Testament when nothing hinders but that Kings may be ministers and ministers Kings CHAPTER XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word church in holy writ The meaning of the word church Math. 18. v. 17. IN treating of the church I conceive a world of writers both Papists and Protestants might have spared themselves much labour about the nature power truenesse fallibility antiquity succession of it if both parties had not walked in the dark and if they had agreed upon some few and very easie common principles consonant to holy Scripture and reason How many volumes on our side are written to state how far the Romish church is a true church to vindicate us from schisme to prove that we have a right succession of churches power and ministry that the English church is a true Catholick church that the reformed in France have likewise a right to that title One party yields more then needs must and fearing to want for themselves a right of church-succession and Baptisme they will acknowledge the Romish church to be a true church and yet with such metaphysicall reservations and modifications that from a metaphysicall goodnesse they insensibly descend to a morall making of a magistrates power an ecclesiast call of a cadaver and carkasse a living body of an aggregation of churches under one presbytery of the same extent with the jurisdiction of the magistrate the only true church of Christ This made the late English hierarchy conceive that their best course was to approach as near as they could to the Romish yea to be one church with them that otherwise they could not make their power calling and succession good nor clear themselves from the guilt of schisme So that as all parties have been equally mistaken in their grounds so have they hardly understood one another raising doubts where there were none some by that weakning their own cause and strengthening that of their adversaries who took all concessions for truths putting their opposites to very great straights For not knowing well how to deny the church of Rome to be a true church and that salvation is to be had in it and not being able to shew an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles time as the Romanists can do nor vindicate themselves from schisme each party is very eager to call his neighbour schismatick rending the seamlesse coat of Jesus Christ that name being liberally bestowed by the Romanists upon the Protestants and by some of these upon those that adhere to the dissenting brethren each of them Papists and Presbyterians challenging that seamlesse coat of Christ even right of church and ecclesiasticall power and therefore for fear of schism rendings they will be sure to cast lots upon it that they may have it whole and entire Whereas had both been well informed of the nature of church and of schisme and that suceession is a needlesse plea neither availing the Romanists a whit nor prejudicing any way the reformers Baronius Bellarmin Stapleton as well as Whitaker Chamier and the like might have saved the world so much labour in reading them the first in putting the reformers upon the task of proving themselves a true church and the latter in taking off the aspersion of schismaticks for then no doubt all the hard task had been on the Romanists side who being not able to make invalid our grounds about the nature of the church the power of the church the calling of pastors their succession and of schisme had been wholly put upon vindicating themselves and not weakning our title for it had been to little purpose so long as we had retained the same grounds which do put us into a firm and unmoveable possession About the nature of schisme Dr. Owen whose grounds which is very strange though we never conferred our notes together are those that I stand upon in treating of the nature of the church hath so well resolved the world that it is but in vain for any one either to write after him or against him And having in my Paraenesis handled the nature of the church intending here only an extract of it I will say only so much of it as will make way to what I mainly intend to prove viz. that the parity and independency of churches each from the other in power of exercising all church acts best agreeth not only with Scripture antiquity and the opinion of Zuinglius Musculus Bullingerus and Erastus but also with the sense of the seven dissenting brethren sitting twelve years agone in Westminster together with the other members of the assembly of Divines yea that many forrain divines and other learned men Salmasius for one no way intending to favour the cause we have in hand have been strong patrons of it in severall of their writings and treating of the right of churches and of the power of the magistrate over them have laid the same foundations as we I find in holy writ specially in the new Testament that the word Church is taken properly three wayes I. for the mysticall body of Jesus Christ the elect justifyed and redeemed whereof the Gospell is full thus Hebr. 12. v. 23. and Ephes 5. v. 26 27. c. II. for the universality of men through the world outwardly called by the preaching of the word yielding an externall obedience to the Gospell and professing visibly Christianity of this mention is made 1 Tim. 3. v. 15. and 2 Tim. 2. v. 20. III. for a particular visible congregation with one accord meeting in one place for the worship of God according to his institution which is spoken of Rom. 16. v. 4. Gal. 1. v. 2. 1 Cor. 16. v. 1. 2 Cor. 8. v. 1. 1 Thess 2. v. 14. Act. 9. v. 31. Act. 15. v. 41. 1 Cor. 16. v. 19. yea such a church as is confined within a private family as Rom. 16. v. 5. St. Hierome upon the 1. of the Galatians takes the word church properly either for a particular church or for that church called the Body of Christ which hath neither spot nor wrinkle dupliciter ecclesia potest dici ea quae non habet maculam rugam vere est Christi corpus ea quae in Christi nomine congregatur relating to the words of Christ Matth. 18. v. 19. where two or three c. which cannot be understood of a nationall church There be two places in the new Testament where the word church is taken otherwise namely Act. 19. v. 41. for a concourse of people Matth. 18. v. 17. a place so much controverted and which when we speak of excommunication requireth we should insist upon it It sufficeth here to say that if by it were meant an ecclesiasticall assembly of pastors and elders some other parallel to it might be found in the old or new Testament I am sure as there is none in the new so neither in the old
not of their own nation and religion then they performed by a confederate discipline what the magistrate was to enjoin and command them The confession of Basilartic 6. hath a notable saying speaking of the duty of magistrates to propagate the Gospell as they are magistrates This duty was enjoyned a magistrate of the gentils how much more ought it to be commended to the Christian magistrate being the Vicar of God If then the heathen magistrate fails of his duty in not propagating the Gospell those that live under him and are better minded ought to supply the part of the magistrate in that particular and yet in doing of that they do but perform their own duty and businesse like as a master leading his horse down the hill his man being out of the way doeth both his own businesse and that of his man and both employeth his own strength in guiding an unruly horse and supplieth that of his man or which expresseth more lively the thing in hand as the Duke of Somerset in training up Prince Edward in the true religion did both do his own duty and that of Henry the 8. his father who being wanting to his duty in shewing his power authority to have his son brought up in the true Protestant religion Somerset Cranmer and others were not to be wanting to theirs and yet were not to act by a power distinct from the power of the King for if so then when ever a power is exercised rightly and yet against an unlawfull command of a superiour we had need to give a new name to that power and there would be as many kinds of power as duties to be performed Having done with Origen I come to Ambrose whom I was to alledge upon the 1. of Timothy relating to the places of St. Paul and Origen and to the power of magistracy assumed by churches There he teacheth the custom both of the synagogues of Christian churches of having elders that composed in stead of the magistrate controversies arising amongst church-members saying that first synagogues and afterwards churches had elders without whose advice there was nothing done in the church and wondreth that in his time which was about the year 370 such men were out of use which he thinks came by the negligence or rather pride of some Doctors who thought it was beneath them to be esteemed the lesse in the church as S. Paul saith of them while they are to decide controversies not as judges invested with a coercive power but only as arbitrators and umpires But the true cause why these elders ceased which he wisheth had been still continued he mentioneth not but the true cause is when the magistrate that was for above 300. years heathenish became Christian these arbitrators and elders ceased in great part at least they were more out of churches then in churches and in stead of them the Emperours created judges which yet retained much of the nature of those whereof Origen and Ambrose speak and which were invested as most of the Lawyers affirm as Cujacius for one with them my Rev. Father in his book de Monarchia temporal and in his Hyperaspistes lib. 3. cap. 15. not with a coercive jurisdiction but as they term it audience hence comes the Bishops and Deanes and Chapters Audit However such arbitrators sate in a court and were chosen by the Christian Emperours and were not members as before ever since St. Pauls time chosen by the members of that church where the contention did arise betwixt brother and brother and at that time it was not thought a violation of the command of St. Paul if a wronged brother had gone to secular judges because they were not infidels but Christians faithfull and saints as the Apostle termeth them 1 Cor. 6. 2. therefore it was free for any lay-man or other either to repair to the Audit of the Bishop or to the secular judge Which custome Ambrose doth not like so well as when Jewes and Christians were obliged by the law of their discipline to have controversies decided by their own elders Certain it is that these elders though they were not as Ambrose wisht they had been in his time arbitrators in those churches whereof they were members kept that office a long time under Christian Emperours but with more authority and dignity because they were countenanced by the Emperours their masters We have them mentioned pretty late even in Theodosius Honorius and Arcadius time for in one law they enjoin that ordinary judges should decide the contentions between Jewes and Gentils not their own elders or arbitrators Thereupon it is worth considering that that title which in the Theodosian Code is de Episcopali audientia in the Justinian Code is de Episcopali judicio a main proof that these judgements in episcopall courts had much still of the nature of those references in churches under the heathen Emperours These episcopall courts were set up by the Emperours to favour the clergy that they might be judged in prima instantia by their own judges for if either party had not stood to the sentence of that court they might appeal to the secular court The words of the 28. Canon of the councell of Chalcedon are very expresse If a clerk hath a matter against a clerk let him not leave his Bishop and appeal to secular judgement but let the cause first be judged by his own Bishop Now this episcopall court being in substance the same power with that of the elders mentioned by Ambrose which were first in synagogues and then in Christian churches under the heathen Emperours one may plainly see how weak and sandy the grounds are upon which ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing in the hands of church-officers is built which government say they is the government of Christ and is to be managed by those church-officers by a warrant from Christ the mediatour For Constantine erecting an episcopall court and empowering the judges of the court to decide causes and controversies did not intend to give them a commission of binding and loosing or to put into their hands the keyes of Heaven so delegating a power which was none of his to give but only granted what was in his own power namely that some magistrates under him should set all things in order in the church and among the clergy Besides he intended to set up that magistracy which was through the necessity of the times assumed first by synagogues then by Christian churches under persecution for sure Constantine did not place the power of the keyes of binding and loosing in the exercise of that power managed either by the elders which Ambrose mentioneth or by the episcopall court erected by himself Neither Constantine nor any of his successours did ever conceive that churches were to be governed by any other power then their own as all other societies of men were In this episcopall court any cause between man and man
for succession is Romanish Ministers are no successours in their ministery to the Iudaicall Priests but to the Prophets 133 Chap. XIII The nature of the ministers power and of that of binding and loosing the power of the keyes Amyraldus and Mr. Lightfoots judicious exposition of the power of binding and loosing The power of governing and ruling is not the ecclesiasticall contended for Mr. Gillespies arguments answered 142 Chap. XIV That the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing are not committed to all church-officers but to the ministers of the Gospell only 155 Chap. XV. That God hath not given to the church-officers of the Gospell a certain platform of government and that it is arbitrary and of humane institution and therefore not to be administred by a power distinct from the humane 161 Chap. XVI The 31. chapter of the confession made by the Rever Assembly examined The use of synods Two things are humbly represented first that for a re-union of jurisdictions over all persons and in all causes a convocation made up of ministers only be re-established during the sitting of Parliament the second is that ministers may be put into the same capacity as all other ranks of free-born people to sit and vote in Parliaments Of the power of synods and that of the magistrate in calling of them The synod of the Apostles was extraordinary not exemplary The exception of the brethren of Scotland against the 2. article of the 31. chapter of the confession examined The uses and abuses of synods that they are not the way to compose differences in matters of religion if their canons are beyond counsells and advices 166 Chap. XVII That the Iewish Church-officers had not a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate Mr. Gillespies distinction that they were not materially but formally distinct examined The argument of Amyraldus that though they had a distinct jurisdiction yet the example of the church of the Iewes is no pattern to the Christian church discussed and proved to be of no validity 192 Chap. XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word Church in holy writ The meaning of the word Church Matth. 18. v. 17. 206 Chap. XIX That a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place about the worship of God is the only true visible church mentioned in Scripture That that church considered as an assembly of Christians bringeth forth other kinds of acts then it doth considered as a society of men by which the nature and extent of the power of a private church is made clear and evident 213 Chap. XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in New-England 222 Chap. XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ 234 Chap. XXII That the greatest opposers of the dissenting brethren namely Salmasius Amyraldus and others have laid down the same grounds for the right and power of particular churches and so confuted rather their own fancies then invalidated the tenets of the brethren The question whether Rome be a true church briefly resolved That Amesius and Iohn Mestrezat late minister of Paris in their writings have held the power of private churches to be independent from any church-judicatory 242 Chap. XXIII The consistency of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power in ordering publick worship proved by the example of the Iewes that they had through all the land particular convocations synagogues or churches called also colledges or schools where the Prophets and sons of the Prophets taught especially on the sabbath-day that they were independent from any church-judicatory How synagogues were altered from their first institution and that being converted into Christian churches they retained the same right power and way of government 251 Chap. XXIV That the Christian churches under heathens were governed by a confederate discipline or a power of magistracy as the synagogues were appointing men which Ambrose calls elders to decide such matters as otherwise were to come under the magistrates cognizance This practise is grounded upon 1 Cor. 6. v. 1 2 c. and confirmed by Origen Iustin Martyr Ambrose and Mr. Lightfoot That the power of these elders continued still under Christian Emperours with some alteration they erecting in lieu of them Episcopall courts That all church-power was the Emperours power That the very heathen magistrates knew no other but that all power was annexed to them 267 Chap. XXV That ecclesiasticall jurisdiction as it is held by the Romish church better agreeth with reason and the letter of the Scripture then that of the presbyterian brethren That some Romanists have ascribed more power to the magistrate in sacred things then the presbyterian brethren 287 Chap. XXVI The description of excommunication in terms received by most of our opposites though otherwise variously defined by them That for four thousand years no such excommunication was in use either among the heathens or the Iewes An answer to some objections That the legall uncleannesse was no type of the morall That the Priests judging of the leprosy is no plea for excommunication nor for ecclesiasticall jurisdiction 298 Chap. XXVII That neither in the time of Ezra such an excommunication began That the casting out of the synagogue did not answer that excommunication That there is no ground for it nor practise of it in the new Testament 307 Chap. XXVIII That the whole context Matth. 18. v. 15 16 17 and 18. maketh nothing for excommunication neither Iudas non-admission if granted to the Eucharist nor the delivering of the incestuous person to Satan nor yet the self-examination required 1 Cor. 11. 316 Chap. XXIX That excommunication is contrary to common sense and reason 326 Chap. XXX That excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity That the corrupting of the doctrine of the Eucharist made way for excommunication 337 Chap. XXXI The History of excommunication from the first reformation from Popery how it was received in Geneva but not settled without disputes and clashings betwixt the consistory and the magistrate 342 Chap. XXXII A continuation of the History of excommunication in France the Low-Countreys Scotland the Palatinate How it came to pass that amongst reformed states the Scottish ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ascended to such a height What plea the reformed churches in France have for excommunication That it is more justifiable among them then in churches under an orthodox magistrate 353 Chap. XXXIII The judgement of some
of the lawfulnesse of a call hath likewise power to make the call null and void in case it be not valid enough in his apprehension and judgement Good Lord what need is there to trouble the world with a distinct power from the magistrate which is thus evacuated and made void by another power CHAPTER IX The concessions of Mr. Gillespie which come to nothing by the multitudâ— of his evasions and distinctions The vanity and nullity of his and other mens divisions distinctions of power Martyr Musculus Gualterus alledged against the naming of a power ecclesiasticall when it is in truth the magistrates power The positions of Maccovius about the power of the magistrate in sacred things not hitherto answered by any THus we see that even Erastus could say no more then Mr. Gillespie and the confession of Scotland But Mr. Gillespie hath many evasions of modalities causalities and distinctions of power by which he seems sometimes to make large concessions to the magistrate but which when he pleaseth and it serves his turn he can elude and bring to nothing throwing in the eyes distinctions in great store to confound the judgement which is a strong argument of weaknesse unsoundnesse as of a house so of a cause when they need so many supporters whereas those that plead for the magistrates power in sacred things have need but of one only rule to state and define the whole controversy about the magistrates power and the measure of obedience which all Christian churches synods and presbyteries are to yield to them and that rule is that all men either single or convened and met in a society under whatever name or title do submit to and obey the magistrate in all things that are not against faith and good manners And these two things 1. the internall power in the ministery 2. and the externall power of the magistrate nakedly understood make short work and rid us of that army of causes kinds and distinctions of power and operations which M. Gillespie opposeth to a single combatant who notwithstanding is much stronger with his one only weapon then Mr. Gilâ—espie with his thousands as the fable saith of the cat whose one only caveat and shift to avoid 〈◊〉 by climbing up the first tree or house did more avail for her preservation then the whole bag-full of wiles and policies of the fox It were an endlesse labour to bring into a body all the divisions distinctions causalities modalities forms and objects of powers dispersed in Mr. Gillespies book Pag. 191. he maketh two objects about which ecclesiasticall power is conversant first the object of the magistrates care of religion and the object of the operation of that care Thus he and others make a power which he calls a care of the religion and another a care about religion As for the power itself considered generally they make it double ecclesiasticall and civil this is wholly the magistrates in the other the magistrate hath also a share for they say this ecciesiasticall power is exercised either in a politick way or in an ecclesiasticall way thus they make an ecclesiasticall civil power residing in the magistrate Next they divide ecclesiasticall power into intrinsecall and extrinsecall into direct and indirect the extrinsecall and indirect they yield to the magistrate thus you have again an ecclesiasticall power belonging to the magistrate Again they have an objective and formall ecclesiasticall power which needeth a further subdivision to be understood for they make an objective ecclesiasticall power conversant about persons and things and this they say belongeth only to the magistrate and a formall ecclesiasticall power in which the magistrate hath his share with the ministers so that of these two ecclesiasticall powers objective and formall it will prove that the magistrate hath 3. parts and the ministers but one for this ecclesiasticall formall power is again divided by them into a power exercised ratione objecti objective-way about things and persons which kind of power say they belongs to the sole magistrate and into a power exercised in an ecclesiasticall way which they say is the ministers portion Pag. 261. he hath an ecclesiasticall power which he divides into perfect and imperfect which he calls pro tanto of this stamp is this division of ecclesiasticall power into the power of every way and the power more suo which distinctions are so subtile that they are beyond Scotus apprehension He hath also a division of ecclesiasticall power into imperative and elicitive this is proper to ministers that to magistrates and then an ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction properly so called and another improperly so called The jurisdiction improperly so called he and all his brethren ascribe to the ministers but the jurisdiction properly so called to the magistrate Which thing no way agreeth with the division of ecclesiasticall power into perfect and imperfect above-mentioned for whereas they make the perfect ecclesiasticall power to belong to the ministers and the imperfect to the magistrate here they make the ecclesiasticall power properly so called to pertain to the magistrate and the power improperly so called to the ministers so that if we believe them the power properly so called shall be the imperfect power as on the contrary the power improperly so called shall be the perfect power which is against any mans common sense and logick By the help of these distinctions the Popes and their advocates have defended the power of excommunicating and deposing Kings yea of disposing of their temporaâ—ties saying that the Pope hath not a direct power over them but an indirect but yet causing to be seized or seizing directly of their dominions as Julius the II. the Kingdom of Navarre per indirectam potestatem in casu necessitatis in ordine ad spiritualia potest summus pontifex manum imponere regnis imperiis cum plenissima potestate I have not done yet ranking in files the severall ecclesiasticall powers They further divide it into elicitive and coercive into primary and secondary power into the power managed directly and ex consequenti into a power of reforming abuses under the notion of formality of scandall and a power under the notion of formality of crime And to draw to an end of dividing they have more divisions of ecclesiasticall powers as into directive and coercive cumulative and privative auxiliary and destructive declarative and executive authoritative constitutive the auxiliary they derive from Charles the great capitulari Car. mag Volumus vos scire voluntatem nostram quod nos parati sumus vos adjuvare ubicunque necesse est ut ministerium vestrum adimplere valeatis we will have you to know that we are ready to help you in the ministerie Now of all these divisions of ecclesiasticall powers the magistrate hath alwayes one half the ministers sometimes none except they take for themselves the destructive and privative powers which indeed signify just nothing and are â—ntâ—arationis except also they content
and 30. chapters of 2 Chronic. for the magistrates power of calling synods is of the same stamp It is true chap. 29. v. 4. Ezechiah gathered Priests Levites together but it was to make an exhoâ—tation to them not that they should congregate into a synod invested with judiciall authority I think that none ever yet dream'd of it that synods in the old Testament could be proved out of that place The last place Prov. 11. v. 14. speaketh of counsellors in the multitude of which there is safety but not a word there of calling of them nor that those who were called were Priests and Levites but rather any other One would almost think that they had a mind to weaken a good cause and make invalid the power of the magistrate by alledging places that make nothing for it but however they will have them to passe for valid proofs that magistrates by divine right are to call synods But to the matter I am quite of another mind then our brethren the Scots are and I desire to be judged by any other then by them whether there be any spark of reason or truth in their saying Is it not more like that in a well-constituted church things must run their wonted channel that the power of calling synods belongeth to the magistrate but the church being in a troubled condition then that ministers yea any good man should contribute his helping hand toward the reforming of the church whether by way of synods or otherwise without expecting orders from the magistrate In turbata ecclesia omnis homo miles est Christianus minister But who sees not but the drift of our brothers the Scots is to constitute a jurisdiction independent from that of the magistrate The third section or article of the 31. chapt of the confession needeth a comment to make it agree with the second it belongeth to synods and councels ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience to set down rules and directions for better ordering of the publick worship of God and government of his church to receive complaints in cases of mal-administration and authoritatively to determine the same which decrees and determinations if consonant to the word of God are to be received with reverence and submission not only for their agreement with the word but also for the power whereby they are made as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in his word First they do not define what synods are here meant whether convocated by the magistrate or by private churches or even convocated by the ministers themselves If by the magistrate how can a company of men called to advise him make constitutions valid except they be first submitted to the judgement and approbation of him by whose authority they were assembled The like judgement may we make of the decrees of syâ—ods convocated by the common consent of private churches If the ministers assemble of their own accord were they so many Apostles they must have some magistracy to give vigour of law obliging to obedience either actively or passively else their canons would have no jurisdiction but over them they could overcome by perswasion The fourth article or section is all synods or councels since the Apostles time whether generall or particular may erre and many have erred therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practise but to be used as an help in both A synod is no rule but to him that is willing to make it a rule All the synods power and authority is only so much as either the magistrates will is or a conscience inlightened or convinced is perswaded to yield unto I know no middle way to create authority There is a rare saying of Festus Hommius disp 18. thes 2. de concil authoritate the foundation of all synodicall authority is an agreement with the divine truth and ordinance whereof we must be first evidently and clearly made certain before the synod get any authority with us So that synods are of authority when men and churches are clearly convinced of the equity reasonablenesse and truth of their decisions I am not of the opinion of Gregory Nazianzen and Bazil who condemned all synods generally for I believe they are of very good use and necessarily to be had so that the members be not invested with any judiciall power independent from the magistrate or from particular churches whose decisions be counsells and advices given to them both not lawes otherwise I think little or no good is to be expected from them and that they are not a way to decide controversies 1. Judges in an assembly never so upright must be indifferent to persons and causes but so cannot ministers be in a synod for a synod made up of orthodox Divines is no competent judge of Arminians Therefore it is no marvell if the councell of Trent did condemn the Lutherans in the first Session before they ever heard them or that a late synod at Charenton prepossessed against independent churches in England did as it were anathematize them though none of the members of that synod being 80. in number had hardly seen the face or writings of any of them 2. It seemeth to be against all courses and proceedings of courts either of law or chancery that both plaintiffs and defendants should sit as judges in one judicatory to determine their own cause 3. If there be but one party either the defendent or plaintiff sitting voting no doubt but he will cast his adversary out of the court therefore there being no other then Protestants sitting and voting in the synod of Dordrecht the Arminians could not chuse but loose their cause besides that it is no lesse unreasonable that one party should submit to the judgement of his adverse party 4. It seemeth neither just nor reasonable that churches and men should submit to the major part of the members stating and concluding of any matter of religion rather then to the weight of the reasons of the minor part dissenting Should in synods alwaies the major number of votes carry it in a generall councill made up of Papists Lutherans Calvinists no doubt but that party that is most numerous though it carrieth it but by one vote would give religion and faith to all the rest therefore the late long Parliament did wisely decline to adhere rather to the major part of the members in the assembly who had voted for a presbyterian government reserving to themselves the liberty to weigh the reasons of both not to number the persons Hence we may gather how unreasonable it is in matters of faith and religion that that which is not the act of all should be reputed as done by all when as it may fall out that the major part hath out-voted the minor but by one suffrage for usually all collections syntagmes of confessions of faith canons and decrees go currant and are published to the world as if all the members had consented to them with a
distinction of jurisdiction was not necessary because it was one people one nation and one temple whereto all the Iewes did gather together and therefore since they could conveniently be governed the unity of jurisdiction standing there ought not to have been a distinction yea it was very convenient that there should be an identity of jurisdiction that it might be believed that it was the same God to whom they all ministred There was the same reason for the temple for it was his will that there should be one place in which they should offer sacrifice unto him lest if that had been done in many places they might have thought there had been many gods Stapleton de Prin. doctrin 197. acknowledgeth the same indentity of jurisdiction among the Jewes I come to the second viz. to Mr. Gillespies concessions which are as large as I can wish that the church state were the same materially that the same man was both high Priest and chief judge of the nation that elders of synagogues did exercise coercive jurisdiction that the Jewish Senat after the thirtieth year of Christ was ecclesiasticall and yet was over all persons and causes except capitall and that there was not then any other senat extant but that before the thirtieth year the same senat having the judgement of capitall causes was civil All these being granted I see not what further can be required in the behalf of unity of jurisdiction since 1. the same men that were members of the ecclesiasticall senat were also members of the civil senat 2. that the synagogues were invested with magistracy since the elders had a coercive power so that in the very synagogues there is by his confession a coalition of powers and jurisd ctions 3. making but one senate both before and after the 30. year which judged of all causes and matters and over all persons the civil before the 30. of Christ judging of ecclesiasticall causes and the ecclesiasticall after the 30. judging of civil But I could never understand why he calls the senate after the 30. year of Christ meerly ecclesiasticall because it did not judge of capitall causes though it had cognizance and judgement of all other matters Can the judging or not judging of capitall and criminall causes alter the constitution and name of an assembly or court so as that when it judgeth of capitall causes it must be called civil otherwise it must be called ecclesiasticall Now because there is some obscurity in that concession of his that the church and state were the same materially we will hear what his countrey-men say to that in a late book printed anno 1657. called A true representation of the present divisions of the church of Scotland that we may the better weigh his recantation or rather modification when he saith that though they were the same materially yet they were distinct formally the words are pag. 18. The church of God being restrained to that one people of Israel their church and commonwealth were materially the same by divine constitution so that none could be members of the commonwealth but such as were also members of the church and so professours of the true religion as now under the Gospell it may be otherwise Now let us hear Mr. Gillespie pag. 6. They were formally distinct in respect of distinct lawes the ceremoniall was given to them in reference to their church state the judiciall was given to them in reference to their civil state But if they were distinct in regard of the judiciall and ceremoniall lawes why may they not be united in regard of the morall law For Mr. Gillespie passeth over the morall law and leaves it uncertain who is to be the keeper and guardian of it and whether it was given in reference to their church state or in reference to their civil state or whether a third power jurisdiction or state must not be constituted that is neither civil state nor church state to which the morall law hath reference for sure there was some union of jurisdictions in the protection and defence of the morall law which was as it were the bottom and the basis upon which the ceremoniall and judiciall were grounded and is of far more large extent then the ceremoniall and judiciall put together and from which in so many difficulties that are incident for the clearing of ceremoniall rites and judiciall sentences there must be continuall appeals to the keepers of the morall law which being at least equally in the custody of the magistrate and church-officers and both parties having a joint interest in the morall law as to see all men and businesses governed and squared thereby they also to that end must conjoin their power and jurisdiction For indeed the morall law is no more different from the politick then from the law given to families fathers masters husbands only the politick law is the practise of the morall or is the morall law applicable to cities families c. In like manner the ceremoniall law is but the morall law applyed in the practise of religious service for the morall law saith God only is to be worshipped the ceremoniall saith where how when by whom So that as all lawes are streams from the morall law so must all jurisdiction be from one fountain of magistracy It seems that Calvin had the same thought when in his harmony of the Pentateuch he reduceth all lawes under one classis But to examine a little nearer his distinction of materiall and formall I do not understand what he meaneth by formall in opposition to materiall for the jurisdictions that are one materially must be also one formally Let us suppose two coordinate supreme senates as Mr. Gillespie would have them among the Jewes one civil and another ecclesiasticall and that as he would have it the same men were members of one and the other I say if they do not differ materially neither do they differ formally so long as no law order or constitution civil or ecclesiasticall can have any force without the joint consent of both and except both senates put their seals of confirmation to what either of them hath decreed For example the appointing a day of publick humiliation by the ecclesiasticall senate must be also an act of the same men sitting in a civil senate who if they will have the injunction to stand must make orders subservient to it that there be no markets nor courts that day kept otherwise those that keep markets or courts upon such a day by vertue of former warrants from the civil senate will not know how far they are to obey the injunction of the ecclesiasticall senate without a dispensation from the civil senate This double jurisdiction is in effect but one for the same men appointing a day of humiliation in an ecclesiasticall senate to be kept forbid also in a civil senate all markets and courts to be kept and though one part of the injunction was made in one senate and the
constitutions that are made about them are acts of the major part of the members are valid not because they are lawes of Christ and approved to every ones conscience but because like lawes and orders of other societies they do oblige as such and as consented unto in the making of them by the major part of the members though it may be the minor part were in the right for as the acts of a magistrate commanding things directly commanded by God are the magistrates acts so those acts performed in a particular church though commanded expressely by God in as much as they require externall obedience either actively or passively are acts of that magistracy set up in that church I find in a result of a synod in New-England printed at the end of the book of Mr. Cotton of the Covenant of Grace some conclusions wholly consonant to what I now write in this chapter of the two kinds of acts that are performed in every particular church the one done by them as church-members the other being an effect of magistracy set up in every particular church considered not as a church but as a society The first kind of acts is proper to those church-members who by any power of magistacy are not put upon stronger engagements of oredience then if there had never been any The second is exercised by magistracy either in the church or out of the church against the obstinate and unruly and such as need to be compelled I find the synod speak much to that purpose namely p. 40. the collectour saith from them that for remedying disorders and taking away or preventing grosse errors there must be a power of restraint and coercion used and in regard that every particular church is to be as well considered in the quality of a civil society as a society of church-members CHAPTER XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in New-England WHen at first I undertook to write of this subject I had no other designe but to assert the nullity of a double externall jurisdiction and to prove that there being no such thing neither in Scripture nor reason as an ecclesiasticall power all jurisdiction that was not united under and appertained not to the magistrate was not a power of coercion was no jurisdiction Neither was I then lesse dissenting from the church-way and power retained by the rever brethren of the congregation then from the presbyterian brethren and the rather because I saw both parties carried with as much eagernesse of opposition against Erastus and Mr. Coleman as they were among themselves besides not fancying to my self otherwise but that all jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall and assumed by whatsoever society of men either single or made up by the aggregation of many societies which was not subordinate to the magistrates power was alike against reason and Scripture But being not able to study my main matter intended without enquiring into the nature of the power that both parties assumed to themselves I found that the tenets of the brethren of the congregationall way could very well accord with mine and which was not yet by any considered that the right of particular churches as the dissenting brethren hold might very well consist with that measure of power that Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Gualterus Grotius Mr. Selden Mr. Coleman allowed to the magistrate in matters of religion and over churches and that independency of private churches I mean independency from presbyterian classicall and synodicall judicatories doth no way hinder their right and liberty nor their dependency on the magistrate nor cutteth short the magistrate of the soveraign power he ought to have overall societies and persons and in all causes and matters Lastly I found that this way of reconciliation was most agreeable with Scripture reason the practise of the Jewes and of the primitive church of Christians besides was confessed so by many learned men who though seemingly otherwise affected and carried by more heat then knowledge of what was passed or held in this Island have notwithstanding in their tracts about the power of churches and discipline laid the same grounds that the dissenting brethren have delivered I need not be very long in proving by reason that this reconciliation betwixt the advocates of the magistrates power in matters of religion and those that plead for the right of churches is already made to our hands by what I have already handled I adde further these following considerations 1. Since every private church hath within it self a power of magistracy and that all magistracy in whatever society it be seated is subordinate to the magistrate of those societies it doth consequently follow that that magistracy wherewith every private church is invested is also subordinate to the magistrate for as I have demonstrated since no society of church-members no more then of citizens merchants physicians and the like can be imagined without lawes discipline and power of restraint and coercion so neither can it be imagined that such a power is not dependent on the magistrate for if a member of a society be obstinate and refractory and will not be ruled but by coercion and compulsion it be more then church-members as such can do to reduce him by exhortation and good advice then church-members must act also by a power of magistracy either assumed or delegated however it be that power of magistracy is subordinate to the soveraign magistrate 2. It is a maxime in Scripture Philosophie and common reason that theorems or propositions that are true asunder are no way contradictory one to another Now these two following propositions are of an undeniable truth viz. The magistrate is a soveraign governour over all persons and societies and in all matters and causes whether they pertain to religion or no and this Every particular church hath a right and power to govern it self without any dependence either on other churches or church-judicatories Each of these propositions being considered as true asunder must also be very consistent and no way clashing one with the other 3. That the right of churches may well stand with the power of the magistrate may appear by example of many societies as families corporations halls whose intrinsecall power of magistracy agreeth exceeding well with that of the magistrate over them for none doubteth but every father of a family hath a power to govern his children houshold and servants as he listeth being in his own as it were house a magistrate and a Priest yet none hitherto questioned but that paternall and oeconomicall powers are subordinate to the power of the magistrate for even the civil law and so