sinnes before Christs Resurrection Ioh 2. so the Cardinall Tolet and Maldonat Cajetanus but the Truth is what is given here Mat. 16. Is but repeated and enlarged Joh 20. And they are now sent to the whole World whereas before they were to preach to Iudea only but this Ioh 20. sayth Rollocus is but a reiterated power it was given before his Resurrection and Beza sayth the same and Bullinger sayth the promise is made here and fulfilled Ioh. 2 c. and Pareus expoundeth what thou shalt loose here by these words Ioh. 20. So Calvin VVhittaker Zwinglius Musculus Now this same Author acknowledgeth that Ioh. 20. Christ gave pastorall power to all the Apostles to forgive sins 2. To bind and to loose are act s of officiall power and of Princes Rulers and Feeders Ergo they are not given to the Church destitute of Feeders and Governors I prove the antecedent 1. To bind and loose by all Interpreters Augustine Cyrill Chrysost. Câ—prian Euthymius Hyeromi Basilus Ambrose Sedulius Primasius and by our owne Calvin Musculus Gualther Pareus Beza Zwinglius Rolloc VVhittaker and the evidence of Scripture iâ— by publick and pastorall preaching to reâ—nit and retaine sins to believers or unbelievers and Bullinger saith it is taken from the Scripture Isa. 52. 49 v. 9. where Christ is said to loose the prisoners and so Musculus Beza and Calvin will have them to be words signifying the â—fficiall authority of Princes Ambassadours to set at liberty prisoners or to cast malefactors in bands and prison as Magistrates and Rulers doe so binding in Scripture is an authoritative act of Princes Superiors Governors and Rulers And so is loâ—sing a judiciall and authoritative act of Rulers and Overseers as Scripture teacheth us But the Church of believers wanting their Officers watchmen and Overseers though combined in a Church Covenant is not a company of Overseers and Rulers or judiciall and authoritative binders and loosers exercising power over themselves 4. Arg. If Christ doe not say in this place nor in Mat. 18. that the keys and the actes of the keys to wit binding and loosing are given to the Church of believers without their Officers then neither places prove that the keyes are given to such a Church But Christ doth not say it Ergo the Text cannot beare it the assumption I prove Christ Mat. 16. 18. speaking of the Church builded on a Rock sayth not I will give to the Church so builded the keys but he turneth the speech to Peter when he promiseth the keys V. 19. And I will give to thee Peter not to the Church the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven surely none needeth to teach our Lord to speak This change of the persons to whom the keys are promised wanteth not a reason Our brethren say the promise is made to Peter because he gave a confession of Christ in the name of all believers and because the keys are given to believers as the Spouse of Christ and as his body united to him but this author granteth every company of believers because they are believers are not an instituted visible Church but they must be a company of believers professing Covenant-wayes Faith in Christ and Church-communion But 1. then the keys are not given to believers because they are believers and the Spouse of Christ but because they are such professors so and so combined in a Church-covenant But yet I aske whether true or false profession be the neerest intervening cause of these to whom the keyes are given If a true profession then 1. Unbelieving Pastors are not Pastors for their profession is not true And children baptized by them are as not-baptized or as baptized by Women 2. If one shall be excommunicated by seven for such a number this Author requireth to make a visible Church even clave non errante and most deservedly he is not bound in Heaven and excommunicated in foro Dei before God for the profession of these seven may be false and so the Church actes performed by them are a non habentibus potestatem and null if they be no Church 3. We can prove by Scripture that Iudas though the child of perdition was a called Apostle But if a false profession be sufficient to make persons a true visible Church theâ— 1. The keys are not given to believers because they are believers and united to Christ as his body and Spouse but. 2. This Author sayth amisse That the Church instituted by Christ is a company of believers and faithfull and godly men whereof Peter was one for a company of hypocrites are not such 2. Our brethren prove the keys to be a part of the liberty of the redeemed ones but counterfeit professors are not redeemed ones nor have they that liberty purchased to them in Christ. 4 It shall follow that our brethren widely mistake a supposed difference which they devise betwixt the Iewish and Christian Church to wit that to make men members of the Iewish Church externall holinesse as to be borne Jewes was sufficient and to be circumcised and not a bastard not descended within three or foure Generations of a Moabite or Ammonite but that the visible Church of the Gentiles after Christ must be the bride of Christ and by true Faith united to him Whereas the members of a Christian visible Church are and may be hypocrites though not known to be such as were the members of the Iewish Church Also Mat. 18 18 19. Christ changeth the persons v. 17. after he hath spoken of the Church v. 17. he sheweth v. 18. of what Church he speaketh and directeth his speech to these to whom he spake v. 1. to the Disciples who were Pastors verily I say unto you What soever yee shall bind on Earth shall be hond in Heaven and therefore none can make an argument from Mat. 16. to wit thus to as many are the keys promised as are builded on the Rock but all the faithfull are builded on the Rock Ergo to all the faithfull are the keys promised 1. The proposition is not in the Text either expressely or by consequent 2. The proposition is false for the Catholick invisible Church is builded on the rock but by our Brethrens confession the keys are not given to the Catholick invisible Church but only to such a company of professing believers as make a Parishionall Congregation 4. That Christ speaketh to Peter as to one representing the Apostles and not as to one representing all believers is cleare 1. Because by the confession of our Brethren binding and loosing are denyed to many that make Peters confession thou art Jesus the Son of the living God as to believing Women and children and many out of Church state 2. If believers as giving Peters confession and as builded upon the rock Christ by this place made a ministeriall Church by Christ and gifted with the power of the keys then the Ministery
The state of the question to be explained 3. The truth to be confirmed In the answers to the questions sent to New England they require of all persons come to age before they be received members of the Church 1. A publiquâ— vocall declaration of the manner and soundnesse of their conversion and that either in continued speech saith the Apologie or in answer to questions propounded by the Elders 2. They require a publick profâ—ssion of their faith concerning the articles of their religion the foresaid way also 3. An expresse vocall covenanting by oath to walke in that faith and to submit saith the Authour themselves to God and one to another in his feare and to walke in a professed subjection to all his holy Ordinances cleaving one to another as fellow members of the same body in brotherly love and holy watchfulnesse unto mutuall edification in Christ Iesus 4. And a covenanting not to depart from the said Church without the consent thereof This Church-covenant saith the Apologie is the essentiall or formall cause of a visible Church as a flocke of Saints is the materiall cause and so necessarily of the being of a Church that without it none can claim Church-communion and therefore it is that whereby a Church is constituted in its integrity that whereby a fallen Church is againe restored and that which being taken away the Church is dissolved and ceaseth to be a Church and it is that whereby Ministers have power over the people and people interest in their Ministers and one member hath interest and powerover another fellow-member The manner of entring in Church-state is this 1. A number of Christians with a gifted or experienced Elder meet often together saith this Authour about the things of God and performe some duties of prayer and spirituall conference together till a sufficient company of them be well satisfied in the spirituall good estate one of another and so have approved themselves to one anothers consciences in the sight of God as living stones fit to be said on the Lords spirituall Temple 2. They having acquainted the Christian Magistrate and neerest adjoyning Churches of their purpose of entring into Church-fellowship convene in a day kept with fasting and praying and preaching one bâ—ing chosen with common consent of the whole in name of the rest standeth up and propoundeth the covenant in the foresaid four Articles above named 3. All the rest declare their joynt consent in this covenant either by silence or word of mouth or writing 4. The brethren of other Churches some specials in name of the rest reach out to them the right hand of fellowship exhorting them to stand stedfast in the Lord. Which done prayers made to God for pardon and acceptance of the people a Psalm is sung But when a Church is to be gathered together of Infidels they must be first converted believers and so fit materials for Church fellowship before any of those things can be done by them 5. Baptisme maketh none members of the visible Church 6. A Church fallen cannot be accepted of God to Church fellowship till they renew their Church covenant Thus shortly for their mind about the gathering of a visible Church Let these distinctions be considered for the right stating of the question 1. Distinct. There is a covenant of free grace betwixt God and sinners founded upon the surety Christ Iesus laid hold on by us when we believe in Christ but a Church Covenant differenced from this is in question sub judice lis est 2. Distinct. There is a covenant of baptisme made by all and a covenant vertuall and implicite renewed when we are to receive the Lords Supper but an explicite positive professed Church covenant by oaâ—h in-churching a person or a society to a State-church is now questioned 3. Distinct. An explicite vocall Covenant whereby we bind our selves to the first three Articles in a tacite way by entring in a new relation to such a Pastor and to such a Flocke we deny not as if the thing were unlawfull for we may sweare to performe Gods commandements observing all things requisite in a lawfull oath 2. But that such a covenant is required by divine institution as the essentiall forme of a Church and Church-membership as though without this none were entered members of the visible Churches of the Apostles nor can now be entered in Church-state nor can have right unto the seales of the covenant we utterly deny 4. Distinct. We grant a covenant in Baptisme which is the seale of our entry unto the visible Church 2. That it is requisit that such Heretickes Papists Infidels as be received as members of our visible Church from which Papists have fallen having received baptisme from us doe openly professe subjection to God and his Church in all the Ordinances of God And that Infidels give a confession of their faith before they be baptized 3. Nor deny we that at the election of a Pastor the Pastor and people tie themselves by reciprocation of oathes to each other the one to fulfill faithfully the ministery that he hath received of the Lord the other to submit to his ministery in the Lord but these reciprocall oathes make neither of them members of a visible Church for they were that before these oathes were taken 5. Distinct. Any professor removing from one congregation to another and so comming under a new relation to such a Church or such a Ministery is in a tacite and vertuall covenant to discharge himselfe in all the duties of a member of that Congregation but this is nothing for a Church-covenant for when six are converted in the congregation whereof I am a member or an excommunicated person heartily and unfainely repenteth there ariseth a new relation betwixt those converts and the Church of God and a tie and obligation of duties to those persons greater then was before as being now members of one mysticall and invisible body Yet cur brethren cannot say there is requisite that the Church renew their Church-covenant towards such seeing the use of the Covenant renewed is to restore a fallen Church or to make a non-Church to be a Church and if those six be converted by my knowledge there resulteth thence an obligation of a vertuall and tacite covenant betwixt them and me but there is no need of an explicite and vocall covenant to tie us to duties that we are now obliged to in a stricter manner then we were before for when one is taken to be a steward in a great family there may be a sort of Covenant betwixt that servant and the Lord of the house and there resulteth from his office and charge a tie and obligation not onely to the head of the family but also to the children and fellow-servants of the house but there is no need of an expresse vocall and professed covenant betwixt the new steward and the children and servants yea and strangers also to whom he owes some acts of steward-duties
the Church receiveth in as you say but the putting of Iudah and the strangers of Israel to this Oath was by the Kings authority who convened them 2. Chron. 15. 9. And Asah gathered all Judah and Benjamin and the strangers with them and they were compelled by the Royall sanction of a civill Law to this covenant v. 12. and they entred into covenant c. 13. That whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death whether small or great man or woman 4. How were they all in conscience satisfied anent the regeneration one of another 1. Being such a number of Iudah Benjamin and strangers out of Ephraim Manasse and Simeon v. 9. Were 2. Gathered together and meet but one day 5. This covenant obliged young ones your covenant seekes no Church duties of little ones for to you they are not members of a visible Church 6. The place 2 Chron. 30. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yeild to God as servants Iunius humbly imploring his help as the same phrase is Lament 5. 6. we have served the Egyptians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Assyrians to be satisfied with bread neither doth the Text say in infinitive that yee may enter into the Sanctuary as if a renewed covenant were a necessary preparation before they could enter into the Sanctuary but it is set downe as an expresse Commandement of the King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enter yee into his Sanctuary and there is not a word of a covenant in the Text but only of the peoples keeping the Passover and though there had been a covenant of which the Spirit of God speaking so much of Iosiah's zealous Reformation would not have been silent it is not to a purpose Iudah was a visible Church before Hezekiah wrote Letters to them to â—ome to Jerusalem to keepe the Passover as is cleare ch 29. 17. they begun to sanctifie the House the first day of the first moneth and all the congregation worshipped 36. And Hezekiah rejoyced at their zeale and so there was a visible Church and the Passover was eaten the 14. day according to the Law also in all covenants renewed by the people of the Jewes the matter was done suddenly and all convened in a day when a voluntary preparation and evidenced regeneration could not be evidenced to the satisfaction of the conscience of all the people nor can this preparation be called Jewish and temporary for it is as morall to all who sweare Churches duties one to another as the covenant it selfe which our brethren say is of perpetuall equity And all these may be answered to the covenant Neh. 10. where there is no insinuation of Church duties but in generall 29. Yo walke in Gods Law and to observe and â—â—e all the Commandements of the Law and not to marry strange â—vives The apology saith it is to no purpose that the people 2 Chro 15. was a Church before this covenant because the place is not alledged to prove that a people are made a Church by entering into covenant with God but to prove that a decayed Church is restored by a covenant now the Church at this time was corrupted with idols sodomy c. Answ. 1. Yet it proveth well that this covenant is not the formall cause of a visible Church for a visible Church hath not its formall being before it hath its formall cause 2. The convening of all the people to sweare is an act of the Church visible now nothing can have operations before it have the formall cause 3. The Author saith who knoweth that all the Tribes of Israel were yet in covenant with God from the dayes of their Fathers Answer I think that it is easily knowne that they used and exercised many Church actions also and so were a Church visible of a promiscuous multitude and it is knowâ—n that none were excluded from this covenant none selected and chosen out as Regenerates who onely were thought fit to sweare this covenant and so that it is not your Church-covenant that all were forced to and commanded under painâ— of death to attest Our brethren as first our Author secondly the Apology thirdly the Author of the Church-covenant repose much on Isai. 56. 3. where the stranger is joyned to the Lord in a personall covenant for his own salvation for so the Text saith v. 3. 4. yet are they not joyned to the visible Church while they lay hold on the covenant that is to sweare a Church-covenant now that they are not members of the visible Church is cleare fâ—r Deut. 23. 1 2 3. The Moabit Ammonite though never so holy cannot be members of the visible Church because they are discharged to enter into the congregation of the Lord. 2. They complainâ— that they are not of the visible Church The Lord hath separated me from his people 3. Adjoyning of them to the visible Church is promised as a reward of their faith and obedience v. 8. even a Name in Gods House Hence it is cleare persons under the New Testament have a promise and propbecy thâ—â— if they be inwardâ—s joyned by faith God shall give them a Name of Church-membership amongst his people by swearing a Church-Oath or if they lay hold on the covenant of the Church Ans. 1. There is no churching here of strangers and Eunuches by Church-Oath but as Calvin Musculus Gualter Iunius observe the Eunuch and stranger are comforted that under the Messiâ—hs Kingdome they shall have no cause to complaine of their ceremoniall separation from Gods people and the want of some ceremoniall priviledges of that kind because the stranger and Eunuch shall have v. 5. an everlasting roome and honor in Gods Housâ— and the Son of the stranger a place in the Catholick Church v. 6. 7. so being they believe and obey But 1. v. 6. to lay hold on my covenant is not to lay hold on the Church-covenant give us precept promise practise or one syllable in Gods Word for this interpretation 1. v. 4. to take hold on the covenant is to believe the covenant and not to sweare a vocall Oath 2. To lay hold on the covenant saith Musculus is to keep the covenant and not to depart from it to live according to it saith Iunius and to rest on God to doe what is Gods will commanded in the covenant saith Calvin and Gualter and so all who spake sense on that place and never one dreamed of a Church-covenant before 3. God saith of it my covenant there is no reason then to call it a Church-covenant here more then Ierom. 31. 32. 33. Psal. 25. 10. Isai. 55. 3. Ierem. 50. 5. Zach. 2. 11. 4 Laying hold on the covenant is not an externall professed vocall visible and Church embracing of the covenant for then the Lord promiseth to the Eunuch the name of a faithfull visible fellow member in a congregation if he shall lay hold on the covenant and sweare it
them all as of one visible parochiall Church Then brethren because Christ speaketh Joh. 3. 29. of the whole Church of the new Testament as of one bride of himselfe as the bridegroome and of the whole Catholique Church that Christ hath washen and redeemed as of one glorious Virgin Ephes. 5. 27. and of the one Lambes wife Revel 21. 9 10. it shall follow that the Catholique church is one visible Church and so one Parochial congregation for you mock at a Catholike visible Church as your Authour doth who calleth it a Chimaera though without reason 5. And certainely twenty beleevers in one house and so twenty hundred convened in one yet out of Church-state are a body married upon Christ in respect of his Spirit and their faith laying hold on him as on their husband yea and the Church of Corinth as Saints by calling and considered without the respect of a visible Church-fellowship is more properly Christâ— wife and Christ their husband then they can be called Christs wife for an externall communion of a visible profession which is common to them with many reproâ—ates yea there is no ground at all to call a company because of their visible profession Christs wife noâ— doth Gods Word speake so the converted by Prophets not in office are most properly his wife and these may say we have betrothed you to Christ and be not deceived nor corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ Jesus Hence that place also is not for our brethren 2 Cor. 9. 12. The Apostle thanketh God for the Corinthians professed subjection to the Gospel in their liberall contribution Then saith the Apologie here is a Church covenant but if this professed subjection be a ground of a Church-covenant the Corinthians extended this charity to the poore aâ— Hierusalem as the Churches of Macedonia did also then many particular congregations are Church-members in Church-fellowship with the Church of Ierusalem for they professed this subjection to the Gospell toward the distressed at Ierusalem and so Corinth exercised Church-acts toward other Churches then their owne Independencie by this must fall Secondly to relieve the poore is a duty of Christian charity common to beleevers in Church-state or not in Church-state how then can it prove a duty of Church-state The Apology addeth Hebr. 10. The Hebrews are commanded not to forsake the assembly of themselves together as the manner of some is Ergo they convened by mutuall consent and so by covenant Answ. Doe not Infidels and Indians as you teach come to your Assemblies to heare the VVord and partake of the prayers and praises of the Church But ye will not say They are to come to those Assemblies by a Church-covenant Secondly what though they intended Assemblies by consent and tacite covenant it will not follow therefore by your Covenant which is the formall cause of a visible Church and this place proveth nothing 2 Cor. 8. 5. The Churches of Macedonia first gave themselves to the Lord and then to us therefore they were In-churched by way of covenant to our ministery so the discourse but these Churches gave themselves to God in that dutie of charity and then to us the exhorters to that charity and the conveyers thereof to Ierusalem then the Church of Corinth was married on God on Paul yea and on the Churches of Jerusalem for the Author maketh this mariage-love and so Jerusalem is erected a mother Church and Corinth subjected unto her for these who give Almes as becometh saints are said to give their heart to God and to the poore as Isai. 53. 10. To draw out their heart to the poore and that because of their chearefull and compassionate giving Our Author saith John Baptist repelled Scribes and Pharisees and the prophane multitude from his baptisme Luke 3. 7. Mat. 3. 7. and this was godly zeale for they were a generation of Vipers Luk. 3. 7. 8. and therefore they were not meet for Baptisme which is a Baptisme of Repentance Luke 3. 3. Philip baptised not the Eunuch while he made profession of faith These and the like the Author and our brethren bring to prove that men are not inchurched but by confession covenant-wayes and also to prove that the matter of the Church should be Saints by calling hence The Apology citeth Iustin Martyr who saith three things were required of such as were to be received into the Church 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they be dedicated to God as members of their Church 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or regeneration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith or a confission of faith and. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a promise or covenant to live according to the rule of the Gospell and the Author saith there were three questions propâ—unded to these who were received by Baptisme Abrenuncias Abrenuncio 2 credis credo 3. spondes sponâ—eo Zipperus the Author saith hath more of this Answ. 1. Yee read not in the word that Iohn Baptist rejected any from his Baptisme who desired to be baptized yea by the contrary Luk. 7. 29. It is said and all they that heard him and the Publicans justified God being Baptized with the Baptisme of John v. 30. but the Pharisees and Lawyers rejected the counsell of God against themselves being not baptized of John then the Pharisees and Lawyers refuse to be Baptized and Mat. 3. 5. Then went out unto him Jerusalem and all Judea and all the Regions round about Jerusalem confessing their sins but when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadduces come to his Baptisme he sayd unto them O generation of Vipers c. But that he baptized them by the same Sermon is cleare for v. 8. He exhorteth them to Repentance and v. 9. dehorteth them from aâ— hypocriticall profession v. 10. he threatneth judgement to them and v. 11. saith I did baptize you with water that you is relative to these whom he called a generation of Vipers and includeth them for there is no ground in the Text to exclude them and Luk. 3. 7. and he said to the multitude that came forth to be Baptized O generation of Vipers c. v. 21. and when all the people was baptized c. Iesus also was Baptized It is true all that were baptized and come to age confessed their sins but they were entered members of the Christian Church by professing the covenant in baptisme and their covenant was no Church-covenant entering them members of a parochiall Church Oath but entered them members of the whole visible Church and they were not tyed to such and such Church-acts of prophecying and judiciall binding and loosing Also could they all be satisfied in conscience of one anothers regeneration for they did not meete frequently together to prayer and spirituall conference 2. How could all Jerusalem and all Judea Ma. 3. 5 6. and all the regions round about and all the people baptized Luk. 3. 21. all sweare a Church-covenant
end could not be existing in Gods wisdome without the meanes that watchmen should goe about the walls before the City bee walled and discipline erected I cannot conceive without Officers the ordinary disciplinators the City of God can be no governing City It is saith he strange where multitudes are converted and that where neither Apostles nor Officers were present that there were no Churches here it is grosse to say That in the Apostles times nothing was begun but by them A. There was conversion of multitudes to the Lord Ergo there was a Church-Covenant in stating them all in Church-State you cannot say it your selves Secondly it is not grosse but Apostolike that all new Acts of government should take their beginning from the Apostles as the chusing of Matthias Acts 1. the ordaining of Deacons Acts 6. the preaching to the Gentiles Acts 10. had their beginning from the Apostles who founded and planted Churches 3. Quest. Whether or not ordination of Elders may be by the Church of beleevers wanting all Elders or Officers Here these particulars must be discussed first from whence is ordination of Elders from Elders or from the people Secondly if election by the people be all that is requisite in a lawfull calling Thirdly the argument from the calling of our reformers must be discussed For the first observe the following considerations First A succession in the Church is necessary ordinarily extraordinarily and in cases of necessity it may be wanting Secondly we deny the popish succession to be a note of the Church nor doe we in any sort contend for it First because a right succession must be a succession to truth of Doctrine not personall or totall to the chaire and naked office So Tertullian and falshood may succeed to truth sicknesse to health as Nazianzen Yea as Occam saith Laymen and Teachers extraordinarily raised up may succeed to hereticall Pastors Secondly there is succession to the errors of preceding teachers either materiall without pertinacie holding what they hold or formall to the same errors with hatred of the truth and pertinacie the latter we reject the former may be in lawfully called Pastors See what Beza saith of this Neither will we here go from true succession whereas Ireneus saith men Cum Episcopatus successione charisma veritatis acceperunt And as Augustine when they doe prove themselves to be the Church onely by Scriptures non nisi caenonic is libris Thirdly we deny not but Asia Africa Egypt and a great part of Europe heard not a word of Christ for a long time as Binnius observeth in the Laâ—eran Councell And succession was interrupted many ages in the world saith Prosper and Augustine Nor can Bellarmine deny it 3. We desire that more may be seene of this also in 〈◊〉 Cyprian Augustine And a great Iesuit Suariz in words passeth from this note The Epistles of Aâ—acletus to all ingenious men except to such as Stapleton are counterfeit and the Greeke Church hath as much of thâ—s as the Roman and more Antiochia Alexandria and Constantinople may say more for it also 3 Distinct. It is one thing to receive ordination from a Pâ—â—latâ— lawfully and another thing to receive lawfull ordination The former wâ— deny Ministers siâ—ne who receive ordination from a Prâ—late as they sinne who receive baptisme from the Romish Church yet is the ordination lawfull and valid because Prelacy though different in nature from the office of a true Pastor is consistent in the same subject with the Pastors office 4. Distinct. Though election by the people may make a minister in some cases yet it is not the essentiall cause of a called Pastor as a Rose caused to grow in winter by art is of that same nature with aRâ—se produced by nature in summer though the manner of production be different So are they both true Pastors those who have no call baâ— the peoples election and those who have ordination by Pastors 5. Distinct. The substance and essence of ordination as we shâ—â— after heare consisteth in the appointing of such for the holy ministery by persons in office All the corrupt rites added to this by Papists take not away the essence and nature of ordination For the Greeke Church even this day at Rome receiveth ordination by imposition of hands not by the reaching a cup and a platter and that with the Popes good will Whereas the Latiâ— Church have far other Ceremonies following the decree of Eâ—ginius the fourth and the common way of Rome approved by Innocentius the third and yet they grant both wayes of ordinations lawfull because as Bellarmine Uasqâ—â— Joan. de Lugo the Popes Professor this day at Rome saith These are but accidents of ordination and because say they Christ ordained that this Sacrament should be given by some materiall signe but whether by imposition of hands or otherwise he hath not determined in individuo particularly see for this Peter Arcudius his reconciliation of the Easterne and VVeâ—erne Church in the Councell of Florence The Greek Church is not blamed though imposition of hands be commanded in the Councell or Carthage See that variations may be in a Sacrament and yet such as make not the Sacrament invalid in Sotus Suarez Vasquez Ioan. de Lugo Scotus But since Robinson granteth that the Baptisme of the Romish Church is not to be repeated ordination of Pastors is of that same nature and must stand valid also Hence our first conclusion In cases of necessity election by the people onely may stand for ordination where there be no Pastors at all This is proved before by us first because God is not necessarily tied to succession of Pastors Secondly because where men are gifted for the worke of the ministery and there be no Pastors to be had the giving of the holy Ghost is a signe of a calling of God who is not wanting to his owne gracious intention though ordinary meanes faile And see for this that learned Voetius Nor do we thinke that we are in this straited as the Papist Iansenius in that place saith That wee must wait for an immediate calling from Heaven as also Robinson saith 2. Conclus Thence may well be deduced that they are lawfull Pastors and need not a calling revealed who in cases of extraordinary necessity are onely chosen by the people and not ordained by Pastors and that Pastors ordained by Pastors as such are Pastors of the same nature as Matthias called by the Church and Paul immediately called from Heaven had one and the same office by nature 3. Conclus The established and setled order of calling of Pastors is by succession of Pastors to Pastors and Elders by Elders 1 Tim. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man 2 Tim. 4. 14. Neglect not the gift which was given to thee by prophâ—cie with the laying on of the
3. Wee are no where forbidden in Gods Word to heare Teachers sent and called but onely Wolves in sheepe skinnes voyd of all calling and intruders for pastors may be antichristian in the manner of the entry as Cajaphas 2. In the matter of their Doctrine Teaching some of mens Traditions in place of Gods Word as Scribes and Pharisees 3. Yea and brooke an antichristian calling as prelates doe and have done in Brittain◠and yet their Ministery be valid For that the calling of a Minister be valid and his Ministeriall acts not null it is sufficient that the governing Church give him a calling either by themselves their expresse call their silence or tacite consen◠or their approbation communicating with him in his Ministery or by these to whom the Church resigned her power or by these who stand in place of the Church though prelates invade the place of the Church yet because first they themselves be pastors and have power to teach and Baptize as pastors called of Christ. Mat. 18. 19. 2. Because they stand for the Church the Church approving or some way by silence consenting as in the case of Cajaphas entry to the priest-hood thereunto these who are baptized of them are not rebaptized and these who are ordained pastors by them are not reordained but have a calling to the Ministery and doe validly confer a calling upon others Yea many of great learning thinke that at the beginning of Reformation thousands being under popery baptized by Midwives and private persons were never rebaptized not that they thinke such Baptisme valid but where the Sacrament is wanting ex invincibili ignorantia facti out of an invincible ignorance of a fact such that way baptized doe indeed want the Lords Seale but wee cannot for that say that they are no better then Infidells and unbaptized Turkes and Iewes because 1. Their being borne in the visible Church giveth a federall holinesse as all of Jewish parents had a federall right to circumcision and were eatenus in so far separated from the wombe 2. Because their profession of that Covenant whereof Baptisme is a seale separateth them sufficiently from Infidells though they want the seale externall But our Divines esteeme and that justly baptisme administrated by Women or such as have no calling to be no baptisme at all for which let the Reader see Calvin Beza the learned Rivetus We stand not for what Bellarmine Maldonatus Gretserus and other papists say on the contrary and also Cajetan and Toletus 4. Robinson and our Brethren acknowledge that the Church of Rome hath true baptisme for they retaine the essentiall causes of Baptisme even as the vessells of the Lords house profaned in Babylon may be carried back to the Temple but if these vessells were broken and mingled with brasse and iron and cast in another mould they could not obtaine their former place in the Temple Baptisme is a vessell profaned in Babell but not broken but the ministry and priest hood of Rome is like the new melted and mingled vessell and essentially degenerated from the office of pastorship But I answer if baptisme be valid in Rome so are the Ministers baptizers for if the Ministers and priests be essentially no Ministers the baptisme administrated by the Romish priests is no Ministery and all one as administrated by Midwives and private persons who therefore cannot administrate the Sacraments validly in the essentiall causes because they are essentially no Ministers If therefore Robinson will have the Romish priest-hood essentially no ministery by that same reason he must say baptisme administrated by Romish priests i◠no baptisme the contrary whereof he confesseth otherwise hee must say baptisme administrated à non habente potestatem even by Women and private Men is valid and cannot be but esteemed lawfull in the substance of the act 2. These have a ministery essentially entyre who have power under Christ to preach the Gospell and administrate the Sacraments Matthew 28. 19. The Romish priests have this and are called to this by the Church But saith Robinson How can England forsake the Church of Rome and forsake the ministery which is in the Church as in the subject especially seeing you teach that a true ministery maketh essentially a true Church I answer England may well separate from Rome everting the fundamentall parts of Faith and not separate from Romes baptisme or ministery in so farre as they be essentially the ordinances of Christ and I retort this argument How can Separatists separate from both us and Rome and yet retaine the baptisme in both our Church and Rome 2. A ministery true in the essence may make a Church true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in so far but because of many other substantiall corruptions in Rome it is a Church which we ought to forsake But sayth Robinson Apostates in the 10. Tribes leaving the Church which was radically at Jerusalem upon their repentance were readmitted to enter into the Temple into which no uncircumcised person might enter but any of the priests following Idolls were never readmitted to be priests though they should repent Therefore the ministery and baptisme are not alike I answer that the true Church was onely at Jerusalem radically as you say would import that the 10. Tribes revolting from Davids house ceased to be a Church which is false Israel though all the Land were in Covenant with God had circumcision and the Passover and so were a true visible Church even when they did meete in their Synagogues The Altar sacrifices Temple are not the essentialls of a visible Church they were a Church and did pray toward the Temple even in Babylon and were to professe the True God before the heathen Ierem. 10. 11. 2. There be typicall reasons to hinder men why they cannot be capable of the priest-hood that did not exclude them from Church state but this hindereth not but if the seales administated by a Minister be true seales then is the Minister thereof catenus in so far a true Minister He addeth a Minister may leave off to be a Minister and be justly degraded and excommunicated but none ever attempted to unbaptize one who was baptized nor can he be unbaptized who is baptized Answ. That proveth a difference betwixt the ministery and Baptisme which is not the question but it proveth not this to be false if Romes baptisme be lawfull in its essence so is Romes ministery CHAP. 9. SECT 9. Of the addition of Members to the Church THE Author sayth a Church cannot consist of a fewer number then seven since there must be foure of them a Pastor Doctor Elder and a Deacon Ans. And wee contend not for number but foure may be a Church of your making and in Church-covenant for it is a wonder that you require officers who by your Doctrine cannot be parts of the Church seeing you make them accidents of the Church and teach that the Church in its being and operation
heathen c. 6. and Chrysostome saith the same in sense Yea I gather this necessary distinction out of the Fathers as Chrysostome Theophylactus Hilarius that they are not members of the visible Church actu pleno in a full act because they want externall communion with the Church yet actu imperfecto imperfectly they are members A second distinction I collect from Ireneus Gregorius Hieronim Optatus Augustine that they are exclusi ab ecclesia quoad communionem non ab ecclesia ipsa They are excluded from the visible communion of the Church rather then from the Church A third distinction may be drawen from Eugenius Chrysostome Gregor Nazianzâ—â— while they call Baptisme januam spiritualem and lavacrum animae the doore of our entry to the Church for which cause papists though fondly place their Font at the Church-doore as the Lavatâ—r of the soule So as excommunicated persons are within the doore of the visible Church though not admitted to the Kings Table 4. The Schoolemen do allow to the excommunicated persons jus non consortium right but not fellowsh â—â— 5. Turrâ—cremaeta Vega. Soto Canus insinâ—â—â— distinctionem inter partes membra Ecclesiae visibilis because of some externall communion that they have as Teeth are parts of the body in a new borne Infant but they are not members but they deny them to be members because they are cut off 6. Suarez excellently prâ—vantur quoad communicationemcum alâ—s membris non quoad esse membri They are deprived acording to the act of communion with other members not as if they ceased to be members as a member which cannot receive nourishment is yet still a member Our Divines from Scripture make three degrees of excommunication 1. A debarring from the Lords Supper Mat. 5. 24. but it is not indeed a delivering to Satan or excommunication this is called the lesser excommunication 2. A delivering to Satan the greater excommunication 1 Cor. 5. 3. 4. of this we speake here especially 3. Maran-atha in the Syriack an is utter cursing till Christs second comming 3. Conclus Wee hold the preaching of the word to be an essentia note of the visible Church Our Brethren as Mr. Coachman Robinson our present Author deny that the profession or preaching of the Word is a true note of the visible Church Because Acts 17 Paul preached to the scoffing Athenians who were not for that a visible Church 2. Papists have some of Gods Ordinances and hereticks also as baptisme and the Old and New Testament as the Philistins had the Arke of God amongst them 3. The word may be preached where Christ is but gathering a Church and so is a meane of gathering a Church and therefore not an essentiall note of a gathered and constituted Church But herein our Brethren say no more against the Reformed Churches then Stapleton to wit that truth of doctrine is no note of the Church because it is not perpetuall and constant 2. Truth of Doctrine concurs to give being to the Church and to the constitution of it Bellarm. This note may be found in other societies and companies beside the Church aâ— amongst Scismaticks and Hereticks More of this please the Reader to see in Costerus in the Jesuite Gordonius Huntlaeus And this is the doctrine of Socinians as may be seene in the Cathechisme of Raccovia in Theo. Nicolaides and Francis Smalcius and Arminians second both in their confession because they think with Socinians that there is no ministery now necessary and so publick preaching is not a note of the Church especially since every gifted man may preach the Word Socinus in his tractate De Ecclesiâ and his Catechisme of Raccovia saith Notae evangelicorum nihil valent ' Doctrina pura est Ecclesiae natura essentia quae dat ei esse adâ—óque signum ejus esse non potest cum signum ipsum a re câ—jus est signum differre oporteat But the truth is the preaching of the Word hath diverse relations 1. As the members of the visible Church are in fiâ—ri in the way to be gathered the Word preached and believed is a way of gathering a Church Rom. 10. 14. 1 Cor. 1. 23. 1 Cor. 3. 5. Acts 16. 14. 2. That same word preached believed and outwardly professed is a signe of the visible Church For where Gods pastors and shepheards are there be flocks of redeemed ones Cant. 1. 8. Iohn 10. 12 13 14. 3 The Word simply preached and professed in a setled way of a fixed ministery is a note of a ministeriall Church this is cleare from Gods intention for he sendeth it of purpose to save his own as Rom. 10. 14. Acts 20. 28. For a man lighteth not a Candle in his house for nothing So this word preached as it is Gods Word is not properly the forme and essence of the Church but as believed and received it is the forme of the Church invisible 2. But to professe this word savingly est signum Ecclesiae non not A it is a signe that doth not infallibly notifie to us that such is for this time an invisible Church of redeemed ones for I have not infallible certainty what one man or what determinate number of men by name are true believers profession may beguile me as also the invisible Church as such is believed and not knowen infallibly by any note or externall marke that incurreth into the senses Neither is the preaching of the Word a note or infallible marke of the Church ministeriall to all or in relation to Infidels for the Word preached actu primo ex naturâ suâ essentially and of its own nature is more knowen and more sensible then the Church because the preached word is a Doctrine expounding what the true Church is and we do not expound ignotum per ignotius vel per aequè ignotum Darknesse cannot let us see darknesse or colours only light doth reveale things But the word preached in relation to unbelievers cannot be an infallible note of the Church for to a blind man the morning as not a sensible marke that the sun is rising nor is smoake to a dead man a sensible marke of fire because he hath no senses to discerne either So to the infidell though the word as a sound or in a literall evidence be clearer then the Church and in a confused knowledge he knoweth the one better than the other yet is the true word in respect of certaine knowledge and spirituall evidence as darke to him as the Church for he hath not Eares to heare nor eyes to see any of the things of God either the word preached or the Church and therefore the word is both by nature and to us naturâ nobis in respect of distinct knowledge more knowen but not simply as the word actu primo but actu secundo as it both striketh upon outward
clearely insinuate that their commandement as Apostles de jure should have ended the controversie but now for the edification and after-example of the Churches they tooke a Synodicall way 13. The way of the Apostles speaking seemeth to mee Synodicall and not given out with that divine and Apostolicall authoritie that the Apostles may use in commanding it is true they use lovely and swasory exhortations in their writing but this is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a decree not an exhortation now James saith 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is set downe as his private opinion with reverence to what Peter and Paul saith and v. 7. Peter when many had disputed and spoken before him standeth up and speaketh and v. 12. Barnabas and Paul after the multitude is â—â—nt doth speake which to mee is a Synodicall order and the whole Synod v. 28. say It seemed good to us They answer 1. Consociated Churches have some power in determining of dogmaticall points but this is no power of jurisdictim The seventh Proposition to which almost all the Elders of New England agreed saith The Synod bath no Church-power but the cause enimeth with the Church Corpus cum causa the Church-body and the cause which concerneth the Church-body doe remaine together â—nd therefore quaestio defertur ad Synodum causa manet penes eccleiam the question is brought to the Synod the cause remaineth with the Church Another Manuscript of Godly and learned Divines I saw which saith That the ministeriall power of applying of the rules of the word and Canons to persons and things from time to time as the occasions of the Church shall require pertaineth to and may be exercised by each particular Church without any necessary dependance on other Churches yet in difficill cases wee ought say they to consult with and seeke advise from presbyteries and ministers of 〈◊〉 Churches and give so much authoritie to a concurrence of judgements as shall and ought to be an obligation to us not to depart from any such resolutions as they shall make upon any consideration but where in conscience and hence our peace with God is apparently concerned Answ. I perceive 1. That our brethren cannot indure that a Synod should bee called a Church but 1. I verily thinke that when Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1 2. had much dissention with those who taught you must bee circumcised after the manner of Moses that the Church of Antioch resolved to tell the Church that is the Synod while as they fall upon this remedy v. 2. They determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine other of them 〈◊〉 goe up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question that is that the Church of Antioch when the subverâ—ers of soules would not heare their brethren of Antioch did tell the Synod convened at Jerusalem that is according to our â—viours order Maâ—â—â— 18. 17. they did tell the Church and my reason is if the Church at Antioch could not satisfie the conâ—câ—enâ—es of some who said you must bee circumcised else you cannâ—x in saved they could not nor had they power in that cast not to goe on but were obliged to tell the Synod that is the Church whom it concerned as well as Antioch for if they had sent the matter to the Synod as a question not as a cause proper to the Synod or Church then when the Synod had resolved the question the cause should have returned to the Church of Antioch and been determined at Antioch as in the proper court if that hold true the question is deserred to the Synod the cauâ—e remaineth with the body the Church but the cause returned never to the Church of Antioch but both question and cause was determined by the synodicall-Synodicall-Church Act. 15 v. 22. 23 24. and the determination of both question and cause ended in the Synod as in a proper court and is imposed as a commandement and a Synodicall Canon to bee observed both by Antioch v. 25 26 27 28 29. and other Churches Act. 16. 4 5. Ergo either the Church of Antioch lost their right and yet kept Christs order Matth. 18. 15 16 17. or the question and cause in this case belongeth to a Synod 2. It is said expresly â— 22. It pleased tâ— Apostles Elders and the whole Church to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch c. What Church was this the whole Church of â—â—leevers or the fiaternitie at Jerusalem say our brethren but with leave of their godlinesse and learning no say â— 1. What reason that the Church of all beleevers men and women of Jerusalem should de jure have beene present to give either consent or surfrage there because it concerned then practise and conscience but I say it concerned as much if not more the conscience and practise of the Church of Antioch if not more for the cause was theirs say our brethen and cause ad corpus say they quaestio ad synodum and it concerned as much the practise and conscience of all the Churches who were to observe these decrees Act 16. 4. 5 Act. 21. 25. yet they were not present If the multitude of â—â—leevers of Jerusalem was present because they were 〈…〉 to the Synod whereas Antioch other 〈…〉 were nor off were not present but in their commissioners then I say the Church â—â— the multitude of Jerusalem whose commidicâ—â—â—s were here 〈◊〉 I say the multitude was present â—uely de 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 nor was there more law for their presence then â—or all other Churches who also in conscience were obliged to obey the councells determinations but I deare a warrant that the fact of the Synod such as was sending of the decrees and Commissioners with the decrees to Antioch should bee â—â—â—â—ibed to the multitude of beleevers at Jerusalem who by no Law of God were present at the Synod and by no Law of God 〈◊〉 more consent then the Church of Antioch and were present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by accident because they dwelt in the 〈◊〉 where the Synod did sit therefore say I the 〈◊〉 Church in the whole Synod 2. By what Law can Jerusalem a sister Church have influence or consent de jure in sending binding Acts as these were as is cleare v. 28. Ch. 16. 4 5. Ch. 21. 25. to the Church of Antioch for this is an authoritative sending of messengers and the Canons to the Church of Antioch as is evident v. 2 2. 3. It is utterly denied that the Church of Jerusalem I meane the multitude of beleevers could meet all at one Synod 4. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 12. which is said to hold their peace is referred to the Apostles and Elders met Synodically v. 6. and is not the multitude of beleevers 5. Where are these who are called Elders not Apostles they are ever distinguished from the Apostles as Act. 15. 2. v. 6. v. 22. Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. â—are is no reason that they were all
not defiled their garments that onely those who were guiltie were rebuked I beleeve and therefore this is to bee proved that Elders are not rebuked but for their remisse watching over an unfixed Congregation the places to me doe not prove it Now whereas our brethren say that they read of no Eldership before the dispersion of the Church at Jerusalem Act. 8. 1. and therefore of no presbyteriall government and after the dispersion the number was so diminished as they might all meet in one Congregation becâ—use it is said Act. 8. 1. They were all scattered abroad throughâ—â—â— the regions of Iudea and Samaria except the Apostles It is easily answered 1. To what effect should the twelve Apostles not also have followed their scattered flocks and to what end did twelve Apostles stay at Jerusalem to preach to one single handfull that might all conveniently meet in one house and a private house for I thinke the persecution could as easily put them from publick meetings in the Temple and Synagogues as it could scatter them all to so few a number as one congregation was the the harvest so great and the Apostolick labourers so sparing in reaping as eleven should bee hearers in one Congregation and one speake onely at once 2. Our brethren may know that wee prove a Presbyterlall government before the dispersion 3. If our brethren elide the force of our argument from multitude of beleevers at Jerusalem to prove a presbyteriall Church they must prove that this dispersion did so dissolve the Church as that three thousand Act. 2. and some added daily v. 47. and five thousand Act. 4. 4. and beleevers more added multitudes both of men and women Act. 5. 14. and Jerusalem was filled with the doctrine of the Apostles c. 5. 28. and yet the number of the Disciples multiplied c. 6. 1. and the Word of God increased and the number of the Disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly and a great company of the Priests were obedient to the faith they must I say prove for affirmanti incumbit probatio that all this number and all these thousands by the dispersion Act. 8. 1. came to one thousand and to a handfull of a single Congregation 3. I see no necessitie that these all be the whole body of the Church I grant Diodâ—tus saith so and Baronius conjectureth that there were fifteene thousand killed at this first persecution but Dorotheus saith there were but two thousand killed and c Salmeron saith of Dorotheus his relation Quae si vera sunt profecta magna fuit persecutio if it bee true the persecution was indeed great and wee cannot but thinke seeing the spirit of God saith this was a great persecution but the Church was greatly diminished but let us see if the Text will beare that so many thousands for I judge at this time that the Church hath been above ten thousands were partly killed partly scattered so that the Church of Jerusalem came to one single Congregation which might meet ordinarily for Word and Sacranâ—ents in one private house where the tewelve Apostles came to them for my part I cannot see it in the Text onely the persecution was great 2. All were scattered except the Apostles 3. Act. 26. Paul saith of himselfe at this time 10. Many of the Saints did I shut up in prison having received authoritie from the high Priests and when they were put to death I gave my voyce against them 11. And I punished them oft in every Synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme and being exceedingly mad against them I persecuted them to strange Cities all which saith many were imprisoned 2. Some scattered but the Text saith not that thousands were put to death and it is not like that the holy Ghost who setteth downe the other sort of persecution and the death of Steven would have beene silent of the killing of thousands 3. Whereas it is said they were all scattered except the Apostles I see no ground of the Text to say that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all scattered hee understandeth all the Disciples as Lyranus saith so saith Eusebius though Sanctius saith hee meaneth of the 70. Disciples And my reasons are 1. The Text saith v. 3. Saul entering into every house â—aling men and women committed them to prison as you may read Act. 26. 10 11. Ergo all and every one without exception of any save the Apostles were not scattered 2. Amongst so many thousands of men and women many for age weakenesse and sicknesse and having young children and women with child were not able to flee therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot bee taken according to the letter every way 3. Paul after this dispersion Act. 26. 11. punished them in every Synagogne What punished hee Jewes no Christians Ergo after the dispersion there were Christians left in Synagogues at Jerusalem which were not dispersed 4. The Text saith that the scattered abroad were Preachers and as I prove elsewhere here after extraordinary Prophets and therefore all were scattered except the Apostles seemeth to imply that especially the whole teachers were scattered except the Apostles and Chrysostome Athanasius Nissenus observes that God out of this persecution tooke occasion to spread the Gospell by sending scattered Preachers to all the regions about so Lorinus Sanctius Cornelius a Lapide say they were not all sattered and Cajetan exponeth these all onely of those upon whom the holy Ghost descended 4. Though this Church should come to one Congregation now this is but by accident and from extrinsecall causes of persecution and scattering but wee have proved at the first founding of this Church Apostolick the Church of Jerusalem called one Church the first draught and patterne of the visible Christian Church was such as could containe many Congregations and could not all meet in one 5. There is no ground to say that Apostles after this dispersion erected an ordinary Eldership in Jerusalem whereas before there was an extraordinary because the Apostles was present with them and you read of no Elders while after the dispersion because 1. you read not of the institution of ordinarie Elders in the Church of Jerusalem after the dispersion more then before and so you are here upon conjectures 2. There is no ground to say that the Apostles changed the government of the first patterne of the Christian Churches from extraordinary to ordinary 3. Nor is there ground that the government of the first samplar of Instituted Churches of the New Testament should rather bee extraordinarie then that first ordering of the Word and Sacraments should bee extraordinary seeing the Apostles the first founders of instituted Churches under the New Testament had as ordinary matter to institute an ordinary presbytery and government having beleevers in such abundance upon whom by the laying on of hands they might give the Holy Ghost as they had ordinary matter to wit a warrant and command from Christ
Arminians Pelagians and old Anabaptists expound it of the visible Church that they may make Judas whom they alledge was chosen out of the world no lesse then Peter an example of their universall election and of the small apostasie of the truly elected and regenerated And you have to side with you in this the Apostate Peter Bertius the Arminians at Hage Arminius himselfe the Socinians as Socinus Theoph. 〈◊〉 and you may see your selves refuted by Amesius refuting the Arminians in the conference at Hage and this you expressely say with Arminians and Socinians 1. Because as you say Judas was one of them whom the Father had given to Christ out of the world whom alone of all them so given to him he hath losed Ergo Christ speaketh of a visible donation Answ. The Antecedent is false Joh. 6. 37. All that the Father had given me commeth unto me and him that commeth unto me I will in no wayes cast out v. 39. And this is the Fathers will which â—â—th sent me that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing but should raise it up at the last day But Judas was cast out and losed and is not raised up at the last day as one which commeth that is beleeveth in Christ. 2. This is the very exception of the Arminians and Amesius answereth quae Scriptura manifesto est judicio Iudam non it a Christo datum commendatum fuisse a Patre ut â—aeteros Christ saith Robinson speaketh of such persons as the world hated because they were not of the world Job 15. 14. But the wicked world 〈◊〉 not hate men as they are elected before God and invisibly or inwardly separated â—ut as they are outwardly separated whether they bee inwardly so or not Answ. 1. Invisible election and the contrary spirit that the children of God are led by which is most unlike to the spirit that leadeth the world is the true ground and cause why the world doth hate them and this choosing out of the world is seene and made visible by the fruits of the spirit to the wicked world but the consequence is nothing he speaketh of election that is visible or made visible yet not as visible for often Paul tâ—â—rmeth the visible Churches Saints Temples of the holy Spirit the sonnes and daughters of the living God and when he tearmeth them such he speaketh to and of a visible Church yet not as visible because to be the temple of the holy Spirit and a sonne and daughter of the living God is a thing formally and properly invisible for faith and the spirit of adoptien are not things visible or obvious to the senses but Separatisâ—s are often deceived with this hee speaketh to the visible Saints Ergo he speaketh to them as visible Saints this is the vaine collection of ignorant Anabaptists Paul writeth to the visible Church but every priviledge that hee doth ascribe to them doth not agree to them as they are visible He saith to the visible Church of Colossians ch 3. v. 3. your life is hid with Christ in God an unvisible life cannot agree to the Colossians as they are a visible Church so separation from the world made manifest and visible is the cause why the world hateth the children of God yet that separation is formally invisible and not seene to the eye of men for it is an action of God to choose men out of the world and no eye mortall can see his actions as they be such And therefore except Robinson prove that this choosing out of the world is common to elect and reprobate and to be seene in Peter and Iudas he bringeth nothing against us to prove his point but hee plainly contradicteth his owne tenents for in his first reason he will have the true Church separated from the world as Iudas the traytor was separated from the world which we grant that is separation in show and in profession and so maketh his visible Church to be made up of traytors and hypocrites who cannot bee the Spouse of Christ nor a part of Christ his mysticall body and his redeemed flocke Now hee still harpeth on this that the visible Church rightly constitute is the Spouse of Christ the redeemed of God the mysticall body of Christ and so hee contradicteth himselfe and saith with us that there bee no visible separation from the world essentiall to such a Church as they dreame of to wit of called Saints Temples of the holy Spirit c. and therefore never one of that side understood to this day the nature of a true visible Church though they talke and write much of it for the truth is the essence and definition of a Church agreeeth not equally to a true Church and a visible Church yea a visible Church as it is visible is not formally a true Church but the redeemed Church onely is the true Church Lastly He speaketh saith he of such a choosing out of the world as he doth of sending unto the world v. 18. Which sending as it was visible and externall so was the selection and separation spoken of Answ. The choosing out of the world is not opposed to sending unto the world for sending unto the world is an Apostolick sending common to Judas with the rest whereby they were sent to preach the Gospell to the world of chosen and unchosen of elect and reprobate but to bee chosen out of the world and given to Christ is proper to the elect onely who are chosen out of the loosed and reprobate world 2. It is also false that the sending of the Apostles is altogether visible for the gifting of them with the holy Spirit is a great part of sending the Apostles as our brethren say a gifted man is a sent Prophet but the Lord his gifting of the Apostle is not visible You cannot saith Robinson be partaker of the Lords Table and of devills Ergo we must separate from the ungodly Answ. The Table of Idols is that Table of devils and of false worship kindly in respect of the object that wee must separate from but a scandalous person at the Lords Supper partaketh of the Table of devils by accident in respect the person being out of Christ eateth damnation to himselfe but it is not per se and kindly the Table of devils to others and therefore I must not separate from it The Supper was to Judas the devils Table because Satan entered in him with a sup to cause him to betray the Lord and Christ told before one of them twelve had a devill and so to one of the twelve the Supper was the devils Table yet could not the Disciples separate therefrom Further he objecteth Paul condemned the Church of Corinth as knâ—â—ed lumpe and as contrary to the right constitution finding so many aberrations and defections from that state wherein they were gathered unto a Church who dare open so prophane a mouth as to affirme that this faithfull labourer
act of justice at the direction of a Minister commanding him in Gods name to execute judgement impartially yet the King doth not an act of justice in the name and authority of the Church And that is true which Beâ—anus saith What the instrument doth the principall cause may do where the Vicar or Deputy and the principall substitutâ—r of the Vicar are both civill persons or are both Ecclesiasticall persons for in a large and unproper sense the nurse is a sort of deputy under the nurse father the Father may take care that the nurse give milke and wholsom milke to his child yet cannot the Father give milke himself The King may take care actu imperato as one intending in a Kingly way that Christs body bee edifyed that the Priests and Prophets feed with knowledge the Church and sister of Christ and so are the Priests under the King and at his command to feed and to feed with wholsome food the flocke and in obedience to the King all are to do their duty and his care is universall over all and his end universall That which is the end of Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons Lawyers Judges c. is in an universall intention the Kings end even Gods honor by pâ—â—curing in a regall way that all do their duty in keeping the two Tables of the Law and so is hee the great politick wheel moving by his royall motions all the under wheeles toward that same end yet cannot the King without sinne and being like a Bird wandring from her nest do that which is properly Pastorall so that the Office is not subordinate to him but immediately from God yet are the operations of the Office and to Preach tali modo diligently sound Doctrine subordinate to him but in a generall and universall way as hee is a kingly mover of all to keep the two Tables of the Law Neither did the King as Suarez saith one and the same way appoint both the High Priest and the civill Judge And Cajetan saith he decerneth the two chiefe heads of Church and Common-wealth but hee appointed not both for God appointed Amariah to bee High Priest and not the King but here is nothing to prove the Kings headship Asa reformed the Church and renewed the Covenant Ezekiaâ— reformed Religion also and brake in peeces the Brazen Serpent and all these in the case of universall apostasie and the corruption of the Priest-hood did reforme the Lords house breake in peeces graven Images but all this giveth to them no mixt Ecclesiasticall power of making Canons of ordaining and depriving Pastors Whereas some object That the care both of temporall good and spirituall good belongeth to the Magistrate therefore hee must have a power to make Church Laws See Pareus For his care cannot bee supreme if hee must rule at the nod and beck of Church-men I Answer the connexion is weak hee who hath the care of both the temporall and spirituall good of the people hee hath a nomothetick power to procure both these two goods it followeth no way for then might hee have a power in his own person to Preach and administrate the Sacraments this power procureth the spirituall good but such as is the care such is the power the care is politick and civill Ergo the power to procure the spirituall good must bee politick and civill 2. Neither is the King to do all at the nod and direction of the Priesthood blindly and without examination That is the blind doctrine of Papists wee hold that hee hath a regall power to examine if the Decrees of the Church bee just Orthodox and tend to edification For hee is the Minister of God for good and to take vengeance on evill doing And there is no just obligation to sinne hee is not obliged to punish with the sword well-doing but evill doing and the Church can oblige the Magistrate to do nothing but that which in case there were no Church Law and in case of the Churches erring hee should doe 2. They object He to whom every soule is subject he hath a power to make Church Laws about all good but all and every soule without exception of Apostles or Church-men is subject to the civill Magistrate Ergo. The proposition is proved from the Law of relatives for he to 〈◊〉 we are subject he may give Lawes unto us for our gâ—â—d See Pareus Answ. He to whom we are subject may give any Lawes or command any manner of way for our good I deny the proposition in that sense for then he might in the Pulpit preach the Commandements of God for our good He might give Laws under the paine of excommunication It is enough that he may give Laws by sanction and civill enacting of Church Laws and pressing us by the power of the Sword to doe our duty for the attaining of a spirituall good He to whom we are subject he may give Laws that is presse in a coactive way obedience to Laws that is most true but it proveth not a nomothetick power in the King 3. They object What ever agreeth to the Kingly power concerning the good of Subjects by the Law of Nations that doth farre more agreeth Kings by the Law of God For the Law of God doth not desir 〈…〉 â—e Law of Nations But by the law of Nations a care 〈◊〉 Religion belong th to the King for Religion by the Law of nature is indâ—â—ed and brought in by the Law of Nations As Cicero saith And therefore to a Christian Kingly power the care of Religion must be due Answer we grant all for a care in a civill and politick way belongeth to the Christian Prince but a care by any meane whatsoever by Preaching or by making Church Canons is not hence proved by no light of nature or Law of Nations in an ecclesiasticall care of Religion due to the Christian Prince but onely in a politick and civill way 4. All beleevers even private men may judge of Religion not onely by a judgement of apprehension but also of discretion to try what Religion is true and to be holden and what is false and to be rejected Ergo farre more may the Christian Magistrate definitively judge of Religion so he doe it by convenient meanes such as are sound and holy Divines and the rule of Gods word The consequence is proved because the faithfull Prince hath supreame power which is nâ—mothetick and a power to make Lawes Answer it is true all private beleevers may try the Spirits whether they be of God or not but hence we may as well conclude therefore Princes may preach and administer the Sacraments as therefore the Prince may define matters ecclesiasticall For a eivill coactive power giveth to no man an ecclesiasticall power except he be called thereunto as Aaron was 2. The meanes alleadged are the judgement of holy and pious Divines and the word of God but Moses whom they alleadge for a patterne of a civill ruler who
and Ostorodius Theoph. Nicolaides reason against Gods ordinance of a sent Ministerie Robins God hath indeed set in the body some to be eyes and mouth and hath not said to all the Church Goe and preach but first they have not their gifts from the Church Secondly you would have the body to starve if such hands as Deacons will not feed and all the body blinde if the eyes of the watchmen be blinde Answ. Yet thus much is granted that gifts give not the keyes nor authority to use gifts and so that all beleevers though gifted and graced also have not power of the keyes 2. It 's certaine that in a constituted Church there be no hands nor mouthes to doe and speake by authority and ex officio by vertue of an office save onely Elders and Pastors and that if they doe or speake they doe it extraordinarily when Churches hands are lame and her eyes blinde or if they doe and speake ordinarily it is from the law of charity in a private way not by power of the keyes and as Judges and Officers Manuscript 5 ch 4 sect The Churches not the Angels of the Churches are blamed for not executing censures against Balaam Jezabel the Nicolaitans g Robinson saith more 1. These whose workes Christ commendeth for that dwelling where Sathans throne was they kept his name and denyed not his faith these he reproveth for suffering the doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitans 13 14 15 16. 2. They which were commended by Christ for their workes love service faith patience increase of workes are reproved for suffering Jezabel but these were not the Angels onely 3. These conjunctions but never the lesse say though they were zâ—alous in many things yet they failed in not being zealous enough against false teachers Ans. 1. These connexions prove guiltinesse in Angels or Pastors and one common fault may be laid upon them all but hence it followeth not that they all abused one and the same power of the Keyes as being all collaterall Judges no doubt the Angels preached not against Balaam Jâ—zabel and the Nicolaitans doctrine and yet women dwelt where Sathans throne is and there faith and patience was commended and yet our brethren will not say women are rebuked and all the beleevers because they did not pastorally preach against Balaam and Iezabel so this argument hurteth them as much as our cause The Pastors were guilty because they did not in their place use the Keyes and the people because they did not say to Archippus and their Officers Take heed how you governe as Israel was involved in Achans trespasse because they warned not one another 2. Seeing the Spirit of God maketh mention of Churches in the plurall number and every one of the seven Churches of Ephesus Rev. 2. 7. of Sâ—yrna v. 11. of Pergamus 17. of Thyatira 29 of Sardis 3. 6. Philadelphia 13. Laodicea 22. It is cleare there were more Churches then a single Congregation and an independent incorporation in every one of them and so a Presbytery of Angels in every one of them behoved to be guilty of this neglect of discipline yet not all one and the same way It is not cleare enough though that the whole Church in Ephesus was to be rebuked or that all and every one of the Elders whereof there were a good number Act. 20. 26. He prayed with them all they all wept sore were guilty of these abuses of the power of the Keyes for in Sardis there were a few names which had not defiled their garments yet the whole body is rebuked Manuscript Ch. 5. Sect. 4. When the word Congregation is put for the Elders or Judges only it is never understood of them sitting in consistery and judgement there alone by themselves and apart from the people but in the presence of the publick assembly who also had liberty in such cases to rescue an innocent from unjust judgment 1 Sam. 14. 45. I answer we urge not a Church assembly of Elders only to exclude the people from hearing yea and in an orderly way from speaking reasoning and disputing even in our Generall assembly but for judiciall concluding we find not that given to any but to the Church-guides Act. 15. 6. Act. 16. 4. 2 It is not a good argument the people sate with the Rulers and rescued innocent Jonathan 1 Sam. 14. Therefore all the people may fit and give judiciall sentence or impede the Elders to sentence any This I grant is alledged by Ainsnorth for to give popular government to the people as also 1 King 21. 13. and Ier. 26. 11 12. but 1. a fact of the people is not a Law 2. It was one fact and that in an extraordinary case of extreame iniquity in killing innocent Ionathan a Prince and Leader of the people 3. in a civill businesse and the people were to be executioners of the sentence of death and they saw it manifestly unjust 4. they were not the common people only but in thar company were the Princes of the Tribes and heads and the King and his family only on the other side what will this infer but that there were no Kings in Israel who had power of life and death nor any judges as Ainsworth contrary to Scripture sayth but that the people were joynt Judges with the King and that the people in the New Testament are co-equall Judges with the Elders from so poore an example and so the Separatists proving from the peoples power of judging in civill causes which yet is a wide mistake and a punishment bodily to be inflicted upon strangers as Paget doth learnedly observe doe conclude the peoples power of judging in Ecclesiastick causes which concerneth only the members of the visible Church Manuscript We grant it is orderly to tell the Elders the offence that the whole Church be not frivolously troubled but it followeth not that the Officers may judge there alone without consent of the people he who told his complaint to the Levite told it orderly enough to the whole Congregation assembled at Mizpeh Jud. 20. Ans. These to whom we are to complaine these and these only are to be heard and obeyed as Judges binding and loosing in Earth and validly in Heaven Mat. 18. but these are not the multitude nor one Elder only but the Church of Elders 2. if the Church of Believers be the only subject as you teach of the Keys and not the Elders but in so far as they are parts of the believing Church then it is more orderly to complaine to the multitude who only are proper Judges then to Elders who are not properly Judges Manuscript A second reason why we allow such power to the people in Church censures is from the Church of Corinth 1. He directeth the whole Church of Corinth to whom he writeth to excomunicate the incestuous man Ans. He writeth to all the faithfull and so to women the woman is not to usurpe authority over
from Galilee Acts 1. 14. and some from Jerusalem v. 15. 3. No particular Church had power Ecclesiasticall as this Church had power to choose an Apostle who was to be a Pastor over the Churches of the whole World as our brethren teach so Mr. Paget sayth well These Disciples who waited upon Christ such as Barsabas and Matthias were no members of the Church of Jerusalem and so what powâ—r had a particular Church to dispose of them who were no members of their Church 3. That which concerneth all must be done by all and that which concerneth the feeding and governing of the Church of the whole World must be done by these who represent the Church of the whole World but that Matthias should be chosen and ordained an Apostle to teach to the whole World concerned all the Churches and not one particular Church 〈◊〉 Therefore there was here either no Church which no man dare say for â—here is here a company of believers where there is preaching and Church government v. 15. 16. 26. or then there was here a Congregation which is against sense and Scripture or there is a Church Provinciall Naturall or Oecumenick call it as you please it is a visible Church instituted in the New Testament after the ascension of Christ and not a Parishionall Church Some answer this was extraordinary and meerely Apostolick that an Apostle should be ordained and is no warrant for a nationall Church now when the Churches of Christ are constituted But I answer this distinction of ordinary and extraordinary is wearied and worne to death with two much employment 2. Beza Calvin Piscator Tilenus Whittaker Chamier Pareus Bucanus professors of Leyden Walaeus VVillet P. Martyr Ursinus c. and all our Divines yea Lorinus the Jâ—suite Cajetan alledge this place with good reason to prove that the ordination and election of Pastors belongeth to the whole Church and not to one man Peter or any Pope Yea Robinson and all our Brethren use this place to prove that the Church to the second comming of Christ hath power to ordaine and exanthorate and censure her officers 2. We desire a ground for this that the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church which is ordinary and perpetuall to Christs second comming should joyne as a collâ—terall cause in ordination and election of an Apostle which ordination is extraordinary temporary apostolick see for this Pet. Martyr VVhittaker Bilson Chamier Pareus Beza Calvin Harmonie of the confessions Iunius Cartwright Fulk Ursinus Zwinglius Munsterus and Theodoret would have us to rest upon Apostolick demonstrations like this And Irenaeus speaketh against rectifiers of the Apostles in this Cyprian sayth the like 2 Acts 6. A Church of Hebrewes and Graecians together with the twelve Apostles is not a particular Ordinary Congregation and a governing Church choosing Deacons therefore they are a nationall Church though the first ordination of Deacons be meerely Apostolick and immediately from Iesus Christ yet the ordination of these seven persons was a worke of the Churches power of the keys Now let our Brethren speake if this was a Congregationall Church that meeteth ordinarily to the word and Sacraments such as they say the Church of Corinth was 1 Cor. â—1 18. So say I of the Church Acts 15. 22. called Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church this could not be a particular Church for no particular Congregation hath Ecclesiasticall power to prescribe Decrees and Canons to all the Churches of the Gentiles and that this was done by an ordinary Ecclesiastick power that remaineth perpetually in a Church such as this was is cleare because our Brethren prove that the whole multitude spake in this Church from vers 12. Then all the multitude kept silence and therefore the multitude say our Brethren spake from v. 21. all the Church voyced in these Decrees and Canons say they 3. Sister Churchers keepe a visible Church-communion together 1. They heare the word and partake of the Seales of the Covenant occasionally one with another 2. They eschew the same excommunicated heretick as a common Church-enemy to all 3. They exhort rebuke comfort and edifie one another as members of one body visible 4. If one sister Church fall away they are to labour to gaine her and if she will not be gained as your Author sayth they tell it to many sister Churches if shee refilse to heare them they forsake Communion with her 1. Here is a visible body of Christ and his Spouse having right to the keyes word and seales of grace 2. Here is a visible body exercising visible acts of Church-fellowship one toward another Hence here a visible Provinciall and Nationall Church exercising the specifick acts of a Church Ergo Here is a Provinciall and Nationall Church For to whom that agreeth which essentially constituteth a Church visible that must be a visible Church You will say they are not a visible Church because they cannot and doe not ordinarily all meete in one materiall house to heare one and the same word of God and to partake of the same Seales of the Covenant joyntly but I answer 1. This is a begging of the question 2. They performe other specifick acts of a visible Church then to meete ordinarily to partake joyntly and at once of the same ordinances 3. If this be a good reason that they cannot be a Nationall Church because they meete not all ordinarily to heare the some word and to partake of the same Ordinances then a locall and visible and ordinary union joyntly in the same worship is the specifick essence of a visible Church but then there was no visible Nationall Churches in Iudea for it was impossible that they could all meete in one materiall house to partake of the same worship 4. These who for sicknes and necessary avocations of their calling as Navigation Traffiquing and the like cannot ordinarly meet with the congregation to partake joyntly with them of these same Ordinances loose all membership of the visible Church which is absurd for they are cast out for no fault 5. This is not essentiall to a nationall Church that they should ordinarily all joyntly meet for the same worship but that they be united in one ministeriall government and meet in their chiefe members and therefore our Brethren use an argument à specie ad genâ—s negativè a provinciall or nationall company of believers cannot performe the acts of a particular visible Church Ergo such a company is not a visible Church just as if I would reason thus A Horse cannot laugh Ergo he is not a living Creature or it is an argument à negatione unius speciei ad negationem alterius such a company is not such a congregationall Church Ergo it is no visible Church at all an Ape is not a reasonable Creature Ergo it is not an Ape 3. Conclu There ought to be a fellowship of
Parish-assemblies in Old England and if it be lawfull to continue in them Which question must be expounded by the foregoing Quest. 10. If you hold that any of our Parishionall assemblies are true visible Churches c. Hence the 11. Question goeth thus in its genuine sense are we not then to separate from them as from false Churches Now neither the Spouse Cant. 1. 7. c. 3. 1. 2 3. nor David Psal. 63. Psal. 42. Psal. 84 nor Ezra 8. 15 16. nor Christ in these cases when they sought Christ in all his Ordinances in the fullest measure were members of false Churches nor did they seeke to Separate from the Church of Israel nor is it Christs command Mat. 28. 10. to separate from these Churches and to renounce all communion with them because these who sate in Moses Chaire did neglect many Ordinances of Christ for when they gave the false meaning of the Law they stole away the Law and so a principall ordinance of God and yet Christ I believe forbad separation when he commanded that they should heare them Mat. 23. 3. Nor doe I judge that because there was but one visible Church in Israel and therefore it was not lawfull to separate therefrom and because under the New Testament there be many visible Churches and many Mount Sions therefore this abundance doth make separation from a true Church lawfull to us which was unlawfull to the people of the Jewes For separation lawfull is to not partake of other mens sins not to converse bretherly with knowen flagitious Men not to touch any uncleane thing not to have communion with Infidels Idols Belial c. Now this is a morall duty obliging Iewes and Gentiles and of perpetuall equity and to adhere to and worship God aright in a true Church is also a morall branch of the second commande and a seeking of Christ and his presence and face in his owne Ordinances and what was simply morall and perpetually lawfull the contrary thereof cannot be made lawfull by reason of the multitude of Congregations 4. The most that these arguments of our Brethren doe prove is but that it is lawfull to goe and dwell in a Congregation where Christ is worshiped in all his Ordinances rather then to remaine in that Congregation where he is not worshipped in all his Ordinances and where the Church censures are neglected which to us is no separation from the visible Church but a removall from one part of the visible Church to another as he separateth not out of the house who removeth from the Gallery to remaine and lie and eate in the Chamber of the same House because the Gallery is cold and smoaky and the Chamber not so for he hath not made a vow never to set his foote in the Gallery But to our Brethren to separate or remove from a Congregation is to be dismembred from the only visible Church on Earth for to them there is not any visible Church on Earth except a congregation And our Brethrens mind in al these arguments is to prove that not only it is unlawfull to stand in the Parish assemblies of Old England because of Popish ceremonies and we teach separation from these ceremonies to be lawfull but not from the Churches but also that it is necessary to adjoyne to independent Congregations as to the onely true visible Churches on Earth and to none others except we would sinne against the second Commandement which I conceive is proved by not one of these arguments And to them all I answer by a deniall of the connex proposition As this These who must doe all which Christ commandeth and seek Christ in all his necessary Ordinances though superiors will not doe their duties these must separate from true visible Churches where all Christs Ordinances are not and joyne to independent Congregations as to the only true visible Churches on Earth This proposition I deny 5. If our Brethrens argument hold sure that we are to separate from a Church in which we want some Ordinances of Christ through the Officers negligence because say they The Spouse of Christ will not rest seeking Her beloved untill she finde him in the fullest manner Cant. 1. v. 7. 3. 1 2. then the Spouse Cant. 1. 7. 3. 1 2. is separating from one Church to another which the Text will not beare 2. I would have our reverend Brethren to see and consider if this argument doth not prove if it be nervose and concludent that one is to separate from a Congregation where are all the Ordinances of Christ as in New England now they are so being hee goe from a lesse powerfull and lesse spirituall Ministery to another Congregation where incomparably there is a more powerfull and more spirituall Ministery for in so doing the separater should onely not rest as the Spouse doth Cant. 1. 3. seeking his beloved untill he find Him in the fullest manner For he is to be found in a fuller manner under a more powerfull Ministery and in a lesse full manner under a lesse powerfull Ministery But this separation I thinke our Brethren would not allow being contrary to our Brethrens Church-Oath which tieth the professor to that congregation whereof he is a sworne member to remaine there 6. The designe and scope of our reverent Brethrens argument is that professors ought to separat from Churches where presbyteriall government is because in these Churches Professors as they conceive doe not injoy all the Ordinances of God Because they injoy not the society of a Church consisting of onely visible Saints and they injoy not the free use of the censure of excommunication in such a manner as in their owne Churches and because in them the Seales are often administred by those Pastors who are Pastors of another Congregation then their owne and for other causes also which we thinke is not sound doctrine But we thinke it no small prejudice say our Brethren to the liberty given to a congregation in these words Mat. 18. Tell the Church if he heare not the Church c. That the power of excommunication should be taken from them and given to a Presbyterian or nationall Church and so your Churches wante some ordinances of Christ. Answ. Farre be it from us to take from the Churches of Christ any power which Christ hath given to them for we teach that Christ hath given to a single congregation Mat. 18. a power of excommunication but how 1. He hath given to a congregation that 's alone in an Iland separated from all other visible Churches a power which they may exercise there alone and. 2. He hath given that power to a congregation consociated with other sister congregations which they may use but not independently to the prejudice of the power that Christ hath given to other Churches for seeing all sister Churches are in danger to be infected with the leaven of a contuâ—acious member no lesse then that single congreation wherof the contumacious resideth as a
as you gather First they did not meet often together for prayer and spirituall conference while they were satisfied in Conscience of the good estate one of another and approved to one anothers Consciences in the sight of God as living stones fit to be laid in the Lords spirituall Temple as you require because frequent meeting and satisfaction in Conscience of the regeneration one of another could not be performed by three thousand all converted and added to the Church in one day for before they were non-Converts and at one Sermon were pricked in heart that they had slaine the Lord of glory Acts 2. 37. 42. and the same day there were added to them three thousand souls Our brethren say It was about the Pâ—ntecost when the day was now the longest and so they might make short confessions of the soundnesse of their conversation before the Apostles who had such discerning spirits Answ. Truly it is a most weake and reasonlesse conjecture for all the three thousand behoved to be miraculonsly quicke of discerning for they could not sweare mutually one to another those Church-duties except they had beene satisfied in Conscience of the regeneration of one another Surely such a miracle of three thousand extraordinarily gifted with the spirit of discerning would not have beene concealed though it be sure Ananias and Saphira who deceived the Apostles were in this number Secondly how could they all celebrate a day of fasting and prayer and from the third houre which is our ninth houre dupatch the confessions and evidences of the sound worke of conversion of thirty hundred all baptized and added to the Church Capiat qui volet because this place is used to prove a Church-covenant I will here once for all deliver it out of our brethrens hands The Author of the Church-covenant saith There was hazard of excommunication John 9. 22. and persecution Acts 5. 3. and therefore the very profession of Christ in such periâ—â—us times was a sufficient note of discerning to such discerning spirits as the Apostles Answ. If you meane miraculous power of discerning in the Apostles that was not put forth in this company where were such hypocrites as Ananias and Saphira Secondly this miraculous discerning behoved to bee in all the three thousand for the satisfaction of their Consciences of the good estate spirituall of all of them And if it be miraculous as it must be if done in the space of sixe houres as it was done the same day that they heard Peter vers 41. then our brethren cannot alleadge it for ordinary inchurching of members as they doe Secondly if it be an ordinary spirit of discerning then at one act of profession are members to be received and so often meeting for the satisfaction of all their Consciences is not requisite Thirdly if profession for feare of persecution be an infallible signe then those who are chased out of England by Prelates and come to New England to seeke the Gospell in purity should be received to the Church whereas you hold them out of your societies many yeeres Fourthly suffering for a while for the truth is not much Iudas Alexander Demas did that for a while The Apologie and discourse of the Church-covenant saith These converts professed their glad receiving of the VVord vers 37 38. in saving themselves from that untoward generation else they had not beene admitted to baptisme But all this made them not members of the Church for they might havereturned notwithstanding of this to Pontus Asia Cappadocia c. but they continued stedfastly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the doctrine of the Apostles Secondly they continued in fellowship this is Church-fellowship for we cannot say That it was exercise of Doctrine and Sacraments and confound this fellowship with doctrine no more then we can confound doctrine and sacraments which are distinguished in the Text and therefore it is a fellowship of holy Church-state and so noteth 1. A combination in Church-state 2. In gifts inward to edification and outward in reliefe of the poore by worldly goods Answ. 1. They could not continue stedfast in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship before they were added to the Church for stedfastnesse in Doctrine and saving themselves from the froward generation could not be but habituall holinesse not perfected in sixe houres Now that same day vers 41. in the which they gladly heard the VVord they were both baptized and added to the Church and therefore their stedfast continuing in Church-state can no wayes make them members in Church-state Secondly though they should have returned to Pontus and Asia c. they returned added to the Church Church-state is no prison-state to tie men to such a congregation locally as you make it Thirdly there is no word of a Church-covenant except when they were baptized they made it and that is no Church-covenant and that should not be omitted seeing it conduceth so much first to the being of the visible Church in the which we must serve God acceptably Secondly and is of such consequence to the end that the holy things of God be not prophaned as you say Thirdly that the Seales of the Covenant be not made signes of falshood Fourthly wee would not be stricter then God who received upon sixe houres profession three thousand to Church state Fifthly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fellowship is no fellowship of Church-order which made them members of the visible Church because the first day that they heard Peter they were added to the Church and being added they continued in this fellowship and in use of the Word Sacraments and Prayer as a reasonable soule is that which makes a man discourse and discoursing is not the cause of a reasonable soule Beza calleth it fellowship in Christian charity to the poore And the Syrian interpreter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Arablan interpreter saith the same The ancient Latine interpreter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly if Baptisme bee the Seale of our entry into the Church as 1 Cor. 12. 13. as Circumcision was the Seale of the members of the Jewes visible Church then such a Covenant is not a formall reason of our Church-membership but the former is true as I shall prove hereafter Ergo so is the latter The Proposition standeth because all the baptized are members of the visible Church before they can sweare this Covenant even when they are Infants 5. Argu. This Church-covenant is either all one with the Covenant of grace or it is a Covenant divers from the Covenant of grace but neither wayes can it be the essentiall forme of a visible Church Ergo First the Covenant of grace cannot be the forme of a visible Church because then all baptized and all beleevess should be in Covenant with God as Church members of a visible Church which our brethren deny If it be a Covenant divers from it it must be of another nature and lay another obligatory tie then either the Covenant of workes
Christ have no Church on earth for the laying hold on the covenant giveth being and life to the Church as the body of Christ and his true spouse as well as it giveth being to the visible Church according to ouâ— brethrens doctrine and if this covenant cease there is not a Church of Christ on earth 8. We have heard nothing here as yet but the covenant of grace and no Church-covenant But saith the Authour of the Church-covenant g Though it be indeed the covenant of grace and made principally with God it followeth not hence that it is not a covenant of the members amongst themselves for the covenant of God tyeth us to duties to our neighbour and to watchfulnesse and edification one of another Levit. 19 17. Deut. 29. 18. the neglect whereof in the matter of Achan brought sinne on all the congregation Josh. 7. yea it tieth us to duties to children not yet borne who shall after become members of the Church when Iehojadah made a covenant betwixt the King and the people it was but a branch of the Lords covenant obliging the King to rule in the Lord and the people to obey in God Answ. 1. But if particular duties to our brethren bind us by a new Church-covenant because Gods covenant commandeth these duties then because Gods covenant commandeth sobriety toward our selves and righteous dealing toward our brethren there is required a selfe-covenant towards your selves for temperance and sobriety toward your selves as there is required a Church-covenant to binde you to duties to those who are in Church membership with you this no man can say nor can severall duties require severall covenants 2. It is true when we enter into covenant with God we sweare duties to all to whom we are obliged but then we are made members of the visible Church before we sweare this Church-covenant and this is as if Abraham were made a living man before he have a reasonable soule and as if Abraham were Israel his father before Israel be Abraham his sonne for if Abraham be in-Churched when he did sweare the covenant of grace as the Authour granteth then he must be a member of a visible Church while as yet there is not a visible Church to which Abraham is tied I deny not but Israel may sweare obedience to all Gods covenant and all duties therein and that he may sweare also in particular to performe all duties to Abraham his father in another oath but that he cannot enter in the state of relation of sonneship to his father while he sweare that oath in particular is a dreame which hardly can be conceived 3. The peoples finne in not warning Achan was a finne against a duty of the covenant exacting obedience of all in brotherhead though not in a Church-state Levit. 19. 17. and Iob and his friends who were members of no visible Church as you say did performe this one to another Iob 4. 3 4. Iob 2. 11. Iob. 4. 1. 4. The covenant that Jehojadah made betwixt the King and the people will prove the lawfullnesse of a covenant to performe Church-duties beside the generall covenant of grace which we deny not but doth not prove that a covenant to Church-duties is the essentiall forme of Church-membership and the onely way by Divine precept of entring persons in a Church-state for persons already in Church-state may upon good reasons sweare a covenant to these duties yet are they not of new inchurched to that congregation whereof they were members before Their next principall argument as the Apology saith if a Church-covenant be the essentiall forme of a Church as a stock of Saints is the materiall cause then the Church-covenant is necessary to the being of the Church and it is that wherby Ecclesia integra constituitur collapsa restituitur quo sublato Ecclesia dissolvitur destituitur that is it is by this covenant a Church is instituted in its integrity and when it is fullen it is restored to its integrity and when this covenant â—easâ—th the Church is no longer a visible Church Answ. When a Church falleth it is not restored to the state of a visible Church by circumcision and yet circumcision is given as a signe of a covenant betwixt God and his Church Gen. 17. 11. nor is a Church restored by Baptisme or Baptizing over againe and yet Baptisme is that whereby we are entered members of the visible Church 2. When persons faile in omitting Church duties I thinke they faile against your Church-Oath yea when they fall into any sinne that may be a scandall to others yea the finne of adultery yet if they repent and heare â—he Church they are not excommunicated neither doe they â—ose the right of Church-membership and right to the seales of the covenant nor is it needfull they be restored by renewing a Church-covenant but we desire to heare from Gods word proofes of the singular vertues of this Church-covenant 3. Discipline is by all Divines thought necessary to the well being of a Church but not to the simple being thereof and for this we apeale to the learned Parker who denieth Discipline to be an essentiall note of the visible Church and citeth Cartwright for this and therefore saith that Calvin Bortrandus de Logues Mornaeus Martyr Marloratus Galusius and Beza omitteth discipline amongst the notes of the Church The apology addeth if the nationall Church of the Jewes was made a nationall Church by that covenant and therby all the Synagogues had Church-fellowship one with another in the Temple then the congregationall Church is made a visible Church by that covenant 2. Also the fallen Church of the Jewes was restored to a Church-state say they by renewing a covenant with the Lord in the dayes of Asah Hezekiah and these who fell to Judah 2 Chron. 9. 25. are commanded not to stiffen their necks or as in the originall to give their hand unto the Lord that so they might enter into the sanctuary 2 Chron. 30. 8. Answ. Is it credible or possible that all the Synagoues of so many hundred thousand people as were in the 12. Tribes were all satisfied in conscience anent the regeneration one of anotherâ— and this is required of you to the right swearing of a Church covenant else how could they in the Oath joyne themselves to all Israel as to a Generation of Saints â—â— Israel before this Oath was circumcised and had eaten the Passoyer and so was a visible Church before yea then God had no Church visible before this Oath which is against Gods promise made to David and his seed Psal. 89. 28. â—9 Also in Abijahs dayes Judah was the true Church of God 2 Chron. 13. 8. And now yâ—t think to withstand the Kingdome of the Lord in the hands of the sonnes of David 10. But as for us the Lord is our God and we have not forsaken Him 3. The inchurching of members is a Church-action as all the Church casteth out so all
the blood that sealeth the covenant shed for one single congregation nor are the promises of the covenant Yea and Amen is Christ for one single flocke onely and primò principaliter but for the whole Catholike Church and therefore they shall name themselves Christians The Author addeth Every Church is Christs married Spouse united to Christ by covenant the violation of marriage is the violation of a covenant yea and there is a marriage betwixt the Church members Isa. 62. 5. as a young man marrieth a Virgin so shall thy sonnes marry thee Answ. A marriage betwixt Christ and his Church we grant and betwixt Christ and every particular soule beleeving in him in respect of the love 2. mutuall interest and claime one to another Cant. 2. 16. and what holdeth betwixt Christ and a Church catholick or particular holdeth also betwixt Christ and every soule and to extort a Church covenant betwixt Christ and a particular soule who may be and often is a beleever yet out of Church-state from the borrowed phrase of marriage is â—oo violent blooding of comparisons and therefore from marriage belonging to the catholike Church principally how can a marriage visible be concluded 2. the sonneâ— are the whole Church of the Gentiles too large a Pâ—rish incolaeterrae saith Musculus and excellently Calvin Christ so is the husband of his Church that he marrieth upon his Church all people and Nations which are gathered to her because while the Church wanteth children she is as it were a widow now this is nothing for a Church-covenant Thirdly there is a relative obligation of mutuall duties of love betwixt fellow members of a visible Church and betwixt sonnes and the mother congregation but this is first done in Baptisme expresly secondly in our comming to be members of such a congregation but the person is before a member of the visible Church The Author addeth If dissolving a covenant be that which dissolveth a Church as Zach. 11. 9. 10. then the making of a covenant is that which constituteth a Church if dissipating of stones unbuild the house then compacting of them together doth build the house but the breaking of the covenant under the name of breaking of the two staves beauty and bands Zâ—ch 11. is the inchurching of the Iewes Ergo Answ. The dissolving and breaking of the covenant of grace and the removing of the Candlestick and the Word of God Revel 2. 5. Amâ—s 8. 11 12. taketh away the being of a Church both as a true Church and as a true visible Church and of such a breaking of the covenant doth the Lord speake Zach. 11. v. 9. and I said I will not feed you that which dieth let it die and that which perisheth let it perish c. and it taketh away the union of brotherhead amongst the members verse 14. so the thing in question is not hence concluded for the question is if a Church-covenant make a Church as visible and the breach of that Church-covenant unmake and dissolve a Church as visible and this place proveth what maketh and unmaketh a Church simply as a Church not as visible and under that reduplication Quest. 3. Whether by testimonies from the new Testament and good reasons a Church-covenant can be evinced Our Author alleageth 2 Cor. 11. 2. I have espoused you to one husband that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ so also the Apologie this was nothing else but the planting of the Church at Corinth if you say this Paul did while he converted them to the grace of Christ by his ministery if this were true saith he then should Christ have many thousands hundreds and scores at least of spouses in one Church which we thinke inconvenient Secondly it is plaine he speaketh of the whole Church as of one spouse and as it were one chaste Uirgin which argueth he perswaded them all as the friend of the bridegroome to give up themselves with one accord as one man into one body to the fellowship and worship of the Lord Jesus Answ. it is a weake cause that hangeth upon the untwisted thred of a misapplied metaphor For 1. espoufing into Christ in the Text is opposed to being deceived and corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ as Evah was deceived by the serpent and opposed to the receiving of another spirit and another Gospell so then to be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ and to receive another Gospell must have this meaning as Evah was deceived by the Serpent so I feare that your simple minds be un-Churched and loosed from the visible Church of Corinth and that you forget your covenant wherein ye sweare to take Christ for your husband and me for the friend of the Bridegroome and that you be remisse in the duties of externall discipline and Church-fellowship and in excommunicating scandalous persons c. Aâ— brethren let not our Lords word be thus tortured and wrested 2. He expoundeth this espoufing the presenting of them to Christ in the day of God as a washed redeemed and saved wife of Christ and not of their Church continuing in visible society Yea all interpreters ancient and moderne as Augustine Theophylact Chrysostome Oecumenius Cyrillus Ambrose Our latter Calvin Bullinger Beza Pomâ—ran Pellicanus Sarcerius Marlorat Paraphrastes Erasmus and Papists Aquinas Haymo give this sense Paul as the friend to the Bridegroome finding the Corinthians despising him and in love with false teachers grew jealous of them for his Lords cause that though he had betrothed them to Christ as a virgin hand fastned by promise to a husband left they should be drawne away to other lovers by the cunning of false teachers as Evah was led from her Lord by subtill Satan 3. Though he speake of them as of one body spouse virgin how doth it follow that he speaketh of them as of a ministeriall and a parochiall body for the marriage the betrothing to Christ and the acts contrary the receiving of another spirit the corrupting of their simple minds are acts altogether spirituall internall invisible and acts of a Church as a true Church the contrary are acts of a false Church as false and not acts of a Church as visible in a visible meeting in a visible external act of marrying nor is their any insinuation that Paul feared the dissolving of the Church oath and visible order of government 4. It is not inconvenient that there be many Spouses as in every true beleever there be many single acts of marriage love and of beleeving and so of taking Christ for their husband and Lord. A visible Church is the House of God 1 Tim. 3. 15. the Temple of God Rev. 3. 12. and yet every beleever is a Temple 1 Cor. 3. 17. and every one His House seeing he dwelleth in them by saith Ephes. 3. 17. also if this be a good reason he speaketh of them all as of one chaste virgin Ergo he speaketh of
Church-assemblies and heare the word Ergo this union must be as in all Bodies Cities Houses Armies by Covenant none is made a Citizen to have right to the priviledges of the City but by a Covenant for when one is received a member of an House or of an Army or of any incorporation 〈◊〉 is by a Covenant Answ. 1. The ennumeration is unsufficient for the Seale of Baptisme and a profession of the truth is that which maketh one a member of the visible Church 1 Cor. 12. 13. for by one spirit we are all baptized into one body and can you deny the covenant which is sealed in baptisme and by this are all the Citizens and Domesticks inchurched and received into the visible Church and when one removeth from one congregation to another hee maketh a tacite covenant to serve God in all his Ordinances with that new society but he is not thereby made a member of the visible Church for that he was before nor hath hee right to the Seales as they are Seales of such a Church but as they are Seales of the whole Catholick Church The Apostles saith the apology did two things when they planted Churches 1. They joyned them together in a Church covenant 2. They constituted Elders in every Church Acts 14 13. what the Apostles did after they converted their hearers a baptizing praying for them laying on of hands exhorting inchurching against persecuters disputing against adversaries miracles are acts tending to the good of the Church not acts of planting a Church Answ. 1. The first of these two is in question we reade not of such a covenant as our brethren speake of 2. Converting of Soules after the Church is constitute is an adding to the Church and preaching tendeth to this The Law of the Lord converteth Psal. 19. and when the Church is planted it is not a perfect house but stones are fitted and laid upon the corner stone dayly 3. That the Apostles act of planting is conversion and gathering to a visible body by a covenant we deny for planting is an erecting of Professors and Judges or Officer whether they be converted or not so they professe the truth 3. Arg. All Churches saith the discourse are confounded if there be not this Covenant to distinguish them Smyrna is not Ephesus or Thyatira none of them is Laodicea 2. Every one of them is rebuked for their own faults 3. Faith or cohabitation doth not distinguish them Ergo this Church-covenant only doth distinguish them Answ. Particular congregations differ not in essence and nature as Church covenants differ not in nature onely they differ in accidents and number and it is folly to seeke differences for Church covenants make not the difference for â— Church covenant ia common to them all 2. So Peter may be rebuked for his fault and John for his yet Peter and John differ not in nature The apology addeth it is not a Covenant simply and is generall that doth constitute a Church or distinguish it from another but a Covenant with application or appropriation to these persons as in mariage all promise these same duties yet a Covenant applyed to this man and this woman maketh this man such a womanâ— husband and no other man Answ. If this be all baptisme and professed Faith applied to this man rather then to this shall as well distinguish persons and Churches as Church covenants so applied 2. This is not a good and fit division so to appropriate this Pastor to this flock as he shall be a Pastor to no other people but to them and everteth all communion of Churches and Saints and denieth the use of the Seales in this Congregation from all members of another congregation whereas God hath made him a pastor in relation to the whole visible Church on Earth though his labours be tyed to one determinate Church So Papists marry the Bishop and his Church hence they thought it unlawsull for a Bishop to d mit his Church in any case for Enaristus calleth that spirituall adultery and we cannot approve of the councell of Antioch and Sardis that none can leave his Wife that is his married Church etiamsi à populis eriâ— Episcopus necessitate adactus And they say that Cresâ—on was condemned in the councell of Carthage for changing his Wife to wit his Church and Innocentius 3. saith the spirituall baend of mariage betwixt a Bishop and his Church is stronger then the mariage-band betwixt a man and his wife yea Dominicus a Soto saith to change Churches is against the Law of nature as to change Wives yea saith Innocentius 3. Onnipotens Deus conjugium quod est inter Episcopuâ— Ecclesiam suo tantum judicio reservavit dissolvendum 3. Argu. A free people saith our Author cannot be joyned in a body but by mutuall consent as appeareth in all Relations betwixt Parents and Children Husband and Wife no Church saith he can take charge of a stranger believer comming from another congregation unlesse he give himselfe and offer his professed subjection to the Gospell also it is a part of the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free that every one choose â—his own Pastor Rom. 14. 1. we are to receive a weake believer Ergo he is to offer himselfe to the Church and to their order by Covenant Answ. 1. It is true the relation of Pastor and free people is founded upon a tacite Covenant but this Covenant is made in Baptisme for a pastor is a pastor to yound children whom â—he received into Covenant in baptisme according to that Acts 20. 28. feed the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers now infants are of these because he is to feed them as a pastor loveing Christ his lambes and young ones no lesse then the aged 2. Because hee exercised pastorall acts over young ones when he baptizeth them yet infants are not under a ministery by a Church covenant 3. The act of election includeth a tacite promise of subjection to the Minister who is elected and the pastors acceptation of the Church-Office includeth a tacite promise to feede that flock but this is no Church-covenant which I prove by one argument unanswerable The Church-covenant say our Brethren is the formall cause of our Churchmembership and of a visible Church as a reasonable soule is the formall essence of a man now the covenant that can intervene betwixt a pastor elected and a people electing is a posterior and later by nature then a Church-covenant for a people is a Church as our brethren teach and so constitute in its full power of all Church operations and so hath its entyre essence and essentiall forme before they elect a pastor as a man must be a reasonable man before he can exercise the second operations or actus secundos flowing from a reasonable soule Therefore a Church and Pastor dâ—e take charge of a stranger comming to the Congregation though there be no
the scandalous 3. Reas. Author If the Apostle speake of severall exercises of severall gifts but both coincident to the same person or Church office why then doth he command the Teacher to waite on teaching and the Exhorter upon exhorting One who hath a gift of giveing Almes and shewing mercy is not commanded to wait upon Almes giving unlesse it be his office as well as his gift Ans. It is not fit that the Doctor should attend the pastorall duties except he be a pastor also and have both gift and office but having gifts for both he may attend both as the Church calleth him to both Author Teaching and exhorting flow from severall gifts and they are seldome found in one in eminency Ans. Then where they are found in one in eminency as sometimes they are either hath God given a Talent for no use which is against the Wisdome of Gods dispensation or then hee who hath gifts for both may discharge both as hee may and can through time and strength of body But wee contend not with our brethren in this seeing they confesse he that is gifted for both may attend both CHAP. 7. SECT 7. Of Ruling Elders WE subscribe willingly to what our Author saith for the office of ruling Elders in the Church For Paul Rom. 12. 8. from foure principall acts requisite in Christs house and body v. 6 7 8. Teaching Exhorting Giveing of Almes Râ—ling maketh foure ordinary officers Teachers Pastors Deacons and Elders Opposite to the office of ruling Elders object that by Rulers may be understood Governours of Families Ans. Families as they are such are not Churches but parts of the Church and cleare it is that the Apostle Speaketh of Christs Body the Church in that place 5. As we have many members in one body c. They Object that Paul speaketh of severall gifts not of publick Offices in the Church for he speaketh of all the power and actions of all the members of the Body of Christ now the offices alone are not the body but all the multitude of believers Ans. This cannot well be answered by these who make all the believers governours and a generation of Kings and Teachers because it is expresly said v. 4. all members have not the same office Ergo they are not all to attend ruling and to rule with diligence 2. 〈◊〉 is false that he speaketh not of Officers and publick Officer Hee who speaketh of reigning doth indeed speak of a King as he who speaketh of exhorting which is the specifick act of a pastor speaketh of a pastor The place â—1 Cor. 12. 28. 29. Is cleare for Ruling Elders but some say that governours are but arhiters which Paul biddeth the Corinthians set up in the Church for decyding of civill controversies 2. Cor. 6. that they goe not to Law one against another before heathen Judges Ans. Paul commandeth to obey Judges but never to set up a new order of Judges in their roome 2. These arbitees weâ—â— not governours to command but rather faithfull Christians to counsell and remove controversies or Christian reconcilers to hinder them to goe to the Law one with another before infiâ—â—â— judges 3. The Apostle is speaking here of such Officers as Christ hath set in the Church as the Church and Kingdom of Christ but these civill arbitrators are no Church-Officers â—â— Tim. 5. 17. The Elders who rule well are worthy of double honour c. This place speaketh cleare for ruling Elders The adversaries say here are meant Deacons to whom are allowed stipends for either here or elsewhere wages are allowed for Deacons Answ. 1. Paul would not speake so honorably of Deacons as to allow them the worth of a double honorable reward Yea Gods Word purteth the Deacons out of the roll of Rulers and governours in Gods house as having nothing to doe by their office to labour in the Word and Prayer but are in Gods wisdome set lower to attend Tables nor doth the word call them Elders or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in relation to the Church but onely in relation to their owne family and house 2 Tim. 3. 12. their office is an office of meere service of Tables 2. He is a labouring Elder worthy of wages that the Apostle speaketh of here as v. 18. The Deaconship being to receive the mercy and charity which is almes and not debt cannot be such an office as taketh up the whole man so as hee must live upon the Churches charges 3. Bilson a man partiall in this cause against the minde of all the ancients saith Didoclavius giveth this interpetation But it is seconded with no warrant of Gods Word for Governours and Deacons are made two species of officers Rom. 12. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he who ruleth with diligence and he who hath mercy with chearefulnesse And two opposite species are not predicated the one of the other And if well governing Rom. 12. be â—ell teaching and diligent exhorting all are confounded in that Text where the Apostle marshalleth the officers and their severall exercises so accurately Nor can hee meane here Bishops so old that they are not now abâ—e to labour in the word and doctrine for then pastoâ—s for their age and inhability to preach should because of their age and infirmity deserve lesse honour and reward then the yonger who are able to labour in the word and doctrine This is crosse to the sift Commandement which addeth honour and double honour to age and gray haires being found in the way of righteousnesse 2. Against Justice that because yeares and paines in Gods Service hath made them aged for that they are to have lesse honour and reward whereas they deserve the double rather then that the younger should be preferred to them Nor. 3. Can the Apostles meaning be that these who rule well that lead an exemplarily holy life are worthy of honour especially painefull preachers Because 1. A person is never called a labourer and worthy of hire as the Oxe that treadeth out the Corne because of holinesse of life especially the Church â—s not to give stipend to a pastor for his holy life 2. Their life should be exemplarily holy who did not labour in the word and doctrine that is we have a pastor passing holy in his life but he cannot preach or keepeth an ill conscience in his calling because he is lazy and a loyterer in preaching 3. What Word of God or dialect in the word expresseth a holy life by well goverâ—ing for a holy life is the sanctity of mans conversation be he a private or a publick man But to govern well is the paraphase of a good Governour and officer in the Greeke tongue or any other Language Nor. 4. Can the Apostle understand by labourers in the Word and Doctrine as Bilson saith such as wâ—nt thorough the Earth and made jâ—urnies as Apostles and Evangelists did to plant visit and confirme Churches and by these who govern well such as labour indeed in the
Persis oriens India omnes Barbarae nationes uâ—um Christum adorant unam observant regulam veritatis What were all these but such as after were called VValdenses And in the first ages Pius 2. saith ante concilium Nicenuâ—â— parvus respectus babitus fuerat ad Romanam ecclesiars before the Nicen councill little respect was â—ad to th Church of Rome See this learnedly Demonstrated by the learned Voetius and his reason is good Ignatius Ireneus Iustin. Martyr Clâ—m Alexandr Tertullian Cyprian speak not one syllable of popery or popish articles also Lucian Porphyrius Trypheâ— Cellus Sosymus Symmachus Iulian mockers of Reiligon would have spoken against transubstantiation one body in many thousand places worshipping of dead bones the worshipping of a Tree Crosse and dumbe images and bread a Pope who could not erre and they would have challenged and examined miracles and I adde if they scoffed at the Doctrine of these called after VValdenses as the confession beareth then were the Church of Waldenses though not under that name in their time The Jewes objected against the Fathers Tatian Theophilus Athenages Iustin Tertullian Alexand. Cyâ—rian Chrysostome Isiodorus Hispalensis Iulianus Poâ—nerius They objected all they could devise against the Christian Faith but not a word of poynts of popery now controversed Ergo popery hath not beene in the World then an 188. In the Time of Victor many opposed victors Tyranny and as Plessaeus and Doctor Molineus saith were called Schismaticks therefore and excommunicated Neither can Gretserus nor Bellarmine defend this but by lies and raylings Yea from the 4. to the 7. age saith Voetius produce one Martyr professor or Doctor See Augustine de side ad Petrum Ruffinus his exposition of the Creed Gâ—nnadius of the Articles of the Church Theodoret his Epitome Divinorum decretorum Cyrillus his tract de fide and produce one holding the popish Faith Clemens Romanus and Elutheriâ—s in the Epistle to the Bishops of France maketh all Bishops pastors of the Church universall Any who readeth Greâ—serus against Plâ—ssie may see in the 4. age that Baronius and Bellarmine cannot desend that appeale was made to the Pope in the councell of Carthage yea the Popes Legate brought Apiarius to the Councell that his cause might be judged there becausâ— the Pope could not judge it and that the Councell of Chalcedon was per precepta Valentiniani convened and that Canstantinople was equall with Rome That Simplicius Gâ—lasius and Symmachus were Judges in their owne cause and that Hormisda an 518. had no command over the Oâ—ientall Churches as may be seene in Baronius So Pelagius the 1. Ioan. the 3. and Pelagius the 2. were refused the honour of universall Bishops and could not helpe the matter See Gretser and Honorius must be defended as not denying two wills and two natures in Christ. See what saith Bâ—ronius of this The councell of Constantinople would not receive the worshipping of Images The best part of the Western Churches were against it The Churches of France Germany Italy Brittaine The councell of franckford of Paris so did they all refuse the power of the Pope So Occam Gerson Scotus in most poynts were not papists Nor Cajetan Contaren Almâ—in Ioa Major Caranza Therefore said Thuanus the Doctrine of the VValdenses were now and then renewed by 〈◊〉 and Hus and when Hildebrand came in all know what wicked new poynts hee brought in as in the Tomes of the councells may bee seene and Onuphrius sayth quod major pars antea parum in usu fuerit The greatest part of his novelty not heard before or little in use His Tyranny upon the consciences of Church-men forbidding marriage and over the Lords people may be seene in Sleidan In Lampadius and his forme of excommunicating the Emperour as it is written by Beruriedenses and Sigonius also Aventinus Gerochus Reicher spergeâ—sis Orthuinus Gratius and others can tell But ere I speake of this monster head I should not have omitted humble Stephanus the 5. To whom Lodovick the Emperour descending from his Horse fell down upon the Earth thrice before his feete and at the third time saluted him thus blessed be the Lord God who commeth in the Name of the Lord and who hath shined upon us As Theganus saith that Pashalis excuseth himselfe to the Emperour Lod. That hee had leapen to the Popedome without his authority which saith this headship is not supreame as Aimoinus saith who was a murderer of Theodorus The Roman Churches Seale-keeper and of Leâ— for having first put out their Eyes hee then beheaded them say the same Aimoinus Gregory the 4. caused Lodovick the Emperours sons to conspire against the Father and was upon that plot himselfe Sergius the 2. made an act that a Bishop should be convinced of no fault but under sevety and two witnesses Siconulphus a Prince desiring to have this Popes blessing came to Rome and kissed sayth Gretserus after Anastasius his precious feete Anguilbert Archiepisc. Mediolanensis departed out of the Roman Church for the pride of Rome and Simon of Sergius sayth Sigonius It was ordinary for all sayth Anastasius to kisse the seate of Leo the 4. Platina saith hee was guilty of a conspiracy against Gratianus a godly and worthy man to expell the French-men out of the Kingdome and bring in the Grecianeâ— Gretser the Jesuite saith their owne Platina is a Lyer in this Wee all know there was an English Woman-Pope called Ioanna betwixt Leo the 4. and Benedictus the 3. Bellarmine Baronius Gretser Lipsius will have it a fable Platina a popish writter is more to be believed then they all for hee affirmeth it as truth A great schisme arose in the Church because Benedictus the 3. was chosen Pope without the Emperours consent The Emperour did hold the bridle and lead the Horse of Nicolaus the 1. Gretser cannot deny this hee defended and maintained Baldvinus who was excommunicated by the Bishops of France because he ravished Iuditha the daughter of Câ—rolus Calvus Hee pleaded that there was no reason but the decretalls of the popes should be received as the Word of God but because they were not written in the bookes of Church-Canons for by that reason some bookes of the old and New Testament are not to be received as Gods Word Grets said these Epistles were equall with Gods Word and said they had neither these Epistles nor the Scriptutes authority from the holy Spirit but from the Church That the church was foure hundred yeeres ignorant of the authority of the Scriptures that hee himselfe was Jehova eternall and that Gratianus had inserted it in his distinct 96. That hee was God Adrian the 2. approved of Basilius his killing of Michael the Emperour his Father Onuphrius who observeth 26. Schisms of antipopes thinketh Schismatick Popes no popes as Benedict 5. and
10 Honorius 2. Clement 3. Gregor 8. Celestinus 2 Victor 2. Some Popes have beene declared Hereticks by papists as Gregorius 12. Benedictus 13. In the councell of Pisaâ— and Iohn 23. In the councell of Constance moreover Bonifacius 8. Sergius 3. Benedictus 7. Eugenius 4. Iohn 9. and Iohn 22. had no tolerable measure of learning to be priests how then could they be universall prophets who could not erre Liberius was an Arrian as Athanasius and Alphons saith Zepherinus was a Montanist as Tertullian saith Honorius was condemned for saying Christ had but one will in generall councells at Constantinople Marcellinus sacrificed to Idolls as Bellarmine confesseth faelix was an Arrian and consecrated by an Arrian Bishop as Hieronim saith Anastasius was a Nestorian as Alphonsus saith Iohn 22. said soules did not see God untill the Resurrection as Erasmus saith Innocentius 1. ordained the Eucharist to be given to Infants as a Jesuite saith to wit Maldonatus All this is observed to prove the Church could not be in the Pope 2. That the Waldenses were opposers of the pope whose confession is set downe by Gulielmus Reginaldus Turco-papista as Vsserus saith and cast to by the Jesuite Gretser to the end of Peter Pilichdorffius his Treaties contra Waldenses and by Reinerus contra Waldenses Their confession containing a condemning of the popes Supremacy unwritten Traditions worshipping of Images Invocation of Saints c. and all the Articles of popery We know how well Calvin thinketh of their confession The slanderous Grâ—tser saith that Wicliffe renewed their errors and taught this Article Dâ—uâ— debet obedire diabolo God should obey Satan But that faithfull witnesse of Christ hath no such thing in his writtings Many other poynts are objected to the Waldenses but Thuanus saith Reliqua quae à Waldensiâ—us affing untur per invidiam assinguntur Other lies and false Doctrines are laide upon them but the Magdeburgenses set downe faithfully the Articles that they held which wee owne as the Truth of God What Sanderus Coccius and Parsonius objected to them that they Taught that carnall coâ—cupiscence was no sin 2. That all oathes in any case are unlawfull 3. That the Magistrate may not use the sword 4. That the Apostles Creed is to be contemned these and other calumnies are well refused by Usser and proved by the Testimony that Papists gave of the Holy life of the Waldenses to bee but Lies and meere calâ—mnies These who of old saith Serarius were called Berengariani from Berengarius are this day called Calvinists and these who are this day sayth Ioan Wendelstonus called Protestants are novi sâ—n Gâ—rmanici Waldenses The new Waldenses of Germany Nec vero saith Usser citing the foresaid Authors justam aâ—lâ—â—c causam videre pâ—ssimus quamâ—brem horum majnum pudere nos debcat we neede not thinke shame of our forbearers the Waldenses Whether did Berengarius feare Leo the 9. his unjust sentence of excommunication but contrary to Victor the 3. he did stoutly plead that the Eâ—ements were a figure or signe of the body and blood of Christ Ar. 1056. And before Nicolâ—us the 2. in a Synod at Rome before 113. Bishops for the space of seven dayes hee pleaded the same cause So saith Albericus Diacon Cassinens and Carolus Sigâ—nius Yea and hee lest behind him in his age multitudes of his followers so as Rome was not able to suppresse the visible Church ever since her Cedar branches did spring up to the Cloudes And we know that the Faith of the Councell of Trent as pressed by Oath prescribed by Pius 4. and by the command of Gregorius 13. was not in the World the 10. age Ambrosius Catharinus Martinus Isengrenius Contarenus the Sorbonists of Paris and the Doctors of Venice in many substantiall poynts contradicted the Church of Rome yea Thuanus and the Bishop of Spalato teach that after the councell of Trent the Reformation spread through the Christian World In the 12. and 13. ages the Doctrine of the Waldenses of Wicliffe and Berengarius did grow but few did write saith Voetius in these times because of heavy persecution multitudes in Germany Austria Moravia Silesia Leiden Collen Osenbruge and many other parts opposed popery Now we say there were multitudes professing the Truth both of Doctors Fathers and witnesses opposing the Roman Church and what calling the Church of Rome gave to our reformers must be measured by the best of the Church consenting to their câ—lâ—iâ—g for wee are not to thinke that all professed popery but many of the gu des opposed many were burdened in 〈◊〉 and yet out of weakenesse durst not professe because of the 〈◊〉 â—â—eaâ—nesse 3. They durst not write and preach ag 〈…〉 n of the time 4. Many were simple many 〈◊〉 3. 〈…〉 Luther and Zuinolius had their whole calling from the 〈…〉 yeâ— think we not that calling no calling but that it hath that which â—ssentially constituteth a Ministe 1. Câ—j phas entered most câ—râ—nâ—â—ly to the Priesthood by the favour of men and to bee High-Priest for one yeare contrary to the Law which ordained the high-priest to remaine for his lifetime But as Iosephus said Toletus Cajetan Maldonat Iansonius yea and our owne writers Calvin Marlorat Musculus Rollock Bullinger observe all was done by the will and lust of men yet Cajaphas was the high-priest and prophecied which is a specifick act of a called Prophet John Ex. 51. 52. It is said he prophecied as high-priest 2. The Scribes and Tâ—aisees set in Moses chaire and are to be heard Mat. 23 1. In so far as they teach Gods Truth and yet their entry to their calling was corrupt if it be true that diverse say that Christ John 10 calleth the Scribes and Pharises Theeves and Robbers because they came not in by the doore but climbed up another way but however there was corruption in the way of their comming to the chaire for they leavened all other the Ordinances of God and the high priest was entered a false way the rest of the Rulers could not come but in a corrupt way But though Augustine and Clemens Alexaâ— expound the place John 20. of such as want a lawfull calling but then the place cannot agree with Scribes and Pharisees which seemeth to fight with the course of the Text. But our Interpeters Brentius Bâ—zâ— Rollocus expound the place of these who preach not Christ soundly and to be the doore and the foundation but humane Traditions and yet had a calling and the Text saith so much where v. 9. Salvation is promised to every one who entereth in by Christ the doore now salvation is not promised to a man because hee hath a lawfull calling to the Ministery hee may have that and yet bâ—e a Child of perdition
by the Word of God and care of Pastors but servants are taken into great houses because they are servicable for if that follow that they are made more servicable it is not the intent of the Lord of the house or of the under-stewards 3. The Oeconomy of Princes houses is no rule for the government of the house of the King of Kings Mr. Coachman while the materialls and pillars of the house are rotten and the house founded upon Briers Brambles and rubbish that is while wicked men are members no Discipline 〈◊〉 Reformation no censures no Election by the multitude will doe good Answ. The connexion is naught the fruit and power of Gods ordinances depend not upon the conversion or non-conversion of the instruments the preaching Sacraments censures are of themselves golden and exercisers and dispensers thereof following Christs direction therein are golden eatenus in so far though in respect of their personall estate they be wooden and clay members voyd of faith 2. It is false that the visible Church is founded upon men or their Faith God strengtheneth the barres of his own Sion And Christ and the Gospell are the pillars thereof Nay the Church strandeth not upon Peter and Paul and the Apostles faith subjective because the Apostles were holy men and Believers but upon the Apostles Faith objectivè that is upon the saving truth that the Apostles delivered from Christ to the Churches Ephes. 20. 21. 1 Cor. 3. 11 12. Mat. 16 v. 18. Quest. 3. Whether or no there be a true Church communion with ordinary hearers of the Word who cannot be admitted to the Lords Supper and what union excommunicated persons who dâ— heare the Word have with the visible Church and how the preaching of the Gospell is an essentiall note of the visible Church For the clearing of these confiderable poynts tending much to a fuller understanding of a true visible Church in its right constitution let these considerations make way to what we can say of these poynts 1. Dist. There is a difference betwixt ordinary and setled bearers of the Word and transient and occasionall hearers 2. Dist. Publick ordinary preaching for the converting of soulâ—â— is a publick Church worship Another set way of ordinary publick use of converting soules by preachers not in office wee know not 3. Dist. Some be members of the visible Church properly and strictly such as are admitted to all the seales of the covenant and holy things of God Others are lesse properly or in an inferiour degree members of the visible Church such as are baptized and are ordinary hearers of the Word but not admitted to the Lords Supper of old the Catechumenoi were such As there be decrâ—â—s of Citizens some having all the priviledges of the City and some onely right to some priviledges but not to all 3. Some have right to all and are most properly in the visible Church 4. Dist. Excommunication being medicinall and for edificatiâ—â— cannot cut off the member close except we should confound killing and curing 5. Dist. There is a note of a ministeriall Church such as is preaching of the Word of God and a note of the visible Church of Believers and obedience professed to the Word preached is such a note 6. Dist. Preaching of the Word may well be a note of the Church invisible in fieri while it is in gathering because God purposeth to convert where the Word is purely preached 2. A note of the invisible Church already constituted in so far as it is obeyed And. 3. A note of the Ministeriall Church in respect where God holdeth out the Standard of the preached word there is his ordered army 1. Conclusi To communicate with the Church ordinatily and of set purpose is an act of externall Church communion 1. Because if the preacher in preaching edifie the Church convened for that effect to receive edification and if he convince the Iâ—fidell by preaching and cause him fall downe and worship God and report that God is in that meeting then to communicate with the Church in hearing and preaching is an act of externall Church communion Because an act of worship terminated and bounded upon the Church is a Church-act But the prophet prophecying in publick to the Church edifieth the Church and converteth infidells in causing them to worship acknowledge Gods presence in a Church-meeting As is cleare 1. Cor. 14. 4. He that prophecieth edifieth the Church v. 5. v. 12. seek that you excell to the edifying of the Church 29. Yet in the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding c. 23. If therefore the whole Church be come together into some place and all speake with tongues and there come in these that are unlearned and Unbelievers will they not say that yee are mad 24. But if all prophecy and there come in one that believeth not or one that is unlearned he is convinced of all c. And that this is a Church-meeting formally it is cleare because it is said 34. let your women keepe silence in the Churches now women out of a Church-meetings are not commanded silence for Tit. 2. 4. They are to teach the younger women and at home in the house Prov. 31. 26. She openeth her mouth with wisdome and the Law of grace is in her lips Acts 20. 7. and upon the first day of the week the Disciples came together to breake bread and Paul preached to them Had they not then a Church Communion in hearing the Word as in the receiving the Sacrament Our brethren say that eating one bread together at the Lords Table is properly a Church Communion For thereby we may eat one bread we are one body for we all partake of one bread 1 Cor. 10. 18. But heating one word is not a Church-communion because Infidels and Turkes who are not members of the Church may heare one word 1 Cor. 14. 24 25. I answer 1. Wee speake of a professed and resolved hearing Turks and Infidels comming in without purpose to joyne with the Church as 1 Cor. 14. 2. 25. are not such hearers 2. If this were a good reason a latent hypocrite eating one bread with sound believers at the Lords Table should keepe no Church-communion with the Church for by our Brethrens Doctrine a â—ypocrilt is no more in deed and truth a member of the visible Church then a leg of wood is a member of a living body But we hold that he is a true member of the Church as visible and that his binding and loosing with the Church suppose he be an Elder is no lesse valid in Heaven when Christs order is followed then the binding and loosing of a believing Elder and therefore that his eating at the Lords Table is an act of externall Church-communion and of visible fellowship in a visible body and the same is every way strong for a visible Church-fellowship in hearing the Word for that same Christ and fellowship with him which is sealed in the Sacrament
Catholick body but the case for ordinary and constant power of ordinary and constant Jurisdiction is not so in a Presbyteriall in a provinciall in a Nationall in the Catholick visible Body And therefore it followeth not that they are not compleat Bodies and entire Churches for all ordinarie and constant Jurisdiction and the reason is cleare because Synods or Synodicall Churches above a Presbytery to me are not ordinary not constant Courts but extraordinary and prore nata occasionall having their rise from some occurrence of providence as is most cleare by Scripture The Church of Ephesus being a Presbyteriall Church did constantly exercise Discipline and try false Prophets and those which called themselves Iewes but were lievs Revel 2. 2. Whereas that famous Councell at Ierusalem was not an ordinary and constant Court but extraordinary that is occasionall for so I take the Word for expressions cause and had its rise Acts 15. 1. from a meere occasion because some came from Iudea and taught the Brethren except yee be circumcised after the manner of Moses you cannot be saved And the subject of this Court was not the constant and ordinary affaires of Discipline that belonged to the presbytery of Ierusalem and Antioch No v. 6. the subject was only an incident controversy raised by false teachers subverters of soules v. 24. and therefore it is said v. 6. The Apostles and Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to consider of this matter therefore the presbyteriall Church hath both Word and Sacraments dispensed in it distributively through all the Churches and for the power of Jurisdiction ordinary intensivè and quoad essentiam Ecclesiae ministerialis according to the entire essence of a ministeriall Church it is as perfit and compleat in one single Congregation as in a provinciall as in a Nationall yea as in the Catholick visible Body whereof Christ is the Head onely a provinciall nationall and the Catholick Church visible extensivè according to the power of extension is a larger and a superior Church and though the presbyteriall Church be a part of the Catholick it is so a part as it is a perfit whole Church as a man is a part of this great all the World yet so as he is a perfit reasonable Creature and so a whole man and a part of the World but a Congregation is so a part of the Presbytery that it hath not a whole entire compleat intensive power over its owne members to excommunicate them because its members are for contiguity and necessity of neere visible communion parts that cannot avoyd dayly edifying or scandalizing of consociated Churches and therefore the consociated churches trust have a power over the members of a Congregation But our Brethren will say Contiguity of locall cohabitation doth not in be a visible Church but only the voluntary agreement of Professors who doe ex pacto and by covenant tacit or expresse make up a conseciation for a Papist and a Protestant may cohabit in one house Answ. That is true but contiguity is such a necessary foundation of externall visible Church fellowship in one presbytery as without that contiguity I see not how jure Divino there can be either a Congregationall Church or any other Church for sure I am Christ hath not ordained me to be a member of a Congregation in America or of a presbyteriall Church in Geneva And that such persons and no more be members of a Congregation is not juris Divini yet without a contiguity lesse or more they cannot be members of a Congregation nor is this single Congregation a limbe of this presbyteriall Church jure Divinâ— onely this in abstracto is jus Divinum that there be a Congregation of a convenient number and a presbytery of such as may meete conveniently in their guides But to returne the Brethren do deny that God gave a power of Jurisdiction to the Catholick visible Court of the Oâ—cumenick Church And why because a generall councell cannot excommunicate nor relax from Excommunication a nationall Church But I answer 1. It is by accident and not through want of innate and intrinsecall power that the Court of a Catholick councell cannot in an ordinary and constant way exercise the power that Christ hath given to her as the presbyteriall church doth and the exigence of providence maketh it so because it falleth out by the blessing of God that Zion must say as it is Esai 49. 20. The place is too streight for me give place to me that I may dwell And because she inlargeth the place of her Tent and stretcheth forth the curtains of her habitation and lengthneth her cords and breaketh forth on the right hand and on the left and her seed inheriteth the Gentiles Esai 54. 2 3. and because from the rising of the Sun to the going dâ—â—ne thereof his Name is great amongst the Gentiles and in every place incense is offered to him Mal. 1. 11. yet have generall councells condemned Hereticks as Nestorians Macedonians Eutyches and others and I see nothing to prove that a generall councell hath no power to excommunicate a Nationall Church If the Lord should be pleased to give the Christian Churches a generall councell this day they might lawfully in a juridicall way declare the faction of Romish pretended catholicks to be mysticall Babylon a cage of uncleane Birds which is excommunication in the essence and substance of the Act nor is there need of a legall and juridicall citation of nationall Churches or a citation of witnesses to prove Romish Heresies and perfidious and detestable obstinacy for their writings and deeds are so notorious that the senses of men may as infallibly prove the fact as we know there is such a City in the world as Rome and Câ—nâ—tantinople as for the instance that a catholick councell cannot ordinarily be had to relax a repenting nationall Church I answer the same inconvenience will follow if we suppose an ordinary case the Church congregationall as our Brethren suppose of Ierusalem Acts. 2. consisting of three thousand and a hundred and twenty having excommunicated Ananias Saphira and others who yet by the grace of God should truely repent in the meane time the Sword of the Roman Emperor intervening scattereth this Church that they cannot convene in a spirituall Court to relax them and out of Court they have no authority of Jurisdiction here were an invincible necessity of their remaining in Satansbonds in foro externo ecclesiae But what then This is to limit God as Papists do in binding and tying salvation of Infants to the outward signe of externall baptisme as if God in soro caeli in his own Court could not absolve penitent sinners because the Church will not which is more ordinary through mens corruption or cannot absolve through the necessity of exigence of divine providence and the more catholick that crosses be as warâ— the universall and catholick cruelty and treachery of the church of Mâ—lignants against the true catholick Church of Christ the more easily are
neerely because as I sayd before the more universall the Church visible is the externall visible Communion is lâ—sse even as when the number of a Family is cut off by the Sword of the Magistrate the matter first and more intimately and more neerely concerneth the Family whereof hee is a Member yet it doth also concerne the Common-Wealth of which also hee is a Member A Finger of the right Hand is infected with a contagious Gangren it is to bee cut off yet the cutting-off concerneth more neerely the right Hand then it doth the left Hand and the whole Body For the contagion should first over-spread the right Hand and Arme and Shoulder before it infect the left Hand and the whole Body though it doe not a little concerne the whole Body also So though actuall Excommunication concerne all the Churches of the Presbyterie yet it doth more neerely concerne the Congregation whereof hee is a Member 2. The pronouncing of the sentence being edificative it is a fit meane to worke upon others but calling and trying of witnesses and Juridicall decerning of a Man to bee Excommunicated requiring secrecies yea and some scandals and circumstances of Adultery Incest Pestiality requiring a modest covering of them from Virgins young Men Children and the multitude wee have no warrant of GOD that they should bee tryed before the whole multitude nor are acts of Jurisdiction for their excellency to bee brought forth before the people but for their neerenesse of concernment and use of edification Object 12. The people are to consent yea they must have a power and some thing more than a consent in Excommunication Ergo they are all to bee present The antecedent is proved 1. Because they were not puffed up they did not keepe the Feast they did not dostaine from eating with the incestuous person onely by consent 2. Others not of that Church did excommunicate by consent 3. It is said v. 12 doe yee not judge them that are within Answ. If you will have them to excommunicate the same way that they doe other duties you may say they excommunicate the same way that Pastors and Elders doe and if they Judge vers 12. as the Elders doe either all the people are Judges and where are then all the governed if all bee governours or then hee speaketh in this Chapter to the Churches-Iudges onely 2. There bee degrees of consent these of other Churches have a tacite and remote consent the people of the Congregation are to heare and know the cause and deale in private with the offender and to mourne and pray for him Object 13. The highest and double honour is due to him who laboureth in the word 1 Tim. 5. 17. but if the Presbyteriall Church be the highest Church it shall not have the double honour for it is onely the governing Church Answ. Highest honour is due in suo genere to both And this is as if you should compare obedience and honour that I owe to my Father with that which I owe to my grand-Father 2. Paul 1 Tim. 5. 17. compareth Elders of diverse sorts together as the Ruling and Teaching Elder here you compare Pastors to bee honoured in respect of one act with themselves to bee honoured in respect of another act and this might prove I am to give more honour to my Pastor for preaching in the Pulpit then for ruling in the Church-Senate Object 14. The Congregation is the highest Church for it hath all the Ordinances Word Sacraments Jurisdiction Ergo there is not any Presbyteriall Church higher which hath only disciplinary power Answ. There is a double highnesse one of Christian Dignity 2. Another of Church-prehemenency or of Ecclesiasticall authority indeed the Congregation the former way is highest the company of Believers is the Spouse and ransomed Bride of Christ. But the Eldership hath the Ecclesiasticall eminency as the Kings heire and Sonne is above his Master and Teacher one way yet the Teacher as the Teacher by the fift Commandement is above the Kings Sonne as the Teacher is above him who is taught And so is the Case here Object 15. The Arguments for a Classicall or Presbyteriall Church do much side with Prelacy for you make many Lords ruling and not teaching Answ. Let all judge whether the independent power of three Elders accountable to none in a Church-way but to Iesus Christ onely as you make your little Kingdomes on Earth be neerer to the Popes Monarchy and especially when there is but one Pastor in the Congregation then the subordinate Government of fourescore or an hundred Eldersâ— sure I am three Neighbours are neerer to one Monarch then three hundred 2. One Monarchicall Society is as tyrannicall Antichristianism as one Monarchicall Pastor 3. If wee made many ruling and dominering Lords you should say something but wee make many servants endued onely with Ministeriall power onely to teach and rule and to bee accomptable to the Church your Eldership in this agreeth with the Pope that though they deliver many Soules to Satan yet no Man on Earth can in a Church-way say What doe you ACT. XV. A Patterne of a juridicall Synod THat the Apostles in that famous Synod Act. 15. did not goe on by the assistance of an immediately inspired spirit and by Apostolick authority but onely as Elders and the Doctors and Teachers assisted with an ordinary spirit to me is evident from the course of the context 1. Because Act. 15. when a controversie arise in the Church â—â— Antiochia Epiphanius saith as also Hieronymus by Câ—â—mbus and others touching the keeping of Moses his Law especially the Ceremonies except they would bee losers in the buâ—nesse of their salvation Paul could not goe as sent by Amiâ—h to submit that Doctrine which hee received not from flesh and blood but by the revelation of Jesus Christ Gal. 1. 12. to the determination of a Synod of Apostles and Elders for who would think that the immediatly inspiring spirit iâ— Pâ—ul would submit himselfe and his Doctrine to the immediately inspiring spirit in Paul Peter Apostles and Elders therefore Paul and Birnabas come as sent to Jerusalem not â—â— Apostles or as immediately inspired but as ordinary teachâ—â— Therefore saith Diodatus Not because these two A◠〈…〉 were every wayequall to the rest in the light and conduct 〈◊〉 Spirit and in Apostolicall authority Gal. 2. 6. 8. had any 〈◊〉 instruction or of confirmation but only to give the weake 〈◊〉 who had more confidence in Peter and James and in the Church at Jerusalem and to stop false doctors mouths and to estaâ—â—â—â— by common votes a generall order in the Church Hence when a controversie ariseth in the Apostolicke Church and the Controversie is betwixt an Apostle as Paul was and others and both sides alledge Scripture as here both did out of all controversie there is no reason that the Apostle Paul who was now a party should judge it and when a single Congregation in the like case is on two
Elders of Jerusalem for 〈◊〉 can Elders of one sister Church impose Lawes burdens â—28 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees Ch. 16. 4. upon sister Churches or hâ—w can they pen canonicall Scripture joyntly with the Apostles Some of our brethren say so much of those degrees that they obliged formally the Churches as Scriptures doe oblige the learned Junius saith well that the Apostles did nothing as Apostles where there was an ordinarie and established Elderyâ—â— in the Church therefore those Elders behoved to bee the 〈◊〉 of Antioch for Act. 17. v. 2. 〈…〉 Commissioners were 〈◊〉 from Antioch then Paul and 〈…〉 I thinke also the Churches of Cyria and 〈◊〉 〈…〉 there as well as Antioch and de jure 〈…〉 should have beene there The case was theirs every way the same with the Church of Antioch and their soules subverted v. 24. 6. Those who are named v. 22. Apostles Elders and the whole Church are called v. 25. Apostles and Elders and Brethren and elsewhere alwayes Apostles and Elders Elders including brethren or the whole Church v. 22. of some chosen men and brethren as Act. 13. 2. v. 6. Ch. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. 2. I desire to try what truth is here that this Synod but power and authoritie in points dogmaticall but no Church-power saith the seventh proposition of the reverend and godly Brethren of New England and no power of jurisdiction but the Church of Antioch had Church-power and power of jurisdiction to determine this cause and censure the contraveeners as our Brethren say But I assume this Synod tooke this Church-power off their hand and with the joynt power of their owne Commissioners sent from Antioch v. 2. v. 22. 23. determined both cause and controversie and it never returned to any Church-Court at Antioch as is cleare v. 25 26 27 28. Ergo this Synod had a Church-power 2. A power and authoritie dogmaticall to determine in matters of doctrine is a Church-power proper to a Church as is granted by our brethren and as wee prove from Act. 20. 29. This is a part of the over-sight committed to the Eldership of Ephesus to take heed to men rising amongst themselves speaking perverse things that is teaching false doctrine and if they watch over them as members of their Church for they were v. 30. men of their owne they were to censure them 2. If Pergamus bee rebuked Reâ—el 2. 14. 15. and threatned with the removing of their Candlesticke because they had amongst them those who held the doctrine of Balaam and the doctrine of the Nicolaitans hated by Christ himselfe and did not use the power of jurisdiction against them then that Church which hath power dogmaticall to judge of doctrine hath power also of jurisdiction to censure those who hold the false doctrine of Balaam and v. 20. Christ saith to Thyatira Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because thou suffâ—â—â— that woman Jesabel which calleth herselfe a Prophetesse to teach and to seduâ—e my servants to commit fornication and to eate things sacrifâ—â—d to Idols Hence I argue what Church hath power to try the false doctrin of Jesabel and is blamed for not censuring her but permitteth her to teach and to seduce the servants of God hath also power of jurisdiction against her false doctrine this poposition I take to bee evident in those two Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira I assume but this Synod Act. 15. hath authoritie and power to condemne the false doctrine taught by subverters of soules teaching a necessitie of circumcision in the Churches of Syria Cilicia Antioch c. Act. 15. vers 23 24. Therefore this Synod hath power of jurisdiction 3. Every societie which hath power to lay on burdens as here this Synod hath v. 28. and to send decrees to be observed by the Churches as Act. 16. 4. and to send and conclude that they observe no such thing and that they observe such and such things Act. 21. 25. by the power of the holy Ghost conveened in an Assembly 25. and judging according to Gods Word as â— 7 8 9 10 11 12 c. these have power of juridiction to censure the contraveners but this Synod is such a societie Ergo it hath this power The Proposition is Matth. 18. 18. If hee refuse to heare the Church let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican nothing can bee answered here but because this Synod commandeth onely in a brotherly way but by no Church-power therefore they have no power of jurisdiction But with reverence of these learned men this is petitio principii to begge what is in question for the words are cleare a brotherly counsell and advise is no command no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no decree which wee must observe and by the observing whereof the Churches are established in the faith as is said of these decrees Act. 16. 4 5. To give a brotherly counsell such as Abigail gave to David and a little maide gave to Namaan is not a burden laid on by the commander but it is said of this decree v. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seemed good to the holy Ghost to lay no other burden on you Also we do not say that power of jurisdiction is in provinciall or nationall Synods as in the Churches who have power to excommunicate for 1. this power of jurisdiction in Synods is cumulative not privative 2. It is in the Synod quoad actus imperatos potius quam act us elicitos according to commanded rather then to elicit acts for the Synod by an ecclesiasticall power added to that intrinsecall power of jurisdiction in Churches doth command the Churches to use their power of jurisdiction rather then use it actually her selfe Let me also make use of two propositions agreed upon in a Synod at New England Their 3. proposition The fraternitie have an authoritative concurrence with the Preshyteny in judiciall Acts. 4. Proposition The fraternitie in an Organicall body actu subordinate id est per modum obedientiae in subordination by way of obedience to the Presbytery in such judiciall Acts 2 Cor. 10. 6. Now if here the whole Church of Jerusalem as they say from v. 22. was present and joyned their authoritative concurrence to these decrees there was here in this Synod an Organicall body of eyes eares and other members that is of Apostles Teachers Elders and people and so a formed Church by our brethrens doctrine â—â—gs Paul and Barnabas v. 2. being sent to this Synod by the Church of Antioch to complaine were sent to tell the formed and organicall Churches as it is Matth. 18 19 which is a good argument if not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Aristotle saith yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. If the Brethren here concurre as giving obedience to the Elders and the Apostles doe here determine as Apostles and Elders then the brothren in this Organicall body doe concurre to the forming of these decrees by way of obedience to the
principles for sometime they say the Apostles gave out this decree as Apostles and sometime there is nothing here done by a meere doctrinall power such as Paul had over Peter or one single Pastor hath over another now it is sure that Paul had no Apostolick power over Peter and that one Pastor have not Apostolick power over another 2. When our brethren say here that the Apostles as Apostles by an infallible spirit gave out this Decree they doe in this helpe the Papists as Bellarmine Becanus Grâ—â—rut and in particular the Jesuit Lorinus who saith decrâ—um authenticum cujus inspirator spiritus sanctâ— and so saith Cornelius a lapide visiâ—m est nob is inspiratis decretis a Spiritu sanctus therefore saith hee the councell cannot erre and so Salmeron and Cajetan say and expresly Stapleton saith this Apostosack definition flowed from the instinct of the holy Ghost observandum saith Stapleton quanta habenda sit ecclesiae definienth authoritâ—s hence our brether here must yeeld either that all Synods are infallible as Papists say this Synod the patterne of all Synods being concluded by an Apostolick spirit could not erre and so neither can councells erre or they must with Socinians and Arminians say there is no warrant for Synods here at all And certainly though wee judge our brethren as farre from Popery and Socinianisme as they thinke wee detest Anti-Christian Presbytery yet if this Synod bee concluded by an Apostolick spirit it is no warrant to bee imitated by the Churches and wee have no ground hence for lawfull Synods Whittakerus Calvin Beza Luther and all our Divines do all alledge this place as a pregnant ground not of Apostolick but of ordinary and constant Synods to the end of the world and Diodatus good to the holy Ghost because they did treat of ecclesiasticall reders concerning the quietnes and order of the Church wherein ecclesiasticall authoritie hath place the Assembly used this tearme it seemed good to us which is not used neither in articles of faith nor in the commandements which meerely concerned the conscience and to shew that authoritie was with holy reason and wisedome there is added and to the holy Ghost who guided the Apostles in these outward things also 1. Cer. 7. 25. 40. 2. If our brethren meane that the Elders and brethren were in this Apostolick and immediatly inspired Synodicall determination not as collaterall penners of Scriptures joyned with the Apostles but onely as consenters and as consenters by power of an ordinary holy Ghost working consent in them more suo according to their capacitie as ordinary Elders 1. They yet more helpe the Papists because they must say onely Apostles and so onely their successors the Prelates had definitive voices in this Synod the Presbyters and Brethren did no more then Papists and Prelates say Presbyters did in generall councells of old and therefore the Presbyter is to subscribe Ego A. N. Presbyter consentiens subseribo whereas the Prelate subscribed say they Ego A. B. Episcopus definiens subscribo wee crave a warrant in Gods Word to make an Apostle or a Prelate a Synodicall definer having a definitive voyce and the Elder Brother or Presbyter to have a consultative voyce for here all the multitude if there was a multitude present doe make Synodicall decrees by consulting and consenting yea all the nation may come to a nationall Synod and both reason dispute and consent because matters of doctrine and government of the Church concerneth all therefore all have an interest of presence and all have an interest of reasoning and 3. by consequent all have an interest of consenting yea of protesting on the contrary if the Synod determine any thing against the Word of God If they say there is a threeford consent in this Synod 1. an Apostolicall 2. a second Synodicall agreeing to Elders as Elders and a third that of the people or a popular What a mixt Synod shall this be but 1. then as the Epistle to the Tlxssalonians is called the Epistle of Paul not the Epistle of Silvanus and Timotheus though Silvanus and Timotheus did consent so these dogmata or decrees should not be called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders as they are called Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 6. Act. 21. 25. but onely the decrees of the Apostles seeing the Elders did onely consent and had no definitive influence in making the decree by this doctrine as Silvanus and Timotheus were not joynt pen-men of Scripture with Paul 3. When as it is said the specification of actions must not bee taken from the efficient cause but from the formall object and all that a done in this Synod might have beene done by a single Pastor I answer wee doe not fetch the specification of this rebuke and of these decrees from the efficient causes but from the formall object for an Apostle might his alone have rebuked these obtruders of circumcision and made this decree materialiter for Paul did more his alone then this when hee wrote the Eâ—istle to the Romans but yet one Pastor could not have Synodically rebuked and given out a decree formally Synodicall laying an Ecclesiasticall tie on moe Churches then one there is great ods to doe one and the same action formally and to doe the same action materially and I beleeve though actions have not by good logick their totall specification from their efficient cause yet that ordinances of God as lawfull have their specification from the efficient causes in part our brethren cannot deny For what made the difference betwixt Aaron his fire offered to the Lord and Nadab and Abihu their strange and unlawfull fire that they offered to the Lord but that the on fire had God for its author the other had men and the like I say of Gods feasts and the feasts devised by Jeroboam else if a woman preach and administrate the Lords Supper in the Church that preaching and sacrament administrated by her should not have a different specification and essence if wee speake morally or Theologically from that same very preaching and celebration of the Supper performed in the Church by a lawfull Pastor it is as I conceive of the essence of an action Synodicall I say not its totall essence that it cannot bee performed by one in a Church-way and with an ecclesiasticall tie but it must be performed by many else it is not a Synodicall action and it is true that Paul Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. hath in substance the same Canon forbidding scandall which is forbidden in this Canon prohibiting eating of meats offered to Idolls and blood in the case of scandall but I pray you is there not difference betwixt the one prohibition and the other yea there is for Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 10. it hath undenyably Apostolick authoritie here it hath onely Synodicall 2. There it is a commandement of God here it is a Canon of the Church 3. There it commeth from one man here from a
flow immediately and necessarily from the essence of a Church and a congregation be essentially a Church then this power agreeth to all Churches whether consociated or not consociated and without respect of what neighbours they have whether many or few whether any or none 2. A congregation its alone cannot have sole power of jurisdiction and then be deprived of it when God sendeth neighbour Churches for then neighbouring Churches which are given for helpe should be given for losse the contrary whereof Ames saith Nor doe Synods saith he constitute a new forme of a Church Answ. Power of Iurisdiction floweth from the essence of a congregation in an Iland Ergo a totall and compleat power of jurisdiction floweth from the essence of a Church or congregation consociated it followeth no wayes so a pastor of a Congregation hath as a pastor power to rebuke sinne and to administrate the Sacraments Ergo when three pastors are added to help him he hath the sole power of rebuking sinne and the sole and entire power to administrate the Sacraments and none of these three pastors hath power with him it followeth not and because these three pastors are added to help him and their pastorall power added to him is cumulative and auxiliary but not privative or destructive of his pastorall power therefore the first pastor suffereth losse by the addition of these three to him who will say this our Brethren do conceive the power of Congregations in its kind and essence to be Monarchicall so as if any power from consociated Congregations be added thereunto the Congregations power Monarchicall is d minished and the essence of it changed 2. Compleat and entire power to rule both the Congregation and the Members of consociated Churches in so far as they do keep communion with that Congregation and may either edifie or scandalize them floweth not immediatly and necessarily from the essence of every Congregation even in remote Islands not consociated with others that we never said 3. A power to governe well and according to the rule of the word added to another power to governe well and according to the word is an auxiliary power and no way destrective of that power to which it is added indeed a power to governe well added to a power of male administration in a Congregation is distructive of that power and reason it should be so because Christ never gave any such power of male administration to a Congregation but a power of right governing added to a power of right governing is neither destructive thereof nor doth it constitute a new forme of a Church or a Church power but only inlarge the prâ—existent form to extend it selfe farther for the edification of more soules But saith Mr. Mather if it be against the light of nature that the adverse party be the sole judge which must be if the sâ—le power of Iurisdiction be in the Congregation as we grant in an extraordinary case when a Congregation is in an Island its alone and so it shall be lawfull for a single Congregation to doe that which is against all equity and the very light of nature it must then follow that it is not against the light of nature that a Congregation though consociated with other Congregations have entire jurisdiction within it selfe Answ. None of us do teach that it is against the light of nature that the adverse party be the judge it might fall out in a generall councell lawfully convened from which there is no provocation yea and in a nationall councell for all councels may erre the adverse party may judge as it was a lawfull councell according to a Church-constitution that condemned Christ of blisphemy and they were also his enemies but we teach that it is not congruous to the wisdome of Christ nor to the light of nature that Christ should have appointed all the ordinary Churchcourts so many thousand congregations who may rather erre then extraordinary and higher Synods to be the onely ordinary judges in their owne cause Nor doth any thing more follow from this argument that when there is one congregation its alone in an Iland destitute of the helpe of consociated Churches which is a defect of an extraordinary providence of Christ in that one singular exigence that that congregation shall be both judge and party in its owne cause if we suppose that one Micaiah shall contend for the truth and all the rest of the Prophets and people of that congregation to be against the truth and to judge and condemne one man who seeketh the Lord in truth It is a wonder to me that Thessalonica was but one single congregation all hearing one Word partakers of one Lords Supper at one Table yet the Apostle ascribeth to them that which is a note to worthy Baynes of the numerous multitude of the Church of Ierusalem from whence went the Word of God to all the world 1 Thes. 1. 8. For from you sounded out the Word of the Lord not onely in Macedonia and Achaia but also in every place your faith to God-ward is spread abroad I deny not what Mr. Mather and Thomson say but 5000 may meet to heare the word and many thousands were gathered together Luke 12. to heare Christ but these reverend brethren doe leave out 1. The inconvenience of thronging so all at once for they trode one upon another 2. Christ preached not to all those thousand at once for it is expresly said v. 1. He began to say to his Disciples So Christ refusing to preach to such a disorderly confluence of people who could not heare and his doctrine being all for his Disciples the very Sermon being preached to his Disciples onely Matth. 10. 2 3 4 c. and the Parable of the rich man v. 22. he applieth to his Disciples Then he said to his Disciples therefore I say unto you take no thought for your life c. It evidenceth to me that Christ condemneth a numerous multitude in one congregation to heare at once And whereas Chrysostome saith 5000 persons did heare his voyce at once in one congregation by meanes of Scaffolds and Galleries and Mr. Mather is willing to yeeld eight thousand an hundred and twenty were all assembled in one place to heare the Word and that all the multitude of converts at Ierusalem were together in Salomons porch Act. 5. 12. I grant three thousand could heare one at once but alas this is a great uncertainty for independent congregations But 1. this is to be proved that eight thousand Mr. Mather hath not added many other multitudes mentioned Act. 5. 14. Act. 6. 1. v. 7. and elsewhere did meet daily in the Temple 2. Daily and ordinarily from house to house 3. To celebrate the Lords Supper daily in the Temple and in every private house there were need of many Scaffolds and Galleries to sit at one Table 4. To make one judicature and have more then power of consenting in Church censures as our brethren
sum of mony the common people ordinarily follow the learned and the wise of the City and Land This could not have been done except the far greater part of the City had submitted to the Gospell for when they were well neer ready to tear Paul in peeces they behoved to be wounderfully tamed when many Believed and came and confessed and shewed their deeds v. 18. Baynes com on 1. ch Ephes. saith Ephesus was a City sogiven to riot that it banished Hermodor Upon no other consideration but because he was an honest sober man And also Paul 1 Cor. 16. saith v. 9. for a great doore and effectuall is open to me at Ephesus This was as all Interpreters Protestant and popish say uno ore a large harvest Upon these considerations I leave to our reverend Brethren their judgement if Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson say right we doe not thinke they were more in number at Ephesus then in Corinth and Ierusalem where the Christians met all in one place Likewise Samaria a numerous City was one Church for that it is said of them Acts 8 5 6. They heard Philip v. 14. Samaria received the Word it was a publick visible Churchreceiving of the word and v. 12. They believed and were Baptized both men and women Where a multitude no better then Heathen as Samaria was receive the Seale of the Covenant to wit Baptisme they must receive it in a Church-way except we thinke that promiscuously all come to age were received to the Seales and when Peter and Iohn came to Samaria to helpe Philip in the worke it cannot be that they all went to one House and to one single Assembly to preach the Word The Church of Antiochia must be a Presbyteriall Church aâ— it is Acts 11. v. 19. 20. for the multitude of Believers may be collected from These who were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Steven 20 when they were come to Antioch spaks unto the Grecians preaching the Lord Jesus 21. and the hand of the Lord was with them and a great number believed and turned to the Lord. This is not like to be one Congregation seeing they are 1. much people 2. many scattered preachers 3. And the Hand of the Lord accompained their labours 2. v. 23. when Barnabas sent by the Church of Ierusasalem came and saw the Grace of God he exhorted them all That with purpose of heart they would cleave to the Lord and upon Barnabas his preaching v. 24. much people was added to the Lord. Here is a second accession made to the Church of Antioch 3 v. 25. Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus to seek Saul 26. And when hee had found him hee brought him to Antioch And it came to passe that a whole yeare they assembled themselves with the Church and taught much people here is a third accession And such a huge multiplication that the Church of Antioch giveth a denomination of Christianity to all the Christian Churches of the World All which saith it cannot be one poore single Congregation for there was at least if not more then one Congregation at Antioch when tidings came to Jerusalem that the Lord had a Church at Antioch before they sent Barnabas to these Churches v. 22. and what might this Church grow to when much people was added to the Lord by the labours of Barnabas v. 24. And how was it increased when Barnabas and Paul after that taught the Word to much people a whole yeare v. 26. It grew after that a great Church so that Chrysostom commendeth Antioch for the prime Church And Oecumenius saith for this cause there was a Patriarch appointed at Antioch which certainly sayth thus much that it was a more numerous Church then one single Congregation and Cyrillus so extolled the Church of Antioch because the Disciples were first named Christians there that he saith this was the new name that Esaiah said the Mouth of the Lord should name and so doth Hilarius expound the Text which seeing it is clearely the new glory of the Church of the Gentiles adjoyned to the Church of the Iewes it cannot arise from a handfull of a single Congregation in the mind of these Fathers and though we love not with some antiquity to make Antioch the first Church before Rome yet seeing it was of old before Rome we may hence collect that that Church which was patriarchall was not Congregationall and therefore I make no use hereof Volaterranus who saith of old the Patriarch of Antioch had under him 14. Metropolitans 53. Bishops and 366 Temples onely it is like that Antiquity hath believed that there was a great number of Believers in this Church at first Now to These which to mee prove it was more then one Congregation wee may adde that there was Ch. 13. 1. in the Church that was at Antioch certaine Prophets and Teachers as they are reckoned out These at Antioch Ministered to the Lord in publick prayers saith Beza and preaching and saith Diodatus in administration also of the Sacraments and other parts of the Evangelick Ministery Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now I would know what all these Prophets and Doctors beside Paul and Barnabas who preached a whole yeare at Antioch did in peaching to one single Congregation and also it is said Acts 15. 35. Paul and Barnabas continued at Antioch Teaching and preaching the Word of Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with also many others Certainly here is a Colledge of preaching Pastors who also did lay hands on Paul and Barnabas Acts 13. v. 3. which all could not be busied in Teaching one single Congregation at Antioch Mr. Mather saith that the whole multitude of the Church of Antioch were gathered together Acts 14. 27. and Acts 15. 30 31. to heare the Epistle read which was sent from the Synod Therefore this Church was no more then might meete in one place Answ. I answer the place Acts 14. 27. is the representative Church for they met for a poynt of Discipline at least for a matter that concerned all the Churches to wit to know how God had opened the doore of faith to the Gentiles then must the many thousands of Men and Women which made up the Church at Ierusalem Acts 2. 42. Acts 4. 4. Acts 5. 14. Acts 6. 1. v. 7. Acts 21. v. 22. be many Congregations now any Man may judge how unpossible it was for the many thousands of the Church of Ierusalem to meet as one Congregation for the Lords Supper and matters of Discipline and it is knowen that the many thousands of the believing Iewes convened to the feast did not make one Church Acts 21. 20. 21 22. for our Brethren say that was an extraordinary confluence of many people from all â—udea came to the feast of Pentecost And this many learned Protestant Divines answer to that place But 2. I doe believe that the assembling of the multitude at Antioch c. 15. v. 30. which sayth
because the Apostle mentioneth onely one single Church-meeting I think not and therefore the Apostles mentioning of one assembling of the Church acts 11. 26. and of one multitude in the singular number acts 15. 30. can never prove that there was but one single Congregation at Antioch Therefore there be great â—dds betwixt meeting in a Church and meeting in the Church Also Tit. 1. 5. for this cause was Titus left at Creet that he might appaynt Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in every City if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be not all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 14. 23. acts 16. 4. 5. That is if ordaining of Elders of every City bee not as good as ordaining of Elders in every Church then must there be but in all and every City where ever the Apostles or Evangelists planted Churches but one single Congregation and not any more then could meet in a single Congregation which is a conjecture and much contrary to these times when the Gospell admirably grew in the World And it must follow that every City had but such a competent number as met in one place and if this hold as an uncertaine thing in great Cities then must we say an Eldership in a City and an Eldership of many Congregations were the first planted apostolick Churches and so rules to us also And looke what frame of Churches the Apostles did institute in Cities that same they behoved to institute in Villages also for places cannot change the frame of any institution of Christ. 2. The communion of Saints and Church-edification is as requisite for Villages as for Cities Arguments removed which Mr. Richard Mather and Mr. William Thomson Pastors in New England in their answer to Mr. Charles Herle do bring so far as they make against the authors former Treatises and a scanning of some Synodicall propositions of the Churches of N. England MR. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 1. 9. Governing power is only in the Elders 1 Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 12. 8. Heb. 13. 17. the people hath no power but rather a liberty or priviledge which when it is exercised about Ordination Deposition Excommunication is of the whole communiter or in generall but not of all and every member in particular Women for their Sex children for want of discrâ—tion are dâ—barred Answ. If there be no governing power in Women nor any act at all in excommunication You loose many arguments that you bring 1 Cor. 5. to prove that all have hand in excommunication 1. Because Paul writeth to all 2. All were to mourne 3. All ware to forbeare the company of the excommunicated men Then belike Paul writeth not to all Saints at Corinth not to Women and Women were not to mourne for the scandall nor to forbeare his company 2. The priviledge being a part of liberty purchased by Christs Body it must be due to Women for the liberty wherewith Christ hath made Women free cannot be taken away by any Law of God from their Sex except in Christ Iesus there be difference betwixt Iew and Gentile male and female nor is it removed because iâ— iâ— a power or authority for the authors say it is no power but a priviledge 3. What priviledge the people have in ordination to confer a Ministery which they neither have formally nor vertually I know not But I doe willingly say something here of the peoples power The first Synodicall proposition of New England is 1. Propos. The fraternity is the first Subject of all Ministeriall power radicalitèr idest 〈◊〉 per modum collationis some say suppletivè non habitualitèr non actualit â—r non formalitèr That is if I conceive it right The people voyd of all Officers have a vertuall power to conferre a Ministery on their Officers though they have not this power in themselves I could in some sense yield that Believers not Angells are capable of the Ministeriall power to exercise it formally but that Believers doe or can by any way of causative influence make Church-Officers I see not they may design a man qualified to bean Officer to the Office and that is all But say they people wanting or being naked and without all Officers hath not formally or habitually any power in them this latter part Igrant and the 2. Proposition I grant to wit That the presbytery is the first subject of all presbyteriall power habitually and formally But I doe not see how it standeth with the third proposition which is 3. The fraternity or the people without the Officers and without Women or children have an authoritative concurrence with the presbytery in judiciall acts Because if the Brethren have an halfe Ministeriall power with the Officers in acts of Jurisdiction and Excommunication Deposition and Censures I see not how there is not a Ministeriall power formally and habitually at least in part in the Brethren and so contrary to the third proposition the Prasbytery is not the first subject of all Prebyteriall power for the brethren are sharers with the Elders in this power 2. We desire to see it made good by Gods Word that the brethren have a joynt power of Jurisdiction with the Elders for the Table giveth them a brotherly publick power not by way of Charity but a politick Church power in many eminent acts especially in those eight and that constantly 1. In the admission 1. In Sending Messengers to the Churches 2. In the excommunication of members 2. 2. In interpretation of Scripture 3. In the calling 3. In a judiciall determination of controversies of Religion in a synod 4. And Deposition of Ministers 4. In a power of disposing of things indifferent I cannot see any judiciall power or any farther then a charitative yielding by way of a loving and brotherly consent that the Scripture giveth to brethren 3. How this can be denied to be a power of jurisdiction and governing and an actuall Ministeriall using of the Keyes of the Kingdome by those who ex officio by place and calling are no Officers I believe is not easily understood 4. The letter that I saw sayth that that learned and godly Divine Mr. Cotton and some others thinke that the Church as it is an Organicall Body made up of Elders and people is the first subject of all Ecclesiasticall power and they divide it into a power of authority and a power of liberty whereof the power of authority belongeth to the Elders or Eldership and the power of liberty to the Fraternity or Brethren that are not Officers and therefore these reverend brethren deny any authoritative concurrence to the brethren and they thinke that the Church as it is an homogeneall body that is a company destitute of Officers cannot formally ordaine excommunicate or censure the Elders though in case of obstinacy they may doe that which is equivalent and so separate from them The 4. Proposition is The fraternity or Brethren in an Organicall Body or in a â—â—med and established Church consisting of Officers and people act and use
their authority subordinate per modum obedi ntâ—ae subordinately and by way of due obedience to the Elders 2 Câ—r 10. 6. But I desire a word of Christs Testament for this where wee aâ—de that collaterall Judges acting as Judges doe act by way of obedience and subjection one to another for if the brethren 1 Cor. 5. convened in Court with the Elders to deliver the incestuous man to Satan do act in that Court as giving obedience to the Elders I see not how they concurre authoritatively is sharers with them of that same Ministeriall power if it be said brethren though they act as Judges in excommunicating yet they remaine brethren and a part of the flock and so in all their morall acts of authoritative concurring with the Elders they are under the pastorall care of these who watch for Soules and so they judge and act even in the Court as under subjection to their watchmen who must give an accompt for their Soules I answer so the Elders in their acts of the most supreame Ministeriall authority and acting in a Church court leave not off to be brethren and a part of the flock of Christ and so in subjection one to another for six Elders watch for the Soule of one and one also for the Soules of six and so if this were a good reason the Elders should act with subordination of obedience to Elders As the people act with subordination to the Elders 2. The place cited for this 2 Cor. 10. 6. where it is said that the Preachers have in readinesse to revenge all disobedience must inferre that they are to revenge by the word which is mighty through God to cast downe strong holds as is said there v. 4. 5. even disobedience of Elders ruling unjustly and abusing the Keyes no lesse then disobedience of the people And I see not how brethen acting in a Church-Court joyntly with Elders how in that they put on the relation of the flock and the part governed in the very act of exercising acts of governing for otherwayes one Pastor in the act of preaching in the Name of Jesus Christ and so in authority above these to whom he preacheth doth preach subordinatè and as in subjection to the whole organicall and formed Church who hath power to censure him if he preach erroneous Doctrine 3. I see not how the third Proposition doth stand to wit that the brethren share with the Elders in authoritative acts of the Keyes and yet they â—ct according to the. 4. Proposition as under the Eldership by way of subjection and obedience to them Except this be that which our brethren meane that the people of a single Congregation exercise acts of Jurisdiction by way of dependence so as they may be censured by the Elders if they erre but the Elders if they erre are every way Popes and so independent that there is no Church-power on Earth above them that in a Church-way may censure them or call them to an accompt 4. The Table of New England divideth the actuall exercise of the power in a Charitative power by way of Love and Charity and a politick or Church-exercise the politick exercise againe is either brotherly fraternall or Presbyteriall and the presbyteriall exercise is either 1. Teaching  or  2. Governing And Teaching is either by way of Office or Administrating the Sacraments The Presbyteriall exercise of the Keyes is independentElders in the power of governing sed respectâ— apotelesmatis sâ—u complementi censurae in respect of the effect or a compleat act of governing the Elders Rule and Act with dependence upon the people in these foure cases 1. In excommunication  2. In judging  3. In sentencing the aocused  4. In election or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in calling of a Minister So that the Elders there alone without the people can exercise none of these acts completely without the people so heare the Elders depend upon the people in their actuall governing and the Fraternity or Brethren depend on the Elders by way of subjection or obedience to them Yet give me leave the letter informeth me that it is said by many learned and godly men in New England that if their policy should make the government of the Church popular they should give up the cause But I conceive the government to be popular though the people only be not governours for Morâ—llius never taught any such thing now this government maketh Elders and people to governe the Church joyntly with mutuall dependence one upon another which certainly maketh the brethren in the Lord as well as the Elders for if the Elders be not these onely which watch for the peoples Soules as these which must give an accompt Heb. 13. 17 18. and they be not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over the people in the Lord as is said 1 Thess. 5. 12. 13. Then the brethren must be taken in with them aâ— joynt governours as is said Propos. 3. Which certainly must confound the Scripturall order established by God betwixt the Pastors and the Flock the Watchmen and the City the shepâ—eards and the flock these who are to obey and these who are over them in the Lord. The 5. and 6. Proposition is The Brethren may not excommunicate an Elder but mediante concilio by the intervening sentence of the Elders is but the brethren may separate and withdraw from the Presbyteris after they refuse sound advise Answ. 1. This is much contrary to that which they ordinarily teach to wit that people destitute of Officers may ordaine and excommunicate their Officers 2. By this learning the Soules of Elders are in an hard case for when they do all scandalously 〈◊〉 there is no Ecclesiasticall meane of edifying them for there is no Church on Earth to excomunicate Elders when they â—â—re Separation from them is an unwarrantable way except they be excommunicated 3. In the case of the Elderships incorrigible scandalls the power of excommunication retireth into the brethren yet it was never formally in the brethren nor can they exercise this power but mediante Presbyteriâ— that is they cannot excommunicate the Eldership but by the Judiciall sentence of the Eldership and so the power is but a shadow Mr. Mather Mr. Thomson cap. 2. pag. 16 17. though some have appealed as Luther and Cranmer from the Pope to a generall councell Yet not from a Congreation to a generall councell Answ. In matters doctrinall some as Luther and others have justly appealed from a Congregation to a generall councell though Luther and Cranmer did it not though verily I professe I cannot see what power of Jurisdiction to censure scandalls can be in a generall councell there may be some meerly Doctrinall power if such a councell could be had and that is all M. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 2. pag 20. if Churches be dependent on Synods because the light of nature teacheth a communion and assistance in government by the same reason Churches must end in a Monarchy on
professor at Rome Joan. de Lugo teach that the Sacraments are morall causes of grace but not physicall It is grosse that Henricus saith that God createth grace per tactum Sacramentorum by the touch of the Sacraments as Christ cured the Leper by the touch of his hand for Sacraments are not miracles as Papists say Phisicke worketh upon a mans body when he sleepeth so doe Sacraments justifie and worke grace ex opere operat◠though the faith of the Sacrament-Receiver doe worke nothing at all 4. Sacraments are considered 1. As holy signes 2. As Religious seales 3. As instruments by which faith worketh 4. As meanes used by us out of conscience of obedience to Christs commandement who hath willed us to use them Sacraments as signes are objective and morall causes exciting the mind as the word doth in a morall way they represent Christ and him crucified and this Sacraments have commune with the word The Sacrament is a visible word teaching us 2. Sacraments have the consideration of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tantum they be seales and not teaching and representing signes onely this way also they have no reall or physicall action in them or from them for a seale of a Prince and State as it is such conferreth not an acre or rigge of land but it is a legall Declaration that those lands written in the body of the Charter doe duely belong to the Person to whom the Charter is given But Arminians do here erre as Episcopius and also Socinus and Smalcius who teach that the Sacraments be nothing but externall rites and declarative signes scadowing out Christ and the benefits of his death to us because they find a morall objective working in the Word of God but a substantiall and Physicall working betwixt us and Christs bodie they say is ridiculous but they would remember that this is an insufficient enumeration the seale of a Kings Charter hath besides a morall action on the mind by bringing to the mind such lands given to such a man and so the seales worketh upon the witnesses or any who readeth the Charter as well as upon the owner of the Charter I say beside this the seale hath some reall action I grant not in it but about it and beside it for it sealeth that such lands are really and in effect given by the Prince and State the action is about the seale not in or from the seale When a Generall of an Army delivereth the keyes of a Castle to a Keeper thereof he saith I deliver the house to you when he delivereth the Keyes onely Physically and not the stones walls or timber of the house by a Physicall action or Physicall touch contactu Physico yet in delivering the keyes he doth really deliver to him the Castle but in a legall and morall way Arminians and Socinians may see here that there is neither an action by way of naked representation and teaching for the Sacrament is a teaching signe to the beholders who receive it not nor is it a Physicall action as if Christs Physicall body in a Physicall way were given yet it is an action reall and morall so the Sacraments are signes exhibitive and not naked signes Our brethren doe side with Arminians and Socinians who so often teach that Sacraments make nothing to be what they were not but onely declare things to be what they are It is true the formall effect of a Sacrament is to seale and confirme to seale and confirme is but a legall strengthning of a right and not the adding of any new thing Yet in this the Sacrament differeth from a seale 1. That to a civill seale there is not required the beleeving and faith of the owner of the Charter to make the seale effectuall for whether the Lord of the lands beleeve that his seale doth confirme him in the lands or not the seale of it selfe by the Law of the Prince State maketh good his right to the lands but Sacraments doe not worke ex opere operato as civill seales doe worke even as Physicke worketh upon the body without the faith of the mind though the man bee sleeping Hence the third consideration of a Sacrament as an instrument Faith in and through the Sacrament being wakened and stirred up layeth hold upon Christ his death and benefits and for this cause there is a reall exhibition of the thing signified and the Sacrament is an exhibitive seale 4. The Sacrament in the use is considered as wee use it in obedience to God who saith in the Lords Supper Do this in remembrance of me and in this it differeth from a civill seale also The Prince doth not conferre a seale to confirme a man in his land upon condition that he will make use of it otherwayes it shall be to him as no seale But God hath given the scale of grace upon condition that wee make use thereof in Faith else the Sacrament is blanke and null Therefore if you beleeve and not otherwayes the Sacrament of the Supper sealeth and confirmeth you in this that Christ is given already and is in the present given to be nourishment to your soule to life eternall and so oft as you eate the certioration and assurance groweth and the faith is increased and a further degree of a communion with Christ confirmed but it is not so in civill seales though yee repeate and reiterate the same seale of lands ten thousand times it never addeth one aker more to the in heritance because the repetition of a civill seale is not commanded under the promise of addition of new lands nor is it commanded as obedience to the owner of the Charter that hee should make use of the seale but from the using in faith the Sacrament we receive increase of Grace and a Sacramentall Grace Hence Baptisme is a seale of our incorporation in Christs visible Church 1 Cor. 12. 13. For by one spirit we be all baptized into one body whether we be Jew or Gentile or whether we be bound or free Act. 2. 41. Then they that received the word were baptized and the same day there were added unto them three thousand souls so Matth. 28. 19. the taught Disciples are to bee baptized in his name Act. 8. 38. Philip was this way received in the Christian Church and Cornelius Act. 10. 47. and Lidia Act. 16. 15. and the Jaylor vers 23. 2. That which distinguisheth by a visible note the Church as visible from the invisible Church and from other visible societies and sealeth our visible union with Christs body that is the seale of our entry in the visible Church but baptisme is such Ergo. 3. What circumcision was to the Church of the Jewes that baptisme is to the Christian Church because in re significatâ in the thing signified and inward substance of the Sacrament they were both one Col. 2. 11. 12. Phil. 3. 3. But circumcision was a seale of the
the most part 2. If the sinnes be against the worship of God as idolatry or sinnes of a wicked conversation the worship of God remaining pure and sound at least in professed fundamentals 3. If the idolatry be essentiall idolatry as the adoring of the worke of mens hands or onely idolatry by participation as Popish ceremonies the Surplice and Crosse being as meanes of worship but not adored and so being Idols by participation as Amesius and M. Ball doe well distinguish and before them so doth the learned Reynold and Bilson make use of the distinction 4. All lenity must be used against a Church if not more lenity then we use in proceeding against single persons 5. Divers degrees of separation are to be considered hence these considerations 1. There is a separation Negative or a non-union and a separation Positive Though a Church of Schismaticks retaining the sound faith yet separating from other be deserted by any it is a Negative separation from â— true Church and laudable as the faithfull in Augustins time did well in separating from the Donatists for with them they were never one in that faction though they separated not from the true faith holden by Donatists but kept a Positive union with them so doe all the faithfull well to separate from the Churches of the Separatists 2. If the whole and most part of the Church turne idolatrous and worship Idols which is essentiall idolatry we are to separate from that Church the Levites and the two Tribes did well as Mr. Ball saith to make a separation from Jeroâ—oams Calves and the godly laudably 2 King 16. 11. did not separate from the Israel and Church of God because the Altar of Damascus was set up and because of the high places Things dedicated unto Idols as Lutheran Images may be called and are called 1 Cor. 10. 34. idolatry yet are they idolatry by participation and so the Cup of Devils 1 Cor. 10. Paul doth not command separation from the Church of Corinth and the Table of the Lord there 3. Consideration There is a separation from the Church in the most part or from the Church in the least and best part In Achabs time Israel and the Church thereof for the most part worshipped Baal Elias Micajaâ— Obadiah and other godly separated from the Church of Israel in the most part Jeremiah wished to have a Cottage in the Wildernesse no doubt a godly wish that he might separate from the Church all then for the most part corrupted yet remained they a part of the visible Church and a part in the visible Church and therefore did he not separate from the Church according to the least and best part thereof The godly in England who refused the Popish ceremonies and Antichristian Bishops did well not to separate from the visible Church in England and yet they separated from the mainest and worst part which cannot be denied to be a ministeriall Church 4. Considerat If a Church be incorrigible in a wicked conversation and yet retaine the true faith of Christ it is presumed God hath there some to be saved and that where Christs ordinances be there also where Christs ordinances be there also Christs Church presence is And therefore I doubt much if the Church should be separated from for the case is not here as with one simple person for it is cleare all are not involved in that incorrigible obstinacy that is yet a true visible communion in which we are to remaine for there is some union with the head Christ where the faith is kept sound and that visibly though a private brother remaining sound in the faith yet being scandalous and obstinately flagitious be to be cast off as an Heathen yet are we not to deale so with an orthodox Church where most part are scandalous 5. Considerat I see not but we may separate from the Lords Supper where bread is adored and from baptisme where the signe of the Crosse is added to Christs ordinances and yet are we not separated from the Church for we professedly heare the word and visibly allow truth of the doctrine maintained by that Church which doe pollute the Sacraments and we are ready to seale it with our bloud and it is an act of visible profession of a Church to suffer for the doctrine mentioned by that Church 6. We may well hold that Ambrose saith well that a Church wanting the foundation of the Apostles is to be forsaken 7. There is a forced separation through Tyranny from personall communion and a voluntary separation David was forced to leave Israel and was cast out of the Inheritance of the Lord the former is not our sinne and our separation from Rome hath something of the former the latter would be wisely considered 8. There may be causes of non-union with a Church which are not sufficient causes of separation Paul would not separate from the Church of the Jewes though they rejected Christ till they openly blasphemed Act. 13. 44 45 46. Act. 18. 16. And when they opposed themselves and blasphemed Paul shooke his â—ayment and said unto them Your blood be upon your owne heads I am cleane from henceforth I will goe to the Gentiles There is a lawfull separation and yet before the Jewes came to this there was no just cause why any should have joyned to the Church of the Jewes who denyed the Messiah and persecuted his Servants Act. 4. Act. 5. seeing there was a cleaner Church to which Converts might joyne themselves Act. 2. 40 41 42. 9. There is no just cause to leave a lesse cleane Church if it be a true Church and to goe to a purer and cleaner though one who is a Member of no Church have liberty of election to joyne to that Church which he conceiveth to be purest and cleanest 10. When the greatest part of a Church maketh defection from the Truth the lesser part remaining sound the greatest part is the Church of Separatists though the maniest and greatest part in the actuall exercise of Discipline be the Church yet in the case of right Discipline the best though sewest is the Church for truth is like life that retireth from the maniest members unto the heart and there remaineth in its fountaine in case of danger CHAP. 4. SECT 6. The way of the Churches of Christ in New England IN this Section the Reverend Author disputeth against the Baptizing of Infants of unbeleeving or excommunicated neareit Parents of which I have spoken in my former Treatise Onely here I vindicate our Doctrine And first the Authour is pressed with this the excommunicated persons want indeed the free passage of life and vertue of the Spirit of Jesus till they be tuitched with repentance yet they are not wholly cut off from the society of the faithfull because the seed of faith remaineth in them and that knitteth them in a bond of conjunction with Christ. The Authour answereth It is true such excommunicates
unto the Church was as the profession of a publike person receiving him and his children who could make no profession but by his mouth unto the Church so his violation of his profession by a scandalous criâ—â— was as a publike violation thereof for himself and his seed who stand or fall before the Church in his name and his person Answ. 1. It is true Christ giveth right to baptisme to the child by the Fathers right I distinguish that by the nearest father onely I deny by the right of fathers in generall true but then it will follow that no infant is to be debarred from baptisme for the sinnes of his nearest parents for if these who are descended of Abraham and David many generations upward from them were within the Covenant and so had right to circumcision for the Covenant made with David and Abraham and the nearest fathers sinne is not the cause of taking away the right to the Covenant from the child and right to the Church Communion 2. I much doubt if the child have right to the seales of the Covenant for the faith of the father and so I deny that hee loseth right to the seales of the Covenant for the fathers scandalous crime which is a violation of the Covenant I doe reverence grave and learned divines who speake so Oecolampadius and Zuinglius say that Insants are sanctified by their parents faith but I conceive they take the word faith objectively for the doctrine of faith profeffed by the father and not subjectively But I think that great Divine Beza saith well that no man is saved by another mans faith nor can the parents faith be imputed to the children which is no lesse absurd nor to say that one man liveth by the soule and life of another man and that he is wise by the wisedome of another man how then are Infants within the Covenant for their parents I answer for the faith of their fathers that is for the Covenant of their fathers they have right to baptisme for that I will be thy God and the God of thy seed Galat. 3. 8. comprehendeth all the beleeving Gentiles And for this cause the children of Papists and excommunicate protestants which are borne within our visible Church are baptized if their forefathers have beene found in the faith and I thinke the reason is given by Doctor Morton who saith The children of all Papists Anabaptists or other Hereticks are to be distinguished from the children of Turkes and Pagans because the Parents of Papists and Anabaptists have once beene dedicated to Christ in baptisme and the child saith he hath onely interest in that part of the Covenant which is sound and Catholike while as the parents themselves stand guiltie of heresie which by their owne proper and actuall consent they have added unto the Church And I thinke the Scripture saith here with us that the nearest parents be not the onely conveyers and propagators of federall holinesse to the posteritie Psal. 106. 35. They were mingled with the heathen and learned their workes 36. and they served their Idols c. 44. Neverthelesse he regarded their affliction 45. and he remembred for them his covenant What Covenant His Covenant made with Abraham and yet their nearest fathers sinned v. 6. We have sinned and our fathers v. 7. Our fathers understood not thy wonders in Egypt they remembred not the multitude of thy mercies but provoked him at the Sea even at the red Sea v. 8. Neverthelesse be saved them for his names sake His name was the glory of the Covenant made with Abraham by which his name and truth by promise was ingaged Esa. 63. 10. But they rebelled and vexed his holy Spirit therefore hee was turned to bee their enemy and hee fought against them v. 11. Then he remembred the dayes of old Moses and his people saying Where is he that led them and brought them out of the red Sea So also Esay 51. 1 2 3. and most evidently Ezek. 20. 8. They rebelled against me c. But I wrought for my names sake that it should not be polluted before the heathen among whom they were in whose sight I made my selfe knowne unto them in bringing them forth out of the land of Egypt Now this name is to be expounded his Covenant Jerem. 31. 32. which he made with them when hee brought them out of the land of Egypt which Covenant is extended unto the Christian Church Heb. 8. 8. 9 10. Now if God gave right unto the sonnes of the Jewes I meane federall right to temporall deliverance and the meanes of grace for the Covenant made with Abraham though their nearest parents rebelled against the Lord that same Covenant in all the priviledges thereof indureth yet yea and is made to all the Gentiles â—al 3. 8. Heb. 8. 8 9 10. for it is the covenant nationall made with the whole race not with the sonnes upon the condition of the nearest parents saith as is cleare after Christs ascension unto heaven Act. 2. 39. For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are afarre off even to as many as the Lord our God shall call Now it is cleare that their fathers killed the Prophets Matth. 23. 30 31 32 33 34 35. they were a wicked generation under blood v. 37. 2. It is cleare that these externally and in a federall and Church profession have right ecclesiastick to the Covenant to whom the externall calling of the preached Gospell doth belong while he saith the promise of the Covenant is made to as many as the Lord our God shall call so the called nation though the nearest parents have killed the Prophets and rejected the calling of God Matth. 23. 33. 34. 37. is the nation which have externall and Church-right to the promises and Covenant and Rom. 11. 28. As concerning the Gospell they are enemies for your sake but as touching the election they are beloved for the fathers sake now their nearest fathers maliciously opposed the Gospell therefore it must be for the election of the holy nation in which respect the nation of the Jewes v. 16. was a holy seed and a holy root and the children were also the holy branches holy with the holinesse of the Covenant and Joshua had no reason to circumcise the people at Gilgal for the holinesse of their nearest parents whose earcasses fell in the wildernesse yet he circumcised them to take away the reproach of his people now this reproach was uncircumcision in the flesh the reproach of the Philistims so Goliah is called an uncircumcised Philistim and of all the nations without the Covenant of God yea by this there were no reason to circumcise the sonnes of Achab and Jezabel whose nearest parents were slaves to Idolatry and who were bloody persecutors of the Prophets nor was there reason to circumcise Jeroboams sonne in whom there was some good for both father and mother were wicked Apostates and very often by
and Jeremiah had prophecied yet not being sent of God they should have beene false Prophets and after the Spirit is entered unto Ezecbiel ch 2. 2. and so he is gifted yet is there another sending v. 3. then said the Lord unto me c. And might I pray you Baruch have preached all his Master Jeremiahs Prophecies But I thinke that should not have made him a Prophet yea and Christ in whom was all fulnesse of gifts and grace Job 1. 16. Col. 2. 9. yet tooke not on him to be a Priest of the New Testament till he was called of God as Aaron Heb. 5. 4 5. Job 1. 18. and Calvin Musculus Gualter expone the Prophets and Pastors prophecying peace Isa. 52. to be the Prophets who not onely were gifted to preach but sent with speciall authority to prophecie the peoples deliverance out of Babylon And lastly by this also have the gifted Prophets a calling of God to administrate the Sacraments because if to be gifted be to be sent of God certainly they are gifted to administrate the Sacraments no lesse then to preach and so saith the Arminians with their Socinians as Socinus and Smalcius If they say Christ requireth a particular Minister to the Sacraments but not so to the word I answer to pastorall preaching he requireth also a peculiar minister as our brethren teach from Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5 4. 5. but to teaching by vertue of a gift any gifted man is sufficient the same distinction may as well hold that there is a pastorall administration of the Sacraments and a common administration of them by vertue of a gift yea and Gerardus observeth well that to the calling of the ministery belongeth the administration of the Sacraments as a speciall part thereof 1 Cor. 12. 29. Ephes. 4. 11. Jam. 3. 1. 7. yea and if ministers bee stewards 1 Cor. 4. 12. are they not dispensators of the Sacraments by their office as of the Word 5. Robinson giveth for shame a sort of calling to the unofficed Prophets to wit that the Church requireth them if they have a word of exhortation to speake on as Act. 13. But 1. not his Church but the rulers required Paul and Barnabas to speake 2. The Rulers knew them to be Apostles and Pastors by office for there were Prophets there Chap. 14. 1. but the Apostles would have none to preach as Pastors by office but such as are proved and authorized by the Elders 1 Tim. 3. 10. ch 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2 3. 3. This calling of the Church is onely for orders cause in the constitute Church but a thing not necessary by divine institution and so the Socinians So Smalcius teach us that the Churches sending and calling in the Apostolick Church was a custome 〈◊〉 decorum arbitramur saith Smalcius u◠id observaretur and and so saith Andr. Raddecius and the Arminians have also the same distinction But this place approveth not that every by person so to speake might preach in the Jewes Synagogues 2. Argum. If Christ ascending on high led captivitie captive and gave gifts unto men some to be Apostles and some Pastors and Doctors and that for the gathering of Christs body and if some not all are Prophets 1 Cor. 12. 29. then hath God appointed Pastors in office to bee the ordinary gatherers of soules in to Jesus Christ and if this bee not said when hee ascended on high hee made all private Christians de jure preachers to edifie publikely the whole Church and if any bee not gifted it is their owne fault for they are obliged to bee such 3. Argum. He who Matth. 10. 42. contradistinguisheth the prophet and the righteous man as different persons and having different rewards he doth not acknowledge a righteous man to be a Prophet hoc ipso because he is a righteous man But Christ doth contradistinguish them v. 41. He that receiveth a Prophet in the name of a Prophet shall receive a Prophets reward and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous mans reward Ergo Christ acknowledgeth them to differ Now if a righteous man hoc ipso because hee is a righteous man and a member of the Church should exercise these same specifice acts with a Prophet that is if hee should publikely preach to convert soules he should by this place bee a Prophet and the reward of a Prophet should be given to the receiver of the righteous man yea and more then the reward of a Prophet in respect he is both a righteous man and a Prophet 4. To all Prophets a speciall promise of Gods assistance and presence is made in the word as Jerem. 1. 18 19. Matth. 28. 20 Luk. 21. Verse 14. 15. Act. 9. Verse 17. But to these who are not prophets by office there is no such promise in the word Ergo 5. All that are sent of God as ordinary converters of soules from the kingdome of darkenesse to the kingdome of Jesus Christ must seeke out fit words as the Preacher did Eccles. 12. 11. 12. hee must convince and judge the hearer and make manifest the secrets of the heart as 1 Cor. 14. 24 25. he must cut the word aright as a Timothy 2 Tim. 2 15. he must give every one of the house meate in due season Matth. 24. 46. he must know and try the wayes of the people Jerem. 11. 18. When he seeth the sword comming he must warne the wicked to turne from his evill way Ezech. 3. 18 19. Hee must watch for soules as one who is to give an account Heb. 13. 17. Hee must exhort the people to bee reconciled to God and this hee must pray and request in Christs stead 2 Cor. 5. 20. And hee must give himselfe wholly to reading 1 Tim. 4. 15 16. And not intangle himselfe with any 〈◊〉 calling 2 Tim. 2. 4. All these cannot be done by Prophets not in office And all these are duties of Pastors in office and to ty private Christians who are commanded to attend their owne callings were unreasonable and repugnant to the Word of God The proposition is cleare no man can preach but hee who must give himselfe to reading and must watch and speake to the present case of the hearers but especially such Preachers as are the onely ordinary converters of soules to Christ must give warning that the unrighteous die not in his sinne now to say that all these were duties incumbent to merchants artificers fashioners carpenters cloathiers were to mocke the word of God and to say these and these onely were the gatherers of a Church and Kingdome to Christ were unknowne Divinity 6. All Prophets are set downe in Christs roll of lawfull officers 2. The rules and canons for the right exercise of their ministery is set downe especially seeing these pretended prophets are presumed to be the greatest part of the visible Church 3. The onely ordinary gainers of
place is to be such as so aboundeth in the knowledge of God as to teach rebuke admonish and comfort mutually one another in a private way not to preach publikely in the Church for the ordinary conversion of soules for which sort of Prophets you do contend Robinson addeth The Apostle cannot meane extraordinary Prophets 1 Cor. 14. there could not bee such a number of extraordinary Prophets now when extraordinary Prophets were beginning to cease in the Church Answ. 1. When the Church of Corinth abounded in every thing in all knowledge and utterance and came behind in no gift 1 Cor. 1. 5. 7. and so much grace was given them in Jesus Christ v. 4. It is cleare there were abundance of Prophets even then in Corinth 2. It is not to purpose for lay-Prophets whether they were ordinary or extraordinary Prophets They were Prophets as the Spirit of God calleth them 1 Cor. 12. 29. set in the Church as officers even as Apostles and Governors and Teachers who are officers And there is no reason that you should impose significations on words at your owne pleasure without warrant of the Word Now shew us in all the old or new Testament when the word Prophet signifieth a naked gifted man out of office in the Lords house for you have as good warrant for you to say there were lay-Apostles lay-Teachers lay-Governors who were gifted persons not in office as you have for lay-Prophets 3. Multitude of Prophets may consist with the time when Seers and foretellers of things revealed in visions were beginnings to cease even as the gifts of the holy Ghost given abundantly at the Pentecost Act. 2. 17. 18. Ioel 2. 28. did consist with the time when things concerning Christ must now have an end Luk. 22. 37. Luk. 24. 44. Robinsons 3. Argument is The Apostle in forbidding women to prophesie in the Church licenceth men 1. The Apostle in and for the worke opposeth the men to the women Sexe to Sexe and in forbidding women hee must license men when the holy Ghost opposeth faith and workes in the cause of justification and denyeth that we are justified by workes is not then the consequence good we are justified by faith 2. If in prohibiting women he gave not libertie to men where were the prerogative of men above women which is the onely ground upon which hee buildeth the prohibition 3. Ver. 34. 35. Women are not permitted to speake in the Church yet may they speake to their husbands at home now if the husbands might not speake in the Church more then the women what reason can be rendred of the Apostle his so speaking 4. The Apostle in the whole Chapter taketh order that some should prophesie in the Church and debarring women therefrom he must either admit men or then we have a third sort of Persons to prophesie who are neither men nor women Answ. Here is a great noyse of Arguments for just nothing and a faire sophisme concluding that secundum quid which should be concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for we deny not but some men in office are permitted yea and commanded to prophesie in publick and we grant that Sex and Sex are opposed but the opposition made by Robinson is creeple and throwne-backed for all and every one of mankind are not permitted to prophesie as all and every woman is forbidden to prophesie or teach in the Church by the Lawes of France a woman may not sit on the Throne and sway the Scepter but friend can you say then the Lawes of France doth license any Frenchman whatsoever he be to sit on the throne and be King Mr. Robinson proveth men are licensed to preach Sed indefinita propositio in materia contingente â—quipollet particulari but he knoweth all men are not licenced to prophesie in publick for ungifted men are not sent of God and we say neither all gifted tradesmen never called by the Church nor educated in Schooles or sent of God to preach in the Church This he covereth and proveth never onely he setteth downe foure armies of Arguments to prove I know not what to prove forsooth that men may prophesie in publike and not women but who denyeth that And the similitude of faith and workes crooketh here for saving faith is opposed to all good workes whatsoever both in kind and individualls for wee are neither justified by good workes in specie nor by any one good worke in individuo but though all women be debarred from teaching in the Church yet are not all men licensed to teach in the Church but onely those say we who are called of God as was Aaron 2. I would bandy the Argument thus It is not permitted to women to administer the Sacraments Ergo It is permitted for any man though not a Prophet by office to administer the Sacraments The Antecedent is Pauls the consequence is yours and so all these foure Arguments prove not what is in question to with that Ergo a gifted person not in office may preach publickly Mr. Robinson addeth In restrayning women he sheweth his meaning to be of ordinary not of extraordinary Prophets because women immediatly and extraordinarily inspired might speak without restraint Exod. 15. 20. Jud. 4. 24. Luk. 2. 36. Act. 2. 17 18. Answ. Robinson cannot show that the same kind of prophecying in women v. 34. is taxed by Paul which is regulated in men v. 26 27 28. and therefore that connexion is denied hee restraineth women from ordinary prophecying in the temple Ergo he speaketh of the ordinary prophecying of men for 1. he compareth prophecying with tongues extraordinary with extraordinary and he desireth them to covet to prophesie ordinary he cannot meane for in all the Word you find not private professors are commanded to desire to bee ordinary Prophets for so God should command them to pray that they might leave their callings and stations contrary to 1 Cor. 7. 20. and give themselves to study sciences and tongues for if the holy Ghost command the meanes he must command the end and if hee command the end hee must command the meanes But v. 34. he setteth downe a new canon about women who tooke on them to prophesie publickly and hee inhibiteth so much as ordinary prophecying yea so much as speaking in the Church and I deny not but Irenaeus Eusebius yea and Tertullian Cyrill Chrysostome Theophylactus with warrant teach that alwayes women extraordinarily inspired may prophesie for in that God immediately exalteth them above men But for ordinary prophecying in publick it is of morall equitie and perpetuall that the women should not teach for Adam was first formed this Paul bringeth as a morall argument against womens preaching His fourth Argument is from 29 and 32. verses Let the Prophets speake two or three and let the rest judge The Apostle cannot saith Robinson speake of extraordinary Prophets for they cannot erre but are infallible but the Prophets here spoken of are not infallible because they are to be censured
all gifted persons as our brethren teach may preach and so the gifted ones amongst the people have authority over the Pastors in this meaning as well as the Pastors have over them and so the difference of rulers and ruled of feeders and the fed is taken away Now for the power of Pastorall teaching the Pastors have authority over the Church but that is over the invisible Church of beleevers and regenerated persons for Pastors as Pastors doe not convert Soules and so they preach to the unconverted not as Pastors or with any Pastorall care for they teach that Pastors Doctors and Church-officers are given Ephes. 4. 11. onely for confirming of those who are already converted not for converting of Soules and by this meanes 1. Pastors doe not preach the Law for the humbling of unconverted sinners they doe not as Pastors or by vertue of the office open the eyes of the blinde nor are they Ministers by whom men beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. nor are they Fathers who begot men in Christ Jesus through the Gospell as 1 Cor. 4. 25. Nor doe they pray men in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God as 2 Cor. 5. 20. Which is strange and uncouth Doctrine of our brethren for all these acts ministeriall are performed upon non-converts who are not properly members of Christs mysticall body nor of the spouse of Christ nor members of the visible Church nor the Sonnes and Daughters of the Lord God Almighty nor have some measure of sincerity and truth as this author Chap. 3. Sect. 3. requireth of members of the visible Church and these are not under any pastorall care really and in very deed who are yet unconverted to the faith therefore the Pastor if hee convert any by his preaching he doth it by vertue of his gift not as a Pastor or by vertue of his office as they teach in their answer to the 32. questions so as Pastors they have no authoritie over the unconverted within the visible Church and this authoritative act of Elders over the people falleth to the ground by their principles 3. This authoritative preaching doth not yet make over to the Elders authoritative power above or over the people such as wee now seeke For 1. By this ruling Elders who do not preach and labour not in the Word and doctrine 1 Tim. 7. 17. by office have not this power Ergo yet you give no peculiar authoritie to the whole Eldership over the people 2. The Spirit of God requireth an authority of overseeing and governing to bee in Pastors beside the authoritative power of preaching for besides that a Bishop should bee â—apt to teach 1 Tim. 3. 2. hee must also v. 4 5 6. bee one who can both govern his own house and also the Church of God and not onely must hee not neglect the gift of prophecying 1 Tim. 4. 14. but also hee must know 1 Tim. 3. 13. how to behave himselfe in the Church of God and must bee circumspect in receiving accusations against an Elder and lay hands suddenly on no man and not be partaker of other mens sinnes 1 Tim. 5. 19. 22. he must not onely bee an approven workman to divide the Word aright 1 Timothey 2. 15. and preach in season and out of season 2 Tim. 4. 2. but also must commit the Word to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. All which are singular points of authoritative power of government different from authoritative power of teaching And so Titus must not onely have the oversight by sound doctrine to exhort and convince the gainesayers Tit. 1. 9. but hee hath power in governing to order the things of discipline and to appoint Elders in every citie Tit. 1. 9. Act. 4. 23. yea there is an oversight in watching for soules in governing no lesse then in teaching Hâ—b 13. 17. Now this Author sheweth us nothing that is a peculiar authoritative power in ruling governing and a disciplinary overseeing of soules which the Word giveth to Elders as they are Elders and called Governors of Gods people as yet yea all the people are governors rulers and overseers in government by them no lesse then the Elders 4. The Author saith Elders have rule over the Church in dispensing all the censures of the Church unlesse it bee in their owne cause for though they take the consent of the Church in dispensing a censure yet they set on the censures with great authoritie in the name of the Lord yea it is no small power that they put forth in directing the Church what censures are due according to the word as though the Judge dispense no sentence but according to the verdict of the Jury yet his authority is great both in directing the Jury to give their verdict according to the Law and in pronouncing the sentence with power and terrour the like dâ—e the Elders in dispensing Church censures Answ. This dispensing of Church censures hath two branches 1. A directing of the Church in the qualitie of the censures 2. A binding of the censures upon them or in executing the censures of the Church For the former if it bee a pastorall direction it is all one with preaching of the Word and is not an act of authority by way of governing but by way of pastorall teaching But 1. Wee would have a word from God giving this power of the keyes peculiarly to the Pastors for if you give the keyes to all the Church of beleevers as beleevers and because they are Christs Spouse his mysticall body the habitation of his Spirit by faith then with your good leave there bee neither keyes nor any power of the keyes given to the Pastors as Pastors and in respect of their office but onely as they are a part of Christs body now as Pastors or Elders they are neither beleevers nor the bride nor a part of the bride but at best the friends of the Bridegroome Joh. 3. 29. especially seeing the Church as the Church and as using actually the keyes doth censure and judicially prescribe the qualitie and quantitie of the censure as they are directed Matth. 18. 1 Cor. 5. 2 3 4 5. yea and the Church judicially and authoritatively pronounceth the sentence and maner of the censure on the sentence for example of ten collaterall and coequall Judges if two of these ten bee skilled Juristes and shall direct the rest in the qualitie of the punishment to bee inflicted upon a malefactor that direction commeth from them not as Judges over the rest nor by any peculiar power that they have above the rest seeing all the ten are equally and joyntly Judges of a like power but that direction commeth from them as skilled Jurists So here though the Elders direct the Church anent the qualitie of the censure they doe not this by an authority above the Church seeing the Church with them have received the Keyes yea they principally as the Spouse of Christ and his mysticall body have received the keyes and
bee sometimes physice impossible because of the corruption of mans nature there being bloody warres in Christendome yet it is morally lawfull for many things may bee inconvenient through mans wickednesse and so hic nunc not expedient which are morally lawfull 2. Conclusion Every particular Pastor hath a power though unproper of dominion and authoritie even out of a Synod about the Acts of preaching and determining truth according to the word of God as Jer. 1. 10. See I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdomes c. 1 Tim. 6. 17. Charge them that are rich that they bee not high minded c. 2 Tim. 4. 1. I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ who shall judge the quick and the dead c. So any Pastor hath power of dominion and authoritie over a Synod and Paul as a Pastor might preach even before the councell at Jerusalem passed their Synodicall determination Act. 15. that circumcision was not necessary and that to obstaine from things strangled from blood and fornication was necessary and lawfull yea and in preaching truth the Pastor is subject to no Synod But the Pastor hath not full power of jurisdiction about his acts of preaching necessary truth 1. Because the Church may for just causes deprive him from preaching 2. Because hee cannot use the censure of excommunication against those who refuse to receive his true and necessary doctrine without the Church joyne her power of jurisdiction with him 3. He his alone cannot in a Synod determine ecclesiastically and in an authoritative Church power that same truth which as a Pastor hee determined and with the power of pastorall dominion hee pressed upon the consciences of the Church yea of the whole Synod because one man is not the Church or Synod and James his alone Act. 15. v. 15. could but say Wherefore my sentence is that yee trouble not them which from among the Gentiles are turned unto God though this was the very word of God which James as a Pastor even as an ordinary Pastor might have preached in the name of God yet is it not the decree of the Church which the Churches is to keep Act. 16. 4. while it bee determined by the Church An example wee may have possible not unlike to this A man hath a power of dominion over his owne proper lands and goods to use them in God for his owne use but the supreme magistrate and Parliament hath a dominion of jurisdiction in a judiciall sentence over those same lands to forfeit them for crimes committed against King and State or this may cleare it Samuel hath a power immediately from God to annoint David King and in this hee is not subject to the suffrages of the tribes of Israel hee hath a power of dominion here but suppose wee that Samuel live till Gods time when all Israel shall crowne David King at Hebron Samuel as a part of the Assembly of Israel his alone without the suffrages of Israel could not make him King at Hebron Hence wee may see how weake the assertion of our brethren is who say That Synods should have power to bind the Churches say they wee see not Bellarmine indeed holdeth so But orthodox writers hold that the sentence of councels is but a certaine inquisition of the truth and a ministeriall and limited sentence so that the decree of a councell is of as great force as the reason thereof so saith Amesius and Junius But certainly this is a meer mistake of our brethren as if they were not orthodox writers but conspirers against the truth with Bellarmine who hold the authoritie of Synods The essentiall end to speak so of Synods is unitie and the eschewing of schisme and wee doubt not but Peter Paul James had in their Sermons and doctrine determined that same veritie to wit that the Law of Moses and ceremonies was a yoak not to bee laid upon the Christian Churches yet it was not a decree for unities sake and fuller authoritie binding the Churches to observe these as Act. 16. 4. while it was determined in a Synod Act. 5. 24. 25. But truely wee hold nothing in this common with Jesuites and Papists for wee condemne not that in Bellarmine that hee holdeth that lawfull Synods for of such wee dispute with him do bind the Churches to obedience in God to their decrees not because they say it but because they say it authoritatively from Gods Word authoritie of Synods no orthodox writers deny authoritie officiall as the representative Church of Christ they have He that heareth you heareth mee hee that despiseth you despiseth me Where two or three are gathered together in a Synod say our Divines I will bee amongst them But authoritie objective they have not so as what they say because they say it therefore the very matter object and thing said by them is no lesse the Word of God then if the Prophets and Apostles by divine inspiration had said it at least it is not infallibly true because they say it for that wee disclaime and it is that authoritie of Synods which Bellarmine and Papists hold Councells saith Bellarmine and Scripture are both infallible and the Jesuits of Rhemes and Lorinus the Jesuite said councells are infallible the holy Spirit is there present Gratian said all the decretall Epistles of Popes and the Canons of the Councells are of equall authoritie with the Scriptures and their Gregorius said hee received with the same reverence and authoritie the foure generall Councells the foure Evangelistâ— it is certaine saith Suarez that a Councell is an infallible rule of faith and Turrecremata saith the same It is certaine saith Bailius Councells are â—â— the Oracles of God to us in difficulties so saith Cajetanus Canus and Gregorius de Valentia wee hold the authoritie of Councels but ascribe to them as much power over the conscience as there is reason in them from Gods Word and no more But 2. This is a weake reason councels have no power to command obedience because their Canons and Decrees are of no more force then they have reason from Gods Word For 1. Friends brethren equals by that have no warrant to rebuke because their rebukes have but as much force as they have reason from the word of God for the reason is alike in both lawfull Pastors cannot command obedience in the Lord your independent Congregations cannot command that which bindeth the Church to obedience because the word or a commandement of a Pastor or your independent Church is onely a commandement ministeriall and limited and hath as much force as there is reason in it from the Word of God yea the Church of Corinâ—h hath not then the power of the Lord Jesus to excommunicate the incestuous person nor the Church of Thyatira to cast out and condemne Jezabell the false prophetesse nor do these commandements of the Synod
or Church assembly have any power to bind the Churches to obedience because these commandements and decrees of censure are but ministeriall and limited and in so farre onely of force as they have reason from the Word of God as you say 3. Conclusion There is an authoritative power in Synods whereby they may and doe command in the Lord the visible Churches in their bounds the whole Churches are subject to the ordinance and decree of the Church Act. 1. where with common consent of a Synodicall meeting Matthias is ordained an Apostle Ergo all the Churches are to take him for an Apostle This argument cannot bee repelled because the Apostles by their extraordinary power did choose Matthias Because 1. they themselves cite this place to prove the peoples power ordinary which is to indure to Christs second comming in calling and electing their owne officers and Elders 2. Almain a Papist alleadgeth the place with good reason to prove that a generall councell is above Peter or the Pope because Peter would not choose Matthias without consent of the Apostles and Church 3. If this was extraordinary that Matthias was chosen why then is the vow and consent of the Church sought for there is nothing extraordinary and Apostolick flowing from an Apostolick spirit which is concluded or done by the spirit ordinary of the Church of beleevers So also Act. 6. If the Apostles did not by the ordinary and Synodicall power of ordinary Pastors choose seven Deacons how doe they first require that the Churches of Grecians and Hebrewes should seek out seven men v. 3. and did ordaine them with the common consent of the whole multitude v. 5. Act. 15. A Synod of moe Churches give decrees which obliege the Churches v. 28. ch 16. v. 4. Ergo Synods have authoritie over the Churches Those who say this Synod is not a patterne for after Synods say farre aside for their reason is this was 1. An Apostolick Synod 2. the holy Ghost was here 3. the thing determined was canonick Scripture But this is a way to clude all the promises made to Pastors in the word when as they are first made to Apostles this promise Behold I am with you to the â—nd of the world and this I will send you the other Comforter who 〈◊〉 lead you in all truth cannot bee made to faithfull Pastors and the Christian Church that now is for it is certaine Christ is otherwise present with his Apostles then with his Pastors after them And that he gave them a tongue a spirit when they were before the councels and rulers as to Apostolick men as Act. 4. 8. 9 10. Act. 5. 29. as Christ promised Matth. 10. 19. 20. Luk. 21. 13 14 15. for they were full of the holy Ghost before rulers but by our brethrens doctrine it shall follow none of these promises belong to Pastors now adayes in the like because no pastors now are Apostles Surely this were to fetter and imprison many glorious promises within the pale of the onely Apostolick Church and because Christ ascending to heaven sent downe the Apostolick spirit to his Apostles to write and preach canonick Scripture it shall follow he fulfilleth that promise John 16. 13. to none now adayes because none have the Apostolike spirit in the manner and measure that the Apostles had Yea further it is canonick Scripture that the Apostles at the last supper did shew forth the Lords death till be come againe therefore it shall follow that we have no warrant to shew forth the Lords death till he come againe 2. But that the Apostles in an ecclesiastick way did determine in the Synod for our imitation and not in an Apostolike way is cleare by many evidences in the text as Act. 15. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent commissioners to the Apostles and Elders about this question Paul as an Apostle needed not be sent to know more of the matter then he knew as an Apostle for as an Apostle he knew the whole mystery of the Gospel Gal. 1. 16. 17. Ephes. 3. 4 5. Ergo he was sent to the Synod as a Pastor and that as an ordinary Pastor 2. They came together v. 6. to consider of this businesse but as Apostles they needed not the help of a Synod Ergo they came together as ordinary Pastors for the Churches after imitation 3. There was much debating and disputing v. 7. about the matter 4. They set down their minds and sentences in order one after another as Peter first v. 7. 8. then Barnabas and Paul v. 12. then James v. 13. and to James his sentence the whole Councell agreeth v. 22. Now what the Apostles as Apostles and from an infallible Spirit do they doe it not by seeking light and help one from another 5. The Decree of the Councell is a thing that Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church resolveth after much dispute v. 22. But all these especially brethren and the whole beleevers as our Brethren say doe not joyne themselves with the Apostles either to write canonick Scripture or to give their consent to the writing of it therefore they doe consent by a synodall authority for the after imitation of the Churches Also there bee reasons of moment for Synods and 1. if according to the Law of nature and nations no man can bee a Judge in his owne cause then are appeales from the Eldership of one congregation when they are a party to the accused person naturall and from a Session to the Presbyteries and Synods of many moe Elders But the former is reason nature Law of Nations Ergo so is the latter 1. It is best reason which hath most of Scripture Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1. 2. had no small disputation with those who said circumcision was necessary finding their parties could not be Judges They appeale to a generall councell at Jerusalem where were the Apostles and Elders The Church of the Grecians and the Church of the Hebrewes strive neither of them can judge other and both appeale to a higher judicatory to the twelve Apostles and their owne Churches meeting with them and there is the matter determined aâ—ent helping the poore by Deacons if the Judge doe wrong and one particular congregation shall oppresse one sincere and sound beleever what remedy hath the care of Christ provided for this that the oppressours may be edisied by Church censures and the oppressed freed and delivered by remedy of discipline of Christ whose it is to judge the poore of the people and to save the children of the needy Ps. 72. 4. Now it is knowne that Diotrephes doth sometime excommunicate and the evill seâ—vant ruleth all Hieronymus saith Arrians ruled all in the dayes of Constantius and Valens Basil saith we may say in our time that there is neither Prince nor Prophet nor Ruâ—â—â— nor oblation nor incense Athanasius and Vincentius Lirinent complain'd that it was in the Arrians times as with the Church and Prophets in the
Church which I grant is true and the end of the Ruler should be onely preservation of peace and the externall tranquillity of the Common-wealth yea I say from the Word of God that externall peace is too narrow an end and it doth belong to the second Table the Kings end as Nurse-father and his a like care is to preserve the first Table and as a Nurse-father to see that the childrens milke be good and wholesome though the milke come not from his owne breasts and so his power hath a kingly relation to all the Word of God and not to externall peace and naturall happinesse onely And the King as the King his end is edification and spirituall good of soules also but alwayes by a kingly power and in a coactive way by the sword whereas the Church are in their care of edifying soules to use no such carnall weapons in their warfare 2 Cor. 10. 4. For which cause that learned P. Martyr and 〈◊〉 Parker and also the Professors of Leyden say that Ministers deale with consciences of men Quoniam Spiritus Sanctus inquit Martyr vim suam adjungit cum praedicationibus orthodoxis the holy Spirit conjoyneth the power and influence of grace with sound preaching and the Magistrate doth onely exercise externall discipline And Parker reasoning against Whitgift and 〈◊〉 proveth well that the Church visible though externall yet is Christs spirituall Kingdome and that Church discipline is a part of Christs spirituall Kingdome and that the externall government of Christ by discipline is spirituall every way according to the efficient 1 Cor. 12. 1. according to the end spirituall â—dification Ephes. 4. 12. according to the matter the Word and Sacraments 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. according to the forme of working by the evidence of the Spirit 2 Cor. 2. 4. 13. And this is the cause I conceive why great Divines have said the object of the Magistrates power as a Magistrate is the externall man and earthly things because he doth not in such a spirituall way of working take care of the two Tables of the Law as the Pastor doth and yet the spirituall good and edification of the Church in the right preaching of the Word the Sacraments and pure discipline is his end It is true whether the blasphemer professe repentance or not the Magistrate is to punish yea and to take his life if he in seducing of many have prevailed but yet his end is edification even in taking away the life for he is to put away evill that all Israel may feare and doe so no more but this edification is procured by the sword and by a coactive power and so the Church power and the kingly power differ in their formall objects and their formall ends But Spalato speaketh ignorantly of Kings Who saith as the internall and proper end of the Art of painting the Art of sailing c. is not life eternall but onely to paint well according to the precepts of Art and to bring men safe to their harborie though the persons who are painters and sailers may direct works of their Art to life eternall so saith he the end of the kingly Art is not life eternall but onely the externall peace of the Common wealth hence inferreth he that there is no subordinatim betwixt the power of the Magistrate and the power of the Church but that they are both so immediate under God as the Church cannot in a Church way regulate the King as a King but onely as he is a christian man the Church may rebuke the King while as he abuseth his kingly power to the destruction of soules and that the Church power as such is not subordinate to the kingly power onely the King may correct with the sword the Pastors not as Churchmen and Pasâ—ors but as men who are his subjects But 1. whereas it is certaine the King in respect of politick power is the immediate Vicegerent of God and above any subject in his Dominions so doth the Bishop make the Shoe-maker the Painter the master-fashioner immediate unto God and censurable by none as they are Artificers even as the King is censurable by none as King and so the King is dishonoured who by office is the Lords annoynted and a little God on earth Psal. 82. v. 1. 2 The intrinsecall end of kingly power is no more the advancing of godlinesse and the promoving of the Kings daughter towards life eternall by the sincere milke of the Word as the Lords Vicegerent and Nurse-Father of the Church then the Painter as a Painter or a Sea-man as a Sea-man is to advance godlinesse for this mans intrinsecall and is onely a safe harbour and shoare to temporall lives not the harbour of salvation to soules and his end is onely a faire Image of Art in Paper or Clay not the Image of the second Adam and by this the King as King is interdicted of any Church businesse or care of soules to be fed by the Word or Sacraments to keepe them cleane if he looke to any of these as an end that is not the eye or intention of the King as King but of the King as a godly Christian saith Spalato hence to care for the spirituall good of the Church and the promoving of the Gospel is as accidentall as to say an excellent Painter such as Apâ—ies intendeth in his painting life eternall so the King by this looketh to the Law of God to Religion and the eternall happinesse of the Church by guesse by accident and as King hath neither chaire nor roome in Christian Synods nor a seat in the Church 3. If the meaning be that the King as King that is rightly exercisng the office of a King is subordinate to no Church power that is he cannot be justly and deservedly rebuked by Pastors that is most true but nothing to any purpose for so the Pastor as a Pastor Jeremiah as he doth truly and in the name of the Lord exercise the propheticall office cannot be deservedly censured nor punished either by the Church-synodrie or the King and Princes of the Land but thus way all members of the Church an I any one single beleever doing his duty should be as immediate and independent and highest next on earth to Christ as the King and his three Estates of the Honourable Parliament are in civill matters and as an Occumenick Councell or in our brethrens meaning independent Congregation which is against reason But if the meaning be the acts of a King as aberring from justice not as a King but as a fraile man may be censured and rebuked deservedly by Pastors in a Church way this way also the Pastor as a Pastor is not subject to the Church but onely as a fraile man and so nothing is said to the purpose in this more then the in the former But if the meaning be thirdly that which onely maketh good sense that the acts of the King abstracted from good or bad or as kingly or
but a power to define in Synods and the exercise of acts Ecclesiasticall and matters Ecclesiasticall are due to Ecclesiasticall persons and to the Church Ergo they are not competent to the civill Judge The proposition is evident by differences betwixt Ecclesiasticall persons and civill Magistrates which might be more accurately set downe by others then by me But they differ 1. that the Churches power is spirituall the Magistrates causatively effectively or objectively spirituall but not intrinsecally and formally spirituall because he may command by the power of the sword spirituall acts of preaching administrating the Sacraments purely of defining necessary truths in Synods and forbid the contrary but he cannot formally himselfe exercise these acts 2. The Church-men are members of the Church the Magistrate as such is a politick Father and Tutor of the Church but not formally as he is such a member of the Church 3. The power of the Magistrate is carnall and corporall and coactive upon the bodies for which cause Tylenus Daneus and others say the externall man is the object of his power the power of the Church is spirituall not carnall not coactive not bounded upon the body the Church hath neither power of heading or hanging but onely they may use the sword of the Spirit exhortations rebukes censures excommunication 4. Edification to be procured by the Word and Sacraments and Church-censures is the end of Church-power but edification to be procured by the sword is the end of the civill Magistrate 5. The Magistrate judgeth not what is true and false to be beleeved simply as teaching instructing and informing the conscience but onely what is true and false to be beleeved or professed in relation to his sword and bodily punishment or civill rewards 6. The Magistrates judgement is kingly supreame peremptory and highest on earth from which we are to provoke in no sort except in appealing to God the Churches judgement is ministeriall conditionall limited by the Word of God 7. The Magistrates power is over all Heathen and Christian over men as men and over men as Christians and agreeth to Heathen and Christian Magistrates alike the Church power agreeth onely to members of the Church and is onely over members of the Church as they are such 8. What ever causes the Magistrate handleth as hurtfull to the Common-wealth and contrary to the Law of God in a politicke and civill way these same the Churches handleth as they promote edification or if they be sinnes the Church cognosceth of them sub ratique scandali as they are Church scandals 9. The civill power is above the Church-men as they are Church-men and members of a Christian Common-wealth and the Church power is above the Magistrate as he is a member of the Church and to be edified to salvation or censured for scandals Matth. 18. 17. 2 This. 15. 13. 1 Tim. 5. 20. and therefore there is both a mutuall subordination betwixt the honors and also because both are highest and most supreme in their â—ind they are also coordinate and two parallel supreme powers on earth as the Church hath no politick power at all so hath the Church no politick power above the King but he is the onely supreme power on earth immediate under God so the King hath no power formally and intrinsecally ecclesiasticall over either the Church or any member of the Church but the Churches power is supreme under Christ the King and head of the Church 10. The Churches power may be without the Magistrate and is compleat both in being and operation as Acts 1. 1. and Acts 15. 1 2. 1 Cor. 5. 1 2 3 4. without it yet it is helped much by the Magistrates power which is cumulative to ad help to the Church and not privative to take away any right or priviledge from the Church for then the Church should be in worse case and greater bondage under a Christian King then if there were no King to defend the Church at al if the Kings power were privative and it is true the Churches own power is cumulative not privative because the Church hath no power to take nothing from it selfe but the King is to adde his royall â—â—ield to the Bride of Christ out of zeale to the honour of the Bridegroome for a politick promoving of godlinesse which the Church as such wanteth But the kingly power though it may be and is in Heathen Nations perfect in its being without the Church power yet is it not perfect in its operations as is said 11. The Church power is to goe before and to define prescribe and teach first and the civill power to adde a civill sanction thereunto as an accumulative and auxiliary supplement 12. The Magistrate hath no power properly to define controversies yet hath he the power of the judgement and discretion and also may with a coactive power cognosce in a politick way of Church matters in reference to the use of the sword but the Church as the Church hath a ministeriall power 〈◊〉 to define controversies according to the Word of God 13. Every one helpeth another to obtaine their owne ends but hey cannot be contrary one to another formally yet doe these differences prove that the Magistrate as such cannot detine in a Synod what is truly to be beleeved and practised by members of the Church what not And also godly Princes have refused this Hosius Cordubensis writeth to Constantius the Arrian Emperour which words Athanasius commendeth Desine desine quaeso memineris te mortalem esse reformida diâ—m judiâ—ii neque te immisecas eco'esiasticis nec nobis in hoc genere praecipe seâ—eâ— potius a nobis disce tibi autem dâ—us imperiunâ— commisit nobis autem quae sunt ecclesiae concredidit Ambrosius epist. 14. ut alii 33. ad Marcellinam sororem dicit se Valentiniano dicere Nolite gravare imperator ut â—uâ—es te in e t quae divina sunt imperiale jus habere noli te extollere sed si vis divinitus imperare esto c. subditus ad imperatorem palatia pertinent ad sacerdotem ecclesia publicorum tibi maenium jus ancessum est non sacrorum Augustin Epist. 48. 162. Neque ausus est Christianus imperator sic eorum Donaristarum tumultuosas et fallaces querelas suscipere ut de judicio Episcoporum qui Romae sederent ipse judicaret 16. iis ipse imperator cessit ut de illa causa post Fpiseopos ipse judicaret a sanctis antistitibus postea veniam petitucus Chrysost. hom 4. 5. de verbis Esa. Qumquam admirandus videtur thronus regius tamen rerum terrenarum administrationem sortitus est nee praeter potestatem hanc praetere â—quicquam autoritatis habet Leontius Tripolis Lydiae Episcopus cum Constantius in eonventu Episcoporum multa praescriberet Miror inquit qui fiat ut aliis curandis destinatus alia tractes qui cum rei militari et reipublicae praesis Episcopis ea praescribas quae ad
but wee uske who shall bee the visible ministeriall and vocall Judge under Christ speaking in his owne Testament for the King is a Politick and civill Judge and the Church an Ecclesiasticall Judge I answer this same is the question betwixt us and Papists anent the Judge of controversies whether the Judge bee a Synod or the Scriptures and wee answer by a distinction the Scripture is norm i judicandi 2. Christ the peremptory and infallible Judge speaking in his owne Word 3. A Synod lawfully conveened is a limited ministeriall and bounded visible Judge and to bee beleeved in so farre as they follow Christ the peremptory and supreme Judge speaking in his owne Word But wee deny that there is on earth any peremptory and in fallible visible Judge But to come yet nearer if the King have sworne to that same religion which the Church doth professe and so acknowledge and professe the reformed religion of that Church hee must then acknowledge the lawfull officers of that Church to bee his ordinary teachers and the lawfull ministers of the Church and that they are both in a Synod and out of the Synod to preach and to bee ministeriall definers of things contraverted and that they shall first determine in an ecclesiasticall way according to Gods Word and hee as King is to command them to determine according to Gods Word under the paine of civill punishment and the Kings civill and coactive way of judging is posterior and ratificatorâ—e of the right and oxthodox ecclesiasticall determination and Junius saith that the Magistrates judging politick presupposeth the Church judging ecclesiasticall going before and Calvin and Amesius are cleare that in this case the Church is to cognosce of hee owne ecclesiasticall affaires Ambrose writeth to the Emperor Valentinian that none should judge of this cause which is ecclesiasticall as one said but a Church-man qui nec munere sit impar neâ—jure dissimilis Gelasius the Pope inveigheth against Anastasius the Emperour because hee confounded these two civill and ecclesiasticall causes But if the Emperour or King professe not the religion of the land and repute it false and if the religion bee indeed hereticall then the Church is not constitute and the case extraordinary but the truth is neither the Kings judgement as a certaine rule to the representative Church nor the representative Churches judgement a rule to the King but the Word of God the infallible rule to both Judgement may crooke truth cannot bow it standeth still unmoveable like God the father of truth but in this case if both erre ex cellently saith Junius the Magistrate erring the Church may do something extraordinarily and tâ—e Church erring the Magistrate may do something also in an extraordinary way as coÌ„mon equitie and mutuall law requireth that friends with mutuall tongues bicke the wounds of friends Also fourthly some say they who make the King the head of the Church acknowledge that the King doth not judge except the matter be first defined in the Scriptures and in the generall councells yet they give a primacie spirituall in matters ecclesiasticall to the King and therefore if the King as King may forbid the inacting of wicked Canons hee determineth them to bee wicked before the Synod have passed their judgement of them I answer that learned Calderwood saith indeed the pretended Lords of high Commission have an act for them under Queene Elizabeth for this effect but it is made for the fashion for all errors and heresies are condemned in Scripture but not onely should there bee a virtuall and tacit determination of matters ecclesiastick which is undeniably in Scripture and may bee in generall councells also but also a formall Synodicall determination in particular must goe before the Princes determination in a constitute Church The Prince may before the Synods determination exhort to the determination of what hee conceiveth is Gods will in his Word but hee cannot judicially and by a Kingly power determine in an orderly way what is to bee defined in a Synod except hee infringe the Churches liberties and judicially prelimit under the paine of civill punishments the free voyces of the members of the Synod which is indeed an abuse of the authoritie of a nurs-father But fiftly it may bee objected that hee may in a thing that is manifestly evident by the Word of God to bee necessary truth command by the power of the sword that the Synod decree that or this particular so cleare in the Word the contrary whereof being Synodically determined hee may punish by the sword and so hee may judicially predetermine some things before the Sâ—nod passe their Synodicall act thereon and if hee may predetermine judicially one thing hee may predetermine all things I answer what the King may judicially determine and punâ—â—h with the sword that hee cannot judicially predetermine and command in any order that hee pleaseth but in a constitute Church whereof hee is a member and to bee taught hee is to determine judicially in an orderly way as a nurs-father But sixtly it may bee objected that if the King have a judiciall power by the sword to annull unjust acts then hath hee a power to 〈◊〉 them though hee abuse that power in making them as unjust and then hath hee a power to interpret Church acts and to defend them 〈…〉 Law saith it is not same power to make Lawes and to dâ—â—â—nd them and interpret them see Paraeus I answer the proposition is not universally necessary except onely in civill matters in the which as the Prince who is absolute hath supreme authority to defend and interpret civill lawes so hath hee power to make them for if the Magistrate hath a supreme judiciall power to interpret Church-Lawes hee is a minister of the Gospell in that case and may by that same reason administer the Sacraments so the argument is a just begging of the question 2. Though the King have power in case of the Church aberration which is somewhat extraordinary it followeth not therefore in ordinary hee hath a nomothetick power to make Church-Lawes Also seventhly it may bee objected if the King in case of the Churches aberration may by the sword rescind Church-Lawes then may hee make a Law to rescind them but those who aâ—firme that the King hath a sort of primacie and headship over the Church say not that the King hath any power formally ecclesiasticall to make Lawes as Ministers in a Synod do but onely that hee hath a power to command any forme of externall worship under the paine of bodily punishment they say not that the King may preach administrate the Sacraments or excommunicate or inflict any Church-censures I answer the transcendent power of Princesand their commissioners is not well knowne for the authors saith Calderwood agree not among themselves but it is true in words the author est Tortura torti the Bishop of Eli denyeth in words if you have strong faith to beleeve
him all spirituall headship over the Church to the King and Burbillus also But Henric. Salcobrigiensis calleth the King primatem ecclesiae Anglicanae the Primate of the Church of England and â—ges oleo sacro uncti capaces sunt jurisdictionis spiritualis because they are annointed with holy oyle therefore are they capable of spirituall jurisdiction also may saith hee creat propria autoritate by his owne authoritie create Bishops and dâ—prive them See what Calderwood hath said and excerped out of the writings of these men the King as King 1. convocateth Synods 2. defineth ecclesiasticall canons 3. giveth to them the power of an ecclesiasticall Law 4. executeth Church Canons 5. appointeth commissioners who in the Kings authoritie and name may try heresies and errors in doctrine punish non-conformitie to Popish ceremonies may confine imprison banish Ministers 6. descerne excommunication and all Church censures and use both the swords 7. relax from the power and censures of all ecclesiastick Lawes give dispensations annull the censures of the Church upon causes knowne to them give dispensations against Canons unite or separate Parish Churches or diocesan Churches and by a mixt power partly coactive and civill partly of jurisdiction and spirituall the King may doe in foro externo in the externall court of Church discipline all and every act of discipline except hee cannot preach baptize or excommunicate And whereas Cartwright saith when a lawfull Minister shall agree upon an unlawfull thing the Prince ought to stay it and if Church ministers shew themselves obstinate and will not bee advised by the Prince they prove themselves to be an unlawfull Ministery and such as the Prince is to punish with the sword O but saith hee the author of the Survey how shall the Prince helpe the matter shall be compell them to conveene in a Synod and retract their mind but they will not doe this 2. By what authoritie shall the Prince doe this even by extraordinary authority even by the same right that David did eate of the Shew-bread if by ordinary authority the Prince would doe it yet doe you resist that authority also Answ. Though the Prince had not externall force to compell Church-men to decree in their Synods things equall holy juâ— and necessary yet it followeth not that the King as King hath not Gods right and lawfull power to command and injoyne them to doe their dutie force and Law differ much as morall and physicall power differ much 2. If they decree things good lawfull and necessary the Prince hath a power given him of God to ratifie confirme and approve these by his civill sanction but hee hath no power ordinary to infringe or evert what they have decreed 3. And if the Church bee altogether uncorrigible and apostate then wee say as followeth 7. Conclution When the representative Church is universally apostaticall then may the Prince use the helpe of the Church essentiall of found beleevers for a reformation and if they also bee apostatick which cannot be except the Lord utterly have removed his candlestick wee see not what hee can doe but heare witnesse against them but if there bee any secret seeker of God in whose persons the essence of a true Church is conserved The King by a royall power and the Law of charitie is oblieged to reforme the land as the godly Kings with a blessed successe have hitherto done Asa Jâ—siah Jehoshaphat 〈◊〉 in which case the power of reformation and of performing many acts of due belonging to the Church officers are warrantably performed by the King as in a diseased body in an extraordinary manner power recurreth from the members to the â—â—â—â—tick head and Christian Prince who both as a King 〈◊〉 â—â— in an authoritative way is oblieged to do more then ordâ—â—â—y and as a Christian member of the Church in a charitative and common way is to care for the whole body 8. Conclusion The influence of the Princes regall power in making constitutions is neither solitary as if the Prince his 〈…〉 could doe it nor is it 2. collaterall as if the Prince and Church with joynt concurrence of divers powers did it nor is 3. as some flatterers have said so eminently spirituall as the consultation and counsell of Pastors for light onely hath influence in Churches Canons but the Princes power hath onely the power to designe so as the Canon hath from the Prince the power of a Law in respect of us The Kings influence in Church Canons as wee thinke is as a Christian antecedent to exhort that the Lord Jesus bee served 2. concomitant as a member of the Church to give a joynt suffrage with the Synod 3. consequent as a King to adde his regall sanction to that which is decreed by the Church according to Gods Word or otherwise to punish what is done amisse Now that the Prince as a solitary cause his alone defineth Church matters and without the Church and that by his ordinary Kingly power wanteth all warrant of the Word of God 2. The King might have given out that constitution Act. 15. It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and to us which in reason is due to the ministeriall function for these are called Act. 16. 4. the decrees of the Apostles and Elders not the decrees of the King or Emperour either by Law or fact 3. Christ ascending to heaven gave officers requisite for the gathering of his Church and the edification of the body of Christ but amongst these in no place we finde the King 4. If this bee true heathen Kings have right to make Church-Canons though they bee not able and bee not members of the Christian Church and so without and not to bee judged by the Church nor in any case censured Matth. 18. 17. 1. Cor. 5. 11. and this directly is a King Pope who giveth Lawes by a Kingly power to the Church and yet cannot bee judged by the Church Burhillus and Thomson acknowledge that a Heathen King is primat and head of the Church and must hee not then have power aciu primo to make Lawes and to feede the flocke by externall government But Lancel Andreas Biship of Ely Tortura torti saith that a heathen King hath a temporall Kingly power without any relation to a Church power and when hee is made of a Heathen King a Christian King bee acquireth a new power But the question is if this new power be a new kingly power or if it be a power Christian to use rightly his former kingly power if the first bee true then 1. as learned Voetius and good reason saith hee was not a King before hee was a Christian for the essence of the Kingly power standeth in an indivisible point and the essence of things admit not of degrees 2. Then should hee bee crowned over againe and called of God to bee a Christian King and so hee was not a King before which is against Scripture for Nebucâ—adnezzar was to bee obeyed
both doth elect and choose the man yet so that he is not elected without the consent of the King or Magistrate in the Kings roome I answer many things are here to be replyed 1. That the King who may be borne an heire to an earthly Kingdome is also borne and by nature a mixt person and halfe a Minister of the Gospell is against Gods word ministers in whole or in part are made so of God not so borne by nature in Aaronâ— Priesthaâ—d men by birth came to a sacred office but that is done away now in Christ. 2. With as good reason may the King preach and administer the Sacraments as a mixt person as he may ordaine by ecclesiasticall blessing imposition of hands ecclesiasticall designation any person to the Ministery that same auth nity of Christ which said to Timoth Lay hands suddainly 〈◊〉 man said also to him 2 Tim. 2. 15. Study to be approved unto 〈◊〉 a workeman that needeth not to be ashamed dividing the word right that is both ordaining of Ministers and pastorall preaching of the Word or pastorall acts flowing from an ecclesiasticall power How then can the one be given to the King by vertue of that same mixt power especially seeing baptizing it directly called 1 Câ—r 1. 17. a lesse principall worke of the ministery then preaching It it be said as ordination is performed by the King is not an ecclesiasticall action but civill or mixt partly civill partly ecclesiasticall I answer by that reason if the King should preach and administrate the Sacraments these actions should not be called ecclesiasticall actions and Uzzah's touching the Arke should not be called an action by office incumbent to the Levites only and it might be said the person being civill the actions are civill And Uzziah's burning of incense upon the Altar of incense was not a Priestly act but an act of a mixt power he was partly a King and partly a Priest who did performe the action but he was a Priest by sinfull usurpation in that action as we know 2. This answer is a begging also of the question 2. Whereas it is said that the Church ordainech Pastors and the King also but divers wayes the one by a regall power the other by me elâ—siasticall power I answer this is spoken to make the people ad saciendum populum for ejusdem potestatis est saith the Law constituere destiâ—â—ere it is the same power to ordaine and to destroy The high-Commission by the Kings authority doth deprive Ministers without so much as the knowledge of the Church If then the King as King may deprive ministers without the notice of the Church then may the King as King also ordaine Pastors without the notice of the Church For the action of the instruments as such is more principally the actions of the principall cause 3 Election of a Pastor is farre different from ordination of a Pastor the whole multitude as Christians have voyces in the election of a Pastor and so hath the King or his Magistrate as a part and member of the Church but this giveth no negative voice to the Magistrate in election but ordination is not done by all the multitude it is a worke of authority done onely by the Church-officers 4. The coactive and civill degradation must have also correspondent thereunto a coactive and civill ordination of Pastors Now I ask what is a coactive ordination If it be the Kings royall and civill authority commanding that the Church officers ordaine Pastors at Christs commandement This we deny not they fight with a shadow or a night ghost not against us who contend for this But if they meane a coactive degradation by the Sword in banishing imprisoning yea and for just causes punishing Ministers to death with the Sword this indirect deprivation we doe not deny But so the King depriveth a man from being a Minister when he is beheaded or hanged or banished for civill crimes no other wayes but as he depriveth a man from being a Fashioner a Saiâ—â—r a Plower a Souldier or a Father to his owne barnes a husband to his owne wife for when the man is beheaded or hanged by the sword of the Magistrate he is dâ—prived from being a fashioner a sailer a father a husband and Solomen did not other way deprive Abiathar from the Priest-hood then indirectly by consining him for treason at Anathoth so as he could not exercise the Priests office at Jerusalem So after Junius Calderwood Gul. Apollonius Sibrandus yea Muketus a man for the times denyeth that the Prince can take away that ecclesiasticall power that the Church hath given And so acknowledgeth Wedelius the same That reasonlesse lyer Lysimach Nicanor in this and in other things hath no reason to say we borrow Jesuites doctrine to answer this argument for the Jesuite Becanus is not â—nacquainted with Jesuits doctrine against the power of Kings yet he answereth that Solomen as King had no power over Abiathar for treason or any other crime and therefore following Bellarmine and Gretserus saith that Solomon did this by an extraordinary propheticall instinct yet Abulensis a great textuall Papist and Bâ—naventura a learned Schooleman saith this pâ—oveth that the King is above the Priest and that Priests in the Old Testament were not eximed from the civill Judges sword and power this is very doubtsome to Suarez who â—aith that it was a tempâ—rall civill punishment of exiâ—e and that â—â—â—sitiâ—n from the exercise of the Priests office followed upon the other But we neede not this answer for Solomons sentence containeth in tâ—rminis a meere civill punishment and these words 1 King 27. S. Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord seem not to be words of the Kings sentence of banishment but are relative to the fulfilling of the Lords word and a consequent of divine justice relative to the prophesie against Elies house Though verily I see no inconvenience to say that Solomon did indeed deprive him from the Priest-hood by an extraordinary instinct of the Spirit as he was led of God to build the Temple 1. Because the text saith so Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord and ver 35. and Zadok the Priest did the King put in the roome of Abiathar which is a direct deprivation from the Priest-hood but I contend not here But that the King causatively may deprive that is command the Church to cast out hereticks and to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. wee confesse as for the power of convocating of Synods some thinke that the King may convocate Synods as men but as Church men they have power if the Magistrate bee averse to convocate themselves see Junius who insinuateth this distinâ—tion But certainly though the Kingly dignity be thought meerely civill yet let this be thought on it may be thought that the Kings power is divine three
Church because that mediatory kingdome substisted fortie yeeres in the Jewish Church in the Wildernesse without circumcision yea and Apostles and Evangelists are no meanes subordinate to that kingdome because Christs mediatory kingdome subsisteth now without these officers 2. Neither is it true that magistracie conferreth no helpe to this kingdom but in these things which concerne the externall man for in a politick and coactive way the Magistracy taketh care by commandements that the Church bee fed with the pure Word of God onely this proveth that magistracie and Church ministery have two different objects and the way of proceeding of these two states the one carnall and with the sword Joh. 18. 36. Rom. 13. 3 4. the other spirituall to the manifestarion of the truth to the conscience 2 Cor. 4. 1 2. Psal. 110. 1. 2. Esâ—y 11. 4. Heb. 4. 12. which we grant to be true 5. It is objected Christ himselfe performed all the parts of his mediatory kingdome and all the functions thereof in his owne person and by his disciples while hee was on earth but hee refused all civill Magistracy and did inhibit his disciples thereof because it is not contained under the administration of his mediatory office as subordinate thereunto Answ. Christ refused magistracie not because it is not subordinate to edification which is the end of Christs mediatory kingdome but because it is not compatible with his spirituall kingdome in one and the same person and therefore this is a caption à non causa pro causa in one and the same person and subject the civill and the Ecclesiasticall power are inconsistent and incompatible that is true Ergo in the kind of lawfull meanes these two powers are unconsistent and uncompatible I deny it to follow for both royall power and Church power concurre for the producing of one and the same end to wit edification and obedience to both Tables of the Law but after different wayes carnall and spirituall I thinke it most considerable that though the Prince may by a coactive way command that same which a Church Synod may command in an ecclesiasticall way yet differeth these same powers in their formall objects because the King commandeth that which is good religious decent in Gods worship as a thing already taught and determined judicially either expressely in Gods Word or then by a pastorall or Synodicall determination and that not by way of teaching informing the mind exponing the Scripture or by pastorall dealing with the conscience as oblieging to a Church Liturgie and ceremonies as one who intendeth formall edification and faith repentance and obedience to God but the King commands that which is good and extra as it is already taught and expounded and as it is an imperated act of externall worship or mercy and justice done by a coactive power Hence the Magistrates power is not to edifie formally but to procure that edification may bee 2. The Magistrates power is Lordly the Churches power is onely ministeriall 3. The Magistrates power may bee in one to wit in the King the Churches power of the keyes is in the Church 4. They differ in formall objects as hath been said Now to obviate what the Jesuite Lysimachus Nicanor saith wee are no wayes of Papists mind in the matter of the Magistrates power for Papists 1. exclude Kings and Emperours from any medling with Church matters Charles the fift was upbraided by Paul the third the Pope of Rome because hee did as became a Prince ordaine meetings conferences and assemblies for composing of differences in Churches matters not giving the power of conveening councells onely to the Pope comparing his fact to the attempt of Uzzah who put his hand to the Ark and to Câ—rah Dathan and Abirams conspiracie against Moses yea and Nicolaus the first in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour denyeth that Emperours are to bee present in Synods except in generall Synods where both Church men and laicks are present wee teach that the Magistrate is as the hand the ministry as the eyes and both are to concurre for the spirituall good of the body of Christ. 2. Papists will have the Magistrates so to defend the faith as they have not power to judge not as Christians with the judgement of descretion what is right or wrong but they must as blind servants execute what Prelates decree yea and see non prâ—priis saith Henr. Blyssemius sed alienis Episcoporum ac pâ—aelatorum suorum oculis videre not with their owne eyes but with the eyes of their Prelates yea and the Magistrate should not read the Scripture say Papists and Nicanâ—rs brethren the Jesuits expresly contrary to Gods Word Deut. 17. 17. Hee shall read in the booke of the Law all the dayes of his life Joshua 1. 8. but onely beleeve as the Church beleeveth and this is blind obedience that they require of Princes this faith or obedience wee thinke abominable in all men as in Princes Of old Popes and Prelates were subject to Kings and Emperors as wee teach from the Word of God Rom. 13. 1. and 1. wee teach against the Jesuit Lysimachus Nicanor that his Prelates should not invade the King and civill Magistrates sword and be civill Judges as Popes and Prelates are against which writeth Tertullian Origen Hilarius Chrysostome Ambrosius Augustinus The author of the Survey saith that if every Eldership be the tribunall seat of Christ what appellation can bee made there from to either provinciall or generall councell and hee meaneth that there can bee no appellation to the King seeing the Presbytery in Churches causes is as immediatly subject to Jesus Christ and the highest Judicature on earth as the King is Gods immediate vicegerent on earth nearest to Jesus Christ in civill causes I answer the cause that is meerely ecclesiasticall as the formall act of preaching and ecclesiasticall determining of truth in Pulpits and the determining the truth in Church assemblies in an ecclesiasticall way in Synods and the excommunicating of a scandalous person are immediatly subject to Jesus Christ speaking in his owne perfect Testament and these causes lie not at the feet of Princes to bee determined by them as Kings but in a constitute Church they are to bee determined by the ordinary Church assemblies and in this place there is no appeale from the Presbytery to a King but it followeth not that there can bee no appellation from a Presbytery to a provinciall or to a nationall assembly 1. Because though every Presbytery bee the tribunall seate of Christ yet it is but a part of the tribunall seat of Christ and such a part as may easily erre and therefore appellation may bee made from the weaker and the part more inclined to erre to the stronger and maniest or the whole who may more hardlier erre and that is not denied by this author who dare not deny but they may appeal from a Bishop who doth and may misleade
Reformation of the Congregations of England IN the first article the Author acknowledgeth the Church of England was once rightly and orderly gathered either by Apostles â—â— apostolick men whether Philip or Joseph of Arimathea or Simon Zelotes as we may read in Fox c. Sothat all the worke now is not to make them Churches which were none before but to reduce and restore them to their primitive institution Answ. Though the Churches of England were planted by the Apostles yet since Popery universally afterward prevailed in both England and Scotland as Beda and Nicephorus and ancient histories witnesse we thinke by our brethrens grounds England losed the very essence of a true Church So that there be neede of the constituting of a new Church and not of simple restitution to the first restitution 1. Because the Congregations wanteth the essentiall constitution of right visible Churches as you say 2. Because you receive none comming from the Church of New-England to the seales of the Covenant because they are members of no visible Church Sect. 2. Certaine propositions tending to Reformation In the third or fourth Proposition the Author condemneth Laicks Patronages 2. Dedicating of Lands to the Ministry to these adde what the Ministers of New-England say in their answer to the thirty two Questions sent to them from Old-England where they condemne stinted maintenance Though the right of Church Patronages were derived from Romulus it is not for that of noble blood â—or Dionysius Halicarnasseus saith Romulus instituted Patronages when he had divided the people in noble and ignoble called Patricii Plebeii But this Patronage was civill and when servants and underlings were hardly used it hath a ground in nature that they choose Patrons to defend them therefore hee who gave libertie to a a servant amongst the Romans was called a Patron and he who defended the cause of the accused as Valla saith was called a Patron If it bee said that the servant was the proper goods and part of the Masters patrimony because hee might sell his servant and therefore there could bee no Law given to prove men may limit the dominion of the master over the servant I answer the servant was a part of his masters patrimony but a part thereof for sinne not as his Oxe or his Asse is a part of his patrimony therefore by the Law of nature whereby the weaker imploreth helpe of the stronger as the Lambe seeketh helpe from the mother and the young Eagle from the old the slave might well have libertie to choose a Patron and this is a ground that the Magistrate the Churches nurs-father by office should plead the Churches cause as her Patron and every one in power is to defend the Church in her liberties and patrimony and therefore in the Apostles time when holinesse and the power of Religion did flourish and was in court there was not need of any positive civill or Church Law for a Patron to the Church every beleever in power is oblieged to defend the Church but when men became Vulturs and ravenous birds to plucke from the Church what was given them the Councell of Millian in the yeare of God 402. wherein some say Augustine was president under Honorius and Arcadius some holy and powerfull men were sought from the Emperour to defend the Church in her patrimony and rights against the power and craft of avaritious men and they were called Patrons and the same was desired in the first Councell of Carthage but with the Bishops advice cum provisione Episcoporum Hence it is cleare patronages from their originall were not Church priviledges and Bishops being a part of the Church could not be the Patrons quia nemo sibi ipsi potest esse patronus and for this cause that learned thinketh this was the originall of Church Patronages but the Patrons have beene chosen with consent of the Church hence they were not as our Patronages are now which goeth 1. by birth 2. and are a part of a mans patrimony and civill thing that the Patron hath right unto under the Kings great Seale but as a Minister is not a Minister by birth neither was a Patron a Patron by birth and from this wee may collect that the Patrons right was but a branch of the Magistrates right and accumulative not primitive and that hee could take nothing from the Church and 〈◊〉 lesse might the Patron forestall the free election of the people by tying them and their free suffâ—ages to a determinate man whom hee presented and it is not unlike which Aâ—entinus 〈◊〉 when Bishops gave themselves onely to the Word of God to preaching and writing bookes in defence of the truth the Emperour tooke care that they should bee furnished with food and â—aiment and therefore gave them a pâ—tronus quem 〈◊〉 patronum curatoremque vocabant whom they called a patron and here observe the Bishop of old was the client and the sonne and Pupill now hee must bee the Patron and Tutor and therefore in time of Popery Antichristian Prelates would bee Patrons both to themselves and to the Churches But this seemeth not to bee the originall of patronages because this ground is common to all Churches but not all but onely some certaine Churches have patronages therefore their ground seemeth rather to bee that some religious and pious persons founded Churches and dotted and mortified to them benefices and the Church by the Law of gratitude did give a Patâ—onage over these founded Churches to the first foundators and their heires so as they should have power to nominate and present a Pastor to the Church But there were two notable wrongs in this for 1. If the fundator have all the Lands and Rents in those bounds where the Church was erected hee is oblieged to erect a Church and furnish a â—â—pend both by the Law of nature and so by Gods Law also Ergo the Church owe to him no gift of patronage for that nor is hee to keepe that patronage in his hand when hee erecteth a Church but and if hee being Lord heritor of all the Lands and Rents both erecteth a Church and dotteth a stipend sub modum eleemosynae non sub modum debiti by way of almes not by way of debt then is there no gratuitie of honour nor reward of Patronage due to him for almes as almes hath no reall or bodily reward to bee given by those on whom the almes is bestowed but onely the blessings of the poore Joh 31. 20. it being a debt payed to God hee doth requite it And Calderword saith no wise man would thinke that the Church men should allure men to found Churches and to workes of Pietie by giving them the right of presenting a man to the change and also hee would call it Simonie not pietie or religion if one should refuse to doe a good worke to the Church except upon so deareâ—t rate and so hard a condition as to
acquire to himselfe poâ—er over the Church of God Though the â—ight of presenting a man to benefice were a meere temporall thing yet because it removeth the libertie of a free election of the fittest pastor as Origen saith it cannot bee lawfull but it is not a temporall or civill right but a spirituall right though wee should grant that the people have a free voyce in choosing and that the patron were oblieged to present to the benefice the man onely whom the people hath freely chosen and whom the Elders by imposition of hands have ordained 1. Because the Pastors hath right to the benefice as the workeman is worthy of his hire and hee hath a divine right thereunto by Gods Law 1 Cor. 9. 8 9. c. Gal. 6 6. Matth. 10. 10. Ergo if the patron give any right to the Pastor to the benefice it must bee a spirituall right If it bee said hee may give him a civill right before men that according to the Lawes of the Commonwealth hee may legally brook and injoy the benefice this is but a shift for the civill right before men is essentially founded upon the Law of God that saith the workeman is worthy of his hire and it is that fame right really that the Word of God speaketh of now by no Word of God hath the Patron a power to put the Preacher in that case that hee shall bee worthy of his wages for hee being called chosen as Pastor hee hath this spirituall right not of one but of the whole Church 2. It is true Papists seeme to bee divided in judgements in this whether the right of patronage bee a temporall or a spirituall power for some Canonists as wee may see in Abb. decius and Rubio and the Glosse saith it is partly temporall partly spirituall Others say it is a spirituall power as Anton. de Butr. and Andr. Barbat and Suarez and whereas Papists doe teach that the Church may lawfully give a right of presenting to Church benefices even to those who are not Church men the power must bee ecclesiasticall and spirituall and cannot bee temporall also Suarez saith that the right of patronage may bee the matter of Simâ—ny when it is â—â—ld for mâ—ney Ergo they thinke it an holy and spirituall power It is true the Bishop of Spalato calleth it a temporall power which is in the hand of the Prince but there is neither reason nor Law why it can bee called a temporall power due to a man seeing the patron hath amongst us a power to present and name one man whom he conceiveth to be qualified for wee find the nomination of a list or the seeking out of men fit for the holy ministry some times ascribed to the Church as Act. 1 23. Then they appointed two Joseph called Barsabas who was surnam d Jusâ—us and Matthias which words may well bee referred to the eleven Apostles and so they nominated men or to the Church of beleevers and so though it bee not an authoritative action it is an ecclesiasticall action and belongeth to the Church as the Church and so to no Patron and the looking out of seven men to be presented as fit to bee ordained Deacons is expresly given to the Church of beleevers Act. 6. 3. Wherefore Brethren looke yee out amongst you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seven men of honest report and sometimes the Apostles doe nominate men for the ministery but never doth the holy Ghost mention a Patron But if the thing it selfe say they hee necessary then is the office not unlawfull But it is most necessary that some one or more eminent and powerfull men should have power to see that the Church goods bee not delapidated Answ. It is a part of the Magistrates office with his accumulative power whereby hee seeth that every one doe their dutie to take care that vulturs and sacrilegious devourers of Church livings bee punished and the Church themselves are to censure all guiltie of Simony or delapidation of the rents of the Church as may bee gathered by due analogie from Peters punishing with death the sacriledge of Ananias and Saphira and the Simony of Simon Magus 2. The ancient Church â—ooke care of dividing of the Church rent very carefully in foure parts one was given to the Pastor who was not to imploy â—ents of the Church upon Horses and Coaches and conquering Baronies and Lordships to their sonnes as our idle belleys were in custome to doe but the Bishop was to entertaine Hospitalls and to feed the poore to take care of bridges repâ—ring of Churches so as Ambrose saith what ever is the Biships it is the poores a second part was given to the Elders and Deacons a third part was for the repairing of Churches and a fourth part for Hospitalls for poore and strangers this distribution with some other order is made if wee beleeve Papists in a Synod at Rome under Silvester the first though Socrates Theodoret Sozomen and others well versed in antiquitie speake nothing of this Synod but you may see this cleare in Synodo Bracarensi in Aventinus in Gregorius so there is no need of a Patron nor was there any in the Apostolick Church Deacons were to take care for tables and the goods of the poore no reason that men seeme more carefull for the good of the Church then Jesus Christ. 3. Though there bee a necessitie that the Church bee defended in her liberties yet is there no reason an office should be made thereof as the Canonists make it an office with a sort of stipend And therefore to make a Patron they require not onely the founding of a Church but also the building of the house upon his owne charges and the dotation of a maintenâ—nce for the Church and for this cause the Patrou hath a buriall place in the Church and if hee or his children become poore they are to be entertained of the Church rents and therefore they call it jus â—uti'e a gainefull power 2. It is jus bâ—norifioum hee hath power to nominate and present a man to the benefice of the vaiking Church 3. It is jus onerosum because hee is oblieged to defend the Church see theâ— Law for this so see also Calderwood Gerardus Suarez Anton. de dom arcb Spal Hâ—spinianus yet Justinianus himselfe forbiddeth that the Patron should present a man to the Bishop to bee examined and tryed and certainly this place and charge for the defending of the Church of Christ from injuries and wrongs 〈◊〉 Christ of want of foresight and providence who hath not appointed officers civill and eccleâ—â—asticall to take care of his Church for no power over the Church was ever given to builders of Synagogues and therefore a calling by the Patron is no more Christs way then a calling by the Prelate and his Chaplaine 2. Nor would the Church receive the ministers from Christ Jer. 2. 5. and the laying
to Jerusalem by revelation as Paul did Gal. 1. Ergo all their acts that they did there they did them by immediate revelation Answ. The consequence is null Paul went by revelation up to Jerusalem and there Gal. 2. hee rebuked Peter as an Apostle no as a Brother for then Paul should have exercised Apostolick Authority over Peter which is popish Object 3. If the Apostles did act as Presbyters here they did wrong the particular Churches and took their Liberty from them in exercising ordinary Ministeriall acts there which are proper to that Church Answ. It followeth upon the denyed principles of an independent Congregation onely for a Church without Elders hath no Presbyteriall power and therefore such a power can not bee taken from it you cannot take from a Church that which by Law it hath not If the Acts of the government in the Apostles are according to the substance of the Acts all one with the Acts of government in the ordinary presbytery Ergo say I those Acts come not from an Apostolicall and extraordinary power even as the Apostles preaching and baptizing are not different in nature and essence from the Acts of preaching and baptizing in ordinary Pastors though they had power to preach and baptize every where and wee onely where wee have an ordinary calling of the Church and from the Apostles preaching and baptizing every where wee may inferre it is lawfull for the ordinary Elders their successors to preach and baptize in some place why may we not inferre because the Apostles in collegio in one presbytery did ordaine ordinary officers that we have thence a patterne for an ordinary presbytery Object 4. If there were no institution for preaching and baptizing but onely the Apostles naked practise we were not warrantably to preach and baptize from the sole and naked example of the Apostles Answ. Shew us an institution for preaching and baptizing then for that which we alledge is an institution Matth. 28. 19 20. Mark 14. v. 15. to you is a commandement given to the Apostles as Apostles as you said in the 1. objection proponed by you and therefore we have no more warrant to preach and baptize from the Apostles example then we have to work miracles and because by the same reason of yours Christs command to his Apostles to preach before his death Matth. 10. is not ordinary presbyteriall preaching but conjoyned also with the power of casting out devills Matth. 10. 1 2 3. it must also upon the same ground bee a Commandement given to the Apostles not as ordinary Pastors but as Apostles if we compare Matth. 10. 1 2 3. with Mark 16. 15 16 17 18. If you flee to John Baptist his practise of baptisme 1. you are farther off then you were 2. What warrant more that John Baptist his practise should warrant preaching and baptizing if it want an institution then the Apostles preaching and baptizing when it is separated from an institution 2. This argument pincheth you as much as us for a thousand times in your bookes a warrant for our ordinary Elders to preach and baptize is fetched from the sole practise of the Apostles 3. By this the argument for the Christian Salbath from the Apostles observing that day shall also fall 4. This also shall make us loose in fundamentalls of Church government which are grounded upon the Apostles practise 5. The Apostles had no Apostolick and extraordinary ground which moved them to preach and baptize according to the substance of the Acts for they did preach and baptize upon these morall and perpetuall motives and grounds which doe obliege ordinary Elders to preach and baptize even to Christs second comming Ergo their very practise not considered with the institution is our patterne and rule It is as evident that there was a Presbyteriall Church at Ierusalem after the dispersion seeing the dispersion as we have proved did not reâ—rench them to one Congregation because our Brethren doe conclude from a company of Elders of the Church of Ephesus Acts 20. of Ierusalem from the Angell of the Church of pergamus of Thyatira a formall ordinary Presbytery of Ephesus of Ierusalem of Thyatira Let us have the favour of the same argument upon the supposall of many Congregations which the word doth warrant and upon the supposall that it is called one Church alwayes as Acts 2. 47. The Lord added to the Church Acts 5. 11. feare came upon all the Church Acts 8. 1. there arose a great persecution against the Church Acts 12. 1. Herod stretched forth his hand to vex certaine of the Church v. 5. prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God Acts 15. 4. and when they were come to Jerusalem they were received of the Church and of the Apostles and Elders Acts. 21. 15. Paul went up to Jerusalem and v. 18. The day following Paul went in with us into James and all the Elders were present Here be Elders of the Church of Ierusalem and Ierusalem is named one Church frequently and alwayes before and after the dispersion it is called a Church in the singular number not onely in relation to persecuters but also in relation to government and because they were a politicall society to which there were many added Acts 2. 47. and which hath Elders Acts 15. 4. Acts 21. 15. 18. And a Church-union in a constituted body hearing the Word and receiving the Sacraments as this Church did Acts 2. 42. is not a Church but in regard of Church-policy and Church-government They reply That enemies doe persecute the Church Acts 8. 1. Acts 12. 1. Acts 8. 3. Saul made havock of the Church that is of the faithfull of the Church for Saul had no regard in his persecution to a Church in their government or Church combination therefore the enemies are said to persecute the Church materially I answer this objection I tooke off before But 2. Principally the enemies persecuted the Church under the notion of â— Society politicall holding forth in a visible Church-profession their faith in Christ and that by hearing receiving the Seales and subjecting themselves in a visible way obvious to the Eye of all to the government of the Christian Church Yea the enemies had no better character to discerne them to be Saints and so worthy of their malice then Church-characters of a Church-profession But 2. Whereas the Holy Ghost giveth the name of one Church to the Church of Ierusalem all constantly speaking of it both as a Church and in relation to persecuters and that every way in that notion as our Brethren say that the Scripture speaketh of their own Corgregationall Church wee have the same reason to call it one Church because of one government for the question is not now if it bee many Congregations but it it bee one Church Object 2. They are called the Elders at Jerusalem not the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem Ergo from this it is not concluded that they were one Church Answ. Acts 16. 4.
they are called Apostles and Elders in or at Ierusalem Acts 16. 4. for another cause these were Elders from other Churches from Antioch no lesse then Elders of Ierusalem they onely sate in Synod at Ierusalem 2. All Ierusalem was not converted to the Christian Faith and therefore they may well bee tearmed Elders at Ierusalem as the Church at Ephesus at or in Thyatira 3. I deny that the Scripture speaketh any other wayes of the Elders of the Church of Ierusalem then of the Elders of other Churches 2. Those Elders ought to meete for the governing of the Church of Jerusalem for this was their duty Ergo they were one Presbytery 2. They did meet Acts 15. 14. to receive Paul and Barnabas and to heare what God had done by them for their edification and Acts 21. Paul goeth to Ierusalem and is received v. 15. by the Brethren but the next day v. 18. The day following Paul went in with us unto James and all the Elders were present and there the Elders doe presbyterially act for the removing of a Church-scandall v. 21. The believing Jewes were informed that Paul taught all the Iewes which were amongst the Gentiles to forsake Moses This was a publick scandall 2. The offended multitude were to convene v. 22. as plaintiffs 3. The Eldership ordaineth Paul to remove the scandall by satisfying the offended by purifying himselfe after the manner of the Jewes and it is cleare Paul should not have satisfyed the scandalized Iewes except Iames and the Elders had injoyned him so to doe 4. This the very course of a presbytery yea our Brethrens doctrine which a Congregationall presbytery would and doth take with any other person who doth give offence yea though it be taken and not given if the way of remedy be lawfull and expedient as this presbytery conceived Pauls purifying of himselfe to be and if any scandalizing person should be disobedient to the voyce of a Congregationall eldership such as our Brethren believe the Eldership of Jerusalem to be they would say they are to censure him and therefore if Paul should have beene disobedient to this he should have incurred a censure It is true Lorinus saith that Chrysostome and Oecumenius will have this to be a Counsell not a Synod to command Paul and they deny any Juridicall power here but v. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to mee it is They were gathered together Diodatus calleth them The colledge of the governours of the Church Beda saith there were foure Synods and hee maketh the Synod Acts 1. at the chusing of Matthias the first the second at the chusing of Deacons Acts 6. the third Acts 15. and this the fourth Acts 21. 2. The Text seemeth to mee to say it for as Acts 15. there was course taken for the Gentiles that they should abstaine from blood lest they should either scandalize or bee scandalized so the Eldership here taketh course that the infirme Iewes be not scandalized as is cleare v. 25. As touching the Gentiles which believe we have written c. and to me they seeme to do both Synodically some thinke that this fact of the Elders and Paul was not lawfull but how ever though it was not a generall councell a presbytery I take it to be taking course to remove a scandall from the weake Iewes in this place as they had by a Synodicall power removed it from the Gentiles Act. 15. It is objected by Master Mather that if a Church in an Island by Divine institution and so this first founded congregation at Jerusalem which did meete in Salomons porch had once an entire power of Iurisdiction within it selfe though in an extraordinary case 1. The case is ordinary as in the Dominion of Wales there is scarce a congregation to be found within twenty or thirty miles 2. Suppose the case were extraordinary and rare may they violate the ordinary rules of Christ for so some may thinke and say that though according to ordinary Rules Baptisms and the Lords Supper must be dispensed only by men and by Ministers yet in the want of these the one may be dispensed by a Woman or Mid-wife and both of them by such as are no Ministers Answ. We thinke a Ministery and Discipline more necessary to a Congregation in a remote Island or to the Church of Ierusalem before they increase to such a number as cannot meet for their numerous multitude in one Congregation then the Sacraments when there be no Ministers to dispense them 1. That the Church be so in the Island its alone may possibly be extraordinary but that in such a case they have the Word preached and entire power of Discipline whole and entire within themselves to excommunicate scandalous persons is not extraordinay when there be no consociated Churches whom excommunication concerneth that are in danger to be scandalized for it floweth connaturally from a Church to which agreeth the essence of a Church to exercise Jurisdiction over all its owne members if there be no more consociated with that Church that is by accident and an extraordinary exigence of Gods providence As a master of a Family is to do his duty to educate his children in the feare of God but if God take all his children from him by death he doth not transgresse the ordinary rule of educating his children in the feare of God when hee hath none This argument supposeth that a Congregation hath no power of excommunication at all either compleat or incompleat as the Mid-wife hath no power to Baptize at all either compleat or incompleat neither doth a Congregation transgresse any rule of Christ at all when it exerciseth entire power of censures within it selfe whereas there be no consociated Churches to share with it in that power A Congregation is capable of entire Jurisdiction because it is a Church But a woman in no case is capable of administrating Baptisme or the Lords Supper except shee were extraordinarily and immediatly inspired to be a prophetesse but for the exercise of entire power of Jurisdicton by a Congregation in a râ—mote Island I hope it hath no such need of immediate inspiration 2. There is no such morall necessity of the Sacraments as there is of the Ministery of the word and consequently of some use of the Keys where a scandalous person may infect the Lords flock For where vision ceaseth the people perish but it is never said where Baptisme ceaseth the people perish and therefore uncalled Ministers in case of necessity without ordination or calling from a presbytery may preach and take on them the holy Ministery and exercise power of Jurisdiction because the necessity of the Soules of a Congregation in a remote Island requireth so but I hope no necessity in any the most extraordinary case requireth that a Midwife may Baptize or that a private man remaining a private man may celebrate the Lords Supper to the Church without any calling from the Church But Mr. Mather if the power of Iurisdiction