Ecclesiasticall Republike of which sort of things the diversity and subordination of Ecclesiasticall Courts was one doth belong by the same reason to the Christian Church I say further though the Common-wealth and civill Policy of the Jewes be not in all points a patterne to our civill Policy yet I am sure it is no errour to imitate the civill policy of the Jewes in such things as they had not for any speciall reason proper to them but are common to all well constituted Common-wealths and so wee may argue from their Common-wealth that it is a good policy to have divers civill Courts and the higher to receive appellations from the Inferiour as it was among them Shall wee not by the very like reason fetch from their Ecclesiasticall Republike diversity of Spirituall Courts and the supreame to receive appellations from the Inferiour because so was the constitution of the Jewish Church and that under the common respect and account of a politicall Church and not for any speciall reason which doth not concerne us CHAP. VIII The fourth Argument taken from Acts 15. THE example of the Apostolicall Churches Acts 15. maketh for us The Churches of Antioch Syria and Cilicia being troubled with the question about the Jewish Ceremonies the matter was debated and disputed at Antioch the chiefe towne of Coelosyria where Paul and Barnabas were for the time It is very probable that some out of the other Churches in that Province as also out of the Churches of Cilicia were present in that meeting and conference for they were troubled with the very same question no lesse then the Church of Antioch Howsoever the matter could not be agreed upon in that meeting but a reference thereof was made to a more generall assembly at Hierusalem and for that effect Paul and Barnabas and others with them were sent thither All this is cleare by comparing verse 2. with 23. Hereupon the Apostles and Elders did synodically come together at Hierusalem and decided the question giving forth decrees to be observed by the particular Churches Acts 15.6.28 and 16.4 We will not dispute what sort of Synod this was only that it was a Synod with authority over many particular Churches and Congregations and whereunto the meeting at Antioch whether it was provinciall or Presbyteriall only did referre the determination of the question about Jewish ceremonies It is answered by some 1. That the reason of sending Paul and Barnabas to Hierusalem was to know whether these teachers who pressed the observation of the ceremoniall Law had any such commission from the Apostles and Elders as they pretended 2. That there is here no Synod nor assembly of the Commissioners of divers Churches for there were no Commissioners from the rest of the Churches in Iudea Galilee and Samaria mentioned Acts 9.31 nor from the Churches of the Gentiles mentioned Act. 14.23 neither were Paul and Barnabas and the rest who went with them Commissioners to represent the Church of Antioch but messengers only to make narration of the case 3. Not only the Apostles and Elders but the whole Church at Hierusalem met together 4. If the resolution which was given be considered as the judgement of the Church at Hierusalem it was only her advice to her sister Churches if otherwise considered it was a decree absolutely Apostolicall and divine Scripture by infallible direction from the holy Ghost and for that reason imposed upon all the Churches of the Gentiles though they had no Commissioners there These answers had need to be stronger before that so many Fathers Councells and Protestant Writers who have understood the matter otherwise should all bee put in an error To the first wee reply that the reason of sending Paul and Barnabas to Hierusalem was not so much to know whether these teachers had commission from the Apostles and Elders to presse the keeping of the Law of Moses as to get a resolution of the question it selfe verse 2. about this question Now the question was not what commission the Apostles had given to those teachers but whether they should be circumcised after the manner of Moses verse 1. To the second we say that if Paul and Barnabas were messengers to make narration of the case certainely they were more then sufficient messengers and there was no need of others to be joyned in message with them so that it appeareth the rest who were sent with them were Commissioners to represent the Churches which sent them Neither is it credible but that all the Churches of Syria and Cilicia which were in the same case with the Church of Antioch did send their Commissioners also to Hierusalem for otherwise how could the Apostles and Elders have so certaine and perfect intelligence of the case of those Churches verse 23. Beside it had beene a great neglect in those Churches if they had not sent some to Hierusalem as the Church of Antioch did for if it was expedient which Antioch did they ought no lesse to have done it their case being the same Moreover it may be collected from verse 3. that the other Churches through which Paul and Barnabas passed in their journey did send some companions along with them to joyne with them in their errand and to give their consent in the meeting at Hierusalem unto that which was to be concluded This is the observation of Cajetan Mentzerus Calvin Gualther and other Interpreters upon that place Lastly it is no way probable that the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem together with those who were sent from the Churches of Antioch Syria and Cilicia and the other Churches through which Paul and Barnabas did travell would come together without acquainting the rest of the Churches of Judea which were so neare at hand and might so easily send their Commissioners to Hierusalem To the third wee reply that it cannot bee proved from the Text that the body of the Church of Hierusalem was present but rather it appeareth from verse 6. that they were not present as hath been said before And though it were granted that they were present yet Master Robinson saith that they did no more then consent to the decree To the last answer it is containe that the conclusion of that meeting at Hierusalem was not a naked counsell and advice but a decree imposed with authority upon the Churches Acts 15.28 and 16.4 and 21.25 And whereas it is affirmed that the decree was meerely Apostolicall and that the Elders did no more then consent thereto even as the brethren did this is manifestly against the Text for Acts 16.4 It is said of Paul and Silas as they went through the Cities they delivered them the decrees for to keep that were ordained of the Apostles Elders that were at Hierusalem And Act. 21.25 all the Elders speaking to Paul say as touching the Gentiles which believe wee have written and concluded that they observe no such thing That this was spoken by al the Elders is plain from v. 18.19.20 So then
assertion I intend to satisfie the scrupulous and to put to silence the malicious so also to confirm the consciences of such as are friends and savourers to the right way of Church government Whatsoever is not of faith iâ— sin saith the Apostle yea though it be in a matter otherwise indifferent how much more is it necessary that we halt not in our judgement concerning the government of the Church but walk straight in the plerophory and full assurance of the same from the warrants of the word of God I say againe from the warrants of the word of God for as it is not my meaning to commend this forme because it is Scotlands so I hope assuredly that my Country-men will not dispise Gods Ordinance because it is Scotlands practice but rather follow them in so far as they follow Christ and the Scripture This therefore I pray that thy love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgement that thou maiest approve the things that are excellent Consider what I say and the Lord give thee understanding in all things Amen THE CONTENTS OF the first part of this Treatise CHAP. I. Of the words Elder Lay-Elder Ruling-Elder FOure significations of the word Elder in Scripture Of the nickname of Lay-Elders That the Popish distinction of the Clergie and the Laity ought to be banished Of the name of Ruling-Elders and the reason thereof CHAP. II. Of the function of Ruling-Elders and what sâ—re of officers they be OF the distinction of Pastors Doctors Elders and Deacons Of the behaviour and conuersation of Ruling-Elders Of the distinction of the power of Order and of jurisdiction That the Ruling-Elder his power of jurisdiction is to sit and voice in all the Consistories and Assemblies of the Church That his power of order is to do by way of authority those duties of edification which every Christian is bound to do by way of charity CHAP. III. The first argument for Ruling-Elders taken from the jewish-Iewish-Church THat we ought to follow the Jewish Church in such things as they had not for any speciall reason proper to them but as they were an Ecclesiasticall Republike That the Elders among the Jews did sit among the Priests and voice in their Ecclesiasticall Courts according to Baravias own confession but were not theirâ— will Magistrates as he alleadgeth Bilsons objections answered CHAP. IV. The second Argument taken from Math. 18.17 WHat is the meaning of these words Tell the Church Why the Presbytery may be called the Church Our argument from this place for Ruling-Elders CHAP. V. The third Argument taken from Rom. 12.8 THe words Rom. 12.8 expounded That by him that ruâ—eth is meant the Ruling-Elder The objections to the contrary answered CHAP. VI. The fourth Argument taken from 1 Cor. 12.28 THâ—t by governments the Apostle meaneth ruling-Elders Two glosses given by our opposites confuted CHAP. VII The fiâ—st Argument taken from 1 Tim. 5.17 OUr Argument from this place vindicated against â—en false glosses devised by our opposites CHAP. VIII The testimony of Ambrose for Ruling-Elders vindicated NO certain ground alledged against the authority of those Commentaries upon the Epistles ascribed to Ambrose Other answers made by our opposites to the place upon 1 Tim. 5. confuted CHAP. IX Other Testimonies of Antiquitie TEstimonies for Ruling-Elders out of Tertullion Cyprian Epiphanius Bâ—sil Chrysostome Hierome Eusâ—bius Augustine Origen Isidore the first counsell of Tâ—lido Other testimoâ—ies observed by Iustellus and Voetius Bilsons answer confuted CHAP. X. The consent of Protestant Writers and the confession of our opposites for Ruling-Elders CItatâ—ons of sundry Protestant writers to this purpose This truth hath extorted a confession from Wâ—itgist Saravia Sultiffe Camero and M. Io. Wemys of Craigtown CHAP. XI Dr. Fields five arguments against ruling-Elders answered HIs first reason that no foot-step of Ruling-Elders for many hundreth years could be found in any Christian Church answered five waies Footsteps of Ruling-Elders in the Church of England His second reason answered That we ought to judge of the Officers of the Church not from 1 Tim. 3. only but from that and other places compared together His third reason answered by the câ—rtain bounds of the power of Ruling-Elders His fourth reason answered by the distinction of the Ecclesiasticaâ—l Sanedrim of the Iewes from their civill Sanedrim His last reason concerning the names holdeth not CHAP. XII The extravagancies of Whitegift and Saravia in the matter of ruling-Elders THe one alloweth of Ruling-Elders under an Infidell Magistrate but not under a Christian Magistrate The other alloweth of them under a Christian Magistrate but not under an Infidell That Ruling-Elders do not prejudge the power of the civill Magistrate but the Prelacie doth which confuteth Whitegift That Christian Magistrates are not come in place of the Jewish Seniors which confuteth Saravia CHAP. XIII Whether ruling-Elders have the power of decisive voices when they they sit in Presbyteries and Synods THe affirmative proved by nine reasons Two objections to the contrary answered The place 1 Cor. 14.32 explained CHAP. XIIII Of the Ordination of ruling-Elders Of the continuance of their Office and of their maintenance THat the want of the Imposition of hands in Ordination the want of maintainance and the not continuing alwaies in the â—xercise of the Office cannot be prejudiciall to the Office it selfe of Ruling-Elders The Contents of the second Part. CHAP. I. Of Popular government in the Church THat this question is necessary to be clâ—â—red before the question of the authority of Assemblies That Jurisdiction ought not to be 〈◊〉 by all the Members of a Congregaâ—ion proved by 〈◊〉 reasons Objections answered The controversie 〈◊〉 CHAP. II. Of the independencie of the Elderships of particular Congregations Dr. Fields question whâ—ther the power of Jurisdiction belongeth to the Eldership of every Congregation or to a common Presbytery made up out of many Congregations answered by an eigâ—â—fold distinction A thrâ—â—fold conformity of those Parishionall Elderships to the primitive pattern CHAP. III. Of great Presbyteries which some call Classes THree false glossâ—s on 1 Tim. 4.14 confuted That the Apostle 〈◊〉 by the Presbytery aâ— Assembly of Presbyters whereof also Fathers and Councels do speak The warrant and authority of our Classicall Presbyteries declared both by good reasons and by the Apostolicall patern for assertion of the latter it is proved 1. That in many of those Cities wherein the Apostles planted Christian religion there was a greater number of christians then did or could ordinarily assemble into one place 2. That in these Cities there was a plurality of Pastors 3. That yet the whole within the City was one Church 4. That the whole was governed by one common Presbytery From all which a Corollary is drawne for these our Classicall Presbyteries CHAP. IV. Of the authority of Syâ—â—ds provinciall and Nationall THat the power of Jurisdiction in the Synod differeth from the power of jurisdiction in the Presbyterie The power of Jurisdiction
in Synods is three-fold dogmatick diataktick and critick Whether the decrees of a Synod may be pressed upon such as professe scruple of conscience there anent CHAP. V. The first argument for the authority of Synods and the subordination of Presbyteries â—â—erto taken from the light of nature THat the Church is a certain kinde of Republike and in things which are common to her with other societies is guided by the same light of nature which guideth them Of this kinde are her assemblies CHAP. VI. The second argument taken from Christs Institution THe will of Christ for the authority of Synods is shewed two waies 1. Because else he hath not sufficiently provided for all the necessities of his Church 2. He hath committed spirituall power and authority to the Assemblies and Courts of the Church in generall yet hath not determined in Scripture all the particular kinds degrees and bounds thereof and that for three reasons The particular kinds of Synods appointed by the Church according to the light of nature and generall warrant and rules of the word are mixed thogh not meer divine ordinances CHAP. VII The third argument taken from the Iewish Church THat there were among the Jews aâ— least two Ecclesiasticall Courts the Synagogue and the Sanedrim That the power of the Synagogical conâ—istory was not civill but spirituall proved against Sutliffe That the Jews had a supream Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim distinct from the civill Sanedrim proved against the same Sutliffe both from the institution therof Deuâ— 17. and from the restitution 2 Chron. 19. and from the practice Ier. 26. The consequence of our argument proved against such as deny it That we ought to follow the Jewish Church in those things which it had not as it was Jewish but under the common respect and account of a politicall Church CHAP. VIII The fourth argument taken from Acts 15. THat we finde Acts 15. a Synode of the Apostles and Elders with authority imposing their decrees upon many particular Congregations Foure answers made to this argument found not to be satisfactory CHAP. IX The sixt argument token from the Geometricall proportion THis argument from proportion doth hold whether we compare the collectives of Churches among themselves or the representatives among themselves or the representatives and collectives together CHAP. X. The sixt argument taken from necessitie THat without the authority of Synods it is impossible to preserve unity or to make an end of controversie Other remedies declared to be ineffectuall CHAP. XI Objections made against the authority of Synods answered THe place Math. 18.17 discussed That one visible politicall Church may comprehend many Congregations proved That the authority of Presbyteries and Synods doth not rob the Congregations of their liberties as the Prelacie did A visible Church may be considered either metaphysically or politically This distinction explained serveth to obviat sundry arguments alledgeâ— for the independent power of Congregations Other two objections answered which have been lately made The first part CONCERNING RVLING ELDERS CHAP. I. Of the words Elder Lay Elder Ruling Elder THE word Elder answereth to Zaken in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek It hath foure different significations 1. It noteth Age. 2 Antiquity 3. Venerability 4. An office In the first signification Elder is opposed to younger as 1 Tim. 5.1 Rebuke not an Elder but intreat him as a father the younger men as brethren 1 Pet. 5.5 Likewise ye younger submit your selves unto the Elder In this sense was the Apostle Iohn called the Elder because hee outlived the other Apostles 2 Iohn 1. and 3. vers 1. In the second signification Elder is opposed to Moderne Mat. 15.2 Why doe thy Disciples transgresse the tradition of the Elders That is of them of old time Mat. 5.21 In the third signification we finde the word Isa. 3. where the Lord saith that he would take away from Israel the prudent and the ancient vezaken that is the worthies among them and such as were respected for wisedome The same word and peradverture in the same sense is turned Elder Exod. 2.16 Eth-zikne Israel the Elders of Israel So the Spanish Seijor the French Seigneur the Italian Signore all comming from the Latine Senior signifie a man of respect or one venerable for dignity gifts prudence or piety Contrariwise men of no worth nor wisedome men despicable for lacke of gifts and understanding are called Children Isa. 3.4.12 Ephes. 4.14 But it is the fourth signification which we have now to do withall and so an Elder is a spirituall officer appointed by God and called to the government of the Church Acts 14.23 When they had by voyces made them Elders in every Church They have the name of Elders because of the maturity of knowledge wisedome gifts and gravity which ought to be in them for which reason also the name of Senators was borrowed from Senes Before we come to speake particularly of those Elders of which our purpose is to treat it is fit we should know them by their right name lest wee nick-name and mis-call them Some reproachfully and others ignorantly call them Lay Elders But the distinction of the Clergie Laity is Popish and Antichristian and they who have narrowly considered the records of ancient times have noted this distinction as one of the grounds whence the mystery of iniquity had the beginning of it The name of Clergie appropriate to Ministers is full of pride and vaine-glory and hath made the holy people of God to be despised as if they were prophane and uncleane in comparison of their Ministers Gerard likeneth those who take to themselves the name of the Clergie to the Pharisees who called themselves by that name for that their holinesse did separate them from the rest of the Jewes for this Etymologie of the name Pharisee hee citeth Tertullian Origen Epiphanius Ambrose and confirmeth it from Luke 18.10 Hence was it that some Councels discharged the Laity from presuming to enter within the Quire or to stand among the Clergie neere the Altar Two reasons are alleadged why the Ministers of the Church should bee called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 First because the Lord is their Inheritance secondly because they are the Lords inheritance Now both these reasons doe agree to all the faithfull people of God For there is none of the faithfull who may not say with David Psal. 16.5 The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of whom also it may not bee said that they are the Lords inheritance or lot for Peter giveth this name to the whole Church 1 Pet. 5.3 Where if it were needfull we might chalenge Bishop Hall who borroweth a glosse from Bellarmine and Gregorius de Valentia telling us that Peter chargeth his fellow Bishops not to dominier over their Clergie so shutting out of the Text both the duty of Pastors because the Bishops onely are meant by Elders and the benefit of the people because the inferiour Pastors are the Bishops
flocke according to this glosse for Peter opposeth the Lording over the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to being ensamples to the Flocke Surely if this Popish Glosse bee true Protestants in their Commentaries and Sermons have gone wide from that Text. But Matthias the Apostle was chosen by lot What then By what reason doth the Canon law draw from hence a name common to all the Ministers of the Gospell Let 〈◊〉 then banish from us such Popish names and send them home to Rome Bellarmin thought we had done so long ere now for he maketh this one of his controverted heads Whether wee may rightly call some Christians the Clergie and others the Laity or not ascribing the negative to Protestants the affirmative to the Church of Rome Yet beside the Clergy and the Laity Papists hold that there is a third sort in the Church distinct from both whom they call Regulares These are such of their religious orders as are not taken up with contemplation alone like the Monkes but with action such as the Dominicans Franciscans c. Who helpe and assist the Clergy in their Ecclesiasticall imployments though they themselves bee not admitted into any particular charge in the Church Now hee who will needs side with the Papists in the distinction of Clergy and Laity may also with them admit a third member of the distinction and make ruling Elders of that sort especially since the reason why the regular Chanoins are assumed as helpers to Parish Priests is propter multitudinem fidelis populi difficultatem invenâ—endi curatos sufficientes idoneos saith Cardinall Cajetan adding further male consultum populo Christiano invenitur sine hujusmodi supplemento Which reasons agree well to ruling Elders For 1. Parishes containe so many that the Minister cannot oversee all and every one without helpe 2. Sufficient and fit Ministers shall hardly bee every where found 3. It is found by experience that sinne and scandall are never well taken neede to and redressed where ruling Elders are not To let all this passe if any man will needs retaine the name of Lay Elders yet saith Gersomus Bucerus What aspersion is that to our Churches is it any other thing then that which Papists object to us for admitting Lay men into Councels They who have place in the highest and most supreame assemblies of the Church wherein the weightiest matters are determined ought much more to be admitted into inferiour meetings such as Presbyteries are But if we will speake with Scripture wee shall call them Ruling Elders Rom. 12.8 he that ruleth 1 Tim. 5.17 Elders that rule well They are called ruling Elders non quia soli sed quia solum praesunt Pastors rule the Church even as they doe but Pastors doe something more from which they may bee designed Whereas the Elders of which wee are to speake have no other imployment which can give them a designation except the ruling of the Church onely That wicked railer Lisimâ—chus Nicanor who assumed the name but forgot to put on the vizorne of a Jesuit in his congratulatory I should say calumniatory Epistle pag. 61. alledgeth that they are called ruling Elders because the Ministers are their ruled Elders If he were a Jesuit he may remember that in their own society besides their Priests Doctors Preachers Confessionaries c. They have also Rectores or Regentes whose office it is to see the rules of their order kept to observe the behaviour of every one when they perceive any seeds of Heresie to signifie the same to the Provinciall and hee to the Generall Yet are these Rectores among the lowest rankes of their officers so that Jesuites need not stumble when wee call our Eldersruling Elders CHAP. II. Of the function of Ruling Elders and what sort of Officers they be NOtwithstanding of all the multiplicity of Popish orders yet Peter Lombard treading the vestiges of the primitive simplicity did observe that the Apostles left only two sacred orders to bee perpetuall in the Church the order of Deacons the order of Elders The administration of Deacons is exercised about things bodily The administration of Elders about things spirituall The former about the goods the latter about the government of the Church Now Elders are of three sorts 1. Preaching Elders or Pastors 2. Teaching Elders or Doctors 3. Ruling Elders All these are Elders because they have voice in Presbyteries and all assemblies of the Church and the government of the Church is incumbent to them all nor onely to the Pastor and Elder but to the Doctor also The Bishop of Dune in his examen conjurationis Scoticae p. 35. alledgeth that our Church of Scotland did never yet determine whether Doctors and Deacons have right of voycing in the Consistories Assemblies of the Church But had he read our booke of Policie hee might have found that it excludeth Deacons from being members of Presbyteries and Assemblies Cap. 8. but admitteth Doctors into the same Cap. 5. The Doctor being an Elder as said is should assist the Pastor in the government of the Kirke and concurre with the Elders his brethren in all Assemblies by reason the Interpretation of the Word which is onely Iudge in Ecclesiasticall matters is committed to his charge But they differ in that the Pastor laboureth in the word of exhortation that is by the gift of wisedome applieth the word to the manners of his flocke and that in season and out of season as he knoweth their particular cases to require The Doctor laboureth in the word of Doctrine that is without such applications as the Pastor useth by simple teaching he preserveth the truth and sound interpretation of the Scriptures against all heresie and error The ruling Elder doth neither of these but laboureth in the government and policie of the Church onely The Apostle hath distinguished these three sorts of Elders 1. Tim. 5.17 Let Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour especially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine Where as Beza noteth hee distinguisheth the Word which is the Pastors part from Doctrine which is the Doctors part Even as Rom. 12.7.8 hee distinguisheth teaching from exhortation and 1 Cor. 12.8 putteth the word of wisedome and the word of knowledge for two different things Now beside those Elders which labour in the Word and those which labour in Doctrine Paul speaketh to Timothy of a third sort of Elders which labour neither in the Word nor Doctrine but in ruling well Hence it appeareth how truely the Booke of Policie Cap. 2. saith That there are foure ordinary perpetuall and necessary Offices in the Church the office of the Pastor the Doctor the Elder and the Deacon and that no other office which is not one of these foure ought to bee received or suffered in the Church But when we speake of Elders Non personatos c. we will not have disguised and histrionicall men puffed up with titles or idols
about the controversie betwixt Boaz and the other Kinsman not as Judges but as witnesses and beholders that the matter might bee done with the more gravity and respect Which doth further appeare from vers 9.11 In like manner wee answer to Deut. 21.19 the Judges decided that cause with advice and counsell of the Elders and so the name of Elders in those places may bee a name not of office but of dignity signifying men of chiefe note for wisedome gravity and experience In which sense the word Elders is taken Gen. 50.7 as Tostatus and Rivetus expound that place In the same manner we say of Deuter. 19.12 and in that case it is further to bee remembred that the Cities of refuge had a kinde of a sacred designation and use for the Altar it selfe was sometimes a place of refuge Exod. 21.14 and when the sixe Cities of refuge were appointed they were of the Cities of the Levits Numb 35.6 that by the judgement and counsell of the Levits who should best understand the Law of God such controversies might be determined as Pellicanus on that place saith well for this cause some read Josh. 20.7 They sanctified Kedesh c. Besides if it bee true that these causes were judged not in the City where the murder was committed but in the City of refuge as Serrarius holdeth with Masius and Montanus and alledgeth for it some very considerable reasons then doth Bilsons Argument from Deut. 19.12 faile also in this respect for the Elders there mentioned are the Elders of the City where the murder was committed CHAP. IV. The second Argument taken from Matth. 18.17 OUR second argument we take from Matth. 18.17 Tell the Church Let an obstinate offender whom no admonition doth amend bee brought and judged by the Church Where first of all it is to bee condescended upon That though hee speaketh by allusion to the Jewish Church as is evident by these words Let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a Publican Yet hee meaneth of the Christian Church when he saith Tell the Church as may appeare by the words following Whatsoever ye bind on earth c. which is meant of the Apostles and Ministers of â—he Gospell Joh. 20.23 so that hee did not send them to the Synedrium of the Jewes when hee bade them tell the Church nor 2. doth hee meane of the Church universall for then we should have none of our wrongs redressed because wee cannot assemble the Church universall nay nor the representative of it which is an Oecumenicke Councell Nor 3. can wee underderstand it of the collective body of a particular Church or Congregation for hee who is the God of order not of confusion hath committed the exercise of no Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to a promiscuous multitude Nor 4. can it be taken of a Prelate who being but one can no more be called the Church nor one can be called many or a member be called a body Non enim una persona potest dici Ecclesia saith Bell. de Eccles. l. 3. c. 17. Cum Ecclesia sit populus regnum Dei. It is plaine that the Church there spoken of is a certaine number met together Where two or three are gathered together c. Nor 5. can wee with Erastus and Bilson expound it of the Christian Magistrate which exposition beside that in a new-fangled language it calleth the Magistrate the Church and goeth about to overthrow all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction It is also utterly contrary to the purpose of Christ and to the aime of that discipline which he recommendeth to bee used which is the good of our brother and the gaining of him from his offence whereas the exercise of civill jurisdiction of the Magistrate is not intended for teâ— good of the offender and for the winning of him to repentance but for the publike good of the Common-wealth and for the preservation of peace order and justice therein according to the lawes Wherefore by the Church whereof our master speaketh we must needs understand such a representative meeting of the Church wherein a scandalous and obstinate person may and ought to be judged And what is that Collegium Presbyterorum saith Camero The Presbytery whereof mention is made 1 Tim. 4.14 Tell the Church that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Chrysostome expounding the place he meaneth the Presbyterie made up of Pastors and ruling Elders And so Zanchius and Iunius expound him The Pastors were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of their presiding in the Consistories of the Church The ruling Elders were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of their ruling the flocke Whitgift saith Truth it is that the place of Matthew may be understood of Seniors but it may bee aswell understood of any other that by the order of the Church have authority in the Church His confession in behalfe of Seniors we accept but that he maketh this Scripture like a nose of waxe and the government of the Church like the French fashion that we utterly abhorre But how is the Presbytery called the Church and why First even as the body is said to see when as the eyes alone doe see so saith Camero The Church is said to heare that which they alone doe heare who are as the eies of the Church Secondly it is a common forme of speech to give the name of that which is represented to that which representeth it So wee commonly say that this or that is done by the States of Holland which is done by the Senate at Hague Now though Bishops or Pastors alone cannot represent the Church because hearers also belong to the definition of the Church yet the Presbytery can well represent the Church because it containeth beside those who labour in the word ruling Elders put in authority by the Church for the government thereof as Gerard rightly resolveth Our Divines prove against Papists that some of these whom they call Laickes ought to have place in the Assemblies of the Church by this Argument among the rest because otherwise the whole Church could not be thereby represented Thirdly the Lord commanded that the children of Israel should lay their hands upon the Levits at their consecration and that the whole congregation should bee brought together for that effect This as some have observed out of Aben-Ezra cannot bee so understood as if the many thousands which were then in the Hoste of Israel had all laid their hands upon them but the Elders of Israel onely representing them So the Lord saith speake to all the Congregattion of Israel c. But the execution of this command is expressed thus Then Moses called for all the Elders of Israel and said unto them c. So Josh. 20.6 Fourthly Pastors and Elders as they are the Ministers of Jesus Christ so are they the Ministers and servants of his Spouse the Church From that which hath beene said we may draw our Argument in this forme Whatsoever Courts doe
represent the Church these are made up of ruling aswell as teaching Elders But Presbyteries and all Assemblies of the Church are Courts which represent the Church Ergo. The proposition is proved thus Whatsoever Courts represent hearers aswell as teachers and the people aswell as the Ministery these are made up of ruling as well as teaching Elders But whatsoever Courts doe represent the Church these represent hearers aswell as teachers c. It is plaine enough that the Church cannot bee represented except the hearers of the word which are the farre greatest part of the Church be represented By the Ministers of the word they cannot be represented more then the Burghes can bee represented in Parliament by the Noblemen or by the Commissioners of Shires therefore by some of their owne kinde must they be represented that is by such as are hearers and not preachers Now some hearers cannot represent all the rest except they have a calling and commission thereto and who can those be but ruling Elders CHAP. V. Our third Argument taken from Romans 12.8 OUR third Argument is grounded upon Rom. 12.8 The Apostle hath declared before that as there are many members in one body and all the members have not the same office for the office of the eye is to see of the eare to heare c. So are their gifts given to the severall office-bearers of the Church wherewith every one in his owne office may glorifie God and edifie the Church vers 4. with vers 5.6 These gifts he saith are differing according to the grace given to us that is according to the holy charge and office given unto us by the grace and favour of God so vers 3. Through the grace given unto me saith Paul that is through the authority of my Apostleship which by grace I have obtained Now whiles he exhorteth every one to the faithfull and humble use of his gift which he hath received for the discharge of his office he illustrateth his exhortation by the enumeration of the ordinary Ecclesiasticall offices vers 6.7.8 And as Beza Piscator and Iunius doe well resolve the text First he maketh a generall division of functions in the Church making two sorts of the same Prophesie whereby is meant the faculty of expounding Scripture and Ministerie comprehending all other imployments in the Church Prophecying the Apostle sudivideth into Teaching which is the Doctors part and Exhortation which is the Pastors Ministery he subdivideth in Giving which is the Deacons part Ruling which is the ruling Elders part and Shewing mercy which pertained to them who had care of the sicke Against this commentary which we have made upon the Apostles words Sutcliffe objecteth a double injury which we doe to Pastors First if these our Elders be the Rulers here spoken of then Pastors ought not to rule as if forsooth Elders could not rule except they rule alone Next hee saith wee make these Elders as necessary to the Church as Pastors so that a Church cannot be where there are not ruling Elders even as there is not a Church where there are not Word and Sacraments Surely a Church may happen to want Pastors and so to want both the preaching of the Word and the use of the Sacraments for that time And so may it want Elders and still remaine a Church but defective and maimed Howbeit the Pastors are more necessary then the Elders because they doe not onely rule but preach beside But to passe this there are other things which better deserve an answer for one might object 1. That the Apostle seemeth to speake of severall gifts onely not of severall offices 2. If hee speake of Offices by what reason make we Prophesie and Ministery generall kindes and all the rest particular offices 3. Why would the Apostle put the Deacon before the Elder 4. Bishop Andrewes in his Sermon of the worshipping of Imaginations maketh a fourth objection that by our interpretation of this place wee make Qui miseretur to be Latine for a widow To the first of these we answer The Apostles Protasis speaketh of severall offices not in the same but in severall members how then should we make his Apodosis to speak of severall gifts in the same and not in severall office-bearers of the Church wherefore as seeing hearing tasting c. doe differ subjectively in respect of the members which doe see heare c. So speaketh the Apostle of teaching exhorting ruling c. as they are in different office-bearers It is least of all credible which Bilson saith de Eccles. gubern c. 10. p. 186.187 that the Apostle speaks not of the gifts of office-bearers but of gifts distributed unto all the members of Christs mysticall body even unto women Hee had shewed us a great secret if hee could have made it appeare that all who are in the Church women and all may both prophesie and rule In this hee shall have the praise of out-stripping the Separatists We know that private Christians may teach and exhort one another but they doe not so devote themselves thereto as altogether to wait upon teaching and exhorting which is the case the Apostle speaketh of To the second wee say that Prophesie and Ministery are put in abstracto and â—oyned with a plurall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but teaching exhorting giving ruling and shâ—wing mercie are put in câ—ncreto and to each of them the single article pre fixed which is a sufficienâ— warrant to expound Prophesie and Ministery as Genera and the rest as Species Chrysostome considering the word Ministery saith Rem hic generalem ponit To the third we answer He which is first named hath not alwayes some prerogative or dignity above him which is last named else doe the Papists rightly argue that Peter was the chiefe of all the Apostles because they finde him named before all the rest Matth. 10.2 Act. 1.13 The Apostle intended to reckon out all ordinary offices in the Church but he intended not the precise order Chrysostome upon this same place saith Vide quomodo ista indifferenter ponat quod minutum est primo quod magnum est posteriore loco Ephes. 4.11 hee putteth Pastors before Teachers here to the Romans he putteth Teachers before Pastors To the fourth wee answer That though it be ordinarily most convenient that the office of attending the sicke bee committed to women yet it is not essentially necessary to the offifice And as Aretius noteth upon the place wee may under 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comprehend not onely widowes appointed to attend the sicke but old men appointed to receive and entertaine strangers Which is also judiciously observed by Martyr Besides when the Apostle 1 Tim. 5. teacheth what is required in widowes who should bee made Diaconesses this hee requireth among other things that they be not such as live in pleasures and idlenesse and take not care to provide for their owne houses verse 6.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which though Erasmus and Beza turne in the
feminine quod si qua yet our English Translators and many good Interpreters turne it in the masculine And surely it shall have more weight if it agree to men as well as women saith Calvin upon that place Now they who read in the masculine that which the Apostle saith there of widowes will not wee suppose blame us for reading Rom. 12.8 in the masculine also He that sheweth mercie Wee conclude our third Argument thus Whatsoever office-bearer in the Church is different from Pastors and Teachers and yet ruleth the Church he must needs bee a ruling Elder But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned Rom. 12.8 is different from Pastors and Teachers and yet ruleth the Church Ergo. CHAP. VI. Argument 4. from 1 Cor. 12.28 OUR fourth Argument is drawn from 1 Cor. 12.28 where we finde againe an enumeration of sundry offices in the Church though not so perfect as that Rom. 12. and amongst others Helps that is Deacons and Governments that is Ruling Elâ—ers Where wee cannot enough admire how the Authors of the new English translation were bold to turne it thus Helps in Governments so to make one of two and to elude our Argument The originall hath them cleerely distinguished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And I finde some late editions of the English translation to have it as it is in the Greek Helps Governments How this change hath been made in the English Bibles I know not Chrysostome expounding this place doth not take Helps and Governements to be all one as Bilson hath boldly but falsly averred Nay Chrysostome maketh the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be ut pauperes suscipiamus and the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he expounded to be praeesse ac curam gerere res administrare spirituales The former belongs to Deacons the later to ruling Elders Two answers are made to this place First D. Field answereth that both here and Rom. 12.8 we reason à genere ad speciem affirmativè because the Apostle mentioneth Governours whom he requireth to rule with diligence therefore they were such Elders as we plead for Whitgift saith the word Governours 1. Cor. 12.28 and Rulers Rom. 12.8 is generall and may either signifie Christian Magistrates or Ecclesiasticall as Archbishops Bishops or whatsoever other by lawfull authority are appointed in the Church We reply first if the Apostle had mentioned Rulers or Governours alone then might we have indeed guessed that hee meant a generall kinde onely and no particular Species But since he hath enumerate so many Species as Apostles Prophets Teachers gifts of miracles gifts of tongues c. Surely they did either most ignorantly or most maliciously erre who tell us that the Apostle putteth a Genus in the midst of so many Species Secondly the Apostle speaketh onely of Ecclesiasticall Officers God hath set some in the Church c. What meant Whitgift to extend his words to the civill Magistrate T. C. answered him that hee could not distinguish betwixt the Church and Common-wealh and so betwixt the Church Officers and the Officers of the Common-wealth He replied that he could not put any such difference betwixt them that the one may not be comprehended under the Apostles word as well as the other For I utterly renounce saith he that distinction invented by Papists and maintained by you which is that Christian Magistrates governe not in the respect they be Christians but in the respect they be men and that they governe Christians not in that they bee Christians but in that they bee men which is to give no more authority to the Christian Magistrate in the Church of Christ then to the great Turke Let our opposites here goe by the eares among themselves for M. Io. Wemys holdeth that all Kings have alike jurisdiction in the Church Infidels as wel as Christian Kings We hold that Christian Magistrates governe their subjects neither as Christians nor as men but as Magistrates and they governe Christian subjects as Christian Magistrates In like manner Christians are governed by Magistrates neither as they are Christians nor as they are men but as they are subjects and they are governed by Christian Magistrates as they are Christian subjects And we all maintaine that a Christian Magistrate hath great authority over Christian subjects in things pertaining to the conservation and purgation of religion which the great Turke nor no Infidell Magistrate hath or can have except hee become Christian. But what doe I digressing after the impertinencies of a roving disputer for what of all this Let Christian Magistrates governe as you will will any man say that his office is Ecclesiasticall or to be reckoned among Apostles Prophets Teachers c. Wherefore Let us proceed to the other answer which is made by Saravia Hee saith that though the Apostle 1 Cor. 12.28 reckon out different gifts wee need not for that understand different persons nor make different orders and offices in the Church of the gifts of miracles healing tongues and prophecies which might bee and were in one man Whereupon he resolveth the Text thus that first Paul setteth downe three distinct orders Apostles Prophets and Teachers then he reckoneth forth these common gifts of the holy Ghost and the gift of governing amongst the rest which were common to all the three The Apostle saith not Governours but Governments saith Sutcliffe to shew that he meaneth of faculties not of persons So saith Bilson in like manner For confutation of all this it is to be remembred First that the gifts spoken of by the Apostle are given of God for the common good and edification of the Church And God hath set some in the Church c. Secondly these gifts the Apostle considereth not abstractâ—â—è à subjectis but as they are in men indued with them as is plaine for hee had before reckoned forth the gifts themselves vers 8.9.10 and if here he did no more but reckon them over againe this were actum agere He is now upon the use and exercise of these gifts by the office-bearers of the Church vers 27.29 And though the Apostle vers 28. speaketh concretively only of these three Apostles Prophets and Teachers yet the rest must bee understood in the same manner per metoxymiam adjuncti as when wee speake of Magistracy and Ministery for Magistrates and Ministers yea the Apostle vers 29.30 so expoundeth himself where hee speaketh concretivè of the same things whereof hee seemed before to speake abstractivè Hee speaketh of them as they are in different subjects which is most evident both by his protasis wherein hee did againe presse the same simile of the severall offices not of the same but of severall members of the body and likewise by the words immediately subjoyned Are all Apostles are all Prophets are all Teachers He would have stood here and said no more if he had meant to distinguish these three orders only as Saravia expoundeth him But now to make it plainely
question Sutcliffe hath given us other three which are no better First he saith that if there bee here any distinction of ruling Elders it is betwixt those that labour more aboundantly and painfully and betwixt those that labour not so much This glosse is also received by Saravia by Titen by Bishop Hall in his Assertion of Episcopacie by divine right They tell us it is one thing to preach another thing to labour in the word and doctrine Answ. 1. It is not the ministery of the word but the ministery of ruling which here the Apostle maketh common to both 2. This exposition alloweth not onely honour but double honour yea a high degree of double honour to such as take no paines in preaching but are sparing therein 3. It maketh the Apostles speech not to grow but to fall for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they have stretched it to the full noteth onely great labour whereas to rule well importeth both great labour and great prudence dexterity faithfulnesse and charity beside 4. It maketh the last part of the speech In the Word and Doctrine to bee superfluous for they hold that all the difference here is in the measure or manner of labour and no difrence in re subjecta 5. All who have any charge in the Ministery are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess. 5.11 If they be at all faithfull and worthy of honor then do they labour 1 Cor. 3.8 yea in labouring watch as they that must give account Heb. 13.27 6. The Rhemists doe interpret the Apostle in the same manner But Cartwright answereth them If hee had meant any extraordinary labour hee would rather have sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for other where hee useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a degree of painful travell above 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is put for common labour Rom 16.12 But it may be the next Commentary shall be better The words saith Sutcliffe are to be rendred thus Let Elders that rule well bee counted worthy of double honour labouring greatly in the Word and Doctrine so that the later part of the speech is added exegetically to shew who they bee that rule well to wit these who labour greatly in the word and doctrine That the words are so to bee understood he undertaketh to prove from the text it selfe For saith hee one who purposeth to say in Greeke especially they who labour will not say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus changing the Participle into a Verb and the prepositive article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is written with an aspiration alone into the subjunctive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum accentu gravi for this answereth to the relative who which the prepositive article doth never Moreover saith he if the Apostle would have distinguished Elders into these that preach and these that preach not he would have added the adversative particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth indeed especially but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alone without â— signifieth greatly or much as here it doth Answ. 1. This reading of his is very harsh and had need to sound better before it contradict both the English Translators and the common current of Protestant Interpreters 2. Hee is not so very well skilled in the Greeke as hee boasteth to bee unlesse he make the Apostle Paul a great Ignoramus in that language For hee putteth a Participle with the Prepositive Article for a Verbe and a Relative Philip. 4.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the peace of God which passeth all understanding So Eph. 4.22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The old man which is corrupt and v. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The new man which after God is created 1 Thess. 5.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To know them which labour among you If Sâ—tcliffs rule hold we may not read it so but thus To know them labouring among you So Apoc. 7.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These are they who come out of great tribulation Many places of this kinde there are which I need not cite 3. An Ellipsis of the particle â— is no error no not in members of an opposition as Col. 2.23 much lesse in the distinction of a Species from the Genus 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without â— is put for especially as well as when it hath â— 1 Tim. 4.10 who is the Saviour of all men especially of these that beleeve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This skilled Grecian would have us to conceive it thus God is the Saviour of all men who beleeve much and so it shall be a comfortlesse text for those of little faith Surely this man had need to be more happy in his third exposition and now let us know what it is He saith that though wee could evince that the Apostle here speaketh of some other Elders besides the Ministers of the word yet wee shall have no advantage for our ruling Elders for the Apostle being to prove that the Ministers of the word ought to be maintained why might he not saith he use this generall proposition That all Rulers whether publicke or domestick whether Civill or Ecclesiasticall are to bee honored When the Apostle speaketh of the chusing of Deacons he will have them to bee such as have ruled their own houses well This is his last refuge and how weak let any maâ— judge We have heard of many sorts of Rulers but who did ever hear before Sutliffe told it of Domesticke or Civill Elders that rule well Had not the word Elders been in the Text but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alone he might have been the bolder to have given this sense But since the Apostle speaketh not generally of them that rule well but of Elders in the Church that rule well this marreth his glosse altogether Bilson giveth yet another sense That there were two sorts of Elders some who laboured in the word and doctrine some who had the care of the poore both were worthy of double honour but especially they who laboured in the word Answ. Deacons are distinguished from Elders Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 1 Tim. 3. and by all antiquity If wee make Deacons to bee Elders and the care of the poore to be an act of ruling then let us make what you will of the plainest Scriptures I finde in Didoclavius three other interpretations beside the former First Bridges saith That by Elders who labour not in the word and doctrine are meant rulers or inferiour Magistrates chosen for compounding of civill controversies Answ. 1. This is a strange language to call civill Magistrates by the name of Elders 2. The Apostle is speaking of Ecclesiasticall not of Civill office-bearers 3. This exposition maketh Pastors who labour in the word and doctrine to bee a sort of civill Magistrates because they are a kinde of Elders that rule well Next Bishop King expoundeth this place of old
heare Hierome and Chrysostome who lived both in the same age with Ambrose what doth a Bishop saith Hierome ordination excepted which a Presbyter may not doe By ordination alone saith Chrysostome are the Bishops higher and this onely they seem to have more then Prebyters Which were not true if Bishops had then governed the Churches by themselves excluding the counsell and advice of Presbyters Yea though ordination was the only one thing which made the difference Ambrose himself sheweth that Presbyters in Egypt did also ordain when the Bishop was not present We have heard Sutcliffe and Doctor Field but Saravia and after him Tilen and after them both Hall hath forged another glosse upon the place of Ambrose They boldly averre that the Elders without whose counsell Ambrose saith nothing was done in the Church were Elders by age and not by office We reply First falshood cannot keepe its feet Before we heard Saravia maintaine that the Seniors among the Jewes who sate in Ecclesiasticall Assemblies with the Priests and had equall suffrages therein with the Priests were their Rulers and their Magistrates now he telleth us they were old men Elders by age only not by office Secondly in his defence of that same twelveth Chapter against Beza hee acknowledgeth that the Christian Church had other Elders by office besides the Ministers of the Word The Church saith hee hath had Elders some by divine institution as the Pastors of Churches and Ministers of the Word of God Others by condition of age or office or estimation or learning and experience How could hee then astrict the words of Ambrose to Elders by age onely 3. Where was it ever read or heard that old men who had no Ecclesiasticall office were taken into the assemblies of the Church so that nothing was done without their counsell 4. The Elders of whom Ambrose speaketh are opposed to the Teachers therefore they are not Elders by age for such are some of the Teachers themselves 5. Ambrose indeed in his preceding words had expounded the place of the Apostle 1 Tim. 5.1 of Elders by age but thereupon he tooke occasion to speake of Elders by office also 6. That the Elders which wee read to have been in the Jewish Church were not Elders by age Basil sheweth plainly whose testimony we shall heare by and by CHAP. IX Other Testimonies of Antiquity THus having cleared the place of Ambrose come we now to other testimonies of the Ancients Tertullian in his Apologeticke against the nations speaking of the Meetings and Assemblies of Christians sheweth that besides other things done therein they had also corrections censures and excommunication and that in the exercise of this discipline Praesident probati quique Seniores honorem â—stum non pretio sed testimonio adepti with us doe sit all the approved Seniors as presidents or rulers having obtained this honour not by price but by a good testimony Cyprian in his Epistles doth often protest that from the beginning of his Bishopricke he did all things by common consent and advice both of his Clergie people Will any man thinke that in ordination excommunication reconciliation of penitents and such like things whereof Cyprian speaketh in these places he sought the counsell and advice of the whole Congregation and of all and every one therein or rather that the people gave their counsell and consent by the Eldership representing them Surely this doing of all things with the advice and counsell of the whole both Clergy and People he otherwhere sheweth to have beene nothing else but the doing of all things by the advice counsell of the Presbytery which had not been so if there had not been in the Presbytery some of all sorts to represent the rest Omni actu saith he adme perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium c. ut firmato consilio quid observari deberet consensu omnium statueretur Epiphanius writing to Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem concerning the tearing of a vaile which hee had seene in the Church of a village called Anablatha with the image of Christ or some Saint upon it and concerning another vaile which he had sent for it intreateth him to give order to the Elders of that place to receive the vaile from the bearer It is not to bee thought there were many preaching Elders in a small village hee speaketh in the plurall Precor ut jubeas Presbyteros ejusdem loci c. Basilius Mâ—gnus in his Commentary upon Isa. 3.2 where the Lord threatneth to take away from Israel the Ancient or the Elder sheweth from Numb 11.16 how warily such Elders were to be chosen and that their gifts not their age made them Elders he proveth from Dan. 13.50 which is the history of Susanna where the Jewish Elders at Babylon say to young Daniel Come sit downe among us and shew it us seeing God hath given thee the honour of an Elder Then he addeth Ad hunc c. After this mâ—nner sometimes it happeneth that youths are found in honour to be preferred to these Elders who slothfully and negligently lead their life These Elders then among the Iewes were falsly so câ—lled for God tooke away as the man of warre and the Prophet so the Elder from the people of the Iewes Therefore let the Church pray that the Elder worthy to be so called be not taken away from her self The whole tenor of his discourse importeth that the Christian Churches had such Elders as wee read to have been in the Jewish Church whereof Daniel was one And of them hee seemed to mean a little before Habet c. The Church also hath Iudges who can agree brother and brother Chrysostome compareth the Church to a house because as in a house there are wife children and servants and the care or government of all is incumbent to the master of the family So is it in the Church wherein beside the ruler of the same nothing is to bee seen but as it were wife children and servants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if the Governour of the Church saith he hath fellows or consorts in the government thereof so hath the man also the wife to be his consort in the government of his house If it be said that by the Ruler of the Church he meaneth the Bishop and by his consorts preaching Presbyters who are the Bishops helpers in the government of the Church I answer If wee understand by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishop then wee make Chrysostome contradict himselfe for in his next Homily hee sheweth plainly that Presbyters have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ruling of the Church as well as Bishops and that the whole purpose of his former Homily agreed to Presbyters no lesse then Bishops Now then who were the consorts which Pastors of Churches or preaching Elders had in the government of the Church Could they bee any other then Ruling Elders Hierome upon that place of Isaiah saith Et nos habemus in Ecclesia
the conâ—esâ—ion of our opposites for ruling Elders THE office of Ruling Elders is not onely maintained by 〈◊〉 Cartâ—right Aâ—â—rsâ— Bucerâ—â— and others whom our opposites will call partiall Writers let him who pleaseth read the commentaries of Martyr 〈◊〉 Gualther Hemmingius Piscator Paraus upon Rom. 12.8 1 Cor. 12.28 Aretius on Act. 14.23 Zepper de Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 1. 12. Bullinger on 1 Tim. 5.17 Arculâ—rius on Act. 14.23 Catal Test verit col 103. Osâ—and cent 1 l. 4. c. 11. Chemnâ—t exam part 2. pâ—g 2â—8 Gerard. loâ— Theol. tom 6 pâ—g 363 â—64 Muscul. loc com de Eccles. c. 5 Bucan loc com â—oc 42. Suetanus de Discipl Eccles. part 4 c. 3. Polanus Synt. l. 7. c 11. Zanchius in 4 praecep col 727. Iunius animad in Bellâ—r cont 5. l 1. c 2 Danaeus de Polit. Christ. l. 6 p 452. Alsted Theol. cas pag. 518.520 Sopingâ—us ad bonam fidem Sibrandi pag. 253. c. The Professours of Leyden Synt. pur Theol. Disp. 42. and sundry others whose testimonies I omit for brevities cause it is enough to note the places The Author of the Assertion for true and Christian Church policie pag. 196.197 citeth for ruling Elders the testimony the Commissioners of King Edward the sixt authorised to compile a booke for the reformation of Lawes Ecclesiasticall among whom were the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely They say Let the Minister going apart with some of the Elders take counsell c. Voetâ—us citeth to the same purpose Marlorat Hyperius Fulke Whittaker Fenner Bunnius Willet Sadeel Lubbertus Trelcatius both the one and the other yea Socinus and the Remonstrants Besides we have for us the practise of al wel reformed Churches and the Confessions of the French the Belgicke and the Helveticke Churches to be seene in the harmony of Confessions But what will you say if the adversaries of ruling Elders be forced to say somewhat for them Whitgift confesseth not onely that our division of Elders into preaching Elders and ruling Elders hath learned patrons but also that the Christian Church when there was no Christian Magistrate had governing Seniors and elsewhere he saith I know that in the Primitive Church they had in every Church Seniors to whom the government of the Congregation was committed Saravia lendeth them his word likewise Quod à me c. Which is not disputed by mee in that meaning that the Belgicke Churches or any other which doe with edification use the service of these Elders should rashly change any thing before that which is better bee substitute Againe speaking of the government of ruling Elders he saith Quod ut c. Which as I judge profitable and good to bee constitute in a Christian Church and Common-wealth so I affirme no Church no Common-wealth to bee bound thereto by Divine Law except perhaps necessity compell or great utility allure and the edification of the Church require it Loe here the force of truth struggling with one contrary minded Hee judgeth the office of ruling Elders profitable and good yet not of divine right yet hâ—e â—cknowledgeth that necessity utility and the edification of the Church maketh us tyed to it even by divine right But if it be profitable and good why did he call in question the necessity at least the utility and the edification of it can one call in question the utility of that which is profitable he would have said the truth but it stucke in his teeth and could not come forth Saelâ—vius de concil lib. I cap. 8. saith that among the Jewes Seniores tribuum the Elders of the Tribes did sit with the Priests in judging controversies of the Law of God Hence hee argueth against Bellarmine that so it ought to bee in the Christian Church also because the priviledge of Christians is no lessâ— thâ—n the priviledge of the Jewes Câ—mero tells us that when the Apostle 1 Coâ— 6. reproveth the Corinthians for that when one of 〈◊〉 had â— matter against anothâ—â— they 〈…〉 the Saints to bee â—udges 〈…〉 noâ— by the 〈◊〉 the 〈…〉 mâ—ltitude sedeos qui in Ecclesia constituti craâ—t ut vacarent gubernationi Ecclesiae that is â—hose who were ordained in the Church to give themselves to the government of the Church My Lord Craigtanne finding the strength of that Argument that if beside the Ministers of the Word other grave and wise Christians may be present in the greatest Assemblies and Councels of the Church why not in Presbyteries also answereth that indeed it is not amisse that the wiser sorâ— among the people be joyned as helpers and assistants to the Pastors providing that this their auxiliary function be not obtruded as necessary This is somewhat for us but we say further if it be necessary in Oecumenicke Councells for no lesse doe the Arguments of our Divines in that question with the Papists conclude then is it necessary in Presbyteries also CHAP. XI Doctor Fields five Arguments against ruling 〈…〉 HIS fiâ—st Reason that shewed 〈◊〉 to thinkâ— there were 〈◊〉 any 〈…〉 Church is because Bishops Presbyters that preach and minister the Sacraments and Deacons howsoever they much degenerated in later times yet all still remained in all Christian Churches throughout the World both Greeke and Latine in their names and offices also in some sort But of these ruling Elders there are no foot-steps to bee found in any Christian Church in the World nor were not for many hundred yeares whereas there would have beene some remaines of these as well as the other had they ever had any institution from Christ or his Apostles as the other had To this wee answer 1. If the Christian Churches throughout the World had wanted ruling Elders longer then they did yet prescription can be no prejudice to the ordinance of God 2. After that the golden age of the Apostles was spent and gone exact diligence was not taken to have the Church provided with well qualified Ministers but many unfit men yea sundry heretickes entred into that sacred vocation whereby it came to passe that corruption and errour overflowed the Churches as both Eusebius proveth from Aegesippus and catalogus testium veritatis from Irenaus Might not this be the cause of changing the office-bearers and government of the Church 3. In the Roman yea in Prelaticall Churches there are scarce any foot-steps at all of the offices of preaching Presbyters and Deacons as they were instituted by the Apostles The Apostles ordained Presbyters to preach the Word to minister the Sacraments to governe the Church and to make use of the keyes But the Popish and Prelaticall Presbyters have not the power of the keyes nor the power of Church government for it is proper to their Prelates as for the other two they are common to their Deacons for they also doe preach and baptise The office of the Popish Priest standeth in two things to consecrate and offer up the body of Christ and to absolve
the faithfull from their sinnes See Conci Triden de sacr Ordin cap. 1. Hier. Savanarola Triumph cruc lib. 3. cap. 16. And the same two make up the proper office of the Priest by the order of the English Service Booke As touching Deacons they were ordained by the Apostles for collecting receiving keeping and distributing of Ecclesiasticall goods for maintaining of Ministers schooles Churches the sicke stranger and poore The Popish and Prelaticall Deacons have no such office but an office which the Apostles never appointed to them for they had no preaching nor baptising Deacons Philip preached and baptised not as a Deacon but as an Evangelist Acts 21.8 Besides at the time of his preaching and baptising hee could not have exercised the office of his Deaconship by reason of the persecution which scattered rich and poore and all Acts 8.1 that which Steven did Acts 7. was no more then every believer was bound to doe when he is called to give a testimony to the truth and to give a reason of his faith and practice 4. Others of the faithfull besides the Ministers of the Word have beene admitted unto Councells and Synods by many Christian Churches throughout the World as is well knowne and this is a manifest foot-step of the government of ruling Elders 5. Nay in the Church of England it selfe at this day there are foot-steps of ruling Elders else what meaneth the joyning of Lay-men with the Clergy in the high Commission to judge of matters Ecclesiasticall Sâ—ravia saith the Churchwardens which are in every Parish of England have some resemblance of ruling Elders whose change appointed by law he saith is to collect keepe and deburse the goods and revenues of the Church to preserve the fabricke of the Church and all things pertaining thereto sure and safe to keep account of baptismes mariages and burials to admonish delinquents other inordinate livers to delate to the Bishop or his substitutes such as are incorrigible scandalous being sworn thereto also to observe who are absent froÌ„ the praiers in the Church upon the Lords dayes upon the holy dayes to exact from them the penalty appointed by law and finally to see to quietnes decency in time of divine service Doctor Fields second reason is for that Paul 1 Tim. 3. shewing who should be Bishops and Ministers who Deacons yea who Widowes passeth immediatly from describing the qualitie of such as were to be Bishops and Ministers of the Word and Sacraments to the Deacons omitting these ruling Elders that are supposed to lye in the midst betweene them which he neither might nor would have omitted if there had beene any such To this the answer is easie 1. As we collect the actions and sufferings of Jesus Christ and the institution of the last supper not from any one of the Evangelists but from all of them compared together for that one toucheth what another omitteth so doe we judge of the office-bearers of the Church not from 2 Tim. 3. only but from the collation of that and other places of Scripture of that kind Ruling Elders are found in other places and in the fifth Chapter of that same Epistle though not in the third 2 Neither were there any absurdity to hold that the Apostle in that third Chapter comprehendeth all the ordinary office-bearers in the Church under these two Bishops and Deacons and that under the name of Bishops he comprehendeth both Pastors Doctors ruling Elders for as al these three are overseers so to them all agree the qualities of a Bishop here mentioned whereof there is only one which seemeth not to agree to the ruling Elder viz. that he should be apt to teach vers 2. Yet Beza maintaineth against Saravia that the ruling Elder teacheth as wel as the Pastor only the Pastor doth it publickly to the whole congregation the ruling Elder doth it privately as he findeth every one to have need And we have shewed before that as a private Christian is bound in charity to teach the ignorant so the ruling Elder is bound to doe it ex offâ—cio The third reason which Doctor Field bringeth against us is for that neither Scripture nor practice of the Church bounding the government of such governours nor giving any direction how farre they may goe in the same and where they must stay lest they meddle with that they have nothing to doe with men should bee left to a most dangerous uncertainety in an office of so great consequence Our answer to this is 1. Wee have shewed already the certaine bounds of the power and vocation of ruling Elders 2. It was not necessary that the Apostle should severally set downe Canons and directions first touching Pastors then Doctors lastly ruling Elders since they are all Elders and all members of the Eldership or Presbytery it was enough to deliver canons and directions common to them all especially since the duties of ruling Elders are the same which are the duties of Pastors only the Pastors power is cumulative to theirs and over reacheth the same in the publicke ministery of the Word and Sacraments and so doth Paul difference them 1 Tim. 5.17 His fourth reason is because we fetch the paterne of the government of ruling Elders from the Sanedrim of the Jewes the platforme whereof wee suppose Christ meant to bring into his Church when he said Tell the Church whereas saith he it is most cleere that the court was a civill court and had a power to banish to imprison yea and to take away life till by the Romans the Jewes were restrained Wee answer that Beza de Presbyteriâ— I. B. A. C. De polit civil Eccl. lib. 2. Also Zepperus Iunius Piscator Wolphius Godwin Bucerus Gerard And sundry others have rightly observed that the Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim among the Jewes was distinct from the civill yet both called by the name of Sanedrim Wee grant with Beza that sometimes civill causes were debated and determined in the Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim but this was done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he saith the fact which was meerely civill was judged in the â—ivill Sanedrim but when the civilâ— Judges could not agree de jure even in civill causes in that case resolution was given by the other Sanedrim as in like cases by the juris-consults among the Romans for the conservation and interpretation of the law did belong to the Leviticall Tribe Hence it is that we read 2 Chron. 19.8.11 Iehosaphat set in Ierusalem of the Levits and of the chiefe Priests and of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel some for the Lords matters among whom presided Amariah the chiefe Priest and some for the Kings matters among whom presided Zâ—badiah the Ruler of the house of Judah Saravia saith this place proveth not that there were two distinct consistories one for civill another for Ecclesiasticall things because saith he by the Kings matters are meant matters of peace and warre by the Lords
matters the matters of law and judgement which are called the Lords matters because the Lord was the author of their civill lawes what a crazie device is this did not matters of peace and warre come under the civill lawes which God had delivered to the Jewes as well as any matter of judgement betwixt man and man and what can bee more plaine then that the Lords matters or things pertaining to God when they are differenced from other matters are ever understood to bee matters spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Quapropter wherefore saith Iunius the Readers are to be warned whosoever they bee that consult the histories of ancient times that where they read the name Synedâ—tum they wisely observe whether the civill Assembly or the Ecclesiastical be meant of because that name was confused and indistinct after the times of Antiochus But notwithstanding that in these latter times all good order had much degenerate and growne to confusion yet it seemeth to me that even in the dayes of our Saviour Christ the Civill and Ecclesiasticall courts remained distinct let me say my opinion with all mens leave and under correction of the more learned that night that our Lord was betrayed he was led to the Hall of Cajaphas where there was holden an Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim which asked Jesus of his Disciples and of his doctrine received witnesse against him and pronounced him guilty of blasphemy Mat. 27.57 Mark 14.53.55 Ioh. 18.19 Nothing I finde in this Councell why we should think it civill for as touching the smiting and buffeting of Christ Mat. 26.67 Luk 22.63 some think it was by the servants of the high Priests and Elders after that they themselves had gone home left the Councell howsoever it was done tumultuously not judicially and tumults may fall forth in any Judicatory whether civill or Ecclesiastical As for the sentence which they gave Mat. 26.66 He is guilty of death it proveth not that this was a civill Court for just so if an incestuous person should bee convict before an Assembly of our Church the Moderator might ask the Assembly what thinke ye and they might well answer He is guilty of death away with him to the Magistrate Shortly then the matter debated in this nocturnall Councell was meerly Ecclesiasticall and the accusation of sedition and making himselfe a King were not spoken of till he was brought before Pâ—â—at But there was another Sanedrim convocat in the morning Mat 27 1. Mark 15.1 Luk 22 66. and this seemes to have been not Ecclesiasticall but Civill 1. because they meddle not with the triall of his doctrine nor any examination of witnesses thereanent only they desire to heare out of his own mouth that which hee had confessed in the other Councell viz. that he was the Christ the Son of God whereupon they take counsell how they might deliver him to Pilate which was the end of their meeting 2. Mâ—â—k saith They bound him and carried him awâ—y to Pilate 3. The Ecclesiasticall Councell had already done that which they thought pertained to them for what should they have convened again Some say that aâ—l the high Priests Scribes and Elders were not present at that nocturnall councell and that therefore they convened more fully in the morning But that the nocturnall Councell was fully convened it is manifest from Mat. 26.59 Mark 14.53.55 4. This last Councell led Jesus away to Pilâ—te and went themselves with him to accuse him before Pilate of sedition and of making himselfe a King Luk. 23.1.2 Mat. 27.12 5. They complain that the power of capitall punishment was taken from them by the Romans importing that otherwise they might have put him to death by their law Ioh. 18.31 Now D. Fields last reason is For that all Fathers or Councels mentioning Elders place them betwixt Bishops and Deacons and make them to be Clergy men and that in the Acts where the Apostles are said to have constitute Elders in every Church Pastors are meant is strongly confirmed from Act. 20.17.28 where the Elders of the Church of Ephesus are commanded to feed the flocke of Christ over which they were appointed over-seers whence it followeth inevitably that they were Pastors We answer 1. Ambrose speaketh of Elders which were not Pastors 2. Beza Gualther expound the place Act. 14.23 where the Apostles are said to have ordained Elders through every Church of ruling as well as preaching Elders 3. As for that which he alledgeth from Act. 20. Beza Iunius and the Professors of Leyden hold that the names of Bishops and Pastors are common both to ruling and preaching Elders and that the Scripture giveth these names to both howsoever in Ecclesiastical use for distinctioÌ„s cause they are appropriate to teaching Elders Surely the ruling Elder both overseeth the flocke and feedeth the same both by discipline and by private admonition and for these respects may bee truly called both Bishop and Pastor 4. How small reason hee hath to boast of the Fathers we have already made it to appeare 5. It is a begging of the question to reason from the appropriation of the name of Elders to the Pastors CHAP. XII The extravagancies of Whitgift and Saravia in the matter of ruling Elders THese two Disputers doe not as D. Field altogether oppose the government of ruling Elders but with certain restrictions about which notwithstanding they differ betwixt themselves â—hitgift alloweth of ruling Elders under a Tyrant but not under a Christian Magistrate but â—ayeth they cannot be under an Infidell Magistrate Me thinkes J see here Sampsons Foxes with their tailes knit together and a firebrand betwixt them yet their heads looking sundry waâ—es To begin with Whitgift he saith in one place I know that in the primitive church they had in every church seniors to whom the Government of the Congregation was committed but that was before there was any Christian Prince or Magistrate c. In another place My reason why it the Church may not bee governed under a Christian Magistrate is it may under a Tyrant is this God hath given the chiefe authority in the government of the Church to the Christian Magistrate which could not bee so if your Seigniory might aswell retaine their authority under a Christian Prince and in the time of peace is under a Tyrant and in the time of persecution for tell me I pray you what authority Ecclesiasticall remaineth to the civill Magistrate where this Seigniory is established Hee who pleaseth may find this opâ—â—ion largely consuted by Beza de Presbyterio contra Erasmum and by I. B. A. C. polit civil Eccles. Jn the meane while I answer First T. C. had made a sufficient Reply hereunto which Whitgift here in his defence should have confuted but hath not viz. That if the Seniors under a Tyrant had medled with any Office of a Magistrate then there had beene some cause why a godly Magistrate being in the Church the Office of a Senior or at least so much as
word onely others he permits onely to consent unto that which is done by them Saravia alloweth grave and learned men to sit with the Ministers of the word yet not as Iudges but as Counsellors and Assessors onely Tilen will not say that the Bishops and Pastors of the Church ought to call any into their Councill but that they may doe it when there is need Against whom and all who are of their mind we object 1. The example of Apostolicke Synods Matthias the Apostle after Gods owne designation of him by the lot which fell upon him was chosen by the voices not onely of the Apostles but the other Disciples who were met with them Act 1.26 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Simul suffragiis electus est as Arias Montanus turneth it For the proper and native signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Lorinus sheweth out of Gagveius is to choose by voices The Professors of Leyden have noted this consensus Ecclesiae per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the election of Matthias Cens. in Confess cap. 21. Jn the Councill of Hierusalem Act. 15. we find that beside the Apostles the Elders were present and voiced definitively for they by whom the Decree of the Synod was given forth and who sent chosen men to Antioch were the Apostles and Elders Gerard Loc. Theol. com 6. n. 28. and thâ— Profess of Leyden cens in conf c. 21. understand that the Elders spoken of v. 5. 6. were the ruling Elders of the Church of Hierusalem joyned with the Apostles who laboured in the word Other ProtestaÌ„t writers understand by the name of Elders there both preaching and ruling Elders The Brethrent hat is the whole Church heard the disputes and consented to the Decrees v. 21 22 23 Ruling Elders behoved to doe more then the whole Church that is voice definitively Lorinus the Jesuite saith that by the name of Elders there wee may understand not onely Priests but others besides them Viz. antiquiores anctoritate praecellentes discipulos Disciples of greatest age and note And this he saith is the reason why the vulgar Latine hath not retained in that place the Greeke word Presbyteri but readeth Seniores 2. Wee have for us the example of Ecclesiasticall Courts among the Iewes wherein the Iewish Elders had equall power of voicing with the Priests and for this we have heard before Saravia's plaine confession 3. The example of ancient Councils in the Christian Church Constantine in his Epistle which he wrote to the Churches concerning the Nicene Councill saith I my selfe as one of your number was present with them the Bishops which importeth that others of the Laity voiced there with the Bishops as well as he and hee as a chiefe one of their number Euagrius lib. 2. cap. 4. saith that the chiefe Senators sate with the Bishops in the Councill of Chalcedon And after he saith The Senators decreed as followeth The fourth Councill of Carthagâ— c. 27. speaking of the transportation of a Bishop or of any other Clergie man saith sane si id Ecclesiae vtilitas fiendum poposecrit decretâ— Pro eo clericorum laicorum Episcopis porrecto in praeseÌ„tia Synodi transferatur The Decrees of the Synod of France holden by Charlemainâ— about the yeare 743. are said to have beene made by the King the Bishops the Presbyters and Nobles Many such examples might we shew but the matter is so cleere that it needeth not 4. The Revieu of the Councill of Trent written by a Papist among other causes of the Nobility of that Councill maketh this one that Lay-men were not called nor admitted into it as was the forme of both the Apostolicke and other ancient Councils shewing also from sundry Histories and examples that both in France Spaine and England Lay-men vsed to voice and to judge of all matters that were handled in Councils alleaging further the examples of Popes themselves That Adrian did summon many Lay-men to the Lateran Councill as members thereof that in imitation of him Pope Leo did the like in another Councill at the Lateran under Otho the first and that Pope Nicholas in Epist. ad Michael Imperat. acknowledgeth the right of Lay-men to voice in Councils wherein matters of faith are treated of because faith is common to all The same writer sheweth also from the Histories that in the Councill of Constance were 24. Dukes 140 Earles divers Delegates from Cities and Corporations divers learned Lawyers and Burgesses of Universities 5. The Protestants of Germany did ever refuse to acknowledge any such Councill wherein none but Bishops and Ministers of the word did judge When the Councill of Trent was first spoken of in the Dyet at Norimberg Anno 1522. all the estates of Germany desired of Pope Adrian the 6. That admittance might be granted as well to Lay-men as to Clergie-men and that not onely as witnesses and spectators but to be judges there This they could not obtaine therefore they would not come to the Councill and published a booke which they entituled Causa cur Electores caeteri confessioni Augustanae addicti ad CoÌ„cilium Tridentinum non accedant Where they alleage this for one cause of their not comming to Trent because none had voice there but Cardinals Bishops Abbots Generals or superiors of orders wheras laickes also ought to have a decisive voice in Councils 6. If none but the Ministers of the word should sit and voice in a Synod then it could not bee a Church representative because the most part of the Church who are the hearerâ— and not the teachers of the word are not represented in it 7. A common cause ought to be concluded by common voices But that which is treated of in Councils is a common cause pertaining to many particular Churches Our Divines when they prove against Papists that the election of Ministers and the excommunication of obstinate sinners ought to be done by the suffrages of the whole Church they make use of this same argument That which concerneth all ought to be treated of and judged by all 8. Some of all estates in the common-wealth voice in Parliament therefore some of all sorts in the Church ought to voice in Councils and Synods for de paribus idem judicium A Nationall Synod is that same to the Church which A Parliament is to the Common-wealth 9. Those Elders whose right we plead are called by the Apostle rulers Rom. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 and Governours 1 Cor. 12.28 therefore needs must they voice and judge in those assemblies without which the Church cannot be ruled nor governed Jf this be denyed them they have no other function behind to make them Rulers or Governours of the Church Rome was ruled by the Senate not by the Censors and Athens was governed by the Arâ—opagus not by the inferiour Office-bearers who did only take heed how the Lawes were observed But let us now see what is objected against this power of Ruling Elders to voice
in Councill and to Iudge of all things even matters of faith treated therein First it is alleadged that lay-men have not such abilities of gifts and learning as to judge aright of such matters But I dare say there are Ruling Elders in ScotlaÌ„d who in a theological dispute should powerfully spoyle many of those who make this objection 2. Antonius Sadeel Iohannes a Lasco Morney and such like shew plainely to the world that gifts singular learning are not tyed to Bishops and Doctors of the Church 3. Neither doe men of subtile wits and deepest learning prove alwayes fittest to dispute and determine questions of faith It is marked in the historie of the Councill of Nice that there was a Lay-man therein of a simple and sincere mind who put to silence a subtile Philosopher whom all the Bishops could not compesâ—e 4. There are many both in Parliament and secret Counsell without all controversie able to give their suffrages and to judge of matters in hand who notwithstanding are not of such learning and Eloquence as to enter into the lists of a publique dispute 5. And if the gifts and abilities of the most part of ruling Elders were as small as their adversaries will be pleased to call them yet this concludeth nothing against their right power of voicing but onely against their aptitude and fitnesse unto that whereto their right would carry them And we doubt that every Pastour be well gifted for all which coÌ„meth within the compasse of his vocation or doth well every thing which he hath power to doe Another objection is made from 1. Cor. 14.32 The spirits of the Prophets arâ— subject to the Prophets whence they collect that prophets and preachers of the word ought to be judged by such as themselves are that is by Prophets and Preachers and by none other To this we say 1. There owne Camero giveth us another commentarie upon that place rightly observing that the Apostle there speaketh nothing of trying or judging the spirits but onely of the order which is to be kept in the Church for whereas in the Church of Corinth the Prophets did prophecy tumultuously many or all of them at once and would not give place one to another this the Apostle condemneth and will have the Prophets so farre subject to the Prophets as that when one riseth up to prophecy the rest may hold their peace 2. That this is the sense it is cleare from the order and dependance of the Text for v. 30. he commandeth him that prophecieth in the Church to hold his peace when any thing is revealed to another Prophet that sitteth by now this he enforceth by foure reasons 1. Because so they might all prophecy one by one and they were mistaken who thought that all could not prophecy except many spake at once 2. All that were in the Church might learne and all be comforted by every Prophet which could not be except they prophecied severally one by one 3. The Spirits of the Prophets are not arrogant but humblie subject one to another each giving place to other 4. God is not the Author of confusion but of peace and order CHAP. XIV Of the Ordination of Ruling Elders of the continuance of their Office and of their maintenance TOuching the first of these it cannot be denyed but as Election to the Office so ordination to the exercise thereof is a thing common both to Preaching and Ruling Elders Howbeit in Scotland imposition of hands is not used in the Ordination of Ruling Elders as it is in the Ordination of Preaching Elders yet this is not to bee thought a defect in their Ordination for imposition of hands is not an Act but a signe of Ordination neither is it a necessary signe but is leâ—t free it is not therefore without reason that Calvin Chemnitius Gerard Bucaâ— Iaâ—iâ— Bucerus and many other of our learned Writers yea the Arch-bishop of Spalato doe all make a distinction betwixt the essentiall act of ordination and the externall rite thereof holding that ordination may be full valid and compleat not onely without the unction used in the Roman Church but even without the laying on of hands used in the Reformed Churches After the Election of Ruling Elders with the notice consent of the whole Church there followeth with us a publique designation of the persons so elected and an authoritative or potestative Mission Ordination or Deputation of them unto their Presbyteriall functions together with publique exhortation unto them and prayer in the Church for them which wee conceive to bee all that bâ—longeth either to the essence or integrity of Ordinaâ—ion I meane not to condemne Imposition of hands nor any other convenient signe in the Ordination of Ruling Elders onely J intend to justifie our owne forme as sufficient As for the maintenance and the continuance of the Office of Ruling Elders wee love not unnecessary Multiplication of questions let every Church doe herein what they find most convenient The manner of our Church in these things is such as best be fitteth the condition of the same such as cannot be in reason condemned Neither is a stipend nor continuance in the Function till Death essentiall to the Ministery of the Church but separable from the same The Levites of old served not at all times but by course and when they were 50. yeares old they were wholly liberat from the burden and labour though not from the attendance of the Leviticall service and Ministers may still upon the Churches permission for lawfull Reasons and urgent Necessities be absent a whole yeere and longer too from their particular charges The Apostles when they were first sent through Iudea tooke no stipend Mat. 10.8 9. Neither did Paul take any at Corinth 1 Cor. 9.18 The Ministers among the Waldenses worke with their hands for their maintainance The old Patriarchs were Priests and Preachers to their families and maintained themselves by the worke of their hands feeding of Flockes tilling the Ground c These things I do not mention as Rules to be followed by us but to shew that the intermission of the exercise of the Ministery the want of maintainance and labouring with the hands are not altogether repugnant nor inconsistent with the Nature of the vocation of the Ministers of the word but in some cases hic nunc may bee most approveable in them much more in Ruling Elders The Revenues of our Church are so small that they cannot spare stipends to Ruling Elders which maketh them willing to serve without stipends and lest they should be overburdened with this their service though they be chosen and called to be Ruling Elders as long as they live at least till they mâ—rit to be deposed yet our booke of policie alloweth them that ease of intermission and serving by course which was allowed to the Levits of old in the Temple The double honour which the Apostle commandeth to give unto Elders that rule well needeth not to be
in a Congregation exercising Iurisdiction as well as in a Nationall at least in a Oecumenicall Synod where there will be as great a multitude and peradventure greater then there is in a well-bounded Congregation Wee reply it is not so much the multitude which should make disorder in the exercise of Jurisdiction by a whole Congregation though indeed in many Congregations the multitude alone would hinder order as the rudenesse of the vulgar sort who if they should all speake their judgement what a monstrous and unavoidable confusion should there be The members of Nationall and Oecumenicall Councils are supposed to be men of knowledge and discretion and so may be kept in good order much more easily then a rude multitude in the Congregation They who are of another judgement object to us First our Saviours precept Matth. 18.17 Where hee biddeth us not â—ell the Eldershish but tell the Church Ans. By the Church he meaneth the representative body of the Church even as that which was spoken to the Elders of Israel Exod. 12.21 was said to be spoken by all the Congregation of Israel Ib. verse 3. and he who was judged by the Elders was said to bee judged by the Congregation Ios. 20.6 More of this place we say elsewhere Next they object the example of excommunication by the whole Congregation of Corinth for the Apostle sheweth that it was the duty of the whole Congregation to cast out that incestuous man 1 Cor. 5.13.4.9.13 In like manner hee writeth to them all to receive him againe when he had repented 2 Cor. 2.6.8 9. Answer Whether the power of excommunication in actu primo seu quo ad esse did belong to the collective body of the Church of Corinth or not is a question controverted and to this day sub judice lis est yet even those who hold the affirmative part of the question doe notwithstanding say that i◠〈◊〉 secundo seu quo ad operari the power pertained onely to the 〈◊〉 body of that Church which 〈…〉 Pâ—esbytery which is also confirmed by 2. Cor. 2.6 where the Apostle speaking of the censure of that incestuous man saith not that it was inflicted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by all but by many Hee was judged and sentenced by those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is by the Pastors and Elders of Corinth howbeit the execution finall act of that high censure was to be with the consent and in the presence of the Congregation Thirdly it is objected that Matthias was chosen by the whole number of the Disciples Act. 1. and so were the Deacons chosen Act. 6. and Elders in every City were made per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Congregation signifying their suffrages by the lifting up or stretching forth of their hands Act. 14.23 Therefore Jurisdiction ought to be exercised by whole Congregations Answ. This Argument faileth two waies 1. Though ordination of Office-bearers in the Church be an act of Jurisdiction it doth not appeare that the election of them is an act of jurisdiction likewise Though the solemnizing of marriage be an act of authority yet the choice and desire of the parties is not an act of authority 2. Or if you will election of Ministers is one of the Rights and Priviledges of the Church yet no act of jurisdiction 3. And if election were an act of authority and jurisdiction yet the alleadged examples prove no more but that this act of jurisdiction is to be exercised by the whole body in Ecclesia constituenda non constituta It may bee so indeed in Churches at their first erection but being once erected and all necessary Office-bearers therein planted from thenceforth the election of Elders pertaineth to the Presbytery to the Pastor and Elders as Zepperus writeth though still with the consent of the Church Fourthly it is objected that what concerneth all ought to be done with the consent of all Answ. Wee hold the same but the consent of all is one thing the exercise of jurisdiction by all another thing Ainsworth in one of his Epistles to Paget condemneth the Elderships sitting and judging matters apart from the Congregation Paget answereth that though the Eldership sit apart to judge yet before any sentence be given for the cutting off of any offender or for any other thing which concerneth all matters are first propounded to the whole Church and their prayers and consent required And surely this forme of proceeding shineth forth to us in that Apostolicall Synod at Ierusalem for the Apostles and Elders met sate and voiced apart from the whole Church as Calvin noteth from Act. 15 6. and they alone judged and decreed Act. 16.4 In the meane while were matters made knowne to the whole Church and done with the consent of all Act. 15.22 If it be objected from verse 12 that the whole multituâ—e was present in the Synod I answer we may understand with Piscator the multitude there spokeÌ„ of to be the multitude of the Apostles Elders V. 6. or if we should understand by the multitude the whole Church this proveth onely that the whole Church heard the question disputed not that they were all present at the judging and determining of it If it be further objected that the Synodall Epistle came not onely from the Apostles and Elders but from the brethren that is the whole Church The answer is easie The Brethren are mentioned because it was done with their knowledge consent and applause To say no more wee would gladly bury this controversie about popular government in eternall silence and oblivion and to this end we are content it be packt up in the words which the Separatists themselves doubtlesse perpending the Reasons above-mentioned have set downe in the 14. Article of the Confession of their Faith published Anno 1616 for this they say Wee judge each proper Pastor may and ought to bee trusted by the Congregation with the managing of all points of their Ecclesiasticall affaires and Government so farre that he with his assistants doe execute and administer the same yet so that in matters of waight the whole Congregation doe first understand thereof before any thing be finished and the finall act bee done in the presence of the whole Congregation and also that they the said Congregation doe â—ot manifestly dissent therefrom We are heartily content that Congregations doe fully enjoy all the Christian liberty which here is pleaded for in their behalfe yea and much more also for the assistants spoken of in these words of the Confession are other Pastors and Colleagues if any there be in the same Congregation as will bee evident to any that readeth that Article But wee are content that the Assistants spoken of be understood to bee Ruling Elders Now if the Authors of that Confession thought the Christian liberty of a Congregation sufficiently preserved when the Pastor or Pastors thereof doe manage the weighty Ecclesiasticall affaires and government with the
desideret 5. Adde unto these a distinction betwixt a Congregation lying alone in an Iland Province or Nation and a Congregation bordering with sister Churches If either there be but one Congregation in a Kingdome or Province or if there be many farre distant one from another so that their Pastors and Elders cannot ordinarily meete together then may a particular Congregation doe many things by it selfe alone which it ought not to doe where there are adjacent neighbouring Congregations together with which it may and should have a common Presbytery 6. Let us put a difference betwixt the subordination of one Congregation to another or of ore Eldership to another and the subordination of any Congregation and of the Eldership thereof to a superior Presbytery or Synod made out of many Congregations as one provinciall Synod is not subject to another Provinciall Synod yet all the Provinciall Synods in the Nation are subjeâ—t 〈◊〉 the Nationall Synod so it is also with the ordinary consistories one particular Eldership is not subject to another yet all the particular Elderships within the bounds of the common Presbytery are subject to the same So that there is a vast difference betwixt this subordination which we maintaine and the subordination of all the Parishes in a Diocesse to the Praelate and his Cathedrall Where Douname doth object that all the Parishes of Geneva are Hierarchically subject to the Presbytery in the city Parker denieth this nisi quis c. vnlesse saith he peradveÌ„ture one may be subject to himselfe for the Parishes each for their owne part and that alihe are this same Presbytery And after Consistorium c. for the Consistory of the Cathedrall Church is an externall meeting divers distinct and separate from the rurall Churches which are no part thereof this cannot be said of the Presbytery of Geneva 7. Wee must distinguish betwixt a dependance absolute and in some respect a Congregation doth absolutely depend upon the holy Scriptures alone as the perfect rule of faith and manners of worship and of Church-government for we accurse the tyranny of Prelates who claimed to themselves an autocratoricke power over Congregations to whom they gave their naked will for a Law One of themselves told a whole Synod that they ought to esteeme that best which seemeth so to Superiors and that this is a sufficient ground to the conscience for obeying though the thing be inconvenient We say that Congregations ought indeed to be subject to Presbyteries and Synods yet not absolutely but in the Lord and in things lawfull and to this purpose the constitutions of Presbyteries and Synods are to bee examined by the judgement of Christian discretion for a Synod is Iudex Iudicandus and Regula regulata so that it ought not to be blindly obeyed whether the ordinance be convenient or inconvenient Last of all we are to distinguish betwixt the condition of the Primitive Churches before the division of Parishes and the state of our Churches now after such division At the first when the multitude of Christians in those great cities of Rome Corinth Ephesus c. was not divided into severall Parishes the common Presbytery in the city did suffice for the government of the whole and there was no need of a particular consistory of Elders for every assembly and Congregation of Christians within the city except perhaps to admonish rebuke exhort or to take notice of such things as were to be brought into the common Presbyterie But after that Parishes were divided and Christian Congregations planted in the rurall villages as well as in the cities from henceforth it was necessary that every Congregation should have at hand within it selfe a certaine Consistory for some acts of Church-government though still those of greater importance were reserved to the greater Presbyterie And thus have J out of desire to avoid unnecessary questions set downe my conceptions concerning the Elderships of particular Congregations and the power of the same If it be said that I seeme to deny the divine right of the same or that they have any warrant from the patterne of the Apostolike Churche I answer I acknowledge the conformity of the same with the patterne thus farre 1. It is to bee suposed that in some small cities especially the same not being wholly converted to the Christian faith there was but one Christian Congregation the Eldership whereof did manage matters of jurisdictioÌ„ proper thereto 2. Even in the great cities at the first there was but one Congregation of Christians and so but one particular Eldership 3. After that the Gospell had spread and Christians were multiplied in those great cities it is true they were all governed by a common Presbytery but that Presbytery was not remote but ready at hand among theÌ„selves Now in this we keepe our selves as closse to the patterne as the alteration of the Churches condition by the division of Parishes will suffer us that is to say we have a common Presbytery for governing the Congregations within a convenient circuit but withall our Congregations have ad manum among themselves an inferior Eldership for lesser acts of Government though in respect of the distance of the seate of the common Presbytery from sundry of our Parishes they can not have that ease and benefit of nearenesse which the Apostolique Churches had yet by the particular Elderships they have as great ease of this kinde as conveniently can be CHAP. III. Of greater Presbyteries which some call classes THe word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyterie we find thrice in the New Testament twice of the Iewish Presbytery at Hierusalem Luke 22.66 Act. 22.5 and once of the Christian Presbytery 1. Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee which 〈◊〉 given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Sutlivius and Douname have borrowed from Bellarmine two false glosses upon this place They say by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here we may understand either an assembly of Bishops or the Office of a Presbyter which was given to Timothy To these absurdities let one of their owne side answer Whereas saith D. Forbesse some have expounded the Presbytery in this place to be a company of Bishops unlesse by Bishops thou would understand simple Presbyters it is a violent interpretation and an insolent meaning And whereas others have vnderstood the degree it selfe of Eldership this can not stand for the degree hath not hands but hands are mens J find in Sutlivius a third glosse He saith that the word Presbyterie in this place signifieth the Ministers of the word non juris vinculo sed ut cunque collectos inter quos etiam Apostoli erant Ans. 1. If so then the occasionall meeting of Ministers be it in a journey or at a wedding or a buriall c. shall all be Presbyteries for then they are ut cunque collecti 2. The Apostles did put the Churches 〈◊〉 better order then to leave imposition of hands or
any thing of that kind to the uncertainty of an occasionall meeting 3 The Apostles were freely present in any Presbyterie where they were for the time because the oversight and care of all the Churches was layd upon them Pastors and Elders were necessarily present therein and did by vertue of their particular vocation meete together Presbyterially whether an Apostle were with them or not No other sense can the Text suffer but that by Presbyterie we should understand consessus Presbyterorum a meeting of Elders and so doe Camero and Forbesse themselves expound it Sutlivius objecteth to the contrary that the Apostle Paul did lay on hands upon Timothy which he proveth both from 2. Tim. 1. and because extraordinary gifts were given by that laying on of hands Ans. There is an expresse difference made betwixt Pauls laying on of his hands and the Presbyteries laying on of their haÌ„ds Of the former it is said that Timothy received the gift which was in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the laying on of Pauls hands but he received the gift 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the laying on of the hands of the Presbyterie as Didoclavius noteth But saith Sutlivius Timothy being an Evangelist as you hold how could hee be ordained by the Presbyterie Ans. 1. Though the Presbyterie did neither give him ordination to bee an Evangelist nor yet conferre by the laying on of their hands extraordinary gifts upon him yet did they lay on their hands as setting to the the Seale and Testimony and commending him to the grace of God even as certaine Prophets and Teachers layd hands on Paul and Barnabas and Ananias also before that time had laid his hands upon Paul 2. The Presbyterie might ordaine Timothy to be an Elder If so be he was ordained an Elder before he was ordained an Evangelist 3. If the testimony of the Presbyterie by the laying on of their hands together with the Apostles hands in the extraordinary mission of Timothy was required much more may it be put out of question that the Apostles committed to the Presbytâ—ry the full power of ordaining ordinary Ministers But it is further objected by Sutlivius that this could not be such a Presbyterie as is among us because ordination and imposition of hands pertaine to none but the Ministers of the word Ans. 1. The children of Israel laid their hands upon the Levites we would know his reason why he denyeth the like power to ruling Elders now especially since this imposition of hands is but a gesture of one praying and a morall signe declaring the person prayed for 2. Howsoever our practice whâ—ch is also approved by good Divines is to put a difference betwixt the act of ordination and the externall right thereof which is imposition of hands ascribing the former to the whole Presbytery both Pastors and Elders and reserving the latter to the Ministers of the word yet to bee done in the name of all Thus have we evinced the Apostles meaning when he speaketh of a Presbyterie and this Consistory we find to have continued in the Christian Church in the ages after the Apostles Jt is certaine that the ancient Bishops had no power to judge any cause without the presence advice and counsell of their Presbyters Conc. Carth. 4. can 23. Field Forbesse Saravia and Douname doe all acknowledge that it was so and so doth Bellarmine de Pont. Rom. l. 1. c. 8. Of this Presbytery speaketh Cyprian Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium c. Of the Presbytery speaketh the same Cyprian lib. 2. Ep. 8. lib. 4. Ep. 5. Ignatius ad Trall and Hierom in Esa. 3. Wee finde it also in conc Ancyr can 18 and in conc Carthag 4. can 35.40 Doctor Forbesse alledgeth that the word Presbytery for fifteen hundred yeares after Christ did signifie no other thing in the Church then a Diocesan Synod But herein if hee had understood himselfe he spake not so much against Presbyteries as against Prelats for a Diocesse of old was bounded within one City Tumque jampridem per omnes provincias per urbes singulas ordinati sint Episcopi c. saith Cyprian It was necessary to ordaine Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Chrysostome speaking of the primitive times yea in Country Villages also were Bishops who were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rurall Bishops whose Episcopall office though limited yet was allowed in the Councell of Ancyra can 13. and the Councell of Antioch can 8. 10. Sozomen recordeth that the Village Majuma which was sometime a suburbe of the City Gaza was not subject to the Bishop of Gaza but had its owne proper Bishop and that by the decree of a Synod in Palestina The Councell of Sardis can 6. and the Councell of Laodicea can 57. though they discharged the ordaining of Bishops in villages lest the name of a Bishop should grow contemptible did neverthelesse allow every City to have a Bishop of its owne What hath Doctor Forbesse now gained by maintaining that the bounds of a Presbyterie and of a Diocesse were all one They in the Netherlâ—nds sometime call their Presbyteries Diocaeses and many of our Presbyteries are greater then were Diocesses of old Wee conclude there was anciently a Presbytery in every City which did indeede choose one of their number to preside among them and to lay on hands in name of the rest and hee was called the Bishop wherein they did more trust the deceiveable goodnesse of their owne intentions then advert to the rule of the Word of God These things premitted I come now to that which is principally intended viz. by what warrant and quâ— jure the Classicall Presbyterie among us made up out of many neighbouring congregations should be the ordinary Court of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction at least in all matters of highest importance which doe concerne either all or any of those congregations For resolution hereof we must understand 1. That causes common to many congregations ought not to be judged by any one of them but by the greater Presbytery common to them all 2. It is to bee supposed that particular congregations at least the farre greatest part of them have not in their proper Elderships so many men of sufficient abilities as are requisite in judging and determining the cases of the examination of Ministers of ordination deposition excommunication and the like 3. When one appealeth from a particular Eldership out of perswasion that hee is wronged by the sentence thereof or when that Eldership finding its owne insufficiency for determining some difficult causes resolveth to referre the same into a higher Court reason would that there should be an ordinary Court of a Classicall Presbytery to receive such appellations or references 4. Congregations which lye neare together ought all as one to keep unity and conformity in Church policy and government neither ought one of them be permitted to doe an
of the Church of Ephesus it iâ— said that Paul kneeled down and praied with them all and they all wept sore Acts 20.36.37 compared with verse 28. Here is some good number imported To the Angell of the Church of Smyrna that is to the Pastors thereof collectively taken Christ saith The Divell shall cast some of you into prison Revel 2.10 which if not only yet principally is spoken to the Pastors though for the benefit of that whole Church This is more plaine of the Church of Thyatira verse 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnto you I say to the rest in Thyatira as if he would say saith Pareus Tibi â—spicopo cum collegis reliquo coetui dico Paul writeth to the Bishop at Philippi Phil. 1.1 and notwithstanding that there was already a certaine number of Bishops or Pastors in that City yet the Apostle thought it necessary to send unto them Epaphroditus also Phil. 2.25 being shortly thereafter to send unto them Timotheus verse 19. yea to come himselfe verse 24. so that there was no scarcity of labourers in that harvest Epaphras and Archippus were Pastors to the Church at Colosse and who besides we cannot tell but Paul sent unto them also Tychicus and Onesimuâ— Col. 4.7.9 Now touching the third proposition no man who understandeth will imagine that the multitude of Christians within one of those great Cities was divided into as many parishes as there were meeting places for worship It is a point of controversie who did beginne the division of parishes but whosoever it was whether Evaristus or Higinus or Dionysius certaine it is that it was not so from the beginning I meane in the daies of the Apostles for then it was all one to say in every City or to say in every Church That which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 1.5 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 14.22 This is acknowledged by all Anti-prelaticall writers so farre as I know and by the Prelaticall writers also The last proposition as it hath not beene denyed by any so it is sufficiently proved by the former for that which made the multitude of Christians within one City to be one Church was their union under and their subjection unto the same Church governement and governours A multitude may bee one Church though they doe not meete together into one place for the worship of God for example it may fall forth that a congregation cannot meet together into one but into divers places and this may continue so for some yeares together either by reason of persecution or by meanes of the plague or because they have not such a large parish-Church as may containe them all so that a part of them must meete in some other place but a multitude cannot be one Church unlesse they communicate in the same Church government and under the same Governours by one Church I meane one Ecclesiasticall Republike even as the like union under civill government and governours maketh one corporation when the Apostle speaketh to all the Bishops of the Church of Ephesus hee exhorteth them all to take heed to all the flocke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over which the holy Ghost had made them overseers so that the whole was governed by the common counsell and advice of the Elders as Hierome speaketh for the same reason we say not the Churches but the Church of Amsterdam because all the Pastors and Elders have the charge and governement of the whole From all which hath beene said I inferre this Corollary That in the times of the Apostles the Presbytery which was the ordinary Court of Iurisdiction which did ordaine depose excommunicate c. did consist of so many Pastors and Elders as could with conveniency meete ordinarily together which is a paterne and warrant for our Classicall Presbyteries I confesse there might be in some townes no greater number of Christians then did meet together in one place notwithstanding whereof the Pastor or Pastors and Elders of that congregation might and did manage the government of the same and exercise jurisdiction therein I confesse also that in those Cities wherein there was a greater number of Christians then could meet together into one place for the worship of God the Presbytery did consist of the Pastors and Elders within such a City for it cannot be proved that there were at that time any Christian congregations in Landward Villages the persecution forcing Christians to choose the shelter of Cities for which reason many are of opinion that the Infidells in those daies were called Pagani because they alone dwelt in Pagis and if there had beene any such adjacent to Cities we must thinke the same should have beene subject to the common Presbytery their owne Pastors and Elders being a part thereof Howsoever it cannot be called in question that the Presbytery in the Apostolicall Churches was made up of as many as could conveniently meete together for managing the ordinary matters of Jurisdiction and Church-government The Pastors and Elders of divers Cities could not conveniently have such ordinary meetings especially in the time of persecution only the Pastors and Elders within one City had such conveniency And so to conclude we doe not forsake but follow the paterne when we joyne together a number of Pastors and Elders out of the congregations in a convenient circuit to make up a common Presbytery which hath power and authority to governe those congregations for if the Presbytery which we find in those Cities wherein the Apostles planted Churches bee a sure paterne for our Classicall Presbyteries as wee have proved it to bee then it followeth undeniably that the authority of Church-government of excommunication ordination c. which did belong to that Primitive Presbytery doth also belong to those our Classicall or greater Presbyteries CHAP. IV. Of the authority of Synods Provinciall and Nationall TOuching Synods I shall first shew what their power is and thereafter give arguments for the same The power of Jurisdiction which wee ascribe unto Synods is the same in nature and kinde with that which belongeth to Presbyteries but with this difference that Presbyteries doe exercise it in an ordinary way and in matters proper to the congregations within their circuit Synods doe exercise this power in matters which are common to a whole province or nation or if in matters proper to the bounds of one Presbytery it is in an extraordinary way that is to say when either Presbytery hath erred in the managing of their owne matters or when such things are transferred to the Synod from the Presbytery whether it be by appellation or by reference The power of Jurisdiction whereof I speake is threefold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So it is distinguished by our writers and all these three doe in manner foresaid belong unto Synods In respect of Articles of faith or worship a Synod is Iudex or Testis In respect of externall order and policie in circumstances a contriver of a
things as are alike common to the Church and to the Common-wealth and have the same use in both whatsoever natures light directeth the one it cannot but direct the other also for as the Church is a company of Christians subject to the â—aw of God so is it a company of men and women who are not the outlawes of nature but followers of the same It is well said by one Hoc certissimum est c. This is most certaine that the Church is a certaine kinde of Republike for it hath all those things which all Republikes must need have but tâ—hâ—th them in a different way because it is not a Civill but an Ecclesiasticâ—ll Republike And againe Est ergo c. â—o that this Republike is much more perfect then all others and therefore cannot but have the things which they have that are in dignity farre inferiâ—ur to it So saith Robinson in his justif of separ pag. 113. The visible Church saith he being a politie Ecclesiasticall and the perfect on of all polities doth comprehend in it whatsoever is excellent in all other bodies politicall Now so it is that while as some hold the government of the Church to bee Monarchicall others Aristocraticall others Democraticall others mixed of all these they all acknowledge that the Church is a Republike and ought to bee governed even as a Civill Republike in things which are alike common to both of this kinde are Courts and Judicatories which doe alike belong to both and have the same use in both viz. for rule and government therefore as natures light doth undeniably enforce diversity of Courts in the Common-wealth some particular some generall some lower some higher and the latter to have authority over the former it doth no lesse undeniably enforce the like in the Church for de paribus idem judicium It cannot bee denyed that the Church is led by natures light in such things as are not proper to religious holy uses but alike common to civill societies at least in so farre as they are common to sacred and civill uses The Assemblies of the Church in so farre as they treat of things Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall after a spirituall manner for a spirituall end and doe consist of spirituall Office-bearers as the members constituent in as farre they are sacred and the Church is therein directed by the Word of God alone yet the having of Assemblies and Consistories and divers sorts of them and the lower subordinat to the higher all this is not sacred nor proper to the Church but common with her to the Common-wealth nature commending therein to the one what it commendeth to the other CHAP. VI. The second Argument taken from Christs Institution AS wee have Nature so have wee Christs Institution for us and this shall appeare two wayes First the fidelity of Christ both in his Propheticall in his Regall or Nomotheticall power was such that he hath sufficiently provided for all the necessities and exigences whatsoever of his Churches to the end of the world Therefore the Apostle calleth him as faithfull in all the house of God as ever Moses was who delivered lawes serving for the government of the Church of the Jewes in all cases Whence we collect that the authority of Classicall Presbyteries over the Elderships of particular congregations and the authority of Synods over both must needs have a warrant from Christs owne Institution because without this authority there are very important necessities of the Churches that cannot be helped For example in most congregations especially in Dorps and Villages when a Pastor is to be ordained the particular Eldership within the congregation can neither examine and try his gifts and his soundnesse in the faith which examination must necessarily precede his ordination nor can they discover him in case he be a subtile and learned hereticke nor yet can they pray in tâ—e congregation over him which is to be ordained and give him publicke exhortation and admonition of his duty God having neither given to the Elders of every congregation nor yet required of them such abilities What shall be done in this case Ainsworth would have the worke stayed and the Church to want a Minister till she be able to doe her workes and her duties which are proper to her Alas bad Christ no greater care of the Churches then so shall they be destitute of a Pastor ever till they be able to try his gifts and soundnesse and to exhort and pray at his ordination and how shall they ever attaine to such abilities except they bee taught and how shall they bee taught without a Teacher Now the power and authority of Classicall Presbyteries to oâ—dâ—in Pastors in particular congregations shall cut off all this deduction of absurdities and shall supply the Churches need I may adde another instance concerning the Classicall Presbytery it selfe What if the one halfe thereof turne to be hereticall or it may bee the major part They shall either have most voyces or at least the halfe of the voyces for them and there shall bee no remedy unlesse the authoritative determination of a Synod be interposed Secondly the will of Christ for Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies to bee over Presbyteries even as they are over the Elderships of particular congregations appeareth also in this He hath given us in the new Testament expresse warrant for Ecclesiasticall Courts and Assemblies in generall that such there ought to be for the right government of the Church Matth. 18.20 Where two or three are gathered together in my Name there am I in the midst of them Act. 15.6 And the Apostles and Elders came together for to consider of this matter From these and the like places it is plaine that Christ willeth jurisdiction to bee exercised and controversies to bee determined by certaine Consistories and Assemblies Of the exercise of jurisdiction is the first place which I have cited to bee understood as the cohesion thereof with the purpose which went before sheweth Of determining questions of faith and enacting lawes concerning things in their owne nature indifferent is the other place to be understood as wee shall heare afterward So then wee truely affirme of Ecclesiasticall Assemblies in generall that power is commited by Christ unto them to exercise jurisdiction to determine questions of faith and to make constitutions about things indifferent in the case of scandall Now the severall sorts of these Assemblies are not particularly determined in Scripture but left to be particularly determined by the Church conforme to the light of Nature and to the generall rules of the Word of God And the particular kindes of Assemblies appointed by the Church conforme to the light and rules foresaid doe fall within the compasse of those precepts which are Divine-Ecclesiastica they are mixed though not meere divine ordinances Even as the Scripture warranteth times of fasting and times of thankesgiving shewing also the causes and occasions of the same and the right manner of
the Elders did decreee ordaine and conclude these things to bee imposed upon the Churches of the Gentiles and not the Apostles only Now the Elders of the Church of Hierusalem had no authority to impose their decrees upon all the Churches of the Gentiles with whom they had nothing to doe as Mr. Robinson saith truely Since therefore these things were imposed upon the Churches of the Gentiles as the decrees ordained by the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem this doth necessarily import that there were in that meeting delegates and commissioners from the Churches of the Gentiles which did represent the same CHAP. IX The fifth Argument taken from Geometricall proportion AS is the proportion of 3. to 9. so is the proportioÌ„ of 9. to 27. of 21. to 81. c. This rule of Giometricall proportion affoordeth us a fifth Argument for the point in hand If we should grant the government of the Church to be popular then by what proportion one or two are subject to a whole congregation by the same proportion is that congregation subject to a provinciall or a nationall congregation I meane if all the congregations in a province or a nation were assembled into one collective body as all the males of the Jewes did assemble thrice in the yeare at Hierusalem and as in the daies of the Judges the whole congregation of the children of Israel was assembled together in Mizpeh as one man from Dan even to Beersheba foure hundred thousand men to try the cause of the Levite and to resolve what to doe there-anent which meeting of the Nation was ordered by Tribes the Tribes by families the families by persons in that case any one particular congregation behoved to be subject to the generall congregation by the same reason whereby one man is subject to the particular congregation whereof he is a member because the whole is greater then a part and the body more then a member Now the same rule holdeth in the representatives of Churches whether we compare them with the collectives or among themselves If wee compare the representatives with the collectives then as one congregation is governed by the particular Eldership representing the â—ame by the like proportion are 14. or 16. congregations governed by a Classicall Presbytery representing them all by the same proportion are all the congregations in a province subject to a Provinciall Synod by the same ought all the congregations in a nation to be subject to a nationall Assembly all of them being either mediatly or immediatly represented in the same for as Parker saith well many Churches are combined into one in the very same manner as many members are combined into one Church If we compare the representatives among themselves then by what proportion a particular Eldership representing only one congregation is lesse in power and authority then a Classicall Presbytery which representeth many congregations by the same proportion is a Classicall Presbytery lesse in power and authority then a Provinciall Synod and it lesse in authority then a Nationall Synod So that the authority of Presbyteries whether Parochiall or Classicall being once granted this shall by the rule of proportion inferre the authority of Synods I know that Synods are not ordinary Courts as Presbyteries are but this and other differences betwixt them I passe the argument holdeth for the point of authority that Synods when they are have authority over all the Churches in a Province or a nation even as Presbyteries have over the congregations within their bounds CHAP. X. The sixth Argument taken from necessity WEE have another reason to adde and it is borrowed from lawlesse necessity for without a subordination among Ecclesiasticall Courts and the authority of the higher above the inferiour it were utterly impossible to preserve unity or to make an end of controversie in a Nation A particular congregation might happily end questions and controversies betwixt the members thereof and so keepe unity within it selfe and not so neither if the one halfe of the congregation be against the other but how shall controversies betwixt severall congregations be determined if both of them bee independent how shall plurality of religions be avoided how shall an apostatizing congregation be amended It is answered 1. If a particular congregation neglect their duty or doe wrong to another the civill sword may proceed against them to make them doe their duty 2. A particular congregation ought in difficult cases to consult with her sister Churches for so much reason dictats that in difficult cases counsell should be taken of a greater number 3. Sister Churches when they see a particular congregation doing amisse out of that relation which they have to her being all in the same body under the same head may and ought to admonish her and in case of generall apostacy they may withdraw that communion from her which they hold with the true Churches of Christ. But these answers are not satisfactory The first of them agreeth not to all times for in times of persecution the Church hath not the helpe of the civill sword a persecuting Magistrate will bee glad to see either division or apostasie in a congregation but so it is that Christ hath povided a remedy both for all the evills and diseases of his Church and at all times The Church as was said before is a Republike and hath her lawes Courts and spirituall censures within her selfe whether there be a Christian Magistrate or not The second answer leaveth the rectifying of an erring congregation to the uncertainty of their owne discretion in seeking counsell from a greater number And moreover if this be a dictate of reason to aske counsell of a greater number when the counsell of a few cannot resolve us then reason being ever like it selfe will dictate so much to a congregation that they ought to submit to the authority of a greater number when their owne authority is not sufficient to end a controversie among them To the third answer wee say that every private Christian may and ought to withdraw himselfe from the fellowship and communion either of one man or of a whole congregation in the case of generall apostasie And shall an apostatizing congregation be suffered to runne to hell rather then any other remedy should bee used beside that commonly ineffectuall remedy which any private Christian may use God forbid What I have said of congregations I say also of Classicall Presbyteries How shall sentence be given betwixt two Presbyteries at varience How shall a divided Presbytery be re-united in it self How shall an Hereticall Presbytery be reclaimed How shall a negligent Presbytery be made to doe their duty How shall a despised Presbytery have their wounded authority healed againe In these and such like contingent cases what remedy can bee had beside the authority of Synods CHAP. XI Objections made against the authority of Synods answered THey who dislike the subordination of particular congregations unto higher Ecclesiasticall Courts object
the Lord and the names of the twelve Tribes upon the brest-plate this proveth not a Church representative but signes representative 5. The body of the Church is now as then necessarily absent from the Consistorial actions of debating and deciding matters of Church government and of Jurisdiction and so that which was called the foundation of a representative Church doth still remaine Now before I make an end I must answer yet other two objections which have beene lately made There is one who objecteth that the Assembly of the Apostles Acts 15. can bee no president nor patterne for succeeding ages First because the Apostles were inspired with the holy Ghost which wholly guided them in all matters of the Church so as in that their determination they say expressely It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burthen Now what Synod in any age after the Apostles could ever say that they were infallibly inspired and assisted by the holy Ghost Secondly that injunction of the holy Ghost and of the Apostles was but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that present time for the avoiding of offences betweene Jewes and Gentiles But the like we read not afterward in all the writings of the Apostles Ans. 1. I say with Whittaker Posse alia c. That other lawfull councells may in like manner affirme their Decrees to be the Decrees of the holy Ghost if they be like unto this councell and if they keepe the same rule which the Apostles did keep and follow in this councell for if they decree and determine nothing but from the Scriptures which was done in this councell and if they examine all questions according to the Scriptures and in all their Decrees follow the voyce of the Scripture then may they affirme that the holy Ghost hath so decreed 2. If the Doctrine or exhortation of a Pastor well grounded upon the Scriptures bee the Word of God then much more is the Decree of a Synod well grounded upon the Scriptures the Decree of the holy Ghost 3. That Assembly was not of the Apostles alone but of the Apostles and Elders neither did the Decrees proceed from the Apostles alone but from the Apostles and Elders Acts 16.4 and 21.25 and in the place which is now objected Acts 15.28 not the Apostles alone but the Elders with them say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us What the Elders did then the Elders may doe now for time hath not diminished their authority 4. Nay what the Apostles did in that Synod the Elders may doe in a Synod now for the Apostles then did nothing but in the ordinary and common way of disputing and debating comparing reason with reason and sentence with sentence and thereafter framing the Decree according to the light which they had by reasoning and by searching the Scriptures But which is most observable the sentence of the Apostle Peter in that Synod was very imperfect and defective for he only disswadeth from imposing the yoke of the ceremoniall law upon the Churches of the Gentiles but maketh no mention of any overture for avoiding the offence betwixt the Jewes and the converted Gentiles at that time which I may suppose he would have done if his light and judgement had carried him that farre In this the Apostle Iames supplieth the defect of Peters sentence and propoundeth an overture which pleased the whole councell and according to which the decree was given sorth This made Luther to say that Iames did change the sentence of Peter And all this it pleased God so to dispose that we might understand that Synod to bee indeed a president and paterne for ordinary Synods in succeding ages 5. Henry Iacob in his third argument for the Divine Institution of the Church saith It is absurd and impossible that the Text Matth. 18. was never understood for 1500 yeares after Christ. Sure this Text Act. 15. was never understood for that whole space if the Assembly there mentioned be not a president to succeeding ages 6. It maketh nothing against us that he saith the decree of the Apostles Elders was for that present time onely nay it maketh for us for in this also that Synod was a paterne to succeeding ages forasmuch as Synods now have no power to make a perpetuall restraint from the practice of any indifferent thing such as was then the eating of bloud and things strangled but onely during the case of scandall And moreover the decree of the Apostles and Elders in that Synod is also perpetuall in so farre as it is conceived against the pressing of circumcision as necessary to salvation One objection more I finde in another late Peece which striketh not at the authority alone but at the very reputation of Synods This Authour alledgeth that the ordinary government by Synods is a thing of great confusion by reason of the parity and equality the voyces being numbred not weighed Equidem saith a wise Father at vere c. To say the truth I am utterly determined never to come to any Councell of Bishops for I never yet saw good end of any Councell for Councels abate not ill things but rather increase them Answ. 1. If the parity and equality make a great confusion in the ordinary government by Synods it shall make no lesse but rather greater confusion in an extraordinary Synod so that there is no ground for his restriction to that which is ordinary 2. If the numbring of voyces and the parity of those that doe voyce make a confusion in Synods why not in Parliaments also and in other civill Courts 3. That testimony doth only strike at the Councels of Bishops and so maketh not against parity but against imparity in Councels And to say the truth wee have found in our owne experience that Prelaticall Synods have not abated but rather increased evils in the Church 4. The words of Nazianzen for he is the Father here meant of are not to be understood against Synods but against the abuse of Synods at that time And in this we must pardon him saith Whittaker that he shunned all Synods in those evill times of the Church when the Emperour Valens was opposite to the Catholicke faith and when the faction of heretickes did most prevaile in that case indeed Synods should have produced greater evils But we trust it shall be now seen that well constituted and free Synods of Pastors and Elders shall not increase but abate evill things FINIS A POST-SCRIPT In answer to a Treatise very lately published which is intituled The Presbyteriall Governement examined WHen the Printer had done all except two sheets of my former Treatise there came to my hands a peece against Presbyteriall Governement which promiseth much but performeth little Though my time be very short yet I trust to make an answer to it as full as it deserveth It hath a magisteriall and high sounding title undertaking the examination of Presbyteriall
in which he thinks it belongeth not to the Elders alone to admit or cut off members His other ambiguous expression I understand better for by the peoples privity hee meaneth that the people should heare the voyces and suffrages of the Elders and by the peoples consent hee meaneth the peoples voting with the Elders as wee shall heare afterward That the admission of members ought to bee with the peoples privity and consent hee will prove by two reasons 1. Because wee finde in the acts of the Apostles that men were received into the fellowship of the Church and baptized publikely and in the face of the congregation 2. Because the whole communalty being neerely to joyne with these that are admitted ought to take knowledge of the profession of their faith These reasons can neither conclude the peoples right of suffrage in this matter nor so much are the peoples hearing of the suffrages of the Elders But only that the matter might not bee ended without the peoples knowledge and tacite consent Beside there is no small difference to bee put betwixt the admission of Jewes Infidells and Hereticks upon their profession of the true Christian faith and the admission of such as have transported themselves from another Christian congregation bringing with them a sufficient testimonie of their holy profession of faith and good conversation In the meane while Let the Reader note that this disputer hath here in a parenthesis interlaced grosse anabaptistry holding it a kinde of unorderly anticipation to baptise infants who cannot give a confession of their faith And within a few lines he lets another thing fall from his pen which smelleth strongly of the Anabaptisticall tenent concerning having all things common even bodily goods But I proceed with him to the second head concerning excommunication and Church censures by the Elders with the peoples privity and consent This he proveth by three arguments 1. Because Paul saith These who sin rebuke publikely that others also may feare a brave argument indeed This charge is not given to ruling Elders and if it had it can neither prove the suffrage of the people nor their hearing of the suffrage of the Elders but onely the execution of the sentence of the Elders in the presence and audience of the congregation 2. Hee argueth from these words Tell the Church where hee would make it appeare that by the Church is not meant the Senate of Elders excluding the people yea hee saith that in this circumstance now in consideration it comes neerer the truth to expound the Church to be the Bishop since neither Bishops nor their Court-keepers doe exclude the people from their consistories Sure I am in Scotland let others speake for themselves The Bishops in their visitations high Commissions Privie-conferences at Synod◠in which they passed their decrees did exclude both the people and the most part of the ministers He thinkes it a course unheard of either among Jewes Gentiles or Christians before this last age that publike judgements should be privatly exercised and without the peoples privity This if at all to the point must be understood not of the finall execution but of the judiciall sentence or decree What then shall wee thinke that the Senators at Rome or the Areopagites at Athens did never conclude or degree any thing concerning a publike judgement except in the audience and presence of the people The Judges in Israel did sit in the gates of of the City that all persons both poore and rich great and small might have accesse unto them with their complaints and that the sentence of judgement might bee the more notorious exemplary being given forth and promulgat in the gates This proveth not that the Judges did debate voyce and conclude all matters in the publike audience of the people It appeareth rather that they were so accomodate that they might doe these things apart from the multitude It is too much for him to affirme either that the Synagogues were places of civill conventions and judgements or that nothing was in the Synagogues decreed without the peoples privity while as hee hath given no proofe nor evidence at all for it You need not my Masters be so curious in the notation of the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which every smatterer in Divinity knoweth But what of it you say the Elders as such are called to wit to their office of Eldership but called out they are not being themselves to call out the Church It is true that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth not only a calling or a gathering together by vertue of verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but also a separation by vertue of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But I hope it is no paradox to say that the Elders are both called or gathered together unto the Eldership and called out or separate from the rest of the Church to that office And it is as far from a Paradox to say that they who are called out cannot call out others especially the one calling out being to an office and the other calling out being from nature to grace He cannot think that the name Ecclesia Church hath been used by any Greek Author before the Apostles times or in their dayes or in the age after them for the assembly of sole Governours in the act of their government I shall first give Instances against him in the verb because hee said the Elders as such cannot be said to be called out The Septuagint reade Deu. 31.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gather unto me all the Elders The like you may find 1 King 8.1 1 Chron. 28.1 I shall next put him in mind that the Septuagint sometime turne Kahal by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Prov. 26.26 His wickednesse shall be shewed before the whole Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And it is plaine that the name of the Congregation or Church is given to the Elders for that which is said of the Elders Deut. 19.12 Ios. 20.4 is said of the Congregation Num. 35.24 Ios. 20.6 So Exod 12.3 compared with verse 21. This if hee will not take well from us with verse 21. This if hee will not take well from us let him take it from an Anti-presbyterian who observeth from 1 Chron. 13.1 2 4. and 2. Chron. 1.3 that both Kahal and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used for the Elders and Governours Guide unto Sion pag. 5. The place Deut. 23.1 2 3. is well worthy of observation It is ordained that he who is wounded in the stones or hath his privy member cut off or is a Bastard or an Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the Congregation the of Lord to the tenth generation The word is Kahal in the Hebrew and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the version of the 70. yet Iunius Piscator and Pelicanus on that place and Martyr on Iud. 11.1 hold that by the Church or Congregation in that place is meant Consessus
upon the same string The first is thus If those Churches planted by the Apostolique institution had power fully in themselves immediatly from Christ to practise all his ordinances Then have all Churches the like power now But the first is true Ergo. The third thus Whatsoever was commanded by the seven Churches to be practised by each of them apart in and for themselves that no Church of God must now omit But Ecclesiasticall government was commanded to the seven Churches to bee practised by each of them c. The fourth thus If the Church of Corinth had power and authority within her selfe to exercise Ecclesiasticall Government then ought not particular Congregations now to stand under any other Ecclesiastical authority out of themselves But the first is true Ergo. The sixth thus If the Apostle gave commandement unto the Eldership of Ephesus for the whole administration of all ordinances in that Church then may the Eldership of every particular congregation administer among themselves all Gods ordinances But the first is true Ergo. Now for answer to these First I simply deny the connexion of the proposition of the fourth argument because it argueth à genere ad speciem affirmative from the exercising of ecclesiastical Government to the exercising of it independently Neither hath hee said any thing for proofe hereof Next the Reader will easily perceive that both in the first and sixth Argument his citations in proofe both of the propositions and assumptions have not so much as the least colour of pertinency and farre lesse of proofe In both these arguments when he would prove the proposition he speaketh to the assumptioÌ„ contrariwise But these things I delight not to insist upon only I shall give two Distinctions any one of which much more both of them shall make these arguments wholly improfitable unto him First I distinguish his propositions That power authority which the Church of Corinth the seven Churches of Asia and other Apostolicall Churches had to exercise Ecclesiastical government in and for themselves the like have all Churches now which are of the like frame and condition but the most part of particular Churches now are of a different frame and condition from the Apostolique Churches and so have not such fulnesse of power as they had Put the case that the Apostolick Churches were no greater then might and did ordinarily assemble together into one place for the worship of God yet since by reason of the troubleâ— of those times which suffered not the Christians to spread themselves abroad all the countrey over but confined them within Cities and safe places those Churches were not planted so thick and neare together as that they might have the conveniency of Synodical consociation hence it appeareth that they might do many things in and by themselves which particular Congregations now having the conveniency of consociation with neighbour Churches ought not to do in and by themselves But this I have said gratis having in my former Treatise at length declared that the Apostolick Churches at least the most and principall of them were greater then could assemble ordinarily in one place of worship and that they were served with sundry both Pastors and Elders that therefore our Parochiall Churches ought not to be in respect of the points in question compared with their Churches nor our Parochiall Presbyteries with their Presbyteries The second distinction which I have to propound is concerning the assumptions of the arguments now in hand The Apostolick Churches did indeed ordinarily exercise Ecclesiasticall government and all the ordinances of Christ in and for themselves yet so that when the occasion of a Synode did occurre for determining a question which was too hard for particular Churches and was also common to many Churches in that case they did submit themselves to the authority of he Synod Which hath also before beene made plaine from Act. 15. To practise all the ordinances of God in a Church is one thing and to practise them independantly so as nevâ—r to be subject to the authority of a Synod is another thing My antagonist doth after take it for granted saith that all learned men have granted that the Churches of the Apostolick constitution were independant bodies But whence are you Sir that would make your Reader beleeve there are no learned men in the Churches of Scotland France the low-countries and the other reformed Churches which have the governement of Presbyteries and Synods conceiving it to be most agreeable to the Apostolicall patterne Have you put out of the category of learned men all Protestant writers who in the controversies about Councels dispute against Papists from Acts 15.2 Why did you not among all your imeprtinent allegations cite some few of those learned men who grant the Apostolick Churches to have been independant bodies But we must heare what more you have to say Your first eight and tenne arguments are in like manner coincident The first you frame thus Such actions the Church may lawfully do wherein no law of God is broken But there is no law of God broken when particular Churches do in and among themselves exercise all Gods ordinances Ergo. The eight thus Whatsoever governement cannot be found commanded in the written Word oâ— God ought not to have any place in the Church of God But the Government of Presbyteries and Synods over many particular congregations cannot be found commanded c. The tenth thus It is a sinne against God to adde any thing to that forme and manner of ordering Churches which Christ hath set forth in the new Testament But to subject particular congregations under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves is to adde c. Now the word independantly must be added to the assumption of the first argument else it cannot conclude what he affirmes and we deny for there is no question but particular Churches may exercise in and among them selves all Gods ordinances in those cases and with those distinctions which I have spoken of before part 2. chap. 2. This being cleared I deny the assumption in all these three arguments I expected proofe for it but he hath given none except that it cannot for shame be denied I had thought it rather a shamefull thing for a writer to trouble his Reader with arguments which he cannot make good But what saith he to the professors of Leyden who hold the institution of Synods not to be humane but divine which they prove from Mat. 18. Act. 15. Nay what is more ordinary in Protestant writers then the applying of those words Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them unto Synods and Councels and hence they condemne the popish Councels in so much that Bellarmin Salmeron and other Jesuits have in this contradicted all our writers telling us as these men doe that our Saviour meaneth not of Councels in these words Moreover that
AN ASSERTION OF The Government of the Church OF SCOTLAND IN The points of Ruling-Elders and of the Authority of Presbyteries and Synods With a Postscript in answer to a Treatise lately published against Presbyteriall Government Gesta Purgat Caecil felic Adhibete Conclericos Seniores plebis Ecclesiasticos viros inquirant diligenter que sint istae dissensiones August epist. 118. Quorum conciliorum est in Ecclesia saluberima authoritas Edinburgh Printed for Iames Bryson 1641. TO THE READER IT is high time for those who have been long praying for the peace of Hierusalem and with bleeding hearts have beheld the sorrowes of Sion now to bestirre themselves with an extraordinary diligence and to contribute their most serious and uncessant endeavours for the setling of these present commotions about Church affairs in such a manner that the sacred twins Truth and Peace may both cohabit under own roofe and that this great and good work of Reformation may not be blasted in the bird nor fade in the flourish but may be brought forward to that full maturity which shall afford a harvest of joy to us and to all the Churches of God One controversie there is about the government of the Church and it is of such consequence that were it well resolved upon and rightly agreed it should facilitate a right resolution in other matters which are in question Now because longum iter per praecepta breve per exempla the way is long by precepts short by platforms therefore I have carefully observed the policie and government of other reformed Churches And because the nearnesse of relation swayeth my affection at least half a thought more unto that which is Scotlands caeteris paribus then unto that which is more remote from us therfore I was most solicitous to see a delineation of the government of that famously reformed neighbor Church which when I had read read over again I did conclude with my self that if these two points at which most exception is taken I mean the office of ruling Elders and the authoritie of Presbyters and Synodes which also are things common to the other reformed Churches could be upon good grounds maintained there is no other thing of any moment to be objected against it And with these thoughts I was so tossed that I could not rest satisfied with the Quid wiâ—hout the Quare but did conceive as great languor and desire for a demonstration of that form of Church government as before I had for a declaration of the same Whereupon I have purchased to my self from Scotland this ensuing Treatise which having fully satisfied my owne minde in the asserting of those most controverted points I have resolved to communicate and publish the same unto others for the reasons following First for the satisfaction of such as do through ignorance or mistaking stumble at such a form of Ecclesiasticall government I do not much marvell to see those that aâ—e of a simple understanding so far conquered as to scruple the office of ruling Elders having heard the big words and lavish expressions of some opposites against the same yet a poor peece it is which one of them would usher in with a tinckling Epistle in which Projicit ampullas sesquipedalia verba He maketh offer to forfeit his life to justice and his reputation to shame if any living man can shew that ever there was a ruling Elder in the Christian world till Fâ—rell and Viret first created them I shall not desire to take him at his word for his life but if he be not able to give a satisfactory answer unto that which is here sayd both from Scripture and from antiquity for ruling Elders then hath he given sentence against his own reputation for ever And so much the more that having in that assertion of Episcopacie boldly averred that the name of the Elders of the Church in all antiquity comprehendeth none but Preachers and Divines and that therfore none but they may be called Seniores Ecclesiae though some others happily may have the title of Seniores populi because of their civill authority notwithstanding the reading of the observations of Iustellus and of both the Cassaubons hath now so farre changed his tone that in his late answer to â—mectymnuus he acknowledgeth that beside Pastors and Doctors and beside the Magistrates or Elders of the Cities there are to be found in antiquity Seniores Ecclesiastici Ecclesiasticall Elders also only he alleadgeth they were but as our Church-wardens or rather as our Vestry-men whereas indeed they were Judges in Ecclesiasticall controversies and in some sort instructors of the people as shall be made to appeare Meane while we do observe what trust is to be given to this bold Speaker who hath beene forcâ—d to yeeld what he had before with high swelling words denied Another Instance of the same kinde is to be noted in his Remonstrance when he speaketh of the prescript forms of prayer which the Jewish Church had ever from the dayes of Moses wherewith also Peter and Iohn when they went up into the Temple at the ninth hour of Prayer did joyn to make good his allegiance he addeth the forms whereof are yet extant and ready to be produced Yet this he handsomely eateth up in his defence where he gives us to understand that those set forms of prayer are indeed specified by Capellus a writer of our owne Age but that the book it selfe which contained these prayers is perished a thousand years ago Well he is now content to say that once those forms were extant and this forsooth he will prove from a certain Samaritan Chronicle in the custodie of his faithfull friend the Primate of Aâ—mach wherein he hath found a story which transporteth him as much as the invention of the demonstration did Archimedes when he cried 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have found it I have found it Yet credâ—t Iudaeus apella Non ego But this lyeth not now in my way Only till a full answer be ready I thought it not amisse to give some taste of the mans vaine arrogant humour whose best weapons are great words As for his last record which he fetcheth from Abrahamus Scultetus against ruling Elders all that and much more hath been and here shall be abundantly confuted Others there be who call in question the power and authority of Ecclesiasticall Presbyteries and of Synods against which also some few Pens have been put to paper and have passed a censure no lesse hard then unseasonable which me thinks might well have been spared unlesse there had been stronger and more convincing reasons for it These I shall beseech that with minds voyd of prejudice they take into consideration the second part of this Treatise written with no heat nor sharpnesse of words but with plainnesse and strength of reason And withall I shall expect that they will not think the worse of the Author for being ready to answer him that asketh
a reason of him or for writing a justification of the government of the Church of Scotland to such as did desire to be more throughly resolved concerning the same but that rather they will make use hereof as a key by divine Providence put into their hands to open a doore unto further light Secondly there is so much the more reason for asserting those two points by how much they have beene mainly opposed by Sathan for he it was whose cunning conveyance of old made the office of ruling Elders to come into dessuetude through the sloth or rather the pride of the Teachers as Ambrose complaineth and yet time hath not so obliterate that ancient order but that the footsteps of the same are yet to be seen in our Officialls Chancellors Commissaries Church-wardens and High-Commission men yea at Rome it selfe in the Cardinalls The same old Serpent it was whose instigation made Licinius whiles he did intend the totall ruine of the Church to fall upon this as the most effectuall means for his purpose that he should straightly inhibit all counsells meetings and conâ—erencies concerning the affairs of the Church By which meanes the Christians of his time were drawne into one of two snares Aut enim legem c. for saith Eusebius either it behoved us to be obnoxious to punishment by violating the Law or to overthrow the Rites and Ordinances of the Church by giving obedience in that which the Law did command for great and waighty deliberations undertaken about things controverted cannot proceed in any other manner or way but by the right managing of Councels The Arminians in the Netherlands found out another of Sathans wiles they were not able to hinder the assembling of a free and lawfull Synod but for their next best they required of the Synod of Dort twelve conditions and the ninth was that there should not be in that Synod any determination or decree concerning the matters in controversie but only an accommodation or conference and that still it should be free to the particular Churches to accept or to reject the judgement of the Synod this was a way of endlesse controversie and justly cried down in the Synod Moreover Satan ever wise in his own principles finding the Church of Scotland like an invincible Sampson by reason of such a constitution and goveâ—nment as being preserved in integritie could neither admit heresie nor schisme did make use of the Prelacie as his traiterous Dalilah to betray that Sampson into the hands of the now adverse Pâ—ilistines the Papists by stealing away both their ruling Elders and the authority of their Presbyteries and Synods for he had well observed that in these two things did their great strength lye and that without these two the Ministers of the Word being like so many scopae dissolutâ— both sparsed and by themselves alone might easily be brought under the yoke When thus the Romish-affected Dalilah had taken away their strength from them she was bold to uâ—tâ—r her insulting voice in the Service-book and book of Canons The Philistines be upon thee Sampson The Papists be upon thee Scotland In this case they did not as Sampson then presume that the Lord was with them as at other times they knew he was departed from them They cried out Return we beseech thee O God of Hosts look down from Heaven behold and visit this Vine and the Vineyeard which thine own right hand hath planted They did again ask the way to Sion with their faces thitherward saying come and let us joyn our selves to the Lord in a perpetuall Covenant that shall not be forgotten And now glory be to the great Name of God in the Church throughout all generations they have by his healing hand quickly recovered their strength Strength I may well call it for sayth a learned Divine as in things which are done by bodily strength so in things which are managed by counsells vis unita fortior power being put together is the stronger and in this he doth agree with Bellarm. that though God by his absolute power can preserve his Church without Synods yet according to ordinary providence they are necessary for the right government of the Church The interweaving and combining of strength by joyning the ruling Elders of every Congregation with the Pastor or Pastors thereof into a particular Eldership by joyning also Commissioners Pastors and Eâ—ders from many particular Elderships ordinarily into a classicall Presbytery and more solemnly provinciall Synod Finally by joynâ—ng Commissioners Pastors and Elders from many classicall PPresbyteries into a Nationall Assembly this doth indeed make a Church beautifull as Tirza comely as Ierusalem terrible as an Armie with Banners It is not to be expected but this forme of Church government shall still be disliked by some whose dislike shall notwithstanding the more commend it to all pious minds I mean by prophane men who escape not without censure under Presbyteries and Synods as they did under the Prelacie by hereticks who cannot finde favour with a Nationall Synod of many learned and godly men as they did with a few Popish Prelats by Matchavellians also who do foresee that Presbyteriall Synodicall government being conformed not to the Lesbian rule of humane authority but to the inflexible rule of Divine Institution will not admit of any Innovations in Religion be they never so conduceable to politicall intentions Some there be who whet their tongue like a sword and bend their bowes to shoot their arrows even bitter words They would wound both the office of ruling Elders and the authority of Presbyteries and Synods with this hateful imputation that they are in consistent with the honor and Prerogative of Princes Sure I am when our Saviour saith Render unto Câ—esar the things which are Caesars and unto God the things which are Gods he doth plainly insinuate that the things which are Gods need not to hinder the things which are Caesars And why shall it be forgotten that the Prelates did assume to themselves all that power of determining controversies making Canons ordaining suspending deposing and excommunicating which now Presbyteries and Synods do claime as theirs by right To me it appeareth a grand mistery and worthy of deliberation in the wise Consistory of Rome That the power of Presbyteries and Synods being meerly Ecclesiasticall being rightly used and nothing incroaching upon the civill power is notwithstanding an intollerable prejudice to Kings and Princes But the very same power in Prelates though both abused and mixed with civill power is not for aâ—l that prejudiciall to Soveraignty Yet if the fear of God cannot moliâ—ie the tongues of thâ—se men one would think that they should be brideled with respect to the Kings most excellent Majestie who hath been graâ—iously pleased to approve and ratifie the present government of the Church of Scotland perceiving â— truâ—â— that Gods honour and his honour Gods Lawes and his Lawes may well subsist together Lastly as in publishing this
dead in sinnes to be meant but holy men who being indued with faith in God and walking in his obedience God authorising them and the Church his Spouse chusing and calling them undertake the government thereof that they may labour to the conservation and edification of the same in Christ saith Iunius A ruling Elder should pray for the Spirit and gifts of his calling that hee may doe the duties of his calling and not bee like him that played the Souldan but a Souter hee must doe his office neither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and pro forma hee himselfe being Parcus Deorum caltor infrequens nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doing all through contention and strife about particulars Si duo de nostras tollas pro nomina rebus praelia I may say Iurgia cessarent pax sine lite foret Nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Empiring and Lording among his brethren and fellow Elders Whosoever will bee great among you let him bee your minister and whosoever will bee chiefe among you let him be your servant saith the onely Lord and Head of the Church Nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 setting himselfe only to do a pleasure or to get preferment to such as he favoureth Nay nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely by establishing good orders and wholesome lawes in the Church but he must carry himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serviceably and ministerially for as his Function is Officium and Iurisdictio so it is Munus a burdensome service and charge laid upon him That a ruling Elder may bee such a one as hee ought to bee two sorts of duties are requisite viz. duties of his Conversation and duties of his Calling The duties of his conversation are the same which the Apostle Paul requireth in the conversation of the Minister of the Word That he bee blamelesse having a good report not accused of riot or unruly vigilant sober of good behaviour given to hospitality a lover of good men just holy temperate not given to wine no striker not greedy of filthy lucre not selfe-willed not soone angry but patient not a brawler not covetous one that ruleth well his owne house having his children in subjection with all gravity one that followeth after righteousnesse godlinesse faith love patience meeknesse c. These and such like parts of a Christian and exemplary conversation being required of Pastors as they are Elders belong unto ruling Elders also This being plaine let us proceed to the duties of their calling For the better understanding whereof we will distinguish with the Schoole-men a two-fold power the power of Order and the power of Jurisdiction which are different in sundry respects 1. The power of Order comprehendeth such things as a Minister by vertue of his ordination may doe without a commission from any Presbyterie or Assembly of the Church as to preach the Word to minister the Sacraments to celebrate marriage to visite the sicke to catechise to admonish c. The power of Jurisdiction comprehendeth such things as a Minister cannot doe by himselfe nor by vertue of his ordination but they are done by a Session Presbytery or Synod and sometimes by a Minister or Ministers having Commission and authority from the same such as ordination and admission suspension deprivation and communication and receiving againe into the Church and making of Lawes and Constitutions Ecclesiasticall and such like whereof we boldly maintaine that there is no part of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction in the power of one man but of many met together in the name of Christ. 2. The power of Order is the radicall and fundamentall power and maketh a Minister susceptive and capable of the power of Jurisdiction 3. The power of Order goeth no further then the Court of Conscience the power of Jurisdiction is exercised in Externall and Ecclesiasticall Courts Fourthly the power of Order is sometime unlawfull in the use yet not voide in it selfe The power of Jurisdiction when it is unlawfull in the use it is also voide in it selfe If a Minister doe any act of Jurisdiction as to excommunicate or absolve without his owne parish wanting also the consent of the Ministery and Elders of the bounds where he doth the same such acts are voide in themselves and of no effect But if without his owne charge and without the consent aforesaid hee baptise an infant or doe any such thing belonging to the power of Order though his act be unlawfull yet is the thing it selfe of force and the Sacrament remaineth a true Sacrament Now to our purpose We averre that this twofold power of Order and of Jurisdiction belongeh to ruling Elders as well as to Pastors The power of Jurisdiction is the same in both for the power and authority of all Jurisdiction belongeth to the Assemblies and representative meetings of the Church whereof the ruling Elders are necessary constituent members and have the power of decisive voycing no lesse then Pastors Howbeit the execution of some decrees enacted by the power of Jurisdiction belongeth to Ministers alone for Pastors alone exercise some acts of Jurisdiction as imposition of hands the pronouncing of the sentence of excommunication the receiving of a penitent c. Are not these things done in the name and authority of some Assembly of the Church higher or lower Or are they any other then the executions of the decrees and sentences of such an Assembly wherein ruling Elders voyced The power of Order alone shall make the difference betwixt the Pastor and the ruling Elder for by the power of Order the Pastor doth preach the Word minister the Sacraments pray in publike blesse the Congregation celebrate marriage which the ruling Elder cannot Therefore it is falsly said by that railing Rabshakeh whom before I spoke of Ep. pag. 7. That the ruling Elders want nothing of the power of the Minister but that they preach not nor baptise in publike congregations yet other things which the Pastor doth by his power of Order the ruling Elder ought also to doe by his owne power of Order And if we would know how much of this power of Order is common to both let us note that Pastors doe some things by their power of Order which all Christians ought to doe by the law of Charity Things of this sort a ruling Elder may and ought to doe by his power of Order and by vertue of his election and ordination to such an office For example every Christian is bound in Charity to admonish and reprove his brother that offendeth first privately then before witnesses and if he heare not to tell it to the Church Levit. 19.17 Matth. 18.15.16.17 This a ruling Elder ought to doe by vertue of his calling and with authority 1 Thess. 5.12 Private Christians ought in Charity to instruct the ignorant Joh. 4.29 Act. 18.26 to exhort the negligent Heb. 3.15 10.24 25. to comfort the afflicted 1 Thess. 5.11 to support the weake 1 Thess. 5.14 To restore him that falleth
Galat. 6.1 to visite the sicke Matth. 25.36.40 to reconcile those who are at variance Matth. 5.9 to contend for the truth and to answer for it Iude v. 3. 1 Pet. 3.15 All which are incumbent to the ruling Elder by the authority of his calling To conclude then the calling of ruling Elders consisteth in these two things 1. To assist and voyce in all Assemblies of the Church which is their power of jurisdiction 2. To watch diligently over the whole flock all these wayes which have been mentioned and to doe by authority that which other Christians ought to doe in charity which is their power of order And the Elder which neglecteth any one of these two whereunto his calling leadeth him shall make answer to God for it For the Word of God the Discipline of this Kirke the bonds of his owne calling and covenant doe all binde sinne upon his soule if either hee give not diligence in private by admonishing all men of their duty as the case requireth or if he neglect to keepe either the Ecclesiasticall Court and Consistory within the Congregation where his charge is or the Classicall Presbyterie and other Assemblies of the Church which he is no lesse bound to keepe then his Pastor when he is called and dessigned thereunto CHAP. III. The first Argument for ruling Elders taken from the Iewish Church HAving shewed what ruling Elders are it followeth to shew Scripture and Divine right for them Our first Argument is taken from the governement and pollicy of the Jewish Church thus Whatsoever kinde of office-bearers the Jewish Church had not as it was Jewish but as it was a Church such ought the Christian Church to have also But the Jewish Church not as it was Jewish but as it was a Church had Elders of the people who assisted in their Ecclesiasticall government and were members of their Ecclesiasticall Consistories Therefore such ought the Christian Church to have also The Proposition will no man call in question for quod competit alicui qua tali competit omni tali That which agreeth to any Church as it is a Church agreeth to every Church I speake of the Church as it is a politicall body and setled Ecclesiasticall Republike Let us see then to the Assumption The Jewish Church not as it was a Church but as it was Jewish had an high Priest typisying our great high Priest Jesus Christ. As it was Jewish it had Musitians to play upon Harpes Psalteries Cymbals and other Musicall Instruments in the Temple 1 Chron. 25.1 concerning which hear Bellarmines confession de bon oper lib. 1. cap. 17. Iustinus saith that the use of instruments was granted to the Iewes for their imperfection and that therefore such instruments have no place in the Church Wee confesse indeed that the use of musicall instruments agreeth not alike with the perfect and with the imperfect and that therefore they beganne but of late to be admitted in the Church But as it was a Church and not as Jewish it had foure sorts of ordinary office-bearers Priests Levites Doctors and Elders and we conformablie have Pastors Deacons Doctors and Elders To their Priests and Levits Cyprian doth rightly liken our Pastors and Deacons for howsoever sundry things were done by the Priests and Levites which were typicall and Jewish onely yet may we well parallell our Pastors with their Priests in respect of a perpetuall Ecclesiasticall office common to both viz. the Teaching and governing of the people of God Mal. 2.7 2 Chron. 19.8 and our Deacons with their Levits in respect of the cure of Ecclesiasticall goods and of the work of the service of the house of God in the materialls and appurtenances thereof a function likewise common to both 1 Chro. 26.20 23.24.28 The Jewish Church had also Doctors and Schooles or Colledges for the preservation of true Divinity among them and of tongues arts and sciences necessary thereto 1 Chron. 15.22.27 2 King 22.14 1 Sam. 19.20 2 Kings 2.3.5 Act. 19.9 These office-bearers they had for no typicall use but wee have them for the same use and end for which they had them And all these sorts of office-bearers among us wee doe as rightly warrant from the like sorts among them as other whiles wee warrant our baptizing of Infants from their circumcising of them our Churches by their Synagogues c. Now that the Jewish Church had also such Elders as wee plead for it is manifest for besides the Elders of the Priests there were also Elders of the people joyned with them in the hearing and handling of Ecclesiasticall matters Jer. 19.1 Take of the ancients of the people and of the ancients of the Priests The Lord sending a message by the Prophet would have a representative body of all Judah to be gathered together for receiving it as Tremellius noteth So 2 Kings 6.32 Elisha sate in his house and the Elders sate with him We read 2 Chron. 19.8 That with the Priests were joyned some of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel to judge Ecclesiasticall causes and controversies And howsoever many things among the Jewes in the latter times after the captivity did weare to confusion and misorder yet we finde even in the dayes of Christ and the Apostles that the Elders of the people still sate and voyced in Councell with the Priests according to the ancient forme as is cleare from sundry places of the new Testament Matth. 16.21 and 21.23 and 26.57.59 and 27.1.12 Mark 14 43. Luke 22.66 Acts 4.5 This is also acknowledged by the Roman Annalist Baronius who confesseth further That as this was the forme among the Jewes so by the Apostles was the same forme observed in their times and Seniors then admitted into Councels Saravia himselfe who disputeth so much against ruling Elders acknowledgeth what hath been said of the Elders of the Jewes Seniores quidem invenio in Consessu Sacerdotum veteris Synagoga qui Sacerdotes non erant I finde indeed saith hee Elders in the Assembly of the Priests of the old Synagogue which were not Priests Et quamvis paria corum essent suffragia authoritas in omnibus sufragiis sacerdotum cum suffragiis Sacerdotum c. And although saith hee their suffrages and authority in all judgements were equall with the suffrages of the Priests c. But what then thinke yee hee hath to say against us Hee saith that the Elders of the Jewes were their Magistrates which in things pertaining to the externall government of the Church ought not to have been debarred from the Councell of the Priests more then the Christian Magistrate ought now to bee debarred from the Synods of the Church Now to prove that their Elders were their civill Magistrates hee hath no better argument then this That the Hebrew word Zaken which is turned Elder importeth a chiefe man or a Ruler We answer First this is a bold conjecture which hee hath neither warranted by divine nor by humane testimonies
Secondly Zaken doth not ever signifie a Ruler or a man in authority as we have shewed before Thirdly let us grant Zaken to bee a name of dignity and to import a chiefe man yet a chiefe man is not ever a Magistrate nor a Ruler It would onely follow that they were of the chiefe of the fathers of Israel that were joyned with the Priests in the Sanedrim and so it was 2 Chron. 19.8 Non hercle de plebe hominum lecti sed nobilissimi omnes saith P. Cunaeus They were saith Loc. Theol. to 6. § 28. Proceres tribuum qui allegabantur una cum sacerdotibus scribis in sacrum synedrium Fourthly they who were so joyned in Councell with the Priests 2 Chron. 19.8 are plainely distinguished from the Judges and Magistrates vers 11. And so are the Princes Rulers distinguished from the Elders Act. 4.5 Judg. 8.14 Deut. 5.23 Jos. 8.33 Fifthly we would know whether he thought that all the Magistrates of the Jews sate in Councel with the Priests or some of them onely if some only we desire either proofe or probability who they were and how many if all then should wee by the like reason admit not the supreame Magistrate alone which hee seemeth to say into the Synods of the Church but all Magistrates whatsoever and what a confusion should that bee Sixthly those Elders that sate in the civil Sanedrim were Rulers by their sitting there but the Elders which sate in the Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim either were not civill Magistrates or at least sate not there as Magistrates So do our Magistrates sometimes sit with us as members of our Assemblies not as Magistrates but as Elders Of the distinction of those two Courts which every one observeth not we shall speake more afterward We have said enough against Saravia but Bilson doth better deserve an answer who alledgeth more specious reasons to prove that the Elders of the Jewes were their civill Magistrates Hee saith There was no Senate nor Seniors among the Jewes but such as had power of life and death of imprisonment confiscation banishment c. which hee maketh to appeare thus In the dayes of Ezra the punishment of contemners was forfeiture of their substance and separation from the congregation Ezra 10.8 The triall of secret murther was committed to the Elders of every City Deut. 21.3.4 They delivered the wilfull murtherer unto the Avenger of bloud to be put to death Deut. 19.12 They condemned a stubborne sonne to death Deut. 21.19 They chastened a man who had spoken falsly of his wife that hee found her not a virgin Deut. 22.15.16.18 Ans. First if it should bee granted that the Elders spoken of in these places were civill Magistrates this proveth not that there were no Ecclesiasticall Elders among the Jewes Iustellus in his Annotations upon the Booke of the Canons of the African Church distinguisheth betwixt the civill Elders mentioned Can. 91. who were called Seniores locorum or Vrbium and the Ecclesiasticall Elders mentioned Can. 100. who were called Seniores Ecclesiae and Seniores Plebis the former name distinguishing them from the civill Elders the latter distinguishing them from Preaching Elders So there might be the same two sorts of Elders among the Jewes And what then It is enough for us that wee finde in the Jewish Church some Elders joyned with the Priests employed in things Ecclesiasticall The Elders and Priests are joyned together both in the new Testament as Matth. 26.59 the chiefe Priests and Elders so in other places before cited And likewise in the old Testament Exod. 24.1 Come up unto the Lord thou and Aaron Nadab and â—bihu and seventy of the Elders of Israel Deut. 27.1 Moses with the Elders compared with vers 9. Moses and the Priests Ezech. 7.26 The Law shall perish from the Priest and counsell from the ancients Jer. 19 1. Take of the ancients of the people and of the ancients of the Priests Wee finde also the Commandements of God first delivered to the Elders and by them to the people Exod. 12.21.28 and 19.7.8 It is said Deut. 27.1 Moses with the Elders of Israel commanded the people Upon which place Hugo Cardinalis saith Argumentum c. Here is an argument that a Prelat ought not to command any thing without the counsell of the Elders Secondly but it cannot bee proved that these Elders in the places objected were Judges or Magistrates nay the contrary appeareth from other places which wee have before alledged for the distinction of Elders from Magistrates or Judges whereunto wee may adde 2 Kings 10.1 Vnto the Rulers of Iezreel to the Elders and to them that brought up Ahabs children And verse 5. Hee that was over the house and hee that was over the Citie the Elders also and the bringers up of the children Ezra 10.14 The Elders of every Citie and the Iudges thereof Fourthly we read of threescore and seventeen Elders in Succoth Judg. 8.14 whereas the greatest number of Judges in one Citie among the Jewes was three for smaller matters and three and twenty for greater matters This objection Bilson himselfe moveth but answereth it not Fiftly as for the places which hee objecteth against us the first two of them make against himselfe In Ezra 10.8 wee finde not onely the civill punishment of forfeiture but also as Pellicanus on that place and Zepperus de pol. Eccl. lib. 3. cap. 7. doe observe the Ecclesiasticall punishment of excommunication or separation from the Congregation the former answering to the councell of the Princes the latter to the councell of the Elders The place Deuter. 21.3.4 maketh against him in three respects First the Elders of the City did but wash their hands over the beheaded Heifer and purge themselves before the Lord from the bloodshed which was a matter rather Ecclesiasticall then civill neque enim c. For there was no neede of a Iudge here who should be present formally as Iudge saith Bonfrerius the Jesuite upon that place Secondly the controversie was decided by the word of the Priests vers 5. Thirdly Tostatus thinketh that the Elders the Judges are plainely distinguished vers 2. Thy Elders and thy Iudges shall come forth Quaeras hic c. Thou mayest here aske saith Pelargus why the Elders of the people and the Iudges were both together called out I answer because God will have both the Magistrate and the subjects to be innocent c. As for the other places that which seemeth to prove most for the civill power of the Jewish Elders is Deuter. 22. yet heare what that famous Commentator Tostatus Abulensis saith on that place Quando talis c. When such a cause was to bee judged because it was very weighty the Elders of the City did meet together with the Iudges thereof for in such facts there is some place for conjecture and the Elders who are the wiser sort can herein bee more attentive then others So hee noteth upon Ruth 4.2 that the Elders sate in the gate
appeare that hee spoke of the other gifts also as they are in different persons hee addeth are all workers of miracles have all the gifts of healing doe all speake with tongues doe all interprete where wee may supply are all for helps are all for governements But can it bee for nought that the Apostle ommitteth these two when he doth over againe enumerate all the rest vers 29.30 It is as if he had said there are some who have none of those speciall and for the most part extraordinary gifts All are not Apostles all are not Prophets c. for some have but common and ordinary gifts to bee Deacons or Elders for government There is a great controversie betwixt the Iesuits and the Doctors of Sarbon about the meaning of this place which we have now expounded The Jesuits in their Spongia writen against the censure of the University of Paris contend that by Helps the Apostle meaneth the regular Chanoins who help the Bishops and the Priests in preaching ministering the Sacraments and hearing confessions By governments they say hee meaneth secular Priests whom they call parochi And because hee putteth helps before governments they inferre that Regular Chanoins are of an higher degree â—in the Hierarchy of the Church then Secular Priests This they maintaine good men for the credit of their owne Polypragmaticke order and not for the credit of other regular Chanoins you may be sure The Doctors of Sorbon in their Vindicia Censura written by Aurelius considered that they could not maintaine the meaning of the Apostle to bee onely of different gifts which no doubt they had answered if they had thought it to carry any probability therefore they acknowledge that under these gifts are contained also the degrees of the Hierarchy And that the Apostles words doe partly belong to the common gifts of the Spirit as powers and interpretation of tongues partly to the Hierarchy of this later sort they make helps and governments And by the helps they seeme to understand Archdeacons and Curates But now to conclude this Argument also thus it is They who have the gift and office of governing the Church and are different from them who have other gifts and offices in the Church can be no other then the ruling Elders which we plead for But these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spoken of 1 Cor. 12.28 are such Ergo. CHAP. VII Argument 5. from 1 Tim. 5.17 OUR fift Argument is taken from a cleer place 1 Tim. 5.17 Let the Elders that rule well bee counted worthy of double honour especially they who labour in the word and doctrine Hence we reason after this manner These Churches which had some Elders that laboured not in the Word and Doctrine yet were worthy of double honour for ruling well had the very same ruling Elders we plead for But the Apostolicke Churches had some Elders that laboured not in the Word and Doctrine yet were worthy of double honor for ruling well Ergo. The Argument riseth from the plaine Text then which what can be cleerer But there are some who would darken light and lighten darkenesse Doctor Field propoundeth three glosses upon this place for the frustration of our Argument First that the guides of the Church are worthy of double honour both in respect of governing and teaching but especially for their paines in teaching so that the Apostle noteth two parts or duties of Presbyteriall offices not two sorts of Presbyters This is manifestly against the Text which speaketh of officers not of offices of persons not of duties for it is not said especially for labouring c. But especially they that labour c. Secondly he saith among Elders some laboured principally in governing and ministering the Sacraments some in preaching So Paul sheweth that he preached and laboured more then all the Apostles but baptised few or none And when Paul and Barnabas were companions and their travells equall yet Paul was the chiefe speaker so that though both were worthy of double honour yet Paul especially But for answer to this First we would gladly know what warrant had hee for expounding Pauls more aboundant labouring then all the Apostles of his preaching alone Secondly what warrant for such a distinction of Elders that some laboured principally in governing some in preaching Because Paul preached and did not baptise and because hee was the chiefe speaker when hee and Barnabas travelled together therefore some Elders laboured in governing some in preaching good Logick forsooth Thirdly thought he that the Apostle did ever account such Ministers as doe not mainly labour in preaching to be worthy of double honour nay it was never the Apostles minde to allow any honour farre lesse double honour either to non-preaching or to seldome preaching Ministers Vt quid enim doctor appellatur nisi ut docâ—at saith Chrysostome 4. Tell me whether is preaching a duty belonging to all the Ministers of the Gospell or not if it be not the duty of all then it is the duty of none but a work of supererogation or some such thing for if some be not bound to preach by their Presbyteriall order and vocation what is there that should binde others to preach The order and calling of a Presbyter is alike common to all Now if all bee bound to preach which Field himselfe seemeth to say in his first glosse when hee calleth paines in teaching a part or duty of the Presbyteriall office no lesse then governing how shall those Presbyters bee worthy of double honour who doe not the duties of their Presbyteriall office but leave the one halfe of them undone Thirdly saith Field there were some that remained in certaine places for governing of those who were already wonne by the preaching of the Gospell others travelled with great labour from place to place to preach Christ to such as had never heard of him Both these were worthy of double honour but especially the later who did not build upon anothers foundation nor governe those whom others had gained The Poet would here answere Non minor est virtus quam quaerere parta tueri A Physitian would haply say that to prevent the recidivation is as much worth as the cure But I answer 1. There is no such opposition in the Text but a subordination rather for Elders who labour in the word and doctrine are not contra-distinguished from Elders that rule well but are declared to bee one kinde of Elders that rule well 2. Though the Apostles and Evangelists travelled from one Countrey to another to preach Christ to such as never heard of him yet where hath hee read that some of these who were meere Presbyters for of such speaketh the Text in hand did so likewise It rather appeareth from Act. 14.23 Tit. 1.5 that Elders were ordained in every Citie there to remain at their particular charges and no Elders finde we ordained by the Apostles ordinatione vaga We have heard D. Fields three glosses upon this place in
and infirme Bishops who cannot labour in the word and doctrine Answ. 1. The Apostle speaketh of Presbyters not of Prelates 2. To rule well importeth as great labour as preaching and somewhat more as I shewed before so that they who cannot labour in preaching cannot labour in ruling neither 3. They who have eviscerate and spent themselves in the work of the Ministry who have been as long as they could stand upon their feet valiant Champions for the truth against the enemies thereof who have served their time according to the will of God without the staine of Heresie Schisme Apostasie or unfaithfulnesse when they become old and infirme they ought not to be the lesse honoured as the impious verdict of this Prelate would have it but so much the more honour ought to be given to their hoare head found in the way of righteousnesse Another Glosse is given by the same King namely that the Apostle would have Ministers not onely to live well but to feed also by the word and doctrine Answ. 1. The rising of the Apostles words doth not concern duties but persons as wee have said before 2. To live well is not to rule well unlesse wee will make all who live godly to rule well 3. Thirdly this glosse doth stil leave a double honor to Ministers that live well though they do not preach We see now our opposites have been trying all windes to fetch upon us but here we leave them betwixt winde and wave â—or this our last argument carrieth us away with full saile CHAP. VIII The testimony of Ambrose for ruling Elders vindicated IF wee looke backe beyond the times of declining unto the first and purest times of the Church wee shall finde ruling Elders to be no new fangled device at Geneva but that the primitive government and policy of the Church hath beene in them restored There is one place of Ambrose which cleereth it sufficiently He writing on 1 Tim. 5.1 Rebuke not an Elder saith Vnde Synagoga c. Wherefore both the Iewish Synagogue and after the Church had Senior or Elders without whose counsell nothing was done in the Church which by what negligence it grew out of use I know not except perhaps by the sloth or rather by the pride of the teachers whiâ—es they alone will seeme to be something This sentence is also cited in Glossa ordinar And it sheweth plainely that as the Jewish so the Christian Church had some Elders who though they were not Teachers of the Word yet had a part of the government of the Church upon their shoulders But that this came into desuetude partly through the sloth of the teachers and Ministers of the Word whiles they were not carefull to preserve the ordinances of God and the right way of governing the Church and partly through their pride whilst they would doe all by themselves and have no consorts Vtinam modo nostra redirent In mores tempora priscos But let us heare a triple divination which the non-friends of ruling Elders give forth upon this testimony First Bishop Hall telleth us that it is not Ambrose but a counterfeit who wrote that Commentary upon the Epistles and for this he alledgeth our owne Parker against us The truth is Bellaâ—mine and Scultingius taught him this answer The place of Parker he citeth noâ— in the Margine but I believe the place he meaneth of is de polit Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 13. where he holdeth indeed that the author of these Commentaries was not Ambrose Bishop of Millaine but sheweth withall that he nothing doubteth of the Catholike authority of the Commentaries themselves Hoc vero c. This saith he may befall the best Author whosoever he be that some may ascribe his workes to another But that hee lived before the Councell of Nice this addeth weight to his testimony of the Seniors These Commentaries are commonly cited by our Divines as Ambrose's I finde them in Erasmus his edition both at Collen 1532. and at Paris 1551. acknowledged to bee the genuine workes of Ambrose only the Prefaces before the Epistles are called in question They are also acknowledged in the edition of Costerius at Basile 1555. Sixtuâ— Senensis ascribeth them to Ambrose in like manner The edition of Collen 1616. hath an observation prefixed which repudiateth many of his workes and these Commentaries among the rest Yet the last edition at Paris 1632. hath expunged that observation which they had not done if they had approved the same Howsoever that same observation maketh those Commentaries to bee as old as 372. or 373. Perkins in his preparative before his demonstration of the probleme calleth in question the Commentary upon the Hebrewes but no more Rivet sheweth that these who reject them doe neither give good reasons for their opinion neither yet doe agree among themselves Bellarmine ascribing them to Hilarius Diaconus Maldonat to Remigius Lugdunensis the Censors of Lovaine to the Author of the questions of the old and new Testament I beleeve that Cooke in his Censura Scriptorum veterum hath touched the true cause why these Commentaries are so much called in question which is the perfidiousnesse of Papists who when they finde any thing therein which they imagine to bee for their advantage then they cry Saint Ambrose saith thus but when they finde any thing therein which maketh against them then they say as Hall doth It is not Ambrose but a counterseit I must confesse that Hall is wiser in disclaiming the same then his fellowes in acknowledging them yet because he found that the Testimony may bee of force though not Ambrose's and beside had no proofe for this alledgeance he durst not trust to it but thought upon another answer To proceed then to their next conjecture Bilson Sutcliffe and Doctor Field tell us that Ambrose meant of Bishops who excluded other Clergy men from their consultations and that by the name of Teachers hee might fitly understand the Bishops seeing none but they have power to preach in their owne right others but onely by permission from them This is a most desperate shift for a bad cause For first there is no warrant neither from Scripture nor Antiquity to distinguish Bishops from other Ministers of the Word by the name of Teachers Secondly as for that reason alledged that none but Bishops have power to preach in their owne right it is contrary to that which Field himselfe saith in the very next Chapter where he holdeth that Presbyters are equall with Bishops in the power of order and that they may preach and minister the Sacraments by vertue of their order as well as Bishops Thirdly neither did the advising of Bishops with Presbyters cease in Ambrose his time For as Field himself noteth out of the fourth Councell of Carthage which was holden shortly after Ambrose his writing hereof all sentences of Bishops were declared to bee void which were not confirmed by the presence of their Clergy Let us also
Senatum nostrum coetum Presbyterorum cum ergo inter caetera etiam senes â—udea perdiderit quomodo poterit habere concilium quod proprie Seniorum est And what sense shall we give to these words unlesse we say it is imported that both the Jewish and the Christian Church had such an Eldership as we plead for Else why did both hee and Basil make such a parallell betwixt the Jewish and the Christian Church in the point of Elders Surely if we understand by the Elders of the Christian Church whereof they speake the Ministers of the Word alone wee must also understand by the Elders of the Jewish Church whereof they speake the Priests which no man will imagine Eusebius in his History citeth Dionysiuâ— Alexandrinus relating his disputes with the Chiliasts after this manner When I was at Arsenoiâ—a where thou knowest this doctrine first sprung c. I called together the Elders and Teachers inhabiting those villages there being present also as many of the brethren as were willing to come and I exâ—orted them publikely to the search of this doctrine c. By the Teachers here are meant the Pastors or Ministers of the Word who are most frequently called by the Fathers Teachers or Doctors neither can it bee supposed that there were any Teachers besides the Pastors in these rurall villages which notwithstanding we see had beside their Pastors or Teachers Elders also Augustine writeth his 137. Epistle to those of his owne Church at Hippon whom he designeth thus Dilectissimis â—ratribus clero senioribus universae plebi Ecclesiae Hipponenâ—is cui servio in dilectione Christs To my welbeloved brethren the Clergy the Elders and the whole people of the Church at Hippon whom I serve in the love of Christ. Hee putteth Elders or Seniors in the middle betwixt the Clergy and the people as distinct from both and yet somewhat participant of both Isidorus Hispalensis speaking of the prudence and discretion which Pastors should observe in teaching of the Word giveth them this advise among others Prius docâ—ndi sunt Seniores plebis ut per â—os infra posâ—tifacilius doceantur The Elders of the people are to bee first taught that by them such as are placed under them may be taught the more easily Origen speaking of the tryall of such as were to bee admitted members of the Church saith Nonnulli praepositi sunt c. There are some Rulers appointed who may enquire concerning the conversation and manners of these thâ—t are admitted that they may debarre from the Congregation such as commit filthinesse In the acts of the 5. Councell of Toledo according to the late editions we read that Cinthila whom others call Chintillanus came into that Councell cum optimatibus Senioribus palatii sui But Lorinus hath found in some ancient copy Cum optimatibus Senioribus populi sui with the Nobles and the Elders of his people I would know who were these Elders of the people distinguished from the Nobles These things may suffice from antiquity to give some evidence that the office of ruling Elders is not Calvins new fangled devise at Geneva as our adversaries are pleased to call it but for further confirmation of this point Voetius disp 2. de Senio and before him Iustellus in annot notis in cod Can. Eccles. Afric Can. 100. hath observed sundry other pregnant testimonies from antiquity for ruling Elders especially out of these notable records Gesta puâ—gationis Caeciliani Faelicis to be seen in the Anna's of Baronius An. 103. and in Albaspinaeus his edition of Optatus These testimonies I have here set downe in the Margine From which passages it is apparant that in the dayes of Ambrose these Seniors were neither in all places nor altogether growne out of use but that both in the Easterne and Westerne Churches manifest footsteps of the same remained neither is his testimony before alledged repugnant hereunto for we may understand his meaning to be either that in some places or that in some sort they were growne out of use because peradventure the Teachers beganne to doe somethings without their counsell and advice which in former times was not so Bilson answereth two waies to the testimony from the 137. Epist. of August and belike hee would have answered in the same manner to these other testimonies he saith we may understand by these Seniors either the better part of the Clergy or the Senators Rulers of the City That they were neither Bishops nor preaching Presbyters nor Deacons it is manifest for they are distinguished from all these In act purgat Cacil Fal. and they are called by Isiâ—ore and Pâ—rpurius Seniores plebis Besides it were strange if August Bishop of Hippo writing to his Clergy should distinguish either the Deacons from the Presbyters by the name of the Clergy which was common to both or some preaching Presbyters from other preaching Presbyters by the name of Seniors On the other part that they were not Magistrates of Cities it is no lesse plaine for they are called Seniores Ecclesiae and Ecclesiastici viri they instructed the people and had place in judging of causes Ecclesiasticall But elsewhere Bilson taketh upon him to prove that those of the Clergie who were by their proper name called Presbyters were also called Seniores as those who came neerest to the Bishop in degree wisedome and age And this he proveth by a testimony of Ambrose Viduarum ac virginum domos nisi â—isitandi gratia Iuniores ad re non est opus hoc cum Senioribus hoc est cum Episcopo vel sigravior est causa cum Presbyteris Answ. 1. Here the Seniors are the Bishop which is neither good sense nor any thing to his purpose 2. Hee hath left out a word without which the sentence cannot be understood and that is vel Ambrose saith Hoc est vel â—um Episcopo c. and so the words may suffer a threefold sense for either Seniores is here a name of age or of office If it bee a name of age as may bee presumed by the opposition thereof to Iuniores then the meaning of Ambrose is that young men should not goe into the houses of virgins or widowes except it bee with some men of age and these to bee the Bishop or the Presbyters If â—t be a name of office theâ— may wee either understand that by the Presbyters he meaneth ruling Elders and by the Bishop the Pastor of any particular Church for if Whitaker be not deceived Pastâ—rs have the name of Bishops not onely in Sâ—â—â—pruâ—e but in the ancient Church also Or that hee comprehendeth under the order of Elders not onely the Preaching Presbyters but the Bishop also who was chiefe among them By the first sense Bilson doth gaine nothing by the other two hee hath worse then nothing for any of them destroyeth his chiefe grounds CHAP. X. The consent of Protestant Writers and
hee exercised of the Office of a Magistrate should have ceased But since they did onely assist the Pastor in matters Ecclesiasticall it followeth that as touching the Office of Elders there is no distinction betwixt times of Peace and Persecution Secondly There were Seniors among the Jewes under Godly Kings and in times of Peace Why not likewise amongst us Thirdly The Ecclesiasticall power is distinct from the civill both in the subject object and end so that the one doth not hinder the other The Magistrates power is to punish the outward man with an outward punishment which the Presbytery cannot hinder for he may civilly bind whom the Presbytery spiritually looseth and civilly loose whom the Presbytery spiritually bindeth and that because the Magistrate seeketh not the repentance and salvation of the delinquent by his punishment as the Presbytery doth but onely the maintenance of the authority of his lawes together with the quietnesse and preservation of the Common-wealth Whence it commeth that the delinquent serapeth not free of the Magistrate though hee bee penitent and not obstinate 4. How thought Whitgift that the christian Magistrate can doe those things which the Seigniory did under a Tyrant Can the Magistrate by himselfe determine questions of Faith Can he know what order and decencie in circumstances is fitteâ—t for each Congregation Can he excommunicate offenders c. 5. When Bishops exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction yea and the civill too this is thought no wrong to Princes Is it a wrong in the Presbytery yet not in this Prelacy Good Lord what a Mysterie is this 6. When Presbyters are established in their full power there remaineth much power to the Prince even in things Ecclesiasticall as to take diligent heed to the whole estate of the Church within his dominions to indict Synods and civilly to proceed in the same to ratifie the constitutions thereof and to adde unto them the strength of a civill sanction to punish Heretickes and all that disobey the assemblies of the Church to see that no matter Ecclesiasticall be carryed factiously or rashlie but that such things bee determined in free assemblies to provide for Schollers Colledges and Kirkes that all corrupt wayes of entring into the Ministery by Simony bribing patrons c. be repressed and finally to compell all men to doe their duty according to the Word of God and Laws of the Church 7. Whatsoever be the power of the supreame Magistrate Ecclesiae tamen c. Yet let him leave to the Church and to the Ecclesiasticall Rulers such as are the Ministers of the Gospell Elders and Deacons their owne power in handling Ecclesiasticall things untouched and whole saith Danaeus For the Ecclesiasticall power doth no more hinder the civill administration then the Art of singing hindereth it saith the Augustan confession 8. We may answer by a just recrimination that the Prelacy not the Presbytery is prejudiciall to the power of Princes and hath often incroached upon the same The Bishops assembled in the eight Councill of Constantinople ordâ—ined that Bishop should not light from their horses when they chance to meet Princes nor basely bow before them and that if any Prince should cause a Bishop to disparage himselfe by doing otherwise he should be excommunicated for two yeares They also discharged Princes from being present in any Synod except the Oâ—cumenicke The 1. Councill of Toledo ordaineth that Quoties Episcoporum Hispanorum Synodus convenerit toties universalis Concilii decretum propter salutem Principum factum peractis omnibus in Synodo recitetur ut iniquorum mens territa corrigatur From which canon Osiander collecteth that some of the Bishops were not faithfull and loyall to the Kings of Spaine The inquisition of Spaine Anno 1568. presented to King Philip twelve Articles against the Netherlands one whereof was That the King write unto and command the Clergie of the Netherlands that with the Inquisition they should accept of 15. new Bishops the which should be free from all secular jurisdiction yea in cases of Treason Now as touching the contrary conceit of Saravia he alloweth such Elders as the Iewish Church had to be joyned now with Pastors under a Christian Magistrate but under an Infidell Magistrate hee saith they could have no place for he taketh the Iewish Elders to have bin their Magistrates that in like manner none but Christian Magistrates should sit with the Ministers of the Word in Ecclesiasticall Courts Princes and Nobles in generall or Nationall Councills and Magistrates of cities in particular consistories This is as foule an error as that of Whitgift for 1. His opinion of the Iewish Elders that they were their Magistrates we have confuted before 2. Though it were so that no Ruling Elders ought to be admitted now except Christian Magistrates yet might they have place under an Infidell Prince as Ioseph under Pharaoh Daniell under Nebuchadnezar There have beene both Christian Churches and Christian Magistraâ—es under Hereticall yea Infidell Princes 3. If Christian Magistrates be come in place of the Iewish Seniors and ought to be joyned with the Ministers of the Word in the consistories of the church We demand quo nomine quo jure whither doe they sit as Christian Magistrates or as men of singular gifts chosen for that effect Jf as Magistrates then shall we make a mixture and confusion of civill Ecclesiasticall function else how shall men by vertue of civill places sit in spirituall Courts Jf as men of singular gifts chosen to sit then may others aswell as they having the like gifts and election be admitted to sit also 4. Saravia contradicteth himselfe for a little after he admitteth grave and godly men in the judicatories of the Church whither they be Magistrates or privat men sive illi magistratu fungantur sive in rep vivant privati CHAP. XIII Whether Ruling Elders have the power of decisive voyces when they sit in Prebyteries and Synods THere are sundry questions propounded by D. Field and other adversaries of Ruling Elders whereinto they thinke wee are not able to satisfie them as 1. Whether Ruling Elders ought to have decisive voyces even in questions of Faith and Doctrine and in the tryall and approbation of Ministers 2. Whether these Elders must be in every Congregation with power of ordination deprivation suspension excommunication and absolution or whether this power bee onely in Ministers and Elders of divers Churches concurring 3. Jf they be Ecclesiasticall persons where is their ordination 4. Whether these 〈◊〉 be perpetuall or annuall and but for a certaine time Whether they ought to serve freely or to have a stipend Touching the first of these since the reformation which Luther began it was ever maintained by the ProtestaÌ„t writers that not the Ministers of the word alone but some of all sorts among Christians ought to have decisive voices in Councils But Dr. Field will admit none to teach and define in Councâ—ls but the Ministers of the
expounded of maintainance and obedience for by double honour wee may either simply understand much honour or by way of comparison double honour in respect of the Widowes whom hee had before commanded to honour as Calvin expoundeth the place Both these Interpretations doth Oecumenius give upon the same place The other question propounded by D. Field concerning Ruling Elders shall have a resolution in that which followeth and so J will proceed conceiving that which hath beene said for Ruling Elders shall satisfie such as desire to understand though nothing can satisfie the malicious nor them who are willingly ignorant Here endeth the first Booke THE Second Part concerning the Assemblies of the Church of SCOTLAND and Authority thereof CHAP. I. Of popular Government in the Church THere bee some that call in question the Warrant and Authority of classicall Presbyteries of provinciall Synods and Nationall Assemblies as they are used and maintained in the Church of Scotland I meane not the Praelaticall faction whom we set aside but even some who are as Antiepiscopall as we are The Scrupulosity of such at least of many such herein doth we conceive proceed not from any perversnesse of mind but onely from certaine mistakings which better information may remove But first of all wee require those whom we now labour to satisfie to condescend upon another point viz. that the exercise of Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction in a particular Congregation ought not to bee committed to the whole collective body thereof but is peculiar to the Eldership representing the same for in vaine doe wee debate the other point concerning Presbyteries and Assemblies if this latent prejudice still occupy their minds that the Government of the Church must needs be popular exercised by the collective body which happily may in some sort bee done within the bounds of a well limited Congregation but is manifestly inconsistent with classicall Presbyteries Synods because the collective Bodies of all particular Congregations within the bounds of a shire of a Province of a Nation cannot bee ordinarily nor at all ordinatly assembled together and if they could I beleeve that the Separatists themselves would in that case allow a dependencie or subordination of particular Congregations unto the more generall Congregation So that the point of popular government being once cleared it shall facilitate the other question concerning the Subordination of particular Elderships to classâ—icall Presbyteries Synods Now there are good reasons why this popular government or exercise by jurisdiction by all can not be admitted into a Congregation First in every Christian Congregation there are some Rulers some ruled some Governors some governed some that command some that obey as is manifest from Hebr. 13.17 1. Thes. 5.12 1. Tim. 5.17 But if the whole Congregation have the Rule and Government who then shall be ruled and governed It will be answered that in the exercise of jurisdiction every Member is to act according to it's owne condition the head as the head the eye as the eye c. that the Rulers and Governors of a Congregation are to have the principall conduâ— of businesse and to bee Heads Eares Mouths c. to the Congregation But this simile maketh rather for us then against us for though every member bee usefull and steadable in the body according to it 's owne condition yet every member neither can nor doth exercise those principall actions of seeing hearing tasting c. I say not that other members cannot see heare taste as the eyes eares and mouth doe but they cannot at all see heare nor taste So if the Rulers of a Congregation be as the eyes eares mouth c. then other members of the Congregation cannot at all act those actions of government which they act Hence it is that some who make the whole Congregation the first subject of the power of spirituall Jurisdiction doe notwithstanding hold that the whole Church doth exercise the said jurisdiction as Principium quod the Eldership alone as Principium quo even as the whole man seeth as Principium quod the eye alone as Principium quo and so of all the rest Thus doe they put a difference betwixt the power it selfe and the exercise of it ascribing the former to the collective body of the Church the latter to the representative knowing that otherwise they could not preserve the distinction of Rulers and ruled in the Church Secondly it is well knowne that in Congregations the greater part are not fit to exercise Jurisdiction for they can not examine the Doctrine and abilities of Ministers how should they ordaine them They can not judge of questions and controversies of faith how shall they determine the same They can not find out and discover Hereticks how shall they excommunicate them It is answered that this evill proceedeth from another viz. That there is too much sloth and oversight in the admission of such as are to be members of a Congregation and that they would be fit enough to doe their duty if they were all Saints they meane appearantly and in the judgement of charity such Rom. 1.7 1 Cor. 1 2. Eph. 1 1. But say we againe 1. Why may wee not hold that when the Apostle writeth to the Saints at Rome at Corinth c. he meaneth not that all who were in those Churches were either truely or appearantly Saints for some wicked ones there were among them and manifestly vitious Rom. 16 17 18. 1 Cor. 5.9.11 But that his meaning is to direct his Epistles to so many as were Saints at Rome Corinth c. mentioning them alone because to them and to none but them did God send his word for a blessing it being sent to others that they may goe and fall backward and be broken and snared and taken as the Prophet speaketh 2. If it should be granted that the Apostle giveth the name of Saints to all and every one that were in the Churches of Rome Corinth and Ephesus yet Mr. Ainsworth himselfe answering Mr. Bernard holdeth that they are called Saints by externall calling onely wherewith many are called who are not chosen and who have no appearant markes of election Others say that they were called Saints in respect of their baptisme wherein they were all consecrated and devoted to God Some say that they were all Saints in respect of their profession 3. Howsoever it was that they were all called Saints yea put the case they had beene all truely Saints surely their sanctification can not import their fitnesse to exercise jurisdiction in the Church The former is a speciall grace of the holy Spirit given to one for his owne Salvation The other is a common gift of the Spirit given for the benefit of the Church Thirdly it were not possible to exercise jurisdiction by a whole Congregation without great confusion and disorder therefore this way cannot be from God who is not the author of confusion but of order If it be answered that order may be kept
knoâ—ledge â—nd at least tacite consent of the Congregation it selfe then doe we not onely sufficiently and abundantly preserve the liberty of the Congregation while as not the Pastor or Pastors thereof alone but sundry Ruling Elders also representing the Congregation doe manage the affaires aforesaid the Congregation withall understanding thereof and consenting thereto Tacitè if not Expressè I doe not thinke but those of the Separation at this time will easily assent to this resolution and reconcilement of the controversie and so much the rather because I beleeve they themselves doe seclude from the exercise of jurisdiction in the Congregation both children under age because of their defect of Judgement and women because they are forbidden to speake in the Church and whether they seclude any other I know â—ot but since according to their owne Tenets some must be secluded and the power given to the Church must in the exercise of it be restrained to some in the Church it is better to say with Aegidius Hunnius that when Christ remitteth us to the Church Mat. 18.17 He meaneth the prime and chiefe Members which represent the Church that is Pastors aâ—d Elders then to say that he sendeth us to the whole body of the Church One scruple more may peradventure remaine They will say it is well that we require the churches consent before any waighty matter which concerneth all be finished but what if this consent be not had Whether may the Eldership cut off an offender renitente Ecclesia For their satisfaction is this also wee say with Zepperus Quod si Ecclesia c. But if the Church saith he will not approve the sentence of Excommunication nor hold it valid and they see many disagreeing among themselves and schismes and greater evills in the Church to follow this sentence of Excommunication the Elders shall not proceed to Excommunication but shall patiently suffer what cannot with the good leave of the church be amended In the meane while they shall publikely and privately admonish and exhort So saith Zanchius that without the consent of the church no man ought to be excommunicated The B. of Spalato and before him Augustine hath given the reason hereof because the end of excommunication cannot be attained if the Church doe not consent thereto for the end is that the offender may bee taken with feare and shame when he findeth himselfe abhorred and accursed by the whole Church so that it shall be in vain to excommunicate him from whom the Multitude in the Church refuse to abstract their communion I conclude that in such cases though the Pastors and Elders have the power of jurisdiction it is not to exercise the same CHAP. II. Of the independencies of the Elderships of particular Congregations WEE have now rolled away one stone of offence but there is another in our way It were most strange if the collective body of a Congregation consisting it may bee of 10 20 30 or 40 persons according to the grounds of these with whom we deale should bee permitted to exercise independently all Eccleasisticall Jurisdiction but it is almost as great a Paradox to say that the representative of every Congregation which is the Eldership therof consisting it may be of a Pastor and two or three Ruling Elders ought independently to exercise the foresaid jurisdiction in all points I am debtor to D. Field for answering one of those questions before propounded concerning Ruling Elders and here it falls in my hand He asketh whether the power of Church-government and jurisdiction doth belong to the Pastor and Elders of every Congregation or to the Pastors and Elders of many Congregations joyned together in a Common Presbytery I beleeve his expectation was that while as we would sayle through betwixt the Caribdis of Episcopall tyranny and the Scylla of popular Anarchy wee should not know hoâ— to direct our course but should certainly either bee swallowed up in the waves of mighty difficulties or split our selves upon hid Rockes of division Our danger I hope is not so great as he did imagine for we hold that the particular Elderships of severall Congregations have their owne power and authority of Church-government but with a subordination unto the common or greater Presbytery whose power is superior and of a larger extent First then we shall take into consideration the bounds of the power of particular Elderships and how the same may be said to be independent and how not for this purpose I shall give foure distinctions out of Parker and to these I shall adde other foure of my owne The first distinction is betwixt things which are proper and peculiar to one Congregation and things which are common to many the former pertaineth to the particular Eldership the latter to the common Eldership Whence it commeth that in Scotland the cases of ordination suspension deposition and Excommunication are determined in the greater Presbyteries because it doth not concerne one Congregation alone but many who be taken into the common Presbytery and who be put out of the samâ— neither doth the Excommunication of a sinner concerne onely one Congregation but the Neighbouring Congregations also among whom as is to be commonly supposed the sinner doth often haunt converse Cyprian speaking of the admission of some who had fallen and who had no recommendation from the Martyrs to be received againe referreth the matter to a common meeting and his reason is because it was a common cause and did not concerne a few nor one church onely See lib. 2. Ep. 14. The second distinction is betwixt Congregations which have a competent and well-qualified Eldership small Congregations who have but few office-bearers and those it may be not sufficiently able for Church-government In this case of insufficiencie a Congregation may not independently by it selfe exercise jurisdiction and not in re propria saith Parker 3. He distinguisheth betwixt the case of right administration and the case of aberration whatsoever liberty a Congregation hath in the former case surely in the latter it must needs be subject and subordinate If particular Elderships doe rightly manage their owne matters of Church-government the greater Presbytery shall not need for a long time it may be for some yeares to intermeddle in any of their matters which wee know by experience in our owne Churches 4. Hee maketh a distinction betwixt the case of appellation and the case de nulla administratione mala praesumpta Though the particular Eldership hath proceeded aright though it consist of able and sufficient men and though it bee in re propria yet if one think himselfe wronged and so appeale then is it made obnoxious to a higher consistory for saith Parker as the Councill of Sardis ordaineth audience must not bee denyed to him who entreateth for it So saith Zepperus speaking of the same purpose cuivis integrum quoque sit ad superiores gradus provocare si in inferioris gradus sententia aut decreto aliquid
injury or to give an offence unto another and for these ends it is most necessary that they be governed by one common Presbytery 5. There may be a competition or a controversie not only betwixt one congregation and another but in the same congregation betwixt the one halfe and the other yea the Eldership it selfe of that congregation may be and sometimes is divided in it selfe And how shall things of this kinde bee determined but by the common Presbytery 6. But which is caput rei these our Classicall Presbyteries have a certaine warrant from the paterne of the Apostolicall Churches For proofe whereof it shall bee made to appeare 1. That in those Cities at least in many of them where Christian religion was planted by the Apostles there were a great number of Christians then either did or conveniently could meet together into one place for the worship of God 2. that in those Cities there was a plurality not onely of ruling Elders but of the Ministers of the word 3. That notwithstanding hereof the whole number of Christians within the Citie was one Church 4. That the whole number and severall companies of Christians within one Citie were all governed by one common Presbytery The second of these doth follow upon the first and the fourth upon the third The first proposition may bee made good by induction of particulars and first it is more then evident of Ierusalem where wee finde unto 120 Disciples Act. 1.15 added 8000. by Peters two Sermons Act. 2.41 and 4.4 Besides whom there were yet more multitudes added Act. 5.14 And after that also wee read of a further multiplication of the Disciples Act. 6.1 by occasion whereof the seaven Deacons were chosen and ordained which maketh some to conjecture that there were seven congregations a Deacon for every one Certainly there were rather more then fewer though wee cannot determine how many It is written of Samaria that the people with one accord gave heed unto Philip Act. 8.6 even all of them both men and women from the least to the greatest who had before given heed to Simon of these all it is said that they beleeved Philip and were baptised vers 10.12 which made the Apostles that were at Ierusalem when they heard that the great City Samaria had received the word of God to send unto them Peter and Iohn the harvest being so great that Philip was not sufficient for it v. 14. Of Ioppa it is said that many beleeved in the Lord. Of Antâ—och wâ— read that a great number beleeved and turned to the Lord Act. 11.21 Of Iconium that a great multitude both of the Jewes and also of the Greekes beleeved Act. 14.1 Of Lidda that all who dwelt therein turned to the Lord Act. 9.35 Of Berâ—a that many of them beleeved also of the honourable women and the men not a few Act. 17.12 Of Corinth the Lord saith I have much people in this Citie Act. 18.10 Oâ— Ephesus wee finde that â—eare fell on all the Jewes and Greekes which dwelt there and many beleeved yea many of the Magicians themselves whose bookes that were burned amouâ—tâ—d to fifâ—y thousand peeces of silver so mightily grew the Word of God and prevailed Act. 19.17.18.19.20 Unto the multitude of Christians in those Cities let us adde another consideration viz. that they had no Temples as now wee have but private places â—or their holy Assemblies such as the house of Mary Act. 12.12 the Schoole of Tyrannus Act 19.9 an upper chamber at Trâ—â—s Act. â—0 8 Pauls lodging at Rome Act. 28. â—3 Neither doe I see any reason why the Church which was in the house of Aquila and Priscilla Rom. 16.5 1 Cor. 16.19 should not be understood to bee a congregation as Erasmus readeth it that is such a-number of Christians as met together in their house So wee read of the Church in the house of Nymphas Col. 4.15 And of the Church 〈…〉 house of Archippus Philem. v. 2. 〈…〉 iâ— is certaine that Christians met together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 house by house Domatius Act. 2.46 both these considerations viz. the multitude of Christians in one Citie and their assembling together for worship in private houses have also place in the next ages after the Apostles Let Eusebius speak for them both Who can describe saith hee those innumerable heaps flocking multitudes throughout all Cities and famous Assemblies frequenting the places dedâ—câ—ted to prayer Thereafter he proceedeth to shew how in aftertimes by the favour of Emperours Christians had throughout all Cities ample Churches built for them they not being contented with the old Orâ—toria which were but private houses Now these two the multitude of Christians and the want of Temples shall abundantly give light to my first proposition But it may bee objected to the contrary that all the Disciples at Ierusalem did meet together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into one place Act. 2.44 And the same is said of the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 11.20 Ans. The disciples at Ierusalem being at that time above 3000. it cannot be coÌ„ceived how any private house could cotain them Beside it is said that they brake bread that is did celebrate the Lords Supper from house to house Therefore many good interpreters understand by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that all the Disciples were linked together into one by amity and love an evidence whereof is given in the next words and had all things common To the other place wee answer 1. That Epistle whether it were written from Philippi or from Ephesus was undoubtedly written very lately after the plantation of the Gospel in Corinth while as that Church was yet in her infancie And if it should bee granted that at that time the whole Church of Corinth might and did meet together into one place this proveth not that it was so afterward for the Churches increased in number daily Act. 16.5 But 2. the place of the Apostle proveth not that which is alledged for his words may be understood in sensu distributivo It was no solecisme for one that was writing to divers congregations to say When yee come together into one place meaning distributively of every congregation not collectively of them all together My second proposition concerning the plurality of the Ministers of the Word in those great Cities wherein the Apostles did erect Christian Churches ariseth from these grounds 1. The multiplicity of Christians 2. The want of Temples of which two I have already spoken 3. The daily increase of the Churches to a greater number Acts 16.5.4 There was need of preachers not only for those who were already converted in the City but also for labouring to winne the unbelievers who were therein These reasons may make us conclude that there were as many Pastors in one City as there were sacred meetings therein and some more also for the respects foresaid And what will you say if we finde examples of this plurality of Pastors in Scripture Of the Bishops or Pastors
Canon or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In respect of heresie schisme obstinacie contempt and scandall Vindex not by any externall coactive power which is peculiar to the Magistrate but by spirituall censures The dogmaticke power of a Synod is not a power to make new Articles of faith nor new duties and parts of divine worship but a power to apply and interpret those Articles of faith and duties of worship which God hath set before us in his written Word and to declare the same to be inconsistent with emergent heresies and errours To this purpose it is that the Apostle calleth the Church the pillar and ground of truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may be expounded either in sensu forensi the Church is the publicke witnesse notifier and keeper of truth even as in Courts and places of judgement there are pillars to which the Edicts of Magistrates are affixed that people may have notice thereof or in sensu architectonico as the Church by her faith is built upon Christ or which is all one upon the doctrine and truth of Christ contained in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles and leaneth thereto so by her Ministery she upholdeth under-propeth and conserveth this same truth lest as the Prophet speaketh Truth fall in the streets perish among men Truth standeth fast in the Church and is kept firme while it is professed preached propugned and maintained against all contrary errour and heresie In the same sense saith the Apostle that unto the Jewish Church were committed the Oracles of God by them to be kept interpreted propagated c. By the Diatakticke power a Synod may institute restore or change according to the condition and exigence of the Church the externall circumstances in the worship of God and Ecclesiasticall discipline I meane those circumstances which are common both to civill and sacred Societies the conveniencie whereof is determinable by the light of Nature alwayes observing the generall rules of the Word which commandeth that all bee done to the glory of God that all bee done to edifying that all bee done in order and decencie that we give none offence that wee support the weake that we give no place to the enemies of the truth nor symbolize with Idolaters c. Now for avoiding disorder and disconformity in a Nation professing one Religion it is fit that Nationall Synods give certaine directions and rules even concerning these rites and circumstances not having therein an Arbitrary or Autocratorke power but being alwayes tied to follow the rules foresaid The Criticke power of a Synod is not a Lordly imperious dominiering over the flocke of Christ which is not to bee ruled with force and cruelty but it is the power of spirituall censures as excommunication deposition and the like most necessary for the repressing of heresie errour obstinacie in wickednesse and scandals otherwise incorrigible Without this power schismes and offences could not bee cured but should the more increase whileas liberty is left to heretickes schismatickes and obstinate persons without any censure to pester and disturb a whole Nation without any regard to the constitutions of a Nationall Synod But may one say if the Decrees of a Synod concerning matters of Faith or Worship may and ought to bee examined by the sure rule of the word of God and onely to be received when they doe agree therewith and if also the constitutions of a Synod in externall circumstances doe not binde except ex aquo bono and propter justas mandandi causas or as Divines speak in casu scandali contemptus and not for the meere will or authority of a Synod and if therefore all Christians are by the private judgement of Christian discretion following the light of Gods Word and Spirit to try and examine all decrees and constitutions of any Synod whatsoever to know whether they may lawfully receive the same as our Divines maintaine and prove against Papists If these things be so it may seeme contrary to Christian liberty and to the Doctrine of Protestant Writers that Synods should exercise the foresaid Criticke power or inflict any spirituall censures at least upon those who professe that after examination of the decrees or constitutions they cannot bee perswaded of the lawfulnesse of the same Ans. 1. Our Divines by those their tenents meane not to open a doore to disobedience and contempt of the ordinances of a Synod but onely to oppugne the Popish errour concerning the binding power of Ecclesiasticall lawes by the sole will and naked authority of the law-maker that Christian people ought not to seek any further reason or motive of obedience 2. A Synod must ever put a difference betwixt those who out of a reall scruple of conscience doe in a modest and peaceable way refuse obedience to their ordinances still using the meanes of their beter information those who contemptuously or factiously disobey the same labouring with all their might to strengthen themselves in their errour and to perswade others to be of their minde 3. This objection doth militate no lesse against Ecclesiasticall censures in a particular congregation then in a Nationall Synod And they who doe at all approve of Church censures to be inflicted upon the contemptuous and obstinate shall put in our mouthes an answer to objections of this kinde CHAP. V. The first Argument for the authority of Synods and the subordination of Presbyteries thereto taken from the light of nature HAving now described the power of particular Elderships which we call Sessions of Classicall Presbyteries and of Synods Provinciall and Nationall it remaineth to confirme by Arguments the subordination and subjection of the particular Elderships to the Classicall or common Presbytery of both to the Provinciall Synod and of all these to the Nationall Assembly So that every one may perceive what reason the Church of Scotland hath to give unto the higher Ecclesiasticall Courts authority over the lower I might insist long enough both in the Testimonies of Protestant Writers and in the examples of the reformed Churches abroad as also in the examples of all the ancient Churches all speaking for this authority of Synods But these I shall passe because I know Arguments from Scripture and reason are required and such we have to give First of all I argue from the very light law of nature That same light of nature which hath taught our Common-wealth beside the Magistrates and Councells of particular Burghs to constitute higher Courts for whole Shires Baliveries Stuartries Regalities and above all these the supreame Court of Parliament to governe the whole Nation hath also taught our Church to constitute Synods Provinciall and Nationall with power and authority above Presbyteries Wee are farre from their minde who would make Policy the Mistresse and Religion the Handmaid and would have the government of the Church conformed to the government of the State as the fittest paterne But this we say in all such
who have received Christ to salvation hath right and title to enjoy him in his politicall ordinances by their own exercising of all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and that independently this is more then either hath been or can be proved Object The union betwixt Christ and his Church is as strait and immediate as the union betwixt the Vine and the Branches betwixt the Head and the Body betwixt the Husband the Wife Therefore every true Church of Christ hath direct immediate interest in and title to Christ himself the whole new Testament and every ordinance of it Answ. The strait union betwixt Christ and the Church expressed by these comparisons cannot bee understood of the Church taken politically for then the union betwixt Christ and the Church might be dissolved as often as the Church ceaseth to bee ordered and governed as an Ecclesiastical Republick It is therefore to be understood either of the invisible Church or at most of the visible Church taken metaphysically or entitatively But I adde withall it is to be likewise understood of every faithfull Christian so that not onely every true Church but every true member thereof by vertue of this union hath direct and immediate title to Christ and to the benefit of all his ordinances for his edification and salvation This is all which the Argument can conclude and it maketh nothing against us Object If all things be the Churches even the Ministers themselves yea though they be Paul Cephas and Apollos then may every Church use and enjoy all things immediately under Christ. But the first is true 1 Cor. 3.24 Therefore c. Answ. Neither can this prove any thing against us for when the Apostle saith All things are yours whether Paul c. He is to bee understood not onely collectively of the Church but distributively of every beleever who hath right to the comfortable enjoyment and benefit of these things so farre as they concerne his salvation And in like manner I may say to the members of any particular congregation All things are yours whether Sessions or Presbyteris or Provinciall or Generall Assemblies And what wonder God is our Father Christ our elder brother the holy Ghost our Comforter the Angels our keepers heaven our inheritance It is therefore no strange thing to heare that as the supreame civill power so the supreame Ecclesiasticall power is appointed of God in order to our good and benefit that it be not a tyranny for hurt but a ministery for help These are the objections alledged for the independent and absolute power of congregations But this is not all Some seeme to make use of our own weapons against us making objection from the forme of the Jewish Church which wee take for a plat-forme They say that the Synagogues of the Jewes were not as the particular Churches are now for they were not entire Churches of themselves but members of the nationall Church neither could they have the use of the most solemne parts of Gods worship as were then the sacrifices That the whole nation of the Jewes was one Church having reference to one Temple one high Priest one Altar it being impossible that the whole body of a Nation should in the entire and personal parts meet and communicate together in the holy things of God the Lord so disposed and ordered that that communion should bee had after a manner and in a sort and that was by way of representation for in the Temple was daily sacrifice offered for the whole nationall Church So the names of the twelve Tribes upon the shoulders of the Ephod and upon the Breast-plate and the twelve loaves of Shew bread were for Israel signes of remembrance before the Lord. That now the Church consisteth not as then of a Nation but of particular Assemblies ordinarily communicating together in all the Churches holy things whence it commeth that there are no representative Churches now the foundation thereof which is the necessary absence of the Church which is represented being taken away in the new Testament That besides all this if wee take the representative Church at Jerusalem for a paterne then as there not onely hard causes were opened and declared according to the Law but also the sacrifices daily offered and the most solemne service performed without the presence of the body of the Church so now in the representative Churches such as Presbyteries and Synods consisting of Officers alone there must be not onely the use of jurisdiction but the Word and Sacraments whether people bee present or not for how can there be a power in the Church of Officers for the use of one solemne ordinance out of the communion of the body and not of another Answ. 1. To set aside the sacrifices other ceremonial worship performed at Jerusalem the Synagogues among the Jewes had Gods morall worship ordinarily therein as Prayer and the reading expounding of the Scriptures 2. Whatsoever the Synagogues had or whatsoever they wanted of the worship of God they had an Ecclesiasticall Consistory and a certaine order of Church government else how shall we understand the excommunication or casting out of the Synagogue the Rulers of the Synagogue and the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue of which things we have before spoken I will not here dispute whether every sin among the Jewes was either appointed to be punished capitally or else to bee expiated by sacrifices but put the case it were so this proveth that no excommunication or Ecclesiasticall censure was not then necessary for beside the detriment of the Common-wealth by the violation of the Law which was punishable by death and beside the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and guiltinesse before God the expiation whereof by the death of Christ was prefigured in the sacrifices there was a third thing in publike sinnes which was punishable by spirituall censures and that was the scandall of the Church which could not be taken away by the oblations of the delinquent but rather made worse thereby even as now a publike offender doth not take away but rather increase the scandall of the Church by his joyning in the acts of Gods worship so long as there is no Ecclesiasticall censure imposed upon him neither yet to speake properly was the scandall of publike offences punishable by bodily punishments but the Church being a politicall body had her owne Lawes and her owne censures no lesse then the Common-wealth 3. As the Synagogues were particular Churches politically so all of them collectively were one Nationall Church politically governed by one supreame Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim which is the representative wee meant of in our Argument 4. But if we take the Nationall Church of the Jewes metaphysically there was no representative thereof unlesse it were all the males who came thrice in the yeare to Ierusalem The daily offering of Sacrifices was not by a representative Church but by the Priests and though there were twelve loaves of Shewbread before
Governement But Presbyteriall Government secretly smileth because while she was ready to say much more for her selfe he did not put her to to it lest himselfe should have been put ad metam non probandi But he particularizeth himselfe and telleth us he hath unfolded the weaknesse of our grounds and disproved our pretended proofs The truth is that the best of them the most of them he hath not touched He addeth that hee hath proved out of the Word of God the liberty of the people in choosing thâ—ir own officers This may be added â—aute but caste I am sure it is not He would make the world beleeve that Presbyterians are against the peoples election of their officers which is a calumny He saith he hath annexed certaine arguments proving Presbyteriall Governement to be contrary to the pattern which Christ hath left in the New Testament These arguments shall be answered with no great difficulty In this place I shall only say a word of them in generall The man hath a notable faculty of proving that wherein the Presbyterians do agree with him and passing that wherein they disagree from him Many humane testimonies and citations of writers he mustreth together to make a simple reader beleeve that many are of his judgemenâ— But I find none of them all except two or three to affirme any thing which we deny But why hath he taken all this paines He will present it forsooth to the Kings most excellent Majestie and to the right honourable Lords and the honourable house of Commons now assembled in Parliament As if it were to be expected that a popular and independant forme of Church government in every Congregation which should most certainly open a doore to a thousand remedilesse confusions may obtaine his Majesties royall assent or the acceptation of the High Court of Parliament Nay brother seek some other friends to your cause for if wise men be not too too much deceived the King and the Parliament in their great wisdome do fore-see that whensoever Episcopall government shall be removed another form of Provinciall and nationall Church government must needs succeed unto it Now to come to the substance of his discourse first hee maketh a quarrell against the Presbyteries of particular Churches which are in Scotland called Sessions then against all higher Consistories in the Church As for the Presbyteries of particular Churches he judgeth them three wayes defective First he requireth that all who are admitted into the company of Elders even the governing or ruling Elders should be apt to teach and able to exhort with sound doctrine and convince gainesayers and that not only privately or in the Consistory but in the publick assembly also if not exactly yet competently Answ. 1. Though ruling Elders ought to teach exhort rebuke c. both in the Consistory and privately from house to house as the case of every family and person doth require which is all that can be drawne from those alleaged places to Timothy and Titus if so be they ought at all to be extended to ruling Elders yet there is no place of Scripture to prove that they ought to teach publikly in the Congregation 2. That expression if not exactly yet competently is somewhat mysterious 3. Ruling Elders are expresly distinguished from those that labour in the word and doctrine 1 Tim. 5.17 and from these that teach or exhort Rom. 12.7 8. 4. If ruling Elders shall â—each publikly in the congregation ex officio and with cure of soules as they speak why shall they not also minister the Sacraments which are pendicles and seals of the word and therefore committed to those who are sent to the publick preaching of the Gospell Matth. 28.19 5. Though he speak here only of ruling Elders yet I doubt he requireth of at least will permit to all men that are members of the Church the same publick teaching and prophesying in the Congregation The second defect which he wisheth supplied is that the temporary ruling Elders may be made perpetuall and for life which he enforceth by foure reasons This I assent unto providing he admit a distinction betwixt the office it selfe and the exercise of the same The office of a ruling Elder ought to be for his life no lesse then the Pastors yet must we not condemne those Churches which dispense with the intermission of their actuall attendance for a certaine space and permit them to exercise their office by course as the Levits did of old whose example himselfe here taketh for a patterne The third thing he saith is of most moment He doth complaine that the Elders do not administer their publik office publikly as they should but only in their private Consistory He doth permit them indeed to meet apart for deliberation whereof we shall here afterward but he will have their Church-office which in the Lord they have received to be executed publickly in the face of the Congregation 1. Because an office publick in the nature ought also to be publick in the administration 2. Because the reformed Churches cannot know their Elders whether they be good or bad except by heare-say 3. Because otherwise the Elders can not ministerially take heed to the whole flock as they are warned to do Acts 20.28 Ans. 1. Ruling Elders do execute their office not only in the Consistory but from house to house throughout al the bounds of the CoÌ„gregation which may easily make theÌ„ known to that Church where they serve whether they be good or bad 2. Their Consistoriall sentences in all matters of importance such as ordination Church censures excommunication c. are made knowne to the whole Church 3. He passeth a short censure upon the reformed Churches The reformed Churches is a great word but this man maketh a moat of it 4. The place Acts 20.28 cannot helpe him for ruling Elders do feed and oversee the whole flock both by discipline in the Consistory and by taking heed to all the sheepe severally as every one hath need and in that respect may be called both Pastors and Bishops Beside I doubt he can prove that place to be meant of ruling Elders He He goeth on to make plaine what hee hath said by descending to some particulars in which the Elders office sâ—emeth especially to consist and these are saith hee The admitting of members into the Church upon profession of faith made and the reproving and censuring of obstinaâ—e offenders These are the most frequent publike administrations of the office of Ruling Elders And what of them hee saith as they leave the execution of these things to the Elders alone in the setled and well ordered state of the Church so doe they deny that they can be rightly and orderly done but with the peoples privity and consent His restriction to the setled and well ordered estate of the Church I cannot understand Hee had done well to have explained what hee meaneth by that not setled nor well ordered state of the Church
Iâ—dicum the Court of Judges and Rulers which is called The Congregation of the mighty Psal. 80.2 So that the true sense of the place is the secluding of those persons from bearing any office or rule in the Common-wealth of Israel whereby they might be members of those Courts which did represent Israel The same sense is given by Lyranus Cajetan Oleaster Tostatus and Lorinus And which is more to be thought of Ainsworth himselfe expoundeth it so and further sheweth that it cannot be meant of joyning to the faith and religion of Israel or entering into the Church in that respect because Exod. 12.48 49. Num. 15.14 15. All strangers were upon their circumcision admitted into the Congregation of Israel to offer sacrifices and by consequence to enter into the court of the Tabernacle which also appeareth from Levit. 22.18 Num 9.14 The point being now cleared from the holy Scriptures we shal the lesse need to trouble our selves in the search of prophane Authors yet Pasor findeth Demosthenes using the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro concione magnatum As for that common expression of Divines that the Elders are the Church representative wee desire not to wrangle about names so that the thing it selfe which is the power and authority of the Officers sitting and judging apart from the people be condescended upon Yet let us see upon what grounds the name of a representative Church is by this man so superciliously rejected First hee saith that no godly no nor reasonable man will affirme that this representation is to be extended to any other acts of religion than these which are exercised in the governing of the Church But quo warrantâ— shall a man be both ungodly and unreasonable for affirming that the Elders may and ought to represent the Church where they serve in preferring a petition to the King and the Parliament for a Reformation or in bearing witnesse of the desolate condition of the Parish through the want of a ministery or in giving counsel to a Sister Church though these bee not acts of governing the Church Well be it as he saith what great absurdity shall fellow then forsooth it appertains to the people primarily and originally under Christ to rule and govern the Church that is themselves But who saith he will so say of a government not personall but publique and instituted as the Churches is Surely they who think the power to be originally in the people might here easily reply that this is no more strange than to say that the power which is primarily and originally in the body of a Kingdome is exercised by the Parliament which is the representative therof But because many learned men deny the power of Church government to be originally in the people though others and those very learned too doe affirme it therefore to passe that I shall serve him with another answer For as we can defend the authority of Presbyteries and Synods without wrangling about the name of a representative Church so can we defend the name of a representative Church without debating the question whether the people have the power originally or not May he therefore bee pleased to take notice of other grounds and reasons for the name of a representative Church as namely First what the Elders with the knowledge and tacite consent of the Church doe approve or dislike that is supposed to be approved or disliked by the whole Church which importeth that the Church is in some sort represented by the Senate of Elders Secondly as wee say wee have seene a man when haply wee have seene nothing but his head or his face which maketh him knowne unto us whence it is that Painters represent men unto us oft-times onely from their shoulders upward so doe wee discern know a visible political Church when we see in the Senate as it were the head and face thereof the officers being as eyes eares nose mouth c. to the Church that is being the most noble and chiefe members whereby the body is governed Thirdly the Senat of Elders is said to represent the Church because of the affinity and likenesse betwixt it and the Senate which representeth a City or some inferior civil Corporation affinity I mean not every way but in this that the government is not in the hands of all but a few and that those few were chosen with the consent of the whole Corporation Fourthly and if for these reasons the Eldership of a particular Church may be called a representative Church there is much more reason for giving this name to a classicall Presbytery or to a Synod provinciall or nationall for these doe result out of many particular Churches being made up of their Commissioners His second reason he taketh from the nature of representations alleaging that if the Elders in their Consistory represent the Church then whatsoever they either decree or do agreeing to the Word of God that also the Church decreeth and doth though absent though ignorant both what the thing is and upon what grounds it is done by the Elders and this how consonant it is to Papists implicit faith he leaveth it to wise men to consider This argument is as much against the representations of Kings and States by their Ambassadours and Commissioners it is against the representation of Churches by the Consistory of Elders and so all the wisdome of Princes and States in their Embassages shall turne to implicit faith because according to this ground what the representing doth within the bounds of his Commission that the represented doth implicitè And now I shall leave to be considered by wise men these vast differences betwixt the Papists implicit faith and the case of our Churches governed by Elderships 1. The Church assenteth not to that which the Consistory of Elders decreeth or doth except it be agreeing to the Word of God as the Reasoner himselfe saith but there is no such limitation in the Papists implicit faith 2. The Consistory of Elders doth not presse any thing upon the Church imperiously or by naked wil and authority without any reason as the Church of Rome doth with those from whom she requireth implicit faith 3. The Papists know not what those things be which they beleeve by implicit faith so that such a faith is rightly called mera articulorum fidei ignorantia a meere ignorance of the articles of faith but the decrees of our Elderships whereunto our Churches do consent are made knowne unto them 4. Our Churches are by the judgement of Christian discretion to examine all things propounded unto them even the decrees of the Elders whereas Papists may not examine what the Church propoundeth or commandeth 5. Papists by their implicit faith beleeve whatsoever the Church beleeveth because they think the Church can not erre but our Churches conceive not only their particular Elderships but oecumenicall councels to be subject to error Come we now to his third generall reason whereby he laboureth to prove
that the consistorian course is contrary to the practise of the Apostolick Churches because the Apostle 1 Cor. 5. writeth to the whole Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous man And that by these words when you are câ—me together the whole Church is to be understood he proveth by three reasons the strength of them all we shall take together in one argument thus They among whom the fornicatour was who were puffed up when they should have sorrowed and out of the midst of whom he was to be put who had done that thing to whom it appertained to purge out the old leven and to whom the Apostle wrote not to be commingled with fornicators or covetous persons they were to be gathered together into one and to judge and excommunicate that incestuous person But they among whom the fornicator was c. were not the Elders alone but the whole Church Ergo c. And now what shall this disputer say if I cleave this his strong argument with a wedge of his own timber thus c. If they among whom the fornicator was who were puffed up when they should have sorrowed and out of the midst of whom c. were to judge and excommunicate that incestuous person then women were to judge and excommunicate him and not men only But the latter is absurd therefore so is the former My proposition he must either grant or else say that the incestuous man was not to be put out of the midst of women and that the Apostle did not forbid women to be commingled with fornicators My assumption is his own Pag. 24. where he tels us from 1 Cor. 14.34 35. 1 Tim. 2.12 that women are debarred from liberty or right of voting in publick ecclesiasticall matters Then let him see to the conclusion Another proofe of the same point he addeth from 2 Cor. 2. where he writeth to these same Corinthians to receive pardon and comfort the penitent which I might repell in the same manner But there is a word in that same Chapter which may cleare the thing Vers. 6. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment or censure which was inflicted of mâ—ny Which many if as he saith in the next page the Apostle had opposed to himselfe alone and not to all then he said but the halfe of that which he meant to say He would have the Corinthians to think it enough that the man had beene publickly censured by so many as were in their Presbyterie Now if he had beene censured by the whole Church it had been more fit and emphaticall to have said censured by all But there is another sence which well fitteth the place Heinsius observeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is one thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another thing the former noting those that exceed in number the latter those that are chiefe in dignity and that therefore the Apostle when he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaneth the rulers and Elders of that Church so that the reading shall be this Sufficient to such a man is this censure inflicted of the chieâ—e In the same sence Piâ—â—rtor taketh the words which also he doth illustrate from Mat. 12.41.42 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a greater then Ionah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a greater then Solomon To conclude this case the Apostle as in other Epistles so in this doth sometime point at common duties belonging to the whole Church sometime at the duties of officers That the whole Church of Corinth should have sorrowed for the incestuous man and that it was a common duty to them not to be commingled with fornicators and to have no fellowship with the unfruitfull workes of darknesse but rather to reprove them In like manner it concerned them all to comfort him being penitent But as for the judging and excommunicating of him that did belong only to the Presbytery of Corinth and so Calvin Piscator Paraeus and many others expound the Apostles words His digression to prove that the Apostle alone did not give forth sentence judiciary upon the offender is not against us but against the prelaticall party therefore I passe it What he alleageth from Act. 1. 6. 14. For the Churcheâ— right of suffrage in the election of Officers we doe most heartily assent unto it with this distinction that when the case is such as it was in the examples alleaged that is when visible politicall Churches are to be erected not having beene before then the right of suffrage in elections doth indeed belong to the whole body And though this way of election were ordinary it cannot prove that the people have the power of that authority in them to which they elect the officers no more then the Electors of the Emperour have in them power of the imperiall dignity saith Baynes But now it is not ordinary for when there is already a setled Ecclesiasticall republike or a Church with officers the officers for the time being ought by their suffrages to elect the officers that are wanting with the knowledge and consent of the Church Somewhat he demurreth upon Act. 15. for the vindication of which place I refer my reader to the second part of the former Treatise Chap. 1. 8. Neither shall I stay to examine by what Method either this discourse or the other about elections falleth into the proofe of his proposition concerning that part of the Elders office which standeth in the censuring of offenders He falleth at last into his owne channell concluding it to bee a thing most equall that the whole Church should clearely and undoubtedly take knowledge of the contumacy of the person that is to bee excommunicated of the crime for which and this we also say with him One word I desire to have cleared before wee proceed One of his grounds in his discourse about elections is that the Church officers as they are the servants of Christ Jesus so also her servants for Jesus sake 2. Cor. 4.5 The professors of Leyden say well that they are not properly the servants of the Church but of God and of Christ They are not Lords of the Church neither but Rulers Guides Bishops and Pastors of the Church yet not servants of the Church except objective that is the servants of God in the Church or for the Churches good If this bee his meaning it is well But I doubt he hath another meaning and that is that the Church doth give the power which is hers unto her officers as her servants to exercise it in her name If this bee the matter then let us marke with Baynes that the Church doth not virtually and out of power make an officer but shee doth it in Stewardlike manner ministring to the sole Lord and master of the house so that hee who is taken in doth not his office in her name but in his masters name as a Butler taken in by the Steward of the house doth not execute his office
in the stewards name but in his masters who only out of power did conferre it on him But now lest any should conceive of him and those of his side that they either exercise amongst themselves or would thrust upon others any popular or democraticall Church governement therefore he desireth the Reader to make estimate both of their judgement and practice in this point according to these three declarations First he saith they beleeve that the externall Church governement under Christ is plainely aristocraticall and to be administred by some choyce men although the state bee after a fort popular and democraticall In respect of the latter he saith it appertaines to the people freely to vote in elections judgements of the Church in respect of the former that the Elders ought to governe the people even in their voting in just liberty by propounding and ordering all things and after the voting of the Church solemnly executing either ordination or excommunication Behold how he runneth upon the rocke of popular governement even whiles he pretendeth to have his course another way God send us better pilots I remember I have read in sundry places of Bodin de repub that the state is oft times different from the governement But sure I am this anti-consistorian maketh not only the state but the governement of the Church to be democraticall that in the superlative degree for the governement is democraticall at least composed of a mixture of aristocracy and democracy which is the most that he dare say of the Church governement where the people have the liberty of electing their owne officers and rulers and where the Senat so farre observeth the people that they may not passe the finall act in any matter of importance without the knowledge and tacite consent o the people though the people doe not vote in the Senat nay though the Senat doe not vote in the hearing of the people Now this seemeth not enough to those with whom wee have now to doe They will have the people freely to vote in all judgements of the Church And what is that but the very exercise of jurisdiction by the people which is the democracy of Movellâ—s condemned by Parker himselfe who maketh the exercise of ecclesiasticall power proper to the Rulers of the Church though he placeth the power it selfe originally in the whole Church Let it further be observed what difference these men make betwixt the Elders and the people in the governement of the Church That which they make proper to the Elders is only the propounding and ordering of matters and the excuting of some solemne act in name of the Church This is no more then belongeth to the moderator or Praeses in any consistory But they will have the matter to bee determined according to the most voyces of the people And so the new forme of Church governement which is here laid before us is a mere democracy with many moderators which is the most monstrous governement that ever was heard of His second declaration is that the Elders may and ought at times to meet apart from the body of the Church for deliberation This if hee meane only of that which hee specifiâ—th the preparing of things so as publikâ—ly and before the people they may bee prosecuted with most conveniency It is no more then what many require in moderators of Synods to whom they think fit that some Assessors or Coadjutors be adjoyned for deliberating in private upon the most orderly and convenient prosecuting of purposes in publike which as it hindereth not the governement of Synods to be aristocraticall so neither doth the deliberation of the Elders in private hinder the governement now in question to be democraticall But if he meane generally that the Elders may deliberate apart upon everything whatsoever which is to be voyced by the people then I aske by what reason doth he seclude from the deliberations those who are to voice for to give being and force to an Ecclesiasticall decree by voycing is more than to deliberate upon it whence it is that Papists give to Presbyters a deliberative voice in Councels but not a decisive voice and we also permit any understanding godly man to propound a matter to a Synod or to reason upon it though none have power of suffrage but the Commissioners of Churches So that he had greater reason to seclude the people from the voyces than from the deliberations His third declaration comes last and that is that by the people whose right in voting they thus stand for they understand not women and children but only men and them growen and of discretion Before hee did object to us that neither in Scripture nor in Greeke Authors the name Church is used for the assembly of sole Governours and to this I suppose I did give a satisfactory answer But good Sir be pleased mutually to resolve us where you have read in Scripture or in Greek Authors the name Church setting aside all representatives of Churches and Assemblies of sole Governors used for men alone and them growen and of discretion secluding women and children for now I see your reserved Glosse upon those words Tell the Church Tell all the men in the Parish that are growne and of discretion you must not take so much upon you as to expound that Text by a Synecdoche which none that ever wrote upon it before your selves did imagine and yet challenge us for expounding it by another Synecdoche following Chrysostome Euthymius Faber Stapulensis and many late Interpreters who understand by Church in that place the Rulers of the Church which are the noblest part of the Church I shall shut up this point with the words of Hyperius who saith that we must not understand by the Church the whole multitude Sed potius delectos c. But rather certaine choice Elders noted for their learning and godlinesse in whose power the Chuâ—ch will have to bee the judgement in such like causes which is proved from that that Matth. 18 after it was said â—ell the Church it is added where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them And 2 Cor. 2. he saith Sufficient is this censure inflicted by many We have now done with the Elderships of particular Churches but there is another blow which I perceive is intended against classicall Presbyteries and Synods provincial and national for the due power by which my opposite would have the Church to be governed hee layeth before us in this Assertion that every particular visible Church hath from Christ absolute and intire power to exercise in and of her selfe every ordinance of God and so is an independent body not standing under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of it selfe And this he will prove by ten Arguments but I shall not need to multiply answers as hee doth arguments because many of them are coincident The first third fourth and sixth doe all hit
commandement whereby we stand obliged to follow the example both of the Jewish Church in the Old Testament and of the Apostolicall Churches in the New Testament in such things as they had not for any speciall reason which doth not concerne us is transgressed by the withdrawing of Congregations from subjection unto Synods Of which things I have said enough before It is now but a poore begging of that which is in question to object that the governement of Presbyteries and Synods hath no warrant from the Word of God Come we then to examine his other Arguments His second he composeth thus If Christ in Mat. 18.17 where he saith Tell the Church doth mean a particular Congregation then hath every particular Congregation an intire power in and of it selfe to exercise Eclesiasticall governement and all other Gods spirituall ordinances But the first is true Ergo for the proposition he citeth some Writers who do not speak of such a connexion as he had to prove The assumption he proveth thus That Church which Christ intendeth in Matth. 18. hath absolute power in and of it selfe to perform all Gods ordinances But Christ intendeth in Mat. 18. a particular Congregation Therefore every particular Congregation hath absolute power c. How bravely doth he conclude the point Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici We will not examine our examinators logick we know what he would say and we woulâ— have him to know againe that Christ in Mat. 18. meaneth indeed some sort of a particular Congregation but neither only nor independantly Nay he meaneth all the Consistories of the Church higher and lower respectively as Parker conceiveth whose words I have before set down and to this sense the threed of the text doth leade us for as in the preceding words there is a gradation from one to two or three more then to the Church so is there a gradation by the like order and reason in the Consistories of the Church Tostatus upon this place acknowledgeth that Diae Ecclesiae reacheth as far as to an oecumenicall Councell when particular Churches erre in their determinations or when the cause is common to all the Churches for example when the Pope is to be condemned His seventh argument followes in my order and it runneth after this manner Such offices and callings without which the Church of God is coÌ„pleat and perfect for government are superfluous and humane But the Church of God may be compleat perfect for government without Presbyteriall and Synodicall offices and callings Ergo. I answer by a distinction Such offices and callings without which the Church of God are according to the course of Gods ordinary providence or at all times and in all cases perfect and compleat for government are indeed superfluous and humane But that such offices and callings without which the Church by the absolute power of God or at some times in some cases is perfect compleat are superfluous humane we utterly deny Now for the point of Synods I shall produce no other witnesses then those which this Disputer here taketh to be for him Whittaker acknowledgeth of Councels that Secundum ordinariam providentiam necessaria sunt ad bonam ecclesiae gubernationem according to ordinary providence they are necessary for the well governing of the Church Parker acknowledgeth Synods to be sometime necessary in the Church and he giveth example of the Councell of Nice without which the evils of the Church in the daies of Constantine could not have bin remedied The ninth Argument remaineth which is this That government which meerly tendeth unto the taking away from particular Congregations their due power is unlawfull But the government of Presbyteries and Synods as they now are doth meerly tend unto the taking away from particular Congregations their due power Ergo. I did expect some strong proofe for the assumption of this argument but we must take it as it is He tels us out of Master Barlow that no man under the degree of a Prophet or an Apostle may prescribe Gods Church and children patternes Our Synods are further from prescribing patterns either of worship or Church government than himselfe is The patterne and whole manner of Church government is set down in the Scripture those circumstaÌ„ces excepted which are common to the Church with the Common-wealth and are therefore determinable by natures light Synods may not prescribe new patterns no more may particular Churches but Synods may in common causes and extraordinarily prescribe unto particular churches such things as particular churches may in particular causes and ordinarily prescribe to their owne members If he will beleeve Parker whom he thinks his owne the authority which particular Churches have severally is not lost but augmented when they are joyned together in Synods But we have before abundantly declared how Presbyteriall Synodical government doth not at all prejudge the rights of congregations As for that which here he addeth by way of supposition putting the case that Presbyteries Synods will not permit a congregation to reject some coÌ„victed hereticks nor to chuse any except unfit Ministers this is just as if one should object against Parliaments that as they are now they do meerly tend to the taking away of the right and liberty of the subject and then for proofe should put the case that Parliaments will protect and maintaine Monopolists Projectorers c. Now in this drove of arguments the drover hath set some like the weake of the flock to follow up behind The first two are blind and see not where they are going for it maketh nothing against us either that the Eldership of one congregation hath not authority over the Eldership of another congregation or that a minister should not undertake the care of more Churches then one His third that presbyteriall power is never mentioned in the Scripture is a begging of the thing in question is answered before yet I must put him again in mind of Parker who speaking of churches saith Legitur in Scripturis de conjunct a earuÌ„ auct oritate quando in Synodis congregantur We read in their Scriptures of their joynt authority when they are gathered together into Synods But there is a speech of Zuinglius against representative Churches which he may not omit Zuingâ—ius doth indeed justly aske of the antichristian prelats who had given them the name of a representative Church who had given them power to make Canons c. yet hee addeth de his duntaxat c. I speak of them only that are such others who put themselves under not above the Scriptures my writings shall nothing prejudge In the fourth place he objecteth that whosoever shall deny their assertion must hold two distinct formes of Church government to be lawfull one where particular congregations do in of themselves exercise all Gods ordinances the other where they stand under another ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves I answer it