers which they afterwards claimed and assumed unto themselves It was done gradually in many succeeding Ages working by a Design to accommodate the State of the Church unto the Political State of the Empire in the distribution of its Government 2. The Beginnings of this great Alteration were small nor at all perceived in the days wherein they were first acted Nor is it agreed nor as far as I see will it ever be agreed among Learned Men when first a Disparity among the ordinary Officers of the Church in Order Degree or Power did first begin nor by what means it was brought about The Apostles were all equal among themselves no one had either Office or Office-Power above others So were all the ordinary Bishops and Presbyters mentioned in the Scripture as shall be proved afterwards No intimation is given of any Preheminence or Superiority amongst them of one over others Yet afterwards in the third and fourth Centuries much of that nature appears It begins to be granted that the Bishops and Elders mentioned in the Scripture were the same and that there was no difference in Name Office or Power during the Apostles times which was the Judgment of Hierome and our Author seems to me to be of the same Mind p. 267. But they say that after the Decease of the Apostles there were some appointed to succeed them in that part of their Office which concerned the Rule of many Churches And this they say was done for the prevention of Schisme but with ill success For as Clemens affirms that the Apostles foresaw that there would be Strife and Contention about Episcopacy even when it was confined unto its Original Order because of the Ambition of Diotrephes and others like him so it became much more the cause of all sorts of Disorders in Schismes and Heresies when it began to exalt it self in Dignity and Reputation The first express Attempt to corrupt and divide a Church made from within itself was that in the Church of Hierusalem made by Thebulis because Simon Cleopas was chosen Bishop and he was refused Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 21. The same Rise had the Schismes of the Novatians and Donatists the Heresies of Arius and others Neither is there any thing certain in this pretended Succession of some Persons unto the Apostles in that part of their Office which concerns the Rule of many Churches by one Overseer No Intimation of any such Appointment by the Apostles or any of them no record of the concurrence of the Churches themselves in and unto this Alteration can be produced Nor is there any Analogy between the extraordinary Power of every Apostle over all Churches and care for them and the ordinary Power of a Bishop over a small Number which Lot or Accident disposeth unto him Besides it cannot be proved no Instance can be given or hath been for the space of 200 years or until the end of the