Kisse It was only a civil custome used then in saluteing one another was not of any Apostolicall institution famous Voetius Polit. Eccles. Pag. 466. sayeth that this Kisse was a common rite in its Kinde forme used according to the received custome in toaken of love friendshipe familiarity as also of subjection and againe Pag. 467. of what soever kinde forme it was it was nothing but a common signe of love good will acquaintance friendshipe familiarity courtesie reverence honour in thwir meetings conferences salutations especially in the Eastern conntreyes see Gen 29 11. 31. 28. 45 15. 1. Sam. 10. 1 2. Sam. 20 〈◊〉 Mat. 26 48. Luk â—…7 45. It is true Paul bids them salute one another with a Holy Kisse but when he doth so he doth not institute the Kisse but only ordereth the manner of their useing of that salutation exhorteh that it be not done wantonly or dissemblingly but Christianly Holily Voetius ubi supra sayeth By thiâ—… Epithet Holy it is distinguished from a lust full Kisse as that Prov. 7. 13. Hypocriticall like that Mat. 26 48 49. And it is called holy because the Kisse of Holy true charity as 1 Pet. 5. 4. And againe he sayeth It is propounded beâ—…y of a command not generall but speciall according to the particular present circumstances of time place and persons Thus it is apparent that for all these foure reasons of his the practice of the Apostles in the matter of Governement â—…being a bussinesse unto which they were called for which they were endued specially assisted by the Holy ghost is obligeing of binding force But there are some other things which he allâ—…igeth against this Part. 2. cap. 6. § 19. Which must be examined He layeth down as probable That the Apostles in probability did not observe any one fixed course in setling the Government of Churches but setled it according to the severall circumstances of places and persons which they had to deal with Though he lay not this down as a foundation of his thesis but only as a Doctrines of probability yet if he be able to make it out that the Apostles in some places did setle Presbyterian Governement in other places Episcopall Governement he shall gaine his poynt And therefore his strength in this particular must be tryed To this end he layeth down three grounds 1. The different State condition quantity of the Churches planted by the Apostles 2. The multitude of unfixed officers which Acted then with authority over the Church where they were resident 3. The different customes observed in severall Churches as tâ—… their Governement after the death of the Apostles As to the last of these grounds it cannot appear to be any at all For the pracctice of the Churches after the dayes of the Apostles will not prove what the practice of the Churches was dureing the dayes of the Apostles nor what the practice of the Apostles was unlesse it could certanely be manifested that these Churches did punctually follow the practice of the Apostles which he will neither affirme nor undertake to prove unlesse he would flatly contradict himself As to the second ground it cometh not up to be a sufficient ground for this position unlesse he will prove that these unfixed officers or Evangelists such as Timothy Titus were as himself acknowledgeth were proper Bishops that is to say were not Evangelists but fixed officers 2 Though the Apostle made use of them in some Churches not in others it will not follow that therefore the Apostles did set up distinct formes or models for the way of setting up a model is adistinct thing from the modell itself the modell or species of Government might be the same whether erected in a place immediately by the Apostles themselves or mediatly by the Evangelists at their direction And 3. Neither the Apostles themselves nor the Evangelists for any thing which can be seen in Scripture did act in matters of governement after an Episcopall manner but conjunctly with other Presbyters in Churches constituted what extraordinary course they tooke in Churches not yet constituted is not much to the purpose in hand for their way of erecting a modell thus being extraordinary is not necessarily imitable And thus one species viz. Presbyterian is directly pointed forth But most of the stresse lyeth on the first ground for proving of which he layeth down two particulars 1. That in Churches consisting of a small number of beleevers where there was no great probability of a great increase afterwards one single Pastor with Deacons under him were only constituted by the Apostles for the ruleing of these Churches 2. In Churches consisting of a multitude of beleevers or where there was a probability of a great increase by preaching the Gospell The Apostles did setle a colledge of Presbyters whose office was partly to governe the Church already formed and partly in labouring in the converting of more As to this last particular it may be passed because it speaketh nothing against the Presbyterians they fully accord with him therein save where he sayeth That these two sores of elders mentioned 1 Tim. 5 17. were both preaching Presbyters the one imployed most in preaching and converting moe and therefore deserved both more respect and maintenance because of their greater burden more abundant labours and greater sufferings and others most in ruling the flock already converted And so rejecteth ruleing elders as not being of divine appoyntment But that a word only may be spoken to it here his glosse agreeth not to the place for 1. This glosse maketh the ministery of the Word common to both or else sayeth that such as ruled at home did not preach at all such the Apostle would not account worthy of double honourâ—… but the Apostle maketh ruling common to both 2. Then the maine difference betwixt these two should lye in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where as the Apostle maketh the difference to lye in the whole sentence lalabouring in word and doctrine For he sayeth not these that rule well and are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in word and doctrine are worthy of double honour but especially such who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. We finde this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 given to others even to such as were fixed to some certaine place as 1. Thes. 5 v. 12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. These unfixed preachers behoved to be either Evangelists such like extraordinary Officers or â—…reaching Presbyters Not Euangelists for there was no doubt about these for all would grant that they were worthy of double honour And it is like the Apostle would not have spoken so to Timothy who was an Evangelist Not preaching Presbyters for there was none of those set apart for that end The Scripture mentioneth no such thing but alwayes teacheth that Presbyters were fixed to certaine places what Presbyters might do did when scattered abroad by reason of
very materiall but what indeed they do signifie in such such places And if there was not such an officer in the dayes of the Apostles as a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter as shall be supposed untill it be better proved then yet it is it will necessariely follow that both those names must signifie one the same thing one the same officer viz a Presbyter 5. To say that both these names are promiscuonsly used sometime for a Bishop some time for a Presbyter if these two be distinct officers is to lay a blot on the Spirit of God speaking in the scriptures for by what rule shall it be known when he is speaking of the one when he is speaking of the other in what a mist labyrinth must all be lest in this bussinesse especially when the maine difficulty touching the being of one of these officers is not removed 6. But to put an end to this let these few things be considered by Mr Stilling fleet 1. Is it probable that Christ or his Apostles would institute a new distinct officer an officer who was to continue unto the end of the world as an ordinary necessary officer yet give him no peculiar proper name by which he might be known every one might know when he were speaken of especially seing all the other officers in Christ's house both ordinary extraordinary have their own distinct names whereby they are known distinguished from others 2. Where will Mr Stilling fleet shew that an inferiour officer was stiled called by the name properly belonging unto a superiour officer where will he finde a Deacon stiled a Presbyter Apostle â—…phet or Evangelist Where will he finde a Presbyter stiled aâ—… Apostle or Evangelist taking these names as restricted to be peculiar names of two extraordinary officers not in their generall acceptation as 2 Cor. 8 23 Phil. 2 25. how can it be then that a Presbyter was called a Bishop if there was a superiour Church officer going under that name as proper peculiar to him 3. Is it not strange that in all the places of Scripture where there is mention made of this Bishop it cannot be clearly demonstrated that any other Church Officer is or can be understood then a Presbyter as to Phil. 1 v. 1. it is beyond all denyall as to Tit. 1 7. Act. 20 28. There the Bishops are expresly called Presbyters And 1 Tim. 3 1 2. Is the very parallel of Tit. 1. 7. In both which places the work mentioned qualifications are only the work qualifications of a Pesbyter 4. What mark will Mr Stilling fleet give to know when the spirit of God mentioning Bishops is to be understood of mere Pesbyters when he is to be understood as speaking of Bishops distinct from Presbyters for neither the name nor the work nor the qualifications will point out this distinction of Officers or direct us which of the two to understand 5. Let Mr Stilling fleet say whether it be not saifer to conclude an identity of offices from the identity of names qualifications work then to conclude a distinction where there is no ground for a distinction appearing in Apostolick times 6. Had Mr Stilling fleet once proved that there was such an officer as a Bishop distinct from superiour to preaching Presbyters instituted by the Apostles in any of the Gospell Churches then this notion touching the promiscuous use of the two names had said something But seing that is not done both these names must signify import one the same officer And so these two names shall be synonimous not equivocall The second thing which he allaidgeth is this The places most in controversy about the forme of governement may be understood without any apparent incongruity of either of the different formes Ans. It is certaine they cannot be understood of both onely the question is of which of the two they must be understood And all this which he sayeth will not much advantage his cause for hence he can onely conclude that there is a difficulty to finde out the species of Government which these places speak to but not that there is a liberty granted to owne either of the two because it is not well known which of the two the places cited do most favoure He is pleased to name some few passages these none of the clearest for the Presbyterian cause But to passe this piece of unfaire dealing the passages which he mentioneth shall be examined then some others shall be adduced to which his answers will not so well suite The first passage which he citeth is Act 11. 30. Which sayeth he may either be understood of the elders of the Church at Ierusalem or of the several Bishops of the Churches of â—…udea Ans. Is it credible that learned Mr Stilling fleet could satisfie himself with this answer Doth he verily think that these elders were or could be Bishops If so what were these Churches over which they were set Could Ierusalem want a Bishop when the other lesser Churches of Iudea had If Ierusalem had also a Bishop who was he He will not say that Iames was Bishop there for Iames was an Apostle so far above an ordinary Bishop where findeth he the name Presbyter in all the New Testament taken for a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter Or where findeth he a company of Presbyters taken for a company of Bishops Is it not also strange that where there were so many Bishops there should not one of them be designed by name 2. What though there should be nothing in the place what wonder when liberty is taken to put such glosses upon it as cannot be confirmed by any other like passage that expresly excludeth the one is not this enough that there is no thing in all the Scripture speaking for that one nor any thing in that passage expresly for it If there be no passage clearing that Bishops were instituted by Christ or his Apostles every passage which speaketh of the governement of the Church by Presbyters excludeth Bishops if it do not expresly directly include them as this passage doth not But 3. Look the context this will be cleared It was the Church of Ierusalem that sent Barâ—…bas thither to Antioch Ver. 22. And Agabus the Prophet who did foretell of the famine was come also from Ierusalem Ver. 27. And so it was to the Church of Ierusalem that Barnabas was sent back againe with this contribution Because this was the chief Church where were many Christians there are few plantations beside found as yet in Iudea that could make up Bishopricks The next passage he citeth is more considerable Act. 15 v. 6. Where he sayeth nothing is expressed to make us know whether these were the fixed elders of that Church or the Bishops of all the Churches of Iudea Ans. What was said to the last may be replyed to this also And further it
congregations But where shall a Magistrat be found for establishing this one forme of Government Is it not then saifest to say That Christ hath set down such a forme which all Churches all the world over are obliged to follow imitat for he is only head of the Church Obs. 3. When he stateth the question Part. 2 c. 3 § 1. He limiteth the disput unto two sorts or species of Government thus Whether the Church should be Governed by a colledge of presbyters or by a superiour order above the standing ministery having the power of jurisdiction ordination belonging to it But under favour this is not faire dealing in stateing of a controversy for his bussinesse is to shew that there is no forme at all setled by a Ius divinum That there is no warrand in the word for any one forme more then for all the rest that there is no one forme so determined by a positive law of God that all the Churches of Christ are bound to observe it but that it is left to the prudence of every particular Church to agree upon its own forme which it judgeth most fit for the ends of Governement in it self if this be his drift scope may not every one see how he prevaricateth here in limiting the disput to these two formes seing there are moe formes pretended unto The independents will grant that there is no warrand in the word for either of those two formes mentioned yet will allaidge that there is another forme allowed of God determined The Papists have a forme of Government it may be the prelats think that their forme differeth from that The Morellians have another forme distinct from all these the Erastians have a sixt it is possible that Mr Baxter shall give him a seventh made out of presbyterian episcopall independent Erastian now if his principles exclude all these why was the disput limited to two or doth he think that these other formes are expresly excluded by the word that Churches are not left at liberty to make choise of any of them but only of either of the two which he mentioned Then the scripture is expresly determinatly against severall formes of Governement if this be true his principles are overturned for if the law of God be expresly against some formes it must be more for other formes then for these all formes are not indifferent nor are men left at liberty to pitch upon what forme they please Obs. 4. He granteth Part. 2. c. 2. § 1. That the Government of the Church ought to be administred by officers of divine appoyntment And now what shall become of that Government by a superiour order above the standing ministery for a prelat as a superiour order is a distinct officer from presbyters so must have a divine appoyntment if he hath a divine appoyntment he must be a standing officer as well as presbyters if so men must not as they please lay him by but the Government by prelats must be juris divini if upon the other hand he be really a distinct officer hath no divine warrant or appoyntment the Government of the Church by prelats must be utterly unlawfull But what sayeth he to this objection Part. 2. c. 4. § 11. These officers are only said to be new that were never appoynted by Christ the Church may appoynt none such but if such be meaned as have a Charge of more then one particular congregation by the consent of pastours themselves such an officer is not neâ—… for beside the generall practice of the Church from the first primitive times which have all consented in the use of such officers we finde the foundation of this power laid by Christ himself in the power which the Apostles were invested in which was extended over many both pastours Churches this power must be proved extraordinary before it can be said to cease that must be done by some arguments proper to their persones for if they be of a morall nature they will prove the office to be so too I say not but that the necessity of the office as in their persons for the first preaching propagating the Gospell did cease with them but that after their death it became unlawfull to take Charge of diâ—…ecesian Churches I deny for to make a thing unlawfull which was before lawfull there must be some expresse prohibition thus he To which it is answered 1. It appeareth then that a Bishop is a distinct officer from a Presbyter for the Apostles were distinct from Presbyters their office by Mr Stilling fleet is the same upon the matter with that of the Apostles viz a power over both Churches pastours for he will not grant that that power in the Apostles was extraordinar for he sayes that the foundation of this power was laid by Christ himself in that power which the Apostles were invested in therefore that power of the Apostles the power of Prelats must be one upon the matter and so Prelats must be distinct from Presbyters as the Apostles were 2. It is strange how he can so confidently say That it was the practice of the Church of God from the first primitive times to consent to the use of such officers sâ—…ing himself is at so much paines to prove that antiquity is most defective in the times immediatly after the Apostles that none dar with confidence beleeve the conjectures of Eusebius at 300 yeers distance from the Apostolicall times when he hath no other testimony to avouch but the hypotyposes of an uncertaine Clement the commentaries of Hegesippus c. Pag. 296. 297. 3. To let this passe Mr Stilling sleet would do well to shew whether the office of Apostles which is a distinct thing from their extraordinary immediat mission which he is pleased to make the maine distinguishing note of an Apostle also from the power of working miracles to confirme the truth of what they preached did cease by God's warrand and approbation or not if not how could any be so bold as to lay this office aside by which persons should be invested with power over many both Churches and pastours how can any say that it is not still necessary Mr Stillingfleet seemeth here to plead for the divine right of prelacy And indeed if the office power of Apostles be the same with prelacie if that power or office be not laid a side with God's warrand approbation it must still be an office allowed of God if so Mr Stillingfleet's notion will fall to the ground His saying that the necessitie of the office as in their persons for the first preaching propagating the Gospell is ceased is nothing to the purpose for he must speak of the office as it is the same with the office of Prelats It is certaine the necessity of the office as in their persons must cease because they are gone
the work of first preaching propagating the Gospell could be done by none after them when they had done it themselves but that was not their ordinary office if Mr Stillingfleet speak truth here If this office did cease by God's warrand then how can any raise it up againe without his expresse warrand for either it was the Lord's will when he caused it to cease that it should cease till he was pleased to make use of it againe or till men pleased to raise it up at their owne pleasure This last cannot be proved therefore seing God thought fit to lay is aside gave no signification of his minde when the Churâ—… should be at liberty to make use of it againe It must now be aâ—… new office unwarranted of God so unlawfull 4. That rule thâ—… to make a thing unlawfull which was before lawfull there must be some expresse prohibition for bidding any furder use of such power will not alwayes hold in this case because some othâ—… thing may be equivalent unto an exprese prohibition 〈◊〉 when God removeth the speciall propper work of such an office the speciall proper qualifications with which such officers were endued when those cease the office ceaseth God thereby declareth that the office work was extraordinary therefore should not continue As for Example in the primitive Church there were some Prophets these were distinct from Apostles Evangelists Pastors c. so were there workers of Miracles such as had the the gift of healing of speaking with tongues And when God withdrew those gifts fiting those offâ—…cers for the work unto which they were then called did he not therby declare that it was his will that that office should cease was there a necessity for any other expresse probition And because of the want of this expresse prohibition will it be lawfull now for any to set up such officers offices in the house of God when God giveth not the qualifications so giveth not the call thereunto So is it in this case of the Apostles when their qualifications their speciall work ceased their office ceased there will be no call for such officers till there be fit work God give fit qualifications without a call warrand it must be unlawfull to set up such an office againe This will be clearer if it be considered what was the speciall work of an Apostle It was this A planting of Churches setling of the Gospell government in them by insâ—…nteing the standing officers thereof that by an eminent power immediatly granted by Christ to them solely This was their speciall work this ceased with them so did their office with it As also the qualifications And therefore it would be unlawfull now for a Church at here own hand to set up such an officer againe though there be no expresse probition By this it is clear 5. That the power office of Apostles laid no foundation for prelaticall power the work belonging to them as such being altogether extraordinare It is true their power did extend over many Churches pastours but yet 1. They were not fixed to such such particular dioecies as propper to themselves but sometimes moe of them were to gether in one place following their work Nor. 2. Did they account themselves the sole pastors of such or such a Church after other ministers had been ordained there 3. â—…or did they ordaine alone in Churches constituted nor 4 Did they exerce jurisdiction alone but alwayes they joyned others with them in Churches setled 5. They assumed to themselves no negative voice either in ordination or jurisdiction so in them there could be no foundation for prelacy laid even as to their common work or work of a lasting nature which did not properly peculiarly appertaine to them as Apostles 6. Neither finally were they consecrated ordained after the manner that prelats are now consecrated being first made Deacons next Presbyters then Bishops so that there is a vaste disparity But distrusting this answer he giveth a second § 12. to this purpose The extending of any Ministeriall power is not the appoynting of a new office because every Minister hath a relation Actu primo to the whole Church of God the resiraint enlargment of which power is subject to positive determinations of prudence conveniency in Actu secundo The exercise and execution of the power of order belongeth to every one in his personall capacity but as to the power of jurisdiction though it belong habitually and Actu primo to each presbyter yet being about matters of publicke and common concernment the limit ation and exercise of it belongeth to the Church in common such is the power of visiting Churches of ordination and censures and when this is devolved to some particular persons by the rest of the pastors or by the Magisrat quoad executionem it belongeth to them Ans. 1. This contradicteth the former answer for the former answer did suppone that these were distinct officers from presbyters because their office was such as the ordinary office of the Apostles and the Apostles were distinct from other Church officers even by their office not in respect only of their extraordinare mission or power of working miracles But this answer affirmeth them to be one the same with presbyters But. 2. By this answer he might plead for the Pope for every Minister in actis primo hath a relation to the whole Church so might be a Pope if the supreme Magistrat or the rest of the Ministers would devolve upon him the execution of the power of jurisdiction so the Pope is no new officer but a mere presbyter only his power of jurisdiction is enlairged So may he plead for Cardmals Patriarchs Primats Archbishops as well as for Bishops But it will be objected that the Pope pretendeth to some other thing as the warrand of his power even to a jus divinum Ans. so do prelats but with Mr Stillingfleet all is one whether that be pretended unto or not for it is no matter what they say of themselves but what any may feigne of them to the end they may both deceive others be deceived themselves This is as if one would defend a man who had taken upon himself to be a King of such or such a common wealth contrare to the fundamentall lawes of the land and would alledge that he were no distinct officer from any other member of Parliam because for sooth the power of Government as to its execution is subject to positive determinations Parliaments may do commissionat some of their number to some eminent piece of work as to be a Generall or the like he who calleth himself King is nothing else notwithstanding that he rule the commonw with as absolute power unlimited as ever King did Sure any man of understanding would smile at such a defence and just
persecution is another question Elders are ordained appoynted to Churches Act. 14 23. Tit. 1 5. But enough of this in this place The first particular then must be a little more narrowly examined he sayeth That in some places at first there were noneplaced but only a Bishop Deacons for this he citeth Clement's Epistle saying The Apostles preaching through countreyes and cities ordained the first fruits of such as beleeved to be Bishops and Deacons But by Bishops here he cannot understand such Bishops as are now spoken of that is such as had power over Presbyters and Churches for himself doth abundantly cleare the contrary And what can be allaidged to prove that he meaneth only one Bishop in one place is not yet apparent only he referreth his reader to other testimonies which must also be looked upon examined But it is certaine the place it self speaketh as much for one Deacon in a place as for one Presbyter or Bishop for both are one as himself will acknowledge as clearly for moe Bishops as for moe Deacons in villages or cities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here are as well Bishops in cities villages as Deacons But then he citeth Epiphanius contra Aeâ—…m Haeres 75. saying That at the first there were no Bishops appoynted then the Apostle writteth to Bishops Deacons for the Apostles could not setle all things at first for there was a necessity of Presbyters Deacons for by these two Officers all Ecclesiastick offices might be performed for where there was none found worthy to be a Bishop the place remained without one but where necessity required one there were some found fit some were ordained Bishops but for want of convenient number there could be no Presbyters found out in such places they were contented with the Bishop Deacons But what can Epiphanius or any other writter in his time do as to the clearing of what was the practice of the Apostles concerning which is the present discourse must their testimony be beleeved without a word of Scripture to warrand the same Yea must they be beleeved when they speak contrary to the word Be it so that there was a time in which there were Presbyters Deacons againe a time in which there were Bishops deacons what will this say so long as nothing is said to prove that these Bishops Presbyters were distinct officers not one the same as is supposed of the Bishops presbyters now under debate all this will never prove a distinct species of Government but alwayes one the same whether the presbyters be called presbyters or Bishops 3. Be it so that in some places there were only one Bishop or Presbyter deacons appoynted of which there can no warrand be seen in scripture for scripture sayeth that there were presbyters ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 14 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 1 5. for it was to cities whither the Apostles did most resort to plante Churches not to countrey villages where gentilisme did long thereafter continue whence these of that religion were called Pagani what will this speak for Episcopall Government so long as this one Bishop could not be a Bishop properly so called not having presbyters under him Or doth he think that it is inconsistent with presbyterian Government that one preaching presbyter be set over a parish or a village that he others joyn with the presbyters one or moe of a Neighbour city in things of common concernment or must he rule in that village independently Mr Stillingfleet will not acknowledge this Nor can he say that he can exerce Episcopall power Therefore though this were granted to him the Government may still be presbyteriall 4 How can Epiphanius say that the Apostles could not setle all things at the first if they could not do it who could do it else had they not the Spirit in great measure to prompt them to do what was fit expedient either they could not get men fit to be Bishops or a sufficient number to be presbyters But this will suppone that at that time presbyters Bishops were destinct which Stilling fleet will not acknowledge Epiphanius cannot give one instance of a Bishop distinct from superiour unto preaching Presbyters setled in a Church alone with some few deacons The reader may see this passage more fully examined by Wallo Messalinus pag. 102. pag. 277. c. The next author which he citeth is Clemens Alexandrinus out of Eusebius saying That Iohn after his retâ—…n from Paâ—…mos went abroad into severall places in some constituting Bishops in some setting in order whole Churches in other choosing â—…ur one among the rest whom he set over the Church But of this the 〈◊〉 is utterly silent therefore it cannot be received as an undoâ—… ed thing what would Mr Stillingfleet gather from 〈◊〉 He seteth it down in the words of Walo Messalinus Pag. â—…25 In majoribus urbibus plures i. e. it is probable that there were moâ—… presbyters ordained in greater townes and fewer in lesser towâ—… bâ—… villages or litle parishes one only especially when there was no 〈◊〉 number of beleevers And now let any â—…dge it there câ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thing gathered thence for Episcopall Government 〈◊〉 thing for this end he must prove out of this passage 〈◊〉 doth nothing He must prove out of it that the 〈◊〉 some places did setle presbyterian Government 〈◊〉 places Episcopall otherwise he is but beating the winde for no asserters of Presbyterian Government did ever yet finde them selves necessitated to maintaine that the Apostles did set up an equall number of Presbyters in every Church or yet a plurality of preaching presbyters in each village or countrey place or such as the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that though all this were granted his poynt would not yet be proved At leâ—… he citeth Ambrose or rather â—…ilarius in Eph. 4. saying primum enim c. i. e. at first all did teach all did baptize at any time or on any day but when the Church took in all places about there were conventicles instituted there were Governours other offices appoynted that so none might assume to himself that office which did not appertaine to him not being as yet ordained therefore the writtings of the Apostles do not in every poynt agree with the ordination which now is in use in the Church c. But how this can speak home to the poynt iâ—… not discernable For the author is to give the ground why the writings of the Apostles were not suiteable to the times in which he lived viz because matters were other wayes setled in his time then in the dayes of the Apostles and will any hence inferre that the Apostles setled Churches with distinct formes oâ—… models because after ages did so who will beleeve this consequence 2. There is no mention made
of any change in the Apostle Paul's time for the author mentioneth here his Epistle to Timothy which was writen near to the end of his dayes 3. Though there had been some change alteration even in the Apostles dayes as to the manner of going about the work of preaching and baptizing these are all the particulars which the author mentioneth some order setled thereanent which had not been setled before what will this speak to the matter of Government which is the only thing now under debate will it follow that because there was a setled order condescended on in preaching and baptizeing which at sirst was not followed therefore the Apostles in some Churches erected presbyterian Government and in others Episcopall By what Medium will this consequence be proved 4. But how how shall it beleeved that things were better setled afterward then they were in the Apostles dayes or that the practice of after ages is as obligatory as the practice of the Apostles It is but a dream then to think that the Apostles did not observe any setled forme in Governing Churches but only Acted according to the principles of humane prudence according to the necessities occasions of the severall Churches which they had planted for neither this author nor any other which he hath cited to this effect doth prove it And though they should all say it we were not bound to beleeve them seing the law the testimony showeth the contrary as may be seen in the writings of such as plead for Presbyterian Governement where they shew that the Church of Ierusalem Ephesus others were Governed by the common consent of Presbyters that the manner of the governement of all Gospell Churches mentioned in the new Testament was uniforme But he hath another thing to say against the practice of the Apostles viz. That we cannot have that certainety of Apostolicall practice which is necessary to constitute a divine right This notion he prosecuteth at great length Chap. 6. as a ground thereunto he Prefixeth § 4. That the Apostles in the forming of Churches did observe the customes of the jewish synagogue And thereupon proceedeth to cleare both what the Governement of the jewish synagogues was how the forme set up in the Christian Church did correspond thereunto all which concerneth the bussinesse in hand litle or nothing there fore may be passed seing it is not very materiall to consider whether or not jewish synagogues were so Governed whether or not the Apostles did follow that copy for that which is now sought for is such a Government as was practised by the Apostles instituted as the forme of Church Government which was to continue such a Governement as had the stamp of divine authority or of a divine institution But now no jewish Governement as such could have this but only such a Governement as these by their practice did institute who were thereunto appoynted of God extraordinarily called qualified And moreover if the jewish Synagogues were Governed uniformly if the Apostles did set up a Governement in the Gospell Churches in a way correspondent there unto It will inevitably follow that the Apostles did take an uniforme way in setling the Governement of all the Churches this crosseth what he said of late confirmeth what was Answered But leaving this The proposition now under consideration is a question of fact the certanety of which is doubted of as he allaidgeth viz what course the Apostles took in Governing Churches or after what manner did they setle a Governement among them The uncertanety of this matter of fact he thinketh to evince by three arguments The last of which viz the defectivenesse ambiguity partiality repugnancy of the records of the succeeding ages which should informâ—… 〈◊〉 what Apostolicall practice was which he prosecuteh largely satisfactorily From § 16. to § 19. may be passed as concerning the bussinesse in hand nothing as to Presbyteriaus for if they be not able to prove the practice of the Apostles out of the sacred write they dispaire as much as he can do of proving the same from humane records that for the same reasons which he there giveth But as for the other two reasons or grounds they must be examined The first then is this The equivalency of the names the doubtfulnesse of their signification by which this forme should be determined now there is a fourefold equivalency of names Bishop Presbyter 1. That both should signifie a Presbyter as Theodor in 1. Tim. 3. 1. 2. That both should signifie a Bishop 3. That both should signifie promiscuously some time a Bishop and sometime a Presbyter and. 4. That the name Bishop alwayes imports a singular Bishop but the name Presbyter doth promiscuously signifie both equivocall words can never of themselves determine what sensethey are to be taken in all that can be inferred from the promiscuous sense of the words is that they may be understood only in this sense but it must be proved that they can be understood in no other sense before any one particular forme of Governement as necessary can be inferred from the use of them Ans. 1. This is a ready way to cast all scripture as unable to determine any controversy for if adversaries may be beleeved all these passages which are made use of against them do carry another sense must be otherwise interpreted so all scripture must goe under the name of equivocall sentences must be laid aside 2. Presbyterians do not lay the stresse of their bussinesse upon the name They have other things whereby to prove their poynt then either the one name or the other And so this doth not concerne them much 3. The question betuixt Presbyterians their adversaries is this whether there be such an officer as a prelat having superiority of jurisdiction over Presbyters people sole power of ordination instituted by Christ or not not whether these two words signifie one thing or another for it is granted by all the Episcopall party except one who in his Annot on act 11. sayeth that there is no evidence whereby these inferiour presbyters may appear to have been brought in the Church so early That there were presbyters ordained in the Apostles dayes and all the question is concerning bishops as distinct from presbyters whether or not they were ordained Presbyterian divines do demonstrat that even in those places where the name Bishop is no such officer can be understood As to that which some fathers say who writting some centuries of yeers after the Apostles dayes speaking of the state of the Church in the Apostles dayes after the forme manner in their times concerning the promiscuous use of the two names it doth no way wrong the cause in hand untill it be proved that there was indeed such an officer in rerum natura this is not yet done 4. Whatever these names may signifie is not
was the elders of that Church unto which Paul Barnabas were sent Ver. 2. this was the Church of Ierusalem that they should goe up to Ierusalem to the Apostles and elders 2. When they came to Ierusalem they found the Apostles elders there present what could the Bishops of all Iudea be doing there at that time If it be said that they came together upon this solemne occasion How did they know of this occasion For the Apostles knew not of it themselves till the Commissioners from Antioch told them Ver. 5. That there were certane of the Sect of the Pharisees arisen which beleeved saying that it was needfull to be circumcised c. And then Ver. 6. The Apostles Elders came together for to consider of this matter He who can imagine that these Elders were the Bishops of the severall dioecies of Iudea may easily cast by the plainest fullest passages of Scripture that can be may imagine what he pleaseth But to put a close to this let that passage Act. 16 4. be considered where it is said They delivered them the decrees to be keeped which were ordained by the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders in Ierusalem or who belonged to the Church of Ierusalem or stayed there The third passage is Act. 21 11. of which he giveth the same dubious sense upon as little ground as before his conjectures may receive the same answers Only where he sayes They might be the Elders of the severall Churches of Iudea he seemeth to prevaricat for the poynt of difference is not betwixt Elders Elders But betwixt Elders Bishops betwixt the Elders of that particular Church of Ierusalem the severall Bishops of the dioecies of Iudea But it seemeth he blushed to name this once therefore thought it best to put in Elders but this was not faire dealing Neither is his conclusion faire when he sayeth There is no certainty of the Church of Jerusalem how that was governed whether by Apostles themselves or other unfixed Elders or only by James who exerced his Apostleshipe most there and thence is afterward called Bishop of Jerusalem For the question is not whether the Church of Ierusalem was governed by all the Apostles or only by one But whether by Presbyters in common or by one Bishop above distinct from Presbyters And by this conclusion he would seem to say that there were no Elders in Ierusalem at all no Governours there but Apostles one or moe Moreover it is sufficiently proved by the Presbyterian divines that the Apostles when acting in governement together with other Elders or Officers did not act as Apostles but as ordinary Officers And also that Iames did not govern the Church of Ierus alone as a Bishop The fourth passage which he citeth is Act. 14 23. upon which he sayeth That no more is imported but that no Church wanted an Elder but not that every Church had moe Elders Ans. whether was this single Presbyter a Prelate or not If not what is this to the present question The governement may be Presbyteriall where one Minister is fixed to one particular flock If he was a Prelat where were his Presbyters under him 2. It is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will signify no more but Ecclesiaâ—…m Church Church but will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie no more but one Presbyter Had it been said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it might import but one Presbyter in one Church Or yet if it had been said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needs import more Theodoret knew the import force of that phrase when he rendereth the like passage in Tit. thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Presbytery in each city The last passage which he citeth is Act. 20 17. There is no certainly sayeth he whether these elders came only from Ephesus or also from the severall Churches â—…f Asia about Ans. Upon what ground can he once think that the elders of Asia may be understood here He hath none other but this that it is said v. 18. that from the first day he came into Asia he had been with them at all seasons because he did not remaine all that time at Ephesus as appeareth Act. 19 20 22 26. But this cannot so much as ground a probability for it is certane the most part of his abode was at Ephesus for full two yeers three moneths are specified Act 19 8 10. the rest of the three yeers if there be not roâ—…ndatio numeri here he might now then have visited other parts have most of his residence at Ephesus heither reaching in the Synagogue nor in the School of Tyrannus where he had taught two yeers three moneths so granting that he might have made some visits unto the other parts of Asia durâ—…ing these Nine moneths yet he might well say to thâ—…se of Ephesus That from his first coming into Asia they had known after what manner he had been with them againe it will not hence follow that others then these of Ephesus were there more then from these words v. 25. Yâ—… all among whom I have gone preaching the Kingdome of God it will follow that all the people he had preached unto both in Ephesus in other places of Asia minor Asia propria were present But whom can we expect to have been there except such only who were sent for viz the Elders of the Church of Ephesus therefore they are called the Elders of the Church not the elders of the Churches as they would have been called if the Elders of the Churches had been there present as we hear of the Churches of Iudea Galilee Samaria Act. 9 31. of the Churches of Galatia Gal. 1 2. Churches of Asia 1. Cor. 16. 19. of Maâ—…edonia 2 Cor. 8 1. of Syria Cylicia Act. 15 41. so would we hear of the Elders of the Churches of Asia But there is no such thing only there is mention made of the Elders of that one Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To conclude this himself sayeth cap. 7. § 2. pag. 349. That this flocke Church were the Christians of Ephesus that all these spoken to were such as had a pastorall charge of this one flock Thus it hath been showne how weak the ground is upon which Mr Sâ—…illing fleet walketh how litle reason he hath to conclude his notion from these passages which he hath mentioned furder the groundlesnesse of his conceite will appear if some two or three passages of scripture be but viewed which he hath passed by without once noticeing unto which the answers which he was pleased to give to others will not quadrate as 1. That place 1 Cor. 5. If any look thorow that epistle they shall easilie see that there were many preaching Presbysers in that one Church here Cap. 5. they are about a work of excommunication so are endued with episcopall power
now presbyterian government is quite overturned all presbyterian assemblies are discharged under the highest paine after prelats are advanced never till then there cometh forth a new order for new meetings upon new principles meetings otherwise constituted then formerly in a word such meetings as did but serve to approve of confirme prelats in their place power therefore all were commanded by the Estate to concur with the prelats in their meetings under a penalty So that it is but a meer falshood to say that the meetings then now are of the same constitution nothing altered for then they were hedges standing in the prelats way though much weakened by reason of the civill power opposeing but now they are props to support strengthen the hands of the prelats as being wholly ruled guided by them By what is said it is hoped that tender Christians will see that there was no small ground of scrupleing at these meeting that they will be loth rashly to condemne such as feared to transgresse in the least resolved rather to suffer then to sin seing it is now beyond controversie that their concurring in those meetings had been upon the matter a consenting unto an approving of prelaticall government upon which account alone the faithfull servants of Christ did refuise to concurre SECTION IX The reasons why Ministers refuised to seek presentations collations cleared defended THus the Lord was pleased to keep his servants out of this snare which the prelats had caused plet for their consciences but there are others stronger following The Parl. in their second session An. 1662 made an act ordaineing all Ministers who had entered to the cure of any parish within brugh or land in or since the year of God 1649. to have no right unto nor uplist the rents of their respective benefices modified stipends manse or gleib for this instant year 1662. nor for any year following unlesse they should obtaine a presentation from the lawful patroâ—… and have collation from the Bishop of the dioecy where he liveth before the 20 of Sepr next for understanding of this It would be considered That before the year 1649. the Church was groaning under that sore oppression of laick patrons having power to presente Ministers unto benefices and then the Parliament was pleased to discharge all presentations of Kirks patronages whether belonging to the King or to any laick patron upon good weighty grounds as the narrative of their 39 act March 9. 1649. sheweth in these words The Estates of parliament being sensible of the great obligation that lyeth upon them by the nationall Covenant by the solemne league covenant by many deliverances mercies from God by the late solemne engadgment unto ties To preserve the doctrine and maintaine and vindicate the liberties of the Kirk of Scotland and to advance the work of reformation therein to the utmost of their power considering that patronages and presentations of Kirks is an evill and bondage under which the Lords people and Ministers of this land have long groaned and that it hath no warrand in God's word but is founded only on the commonlaw and is a custome popish and brought into the Kirk in time of ignorance and superstition and that the same is contrary to the second book of discipline in which upon solide and good ground it is reckoned among abuses that are desired to be reformed and unto severall acts of the generall assembly and that it is prejudiciall to the liberty of the people and planting of Kirks and unto the free calling and entering of Ministers unto their charge And after this Ministers entered by the call of the people of whom they were to have charge Now this Parliament will have this piece of reformation undone the Church brought back unto her old state of bondage so will have Ministers to seek for these presentations thereafter to go to the Bishop for his license approbation to officiat exerce the Ministeriall function But the faithfull zealous servants of Christ had not freedome nor liberty to do either of these therefore resolved to suffer rather then to sin They had not freedome to go to seek a presentation for these reasons 1. Because they saw no warrand for such a way of entering into the Ministery allowed of Christ or his apostles nor practised many hundereds of years thereafter and therefore toapprove of such a way had been a sin 2. The Church had been long groaning under that oppression bondage was desireous to be rid thereof at the very beginning but could never obtaine it untill An 1649 Now if they had obeyed this act submitted unto this oppression they had consented unto the spoileing of the Church of her privileges and had condemned that worthy renowned Parliament who were graciously moved of God to take off this Yoke off her necke 3. They should in so far have consented unto the defection now carryed on for this was a piece thereof The restoreing of the Church unto her rights privileges was a part of the work of reformation yea no small part thereof when this privilege is taken away the work of reformation is in so far overturned therefore such as would have sought presentations should have made defection themselves have consented unto approved of the Parliament in carrying on the worke of defection in so far 4. By the 36 act of the first Session of this Parliament It is ordained that the person to be presented shall in presence of the patron or his atturney and of the sheriffe of the shire Stewart of the Stewartry or heretable baily or commissar of the bounds of it be in the countrey and of the Magistrats of the brughs within the brugh before the granting and their accepting of the presentation Take and subscribe the oath of alleagiance otherwise his presentation is null and void of it self Now as shall be showne hereafter no man could with a saife conscience take that oath as it was tendred by this Parliament 5. They should have thereby condemned the manner of Elections by the people consequently themselves as being hitherto intruders because entering into the Ministery without a lawfull call viz without the presentation of the patron But it will be objected That all the ministers of Scotland who entered before the year 1649. should by this meanes be condemned as intruders entering without a lawfull call Ans Though patronages cannot but be condemned as sinfull tending to ruine the Church to defraude her of much advantage beside the spoiling robeing her of her privileges liberties which are purchased to her by the blood of Christ because the patron who sometime may be a prophane person a persecuter either hath not understanding to discerne the spirits or will not make choise of the best most able minister Yet such as entered that way before the
excellent Voâ—…t ubi suprâ—… Pag. 189. Quaest. 11. 9. That no Church canon or ordinance hath any effect force or validity but what shall be approved confirmed by him or his commissioner for so much doth the fore cited Act import now who but he who hath drunken in the opinions of Erastus Arminians will assent unto this It is true the canons ordinances of a Church judicatory cannot have the strength of a municipall law without the Magistrat's civill sanction But yet they may have the strength of Church Canons whether he approve of them or not as the Acts of the Councell at Ierusal Act 15. of all other Synods Assemblies which the Church had dureing the first three hundered yeers had Otherwise the Church should be in a hard case when the civill Magistrat did refuse his concurrence as hath been oft hinted in a better case under heathens then under Christian Magistrats Therefore this could not be assented unto 10. That all Church Canons are his proper Acts flow natively from him his power for the meeting is but for Counsell advice to him all which they say is without force unlesse he approve it as the Act sayeth so all their Acts Canons are his only not theirs But this could not be granted because 1. what ever he doth as supreme Governour or Magistrat is a civill Act no Church Act so no Church Canon 2. No Church Canon can be made by any but by Church Officers who are impowered by Iesus Christ for that effect but the Magistrat as such is no Church Officer 3. This power is without all warrand of Scripture therefore can not be acknowledged Thus you see what incroachments upon the Privileges of the Church the taking of this oath thus sensed by them carryeth along with it albeit there be some Erastians others who take these for no incroachments but trutâ—…es Yet reformed divines such as famous worthy Voetius Apollonius others have sufficiently manifested them to be grosle errours because the end designed in this undertaking is satisfaction to orthodox reformed sound divines with whose principles the present suffering Church of Scotland doth accord it is accounted sufficient only to mention those things which the taking of this oath as explained by their Acts deeds who tender it would clearly import an assenting unto But to proceed 15. By this oath They should grant that the Church is very imperfect so long as she wanteth a Christian Magistrat for she wanteth a chief Officer And hence it will follow that the Church in the dayes of the Apostles some hundereds of Years thereafter was imperfect as to its Constitution wanting this supreme Governour Otherwise they must say that Nero Caligula the rest of the Roman persecuting Emperours did sufficiently fill up this place And that the Apostles did upon the matter would not have refused plainely to have affirmed that these persecuting heathens were supreme Governours over all persones in all causes Civill Ecclesiastick But none of those can be affirmed with any probality or shew of reason 16. Yea by taking this oath They should grant that the Apostles primitive Church walked not regularly in the matter of governing the Church Because they acted with no such subordination unto the supreme Magistrat who then was they derived no power from him as their supreme Governour in causes Ecclesiastick To say that necessity did put them to this is but a poor defence for then out of necessity the primitive Church did rob the Magistrat of his power or else this power agreeth not to all Magistrats but only to Christian Magistrats it so it cannot be a power or Privilege annexed to the Crown And further it doth not agree to them as Christians nor yet as Magistrats otherwise it should agree to all Christians to all Magistrats which is false therefore i cannot agree to them as Christian Magistrats for as learned renowned Doct. Vâ—…us sayeth Polâ—…t Eccles. Pag. 137. Duo subjecta principia formalia quae non sunt unum auâ—… unâ—…a per se non possunt fundare effectum formalem per se unum sc. ex gr Homo unus si sit Consul Patâ—…r non poteâ—… dici habere potestatem consularem in cives qua Consul-paâ—…er nec potestatem patriam in sâ—…ium quâ Pater-consul 17. By taking of this oath They should yeeld unto the opening of a door unto the utter destruction overthrow of all Church judicatories for by their judgment who tender that oath the King is the fountaine of all Church power who ever executeth any Church power executeth it as his Commissioner he may imploy in this bussinesse whom he pleaseth by the Act for the heigh commission he imployeth civill persones who are no Church Officers in deposeing Ministers in excommunicating so he may imploy such persons alwayes only such for he is at liberty to imploy whom he will so at length he may put aside all Church Officers so lay aside all Church judicatures handle all Church bussinesse in civill courts But what Christian could yeeld to this See Voetius ubi supra Pag. 146 Arg. 11. 18. By this oath they should grant unto the Civill Magistrat power to erect new courts which have no warrand in the word such courts as the Church had not all the dayes of the Apostles nor many centuries of years thereafter for by vertue of his supremacy he erecteth this new court called a Heigh or Grand Commission wherein civill persons meddle with Church matters execute Church censures Church-men meddle with civill matters civill censures But to yeeld to this should be to destroy all Church power to condemne the Apostles for not leaving behinde them the example of such a court the primitive Church for not setting up such a court By Presbyterian principles no judicature must be acknowledged for a court of Christ but that which hath Christs warrand 19. By taking this oath They should yeeld unto the lawfulnesse of appealing from a Church judicature unto the civil Magistrat for it is lawfull to appeal from an inferiour judicature unto a superiour by the tenderers of the oath the supreme Magistrat is a superiour judicature It is lawfull to appeall from the Commissioners unto such as have given them that commission And Ministers in these judicatories are but his Commissioners But sound divines writting against Erastus the Arminiant will justify their refuseing to yeeld to this if they should have yeelded to this they should have condemned the Generall Assemblies that declared such as appealed from a Church judicature unto the King his Councell censurable with the sentence of excommunication And approved of such perverse troublers of the Church as took this corrupt course to keep themselves from censure Moreover there is no example of any such lawfull appellation for Paul's
appeal unto Caesar was from a civill court from Festus was in a matter of life death from no Church judicatorie See Voetius ubs supra Pag. 197. Quaest. 24. SECTIO XIII The former purpose further prosecuted fleet 's notion examined THere is one reason more pleading against the taking of the oath as it is now glossed it is this 20. By taking of this oath they should assent unto that power which is given unto the King in the 16 Act of Parliament viz. a power to settle secure Church governement in such a frame as shall be most agreable suiteable unto Monarchicall Governement most complying with the publick peace quyet of the Kingdome And so grant 1. That there is not one forme or modell of Church governement set down in the word obliging Churches in all ages to follow the same 2. That the supreme Magistrat alone may appoynt what forme he thinketh good To speak to this head at length would take a long time in regard that one Mr Stilling fleet hath been at the paines to give the World a proof of his learning reading by engaging in this quarrell in pleading against the privilege prerogative of the Crown of Christ whom God hath made King in Zion who will reigne untill all his enemies be made his footstool He would without all doubt have had more peace when stepping into eternity if he had imployed his partes abilities for Christ his interests as King sole King in his Church Kingdom But yet though the nature of this discourse will not admit so long full an examination of the grounds whereupon this learned man walketh Some thing must be said in short so much the rather because through the injury of the times the labours of such as have fully solidly answered him cannot be gotten printed And therefore till providence so order matters as that both those severall other things against prelats may receive a free Imprimatur Take these few observations upon his whole book which he is pleased to call a weapon salve c. so far as concerneth the bussinesse in hand Obs. 1. He granteth pag. 154. That it is necessary there should be a forme of government in the Church by vertue not only of that law of nature which provideth for the preservation of societies but likewise by vertue of that divine law which takes care for the Churches preservation in peace and unity So then if there be such a divine law for a forme of Church Government iâ—… in the primitive times there was a forme of Church Government followed the poynt is gained by Mr Stillingfleet's own concessions for part 1. c. 1 § 3. He sayeth that there is not the same necessitie for a particular clear revelation in the alteration of a law unrepealed in some circumstances of it as there is for the establishing of a new law as to the former a different practice by persons guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient which is the case as to the observation of the Lord's day under the Gospell for the fourth command standing in force as to the morality of it a different practice by the Apostles may be sufficient for the particular determination of the more rituall occasionall part of it Now there being a standing morall law for a forme of Church governement the practice of the Apostles who were guided by an infallible Spirit is sufficient for an alteration And so as their practice obligeth now to the observation of the first day Sabbath because of the standing force of the morall law for one day of Seven So their practice obligeth now unto that forme of Governement which they used because of the standing force of the law of God for a forme of Church Governement So that we need not enquire after a particular clear revelation in this case where there is but the alteration of a law unrepealed as to some particular circumstances And thus if the morality of the first day Sabbath stand the morality of the governement of the Church which the Apostles did set up will stand also Their practice altering the last day of Seven into the first will no more oblige then their altering of the ancient governement into a new one which was distinct from the former Obs. 2. Part. 2. c. 1. § 4 5 6. When he is about the stateing of the question he will have a nationall Church to be understood as a Church in which a forme of Government should be setled It is true a nationall society incorporated is a Church It is also true that the notion of a Church agreeth to other societies then nationall as himself sayes wherever the notion of a Church particular is to be found there must be a Governement in that Church so every society which may be called a Church should have a Governement in it But now the question is whether every such society as may be called a Church should have its own liberty to set up what forme of Government it thinketh best or only a nationall Church If only a nationall Church have that liberty then that liberty agreeth not to a nationall Church as it is a Church but under some other notion what is this other notion Is it because they are under one civil Governement But many nations may in some respect be under one civil Government in some respect there is hardly any one nation which in all its parts incorporations cities is governed after one the same manner But further what hath the Church to do with the civill lawes or civill way of Governement especially seing himself granteth that the Church is a quite distinct society from the civil state But next if every Church hath this liberty then in one the same nationall Church there may be many severall sorts of Governements this would occasion the greatest confusion in the world looketh no way like the ordinance of God which neither tendeth to union nor edification but to confusion distraction will make every parochial Church he cannot deny a parochiall Church to be a Church to have its own distinct forme of Government thus porachiall Churches should be like the Cantâ—…ns of Helvetia or distinct Kingdomes ruled by their own lawes after their owne manner If it be said that the unity peace of the nationall Church ought much more to be looked after then the peace unity of any one particular congregation Ans. will it thence follow that every particular congregation in a nationall Church should be Governed after one manner then it will follow also that all nationall Churches being members of the Church universall must be Governed after one the same manner for the peace unity of the Church universall is preferable unto the peace unity of a Nat. Church as the peace unity of a Nat. Church is preferable unto the peace unity of Particular
the duties of the one as well as for the duties of the other And every Presbyter hath the Ius to both as well in actu secundo as in actu primo judicious Vâ—…etius Polit. Eccl. Pag. 224. Quaest. 15. doth abundantly cleare this particular shewing that such a delegation is not lawfull out of Mat. 18 18. 16 18. 1 Cor. 5. Act. 20 28. 1 Tim. 5 17. 1 Thes. 5 12. 1 Pet. 5 1 2. comp with 1 Tim. 3 5. Ioh. 20 20. 1 Tim. 3. 4 13 14. 2 Tim. 2 2. 4 2. Tit. 1 3 5 7 8. Whatever may be done in case of necessity for dispatching of some particular Act which is transient And how or what way the limitation exercise of the power of jurisdiction belongeth to the Church in common more then the limitation exercise of the power of order is not yet clearly demonstrated by any thing which Mr Stillingfleet hath said And it is known that Prelats arrogat to themselves a speciall or sole interest in the power of order as well as in the power of jurisdiction therefore they stile themselves the only Pastors of the Dioecies say that the Presbyters are but their Substitutes Vicars And it is certane that they assume to themselves the sole power of ordination And though here in this place which is now under consideration Mr Stillingfleet is pleased to rancke up ordination under the power of jurisdiction yet else where viz. Pag. 273. he sayeth that The collation of orders doth come from the power of order not meerly from the power of jurisdiction 8. How cometh the Christian Magistrat in here to appoynt the constant limitation exercise of the power committed by Christ unto Church Officers This is a very great power granted unto the civill Magistrat some warrand would be seen for it But this is not the proper place to examine his notions concerning the power of the civill Magistrat in Church matters Enough of this observation Obs. 5. With Presbyterians the practice of the Apostles of the Churches in their dayes following their appoyntment command is of much weight It is true their examples as examples do not binde But when the Lord hath sent them forth for this end errand to plante Churches to ordaine new offices officers immediatly under him and to appoynt unto these officers their proper work to show them how what way they should goe about their work when in all things they delivered nothing to the Church but what they received of the Lord 1 Cor. 11 23. as Tertull. said de praeser adv haereses Apostoli nihil ex suo arbitrio elegerunt quod inducerent sed acceptam à Christo disciplinam fideliter nationibus assignaverunt Sure then their practice example ought to be followed Seing they were sent forth for this end especially viz. to reforme setle Churches in doctrine worship discipline governement according to a new Gospell modell can any think that we are not obliged to follow their practices It it true there can be no duty without a law making it a duty But Christ's sending them forth for this end giving them a speciall commission for this work sending them forth as the Father sent him breathing the Holy Ghost upon them commanding them Math. 28 v. 19 20. To goe teach all Nations all things which he had commanded them Act. 1 2 3. Speaking to them of the things pertainting to the Kingdome of God By which sayeth Calvin on the place Is signified that Christ would not goe away till first he had seen to the governement of the Church carry a law in their bosome say that their example is obligeing And when there is a law or warrand for following such an example it is but in vaine to dispute whether it be the example which bindeth or the rule making it our duty to follow such an example But moreover he will grant that examples in actions that are morall naturall are obligeing whether as examples or by reason of the morality of the action needeth not be anxiously enquired after will not actions done by them upon morall grounds that are of perpetuall concernement become actions morall naturall so obligeing Is not their example in observing the first day Sabbath obligeing And why He sayes because there was a morall law standing in force concerning the observation of one day in Seven Why then shall not their example in observing such or such a forme of governement be obligeing seing there was a morall law standing in force concerning the governement of the Church in generall Is there any rule extant making their example in the one case obligeing not in the other If the Apostolicall practice in the one case make an Apostolicall tradition so a divine institution so will their practice do in the other case yea the examples of the Churches practise in the Apostles times hints from their writtings do sufficiently evidence an institution we read of elders in Ierusalem hence we saifly argue that they were ordained though we read not in terminis terminantibus of the manner how they were ordained sayeth one But he hath foure things to object against this ground taken from the practice of the Apostles though acted by the Spirit Part. 2. cap. 6. § 20. As 1. That the Apostles did many things without any intention of obligeing others as preaching without maintenance c. Ans. 1. The consequence is null Because they did many things without such an intention will it follow Ergo they did nothing with such an intention 2. The disput is about such actions as were done by them by vertue of their speciall office calling of which kinde this is none to preach at some Churches without wages 3. Yea this same action of preaching without wages is to be imitated in the like cases that is when Ministers have a competent livelyhood otherwise as Paul had who said he robed other Churches 1 Cor. 11 ver 8. when there is no other way to stope the mouthes of false teachers who thereby take occasion to hinder the good of the Gospell for this was the thing which moved Paul to take â—…o wages from Corinth That he might cut off occasion from them that desired occasion and these were the false Apostles 1 Cor. 11 v. 12 13. 2. He sayeth The Apostles did many things upon particular occasions emergencies circumstances which things so done cannot binde by vertue of their doing them any furder then a parity of reason doth conclude the same things to be done as Paul's celebat communitie of goods their preaching from house to house absteaning from blood c. Ans. this is still to argue a particulari because such such particular practices oblige not Ergo no practice obligeth is a weak consequence 2. Actions done upon particular occasions emergencies are of another nature then such actions as are done
upon morall lasting grounds 3. If even those actions binde upon the ground of a parity of reason much more will these binde upon the same account for whatever ground or reason be given why the Apostles followed such a modell of Government in their dayes will stand good now evince that the same modell ought to be followed 4. And where as he sayeth before an acknowledged Apostolicall practice be looked on as obligatory it must be made appear that what they did was not according as they saw reason cause for the doing of it depending upon the severall circumstances of time place and persones but that they did it from some unalterable law of Christ or from indispensable reasons as will equally hold in all times places persons he confirmeth what is now answered for the reasons of their erecting such a species of Government do equally hold in all times places nothing can be said for the dependence of such a forme upon the severall circumstances of time place persons As for the particulars mentioned by him It is answered 1. For Celebat Christ himself Mat. 1 9 v. 12. restricteth it to such as have the gift of continency it bindeth none else 2. The Community of goods was for that time only for the contrary is practised in after times by all other Churches Christians for when Paul is pressing the Corinthians unto a contribution he never mentioneth this as an argument moving thereunto 3. Their preaching from house to house was for want of conveniency of more publicke places yet when they had liberty they went to the temple to Solomons porâ—…h to Synagogues 4. As for that Act 15 concerning the abstaineing from blood things strangled things offered to idols it was only for that time of the scandall not alwayes for Paul taketh off this 1. Cor 10 25 when he sayeth whatsoever is sold in the shambles that eat asking no question for conscience sake againe when he sayes 1. Tim 4 3 4 5. Every creature of God is good nothing to be refused if it be received with thanks giving But there is nothing of this kinde that can be showne in the matter of the species of Government as shall further appear when his alledgances are answered afterward 3. He sayes officers that were of Apostolick appoyntment are growne out of use in the Church as widowes 1 Tim. 4 9. or diaconisses Rom 16 1. Ans. These Diaconisses were not Church-officers having any Ministeriall charge or office in the Church for there is nothing spoken of their ordination But they were poor eleemosynaries indigent women taken in for some service unto sick strangers or propter horam balnei aut visitationis quando nudatum fuiâ—… corpus mulieris as sayeth Epipâ—… rius lib. 3. Tom. 2. haeres 79. And so their work was for those â—…ote countreyes because now there is no such necessitie for their work themselves are laid aside But 2. are there not severall other officers laid aside as Apostles Prophets Evangelists will he hence conclude that therefore nothing of their practice obligeth 3. If this ground be followed forth that Apostolick practice even in the matter of officers instituted by them is not of an obligatory nature then may all Church officers be laid aside so his formerly mentioned position concession touching the government of the Church by officers only of divine appoyntment will fall to the ground If he say that divine institution is one thing bare examples are another thing Ans. Then his reason here is impertinent for all Church officers are of divine institution these Diaconisses among the rest must be of divine appoyntment then what hath this to do here where the examplary practices of the Apostles are only spoken of which yet to presbyterians in the case of Government will speak faire for a divine institution finally if it could be cleared what was ought to be the proper work of these Widowes that it were of a lasting necessity unto the Church in all places at all times of which the scripture is altogether silent as may be seen concerning other standing officers of the Church respect should be had to that ordinance of God as well as to others 4. He sayeth Rites customes apostolicall are altered 〈◊〉 dipping in baptisme love feasts holy kisse therefore men do not think that apostolical practice doth binde Ans. 1. He still argueth à particularâ—… which is very unsure fallacious because in some things men look not upon the practice of the Apostles as bindeing therefore in nothing This argument will not hold 2. There is a great difference betwixt rites customes which are alterable such such formes of Government which be of a more lasting nature As for dipping in baptisme It is no where commanded nor was it constantly practised by the Apostles nor other Church officers It is true they were commanded to Baptize but this will not necessarily import baptizing by dipping for baptizing any thing may be otherwise then by dipping as these places do cleare Mark. 7 4. Heb. 9 v. 10. with Numb 8 7â—… 1. Cor. 10 v. 1. Rev. 19 13â—… compared with Isa. 63 3. Mat. 3 11. compared with Act. 2 17. And next it is severall times found that they baptized when where they could not get Dipping used as Act 2 41. 4 4. Where such multitudes could not be gotten dipt especially in the streets so Act 9 18 19. This was in a lodging when Paul was sick weak so unfit for Dipping So Act 16 33. This was in the night in a privat lodging when Paul Silas by reason of their sores were unable for dipping And therefore all that can be said in this is that sometimes they used Dipping sometimes sprinkling as occasion offered this will speak nothing for the Apostles continuall practiseing of dipping so it will not speak home to the case in hand 4. As for love feasts if they were ordinary seasts amongst private Christians it was but an Act of civility to use these they needed no institution from the Apostles practice a custome it is that continueth yet But if it be meaned of the feasts which they keeped at the Lord's suppâ—… when rich persons brought some meat with them to make a feast of at that time This was not constantly practised by the apostles of whose practices we are now speaking not yet was it warranted by them yea Paul writting to the Corinthians Epist. 1. c. 11. v. 22. sayeth have yee therefore no houses to eat drink in And so would have them forbearing that custome which they had so much abused Their custome was to keep those feasts in the place of the assembly he would have them if so they would feast keeping those feasts at home in their own houses therefore this is nothing to the purpose in hand 5. As for the Holy
In this Chap. the Apostle speaketh to them all alongs in the plurall number Mr Stillingfleet who is no friend to the independent way will easily acknowledge that what is there said was spoken to the Church Governours So then Mr Stillingfleet must say that these Governours were Presbyters of that one Church ruleing it together communi corsilio And that they can not so well be understood of Bish. for one Church should have but one Bishop So then here is a place which cannot be understood alike of both but must of necessity be understood of a Presbytery of a Presbytery having full Episcopall power in the matter of jurisdiction what Mr Stilling fleet will reply to this can hardly be conjectured A second passage is Phil. 1 v. 1. where mention is made of Bishops Deacons now these Bishops could not be Bishops properly so called in opposition to as distinct from preaching Presbyters Because of such Bishops there can be but one in one Church at once therefore they behoved to be Presbyters endued with Episcopall power having the thing as well as the name Presbyters of that one Church So that this passage cannot be equally understood of both with any shew of reason A third passage is 1. Thes. 5 12 13 14. Where there are some mentioned who were labouring among the people were over them in the Lord these were to warne the unruly c. So that in this one Church there were severall Presbyters Presbyters endued with power of warning the unruly Mr Stillingfleet cannot imagine any colurable pretence whereby without much apparent incongruity this passage may be understood of either of the different formes And seing this ground faileth here we may for all which he hath said to the contrary arrive to such an absolute certainty of that course which the Apostles took in setling Churches So much for this observation 6. It may be observed That Presbyterians have more then the practice of the Apostles even their positive institutions in these few particulars 1. In ordaining instituting such such Officers as Pastours Doctors Elders Deacons as may be seen Rom. 12 v. 6 7 8 1 Cor. 12 28. Ephes. 4 v. 11 12. In all which places there is no mention made of a Bishop distinct from a preaching Presbyter If Mr Stillingfleet say according to his principles that there was no necessity of making mention of him particularly because he is no distinct officer from a Presbyter but only impowered by the rest as their Commissioner Beside what hath been replyd to this formerly this may be added here That if this be truth which Mr Stillingfleet affirmeth he hath wasted much paper and paines in vaine when he went about to prove that no certanety of the practice of the Apostles could be come at whether they did set up episcopall or Presbyterian Governement for these should not be two distinct Governments And he had a shorter cut for Answering all the places of scripture then the way was which he took Yea he might have spared his whole book given out this one Thesis for all viz Though Presbyterian Governement be Iuris Divini yet the Presbyters may lawfully intruste one of their number with some speciall piece of the exercise of jurisdiction ordination And then he might have had more to say upon the ground of prudence or the like for himself then now he hath But it is not good to be wise above what is written it is best wisdome prudence to follow the rule of the word But more over 2. They have the Apostles institutions concerning the qualifications of these officers as is to be seen in Paul's epistles to Timothy Titus 3. These officers are commanded to such such pieces of work Some to rule some to teach also some to take care of the poor 4. These officers are commanded to attend that work of theirs with all diligence in their own proper persons without rolling it over on others Rom. 12 6 7 8. The Minister is to waite on his Ministery he that teacheth on teaching he that giveth is to do it with simplicity he that ruleth is to rule with diligence 5. In matters of discipline juridiction they are commanded to Act joyntly for the officers of the Church of Corinth were appoynted to conveen together that they might deliver the incestuous person unto Satan 1 Cor. 5 4 5. So the brethen the officers of the Church of Thessalonica were exhorted to warne the unruly Now lay all these together Such such officers set to such such work appoynted to attend the same ordained to Act joyntly in matters of government there is a species of Government a species warranted by Divine institution viz by Apostolick commands for these positive commands are of a lasting nature till God repeale them againe Himself giveth some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Marks whereby to know when positive lawes binde immutably the first whereof mentioned Part. 1. c 1. § 6. Part. 2. c. 2. § 2. Is usefull here viz. when the same reason of the command continueth still Now let Mr Stilling fleet show if he can what reason could plead for Ministers acting collegiatly in matters of discipline then which will not be of force now was there lesse of the spirit then nor is now Or was there fewer able fit men for to be Bishops then nor is now Or was there lesse care to have things done orderly exactly or shall we say that all these commands were for that age of the Church only If so there is an easie way found to cast all the commands injunctions of the Apostles though they were induced with the spirit Shall it be thought that the command given to the Church officers of Corinth to conveen to excommunicat did binde them only at that time if so there should be a wide door opened to much evil a way prepared for laying aside all the injunctions instructions of the Apostles as now uselesse as an almanack out of date Enough of this consideration Obs. 7. It would seem to be a great reflexion upon Iesus Christ who was faithfull to him that appoynted him that as a sonne so beyond Moses who was faithfull as a servant Heb. 3. 2 5 6. To say that he hath not appoynted a standing forme of Governement in his house Mr Stilling fleet replyeth Part 2. c. 4. § 1. 1. That then it must be made appear that the setling of this forme was a part of his mediatory work Ans. This may easily be made to appear for it did belong to his Kingly office so was a part of his mediatory work as well as his instituting of officers in his house as Mediator the Government is laid on his shoulders Isa. 9. 6. And all power in heaven earth was given to him Mat. 28 18. He addeth I grant he is King of the Church doth
been already said Obs 8. Mr Stilling fleet is not well pleased with such as lay any weight upon the former ground mentioned viz Christ's being obliged there unto by his office as mediator King Lord of his house would have them rather proving that Christ hath determined a forme of Governement then that he ought so to have done Therefore we shall shew that Christ hath so done indeed And what the Apostles did at his command or by vertue of the commission he gave unto them will easily be granted to be equivalent But to passe this Christ himself hath laid down the maine ground foundation of a species of governement in Math. 18 ver 15 16 17. For there he is setting down a course for the removing of scandalls that will fall out among his Disciples followers ordering the matter so that when privat meanes will not gaine the offending brother more publick meanes must be used he must be brought unto the Church judicature that Church judicature hath power to excommunicat him if so be he heare them not as to the removing of the scandall It is true many parties endeavour to presse these words for their own use but it will not hence follow that therefore these words are incompetent to determine any one forme for if this ground be relevant much of the scripture should become incompetent to determine matters of faith doctine because severall parties labour to wrest the same to their own judgment It would be tedious here to examine the clames of all parties unto this place the present work is only to deal with Mr Stillingsleet therefore only his notions concerning this place must be examined Concerning this place then he giveth his judgment 2. part cap. 5. § 8. first he taketh the trespasses mentioned to be matters of private offence injury not matters of Scandall his grounds are these 1. The parallel place Luk. 17 ver 3. is to be understood of privat injuries because it is in the power of each privat person to forgive them Ans. So said Erastus before him but after narrow search it will be found that the forgiving mentioned in the Text Math. 18. is a desisting from any further prosecution of the bussinesse a forgiving which must not be granted untill the brother be gained But whether the offending brother be gained or not all private injuris must be forgiven him none must keep up a Spirit of revenge against him And therefore these trespasses must be matters of Scandall which unlesse the offending brother be gained must be prosecuted untill the yondmost step be used 2. He sayeth It appears from the next words of Peter ver 20. This is another of Erastus's shifts But for answere It will not appear till Mr Stillingfleet first cleare that there is such a connexion betwixt these verses as will undoubtedly demonstrat that one purpose is to be understood in Both. But commentators shewe the matter to be otherwise indeed there is nothing that can so much as ground a probability of such a connexion here unlesse it be these words Then came Peter to him but whosoever shall look on Luk. 8 v. 19. shall have the like thus Then came to him his mother c. And yet this was not immediatly after what was said before as will appear when compared with other Evangelists And so since it is not certaine that this was immediatly after the former purpose no reason can be given to evince the identity of these purposes 3. He sayeth If it were meant of any scandalous sin it might so fall out that matters of scandal should be brought before the Church when only one person knowes it Ans. It is not said that every such scandall or trespasse whereof only one is conscious should be brought in publick but that more noture scandalls ought to be brought before Church judicatures when more privat admonitions will not gaine the offender But 2. This inconvenience will recurre upon himself in the case of privat offences But next as to the word Church he sayes It is a select company called together to hear the whole cause this was agreable to the jewish practice pudefacere coram multis delictum publicare to this the Apostle alludeth 2 Cor. 2 v. 6. this is the reproof before all 1 Tim. 5 v. 20. Ans. 1. The word Church is not usually so taken in the New Testament the Hebrew words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Old Test. do alwayes import a company imbodied in a stated way as a fixed congregation either for governement or Worship Mr Leigh in his Critica sacra sayeth that among the Grecians chiefly the Athenians from whom it came it was used for a multitude called together by the command of a Magistrat 2. Christ sayeth tell the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so directeth them to a fixed standing company 3. That pudefacere coram multie being the same with 2 Cor. 2 6 the censure of many confirmeth this For that censure was by a Church judicature conveened in the name of the Lord Iesus to take course with a scandalous person 1 Cor. 5. Againe 4. No commentator taketh the words so only Grotius other Erastians put such a glosse upon them 5. Christ's scope is to have the offending brother gained not to have matters of fact which are questionable cleared 6. If this be the meaning of the word Church what shall be the sense meaning of these words Let him be unto thee as a heathen man a Publican He answereth Tho meaning is look upon him as an obstinat refractary creature meddle no more with him then with a heathen a publican And is this all the punishment which the offender must meet with Who gave privat men this power to passe such a sentence But 2. This must be a Church sentence because it is added Whatsoever you shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. To this he replyeth That the meaning is it is an evidence that his sin is bound upon him that he is lyable to punishment But how is his sin bound upon him or how is he made lyable to punishment There must be something done on earth which God must ratify in Heaven on earth there is none to do any thing but either the pursuer himself or the select company It cannot be the pursuer for that were a dreadful intolerable slavery to subjecte every man to the lust of his enemy pursuer If it be the select company how or whence have they this power If they be cloathed with authority then are they a judicature this is the thing pleaded for And thus it appeareth that scandals are here understood that this Church is a Church judicature notwithstanding of all which Mr Still hath said to the contrary which is but the very same which others had said
before him which was sufficiently answered by worthy learned Mr Gillespy in his Aarons rod blossoming though he will not so much as once take notice of his replyes The ancients did so understand the place particularly Orig. Tract 6. in Mat. But that it may be cleared how there is a foundation here laid down for a way of removing of scandals by Church officers in communi associated together in a judicature so how there is a way laid down for presbyterian Government let those particulars be considered 1. From the beginning of the chapt the Lord is speaking of scandals first of scandals given as is clear v. 6 8 9. after he hath used some arguments to presse his followers to beware of that evill he cometh v. 15. with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may be rendered but if thy brother to another case about the same purpose or head viz. to cleare this question what shall be a christians carriage when his neighbour stumbleth or offendeth him by his unchristian carriage in his ordinary walk So Galvin Aretius others so he is speaking of reall scandals for 1. They are Brethren or Church members with whom this course must be taken 2. The offending brother is to be rebuked or convinced of his fault 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth such a convinceing as ' is for sin Ioh. 8 9 46. so the LXX use it Lev. 19 17. where sinnes scandals are spoken of 3. He sayes if he hear thee not if he repay thee the wrong he hath done or if he be reconciled 4. Then he is gained now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Stillingfleet himself confesseth is used for conversion turning others from sin 1. Cor. 9 19. 1. Pet. 3 1. compared with Iam 5 20. Hence 2. It would be considered that the Christian's scope in this bussinesse should be to gaine the man's soull for this cause he is to assay all calme peaceable gaineing private meanes to bring the offending brother to conviction acknowledgment of his fault so first speak to him alone then take some others with him to be witnes both of his Christian carriage towards him in desireing to have him gained of his unwillingnesse to be gained that so they may bear witnesse of both unto the Church judicature 3. When privat means do not worke he is to be delated unto the Church judicature for the person offended must tell the Church What Church He must tell that Church unto which the witnesses will be usefull that is a judicature for to that witnesses have a relation That Church which is able to convince if any do it That Church whose sentence is the last remedy Thâ—… Church which hath power to binde loose That Church which hath power to binde loose with a promise of the ratification of what they do in heaven That Church which hath the keyes Mat. 16. power authoritatively to pardon retaine sinnes Ioh. 20 23. That Church which hath power to pronunce that sentence after which the man is to be looked upon as a heathen a publican 4. And when this Church judicature can not get him convinced they must passe a sentence upon him this sentence is the sentence of excommunication as learned Mr Gillespy hath abundantly shewed Aaron's rod. book 3. c. 2. 3. Hence it is clear 5. That here is set downe the way of taking away Church scandalls by inflicting Church censures And this by Christ's appoyntment is not to be done by any one person but by the Church officers in communi collegiatly for it was never heard of to this day either in sacred or prophane writtings that one man was called a Church or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is a good basis for Government yea for presbyterian Government or the Government of the Church communi consilio presbyterorum here there is not only a foundation for graduall appeals as himself confesseth here though part 2. cap. ult § 8. he would say that presbyterians found their subordination of courts Upon the principles of humane prudence for Church censures for the lawfull use of excommunication as he confesseth also But also for the species or modell of Government Or for the manner of the constitution of the judicatures which should excommunicat take notice of Church scandalls for it is called the Church so cannot be meaned of a prelat who is no where so called and yet arrogateth to himself all the power of jurisdiction But Mr Stilling fleet hath two arguments whereby he endeavoureth to prove that Christ did never intend to institute any one forme of Government in the Church part 2. c. 4. § 4. 5 6. c. This is a great undertaking and his arguments must needs be very strong but whether so or not the reader may judge The summe of the first is this If there be any such institution of Christs as a standing law it must either be expressed in direct termes which cannot here be showne Or deduced by a necessary consequence and no consequences can make new institutions but only apply one to particular cases And then the obligation of what is drawne by a necessary consequence must be expressed in scripture Ans. It hath been showne that the practice of the Apostles was for a forme of Government and from their practice a law may by necessary consequence be drawne considering their place office how they were sent forth to plant Churches to set up officers to appoynt unto each of them their proper work c. And for this cause were endued with extraordinary qualifications assistence confirming their commission by many signes wonders And this carryeth an obligation in its bosome There hath been showne also a standing law of Christ's from which a forme of Governement may be deduced a standing law about the removing of scandals which will found a species of Governement by Church officers in common as well as appeals Church censures excommunication from thence there is an obligation for the one as well as for the rest 2. But if all this will not satisfie let Mr Stilling fleet satisfie himself with the standing obligation of the moralitie of the first day Sabbath he shall with all satisfie himself as to the standing obligation of the moralitie of a species of Church Governement He can produce no law for the first day Sabbath but a law deduced by necessary consequence without any obligation expressed in scripture concerning that which is so drawn by consequence if this be enough in the case of the first day Sabbath why not also in the case of Governement If he say in the bussinesse of the Lord's day there was only an application of an institution to a particular case It is Ans. So is it in the matter of Church Governement for there was a law for a Governement in genere this law drawn by consequence from the
practice of the Apostles primitive Church is but an application of that generall to a particular species of Governement His second arg is this All the standing lawes respecting Church Governement are equally applyable to severall formes Ans. Are they applyable to the hierarchie to Erastianisme to independency to Morellianisme Or only to Presbytery Prelacy If only to these two then all other formes but one of these two are utterly excluded there is no more liberty left save to make choise of one of these But what if this ground of his shall not hold He referreth all the lawes to these three heads The 1. Head is the qualifications of the persons for the office of Governement so citeth 1 Tim. 3 1 to 8. Tit. 1 5 to 10. Ans. And may it not be said useing his own words muâ—…atis mutandis that all these the rest are equally required as necessary in a Pope in a Patriarch c. As well as in a Bishop or Presbyter Yea every one may invent a number of new officers defend them with this that all these qualifications agree to them The 2. Head is The precepts requireing a right management of the work citeth Act. 20 28. 2 Tim. 4 2. 2 2. 1 Tim. 5 19 21 22. Heb. 13 17. Tit. 1 5. And addeth there is no precept in all these Epistles to Timothy Titus prescribeing whether they should Act solely or only as Consul in Senatu Ans. But if the precepts be such require such a management such work as can not with any possibility in any tolerable manner be obeyed performed by officers under such a forme then it cannot be left to the will of men to set up such a forme so is the case here The precepts are not applyable unto prelats Is one man able to exhort reprove watch over a whole dioâ—…cy his alone seing he in all probability shall never see their faces And as for delegation of Church power Mr Stilling fleet himself sayeth Part. 2. c. ult § 8. Pag. 414. That there is not the least footstep of it either in scripture or antiquity Is it possible that one man can in any tolerable manner obey these commands watch over such a number over which Two or Three hundered ministers could not get well watched God layeth not utter impossibilities on his officers So then seing these precepts are not applyable unto any other forme then Presbyteriall his Argument falleth to the ground Seing it is not imaginable that one man can rule such a numerous people watch over them by discipline over whom fifteen or sixteen Presbyteries each of them consisting of fifteen or sixteen Ministers as many ruling elders beside the competent number of ruling elders which each particular congregation had were set had all work enough more then they could well overtake But. 2. What will he do with that command 1 Cor. 5. given to the elders of that Church to conveen together for an Act of discipline Doth not that command concerne Gospell Churches now as much as any of these precepts in the Epistles to Timothie or Titus And how is it imaginable that it can be applyable unto one man Sure then this command is not equally applyable to both formes For a precept given to a collegiat body to meet together is not applyable to one single person The 3. Head is generall rules such as these that none preach without a call Heb. 5 2. Rom. 10 14. That offenders be censured that complaints bâ—… made to the Church in case of scandall that all be done decently in order to edification Ans Well then if it be a standing rule that complaints be made to the Church it is a standing rule that there should be a fixed Church to receive these complaints all the question is whether this fixed Church which can take notice of complaints inflict Church censures excommunicate can as well be understood of a prelat as of a body of Church officers incorporated And if Mr Stilling fleet can be able to show that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is or may be taken for one single person then his notion will be more able to stand But if not of necessity it must fall to the ground Obs. 9. It is worth the considering how weighty a bussinesse the matter of the Governement of the Chuch is of what great consequence it is to have it modelled aright For experience hath made it appear how much more effectuall for keeping of the Church of Christ pure from errour heresy for beareing downe of Prophanity for promoving of the work of Godlinesse in power one species or forme is then another And this may speak very much for the Lord's keeping that in his own hand not leaving it unto any Prince or Pastor to determine what shall be the species of Governement Especially considering with what byasses by-respects the most of men are ready to be carryed how readyall are to modell Church Governement so as may most suite their own ends serve most to make them great in a world And hence it hath been seen that when men leave the simplicity of the Gospell the pâ—…terne there set down they run wilde never once consult the edification of the Church or the promoveing of the work of God in souls c. But their own base ends And when men will be wise above what is written follow their own notions devices God giveth them up to delusions to more strange phancies And sad experience hath proved how dangerous it is to depart from the rule of the word in matter of discipline for by this meanes it came to passe that the Church did not only get Bishops distinct from superiour unto Presbyters but also Metropolitans after these Primats at length Patriarchs finally the Pope They followed not the rule of the word but thought that they were lest at liberty as Mr Stilling fleet doth sadly make out Part. 2. c. 7. would have the Chuch as pompous as the state so made the state Governement their copie And therefore as there was one Emperour so there behoved to be one universall Bishop Pope whom the world had never seen had not this notion of Mr Stillingfleets been in their head viz. that they might order the matter of Church Governement as they pleased best though Mr Stillingfleet make use of this as a confirmation of his notion yet it is such a proof of it as may make all tender hearted protestants tremble at it reject it as being the very thing which raised up Antichrist Obs. 10. Mr Stillingfleet is pleased in the last Chapt of his book to gather together some expressions of Divines at home abroad in France Germanie the low countreyes as favouring his purpose which to examine a work of this nature will not suffer any who will may do it
their own belly not the glory of Christ. And how well this agreeth unto those men now spoken of any who know them may judge And therefore seing it is their designe intended work to deceive the hearts of the simple by their bold consident assertions to cause them beleeve things contrary to the Doctrine which they have already learned received it must be a necessary duty for poor simple people to avoid such So the Apostle writting to Titus cap. 1 14. forbiddeth to give head to jewish fables commandements of men that turne from the truth who are these who teach such things See v. 10 11. unruly vaine talkers deceivers teaching things which they ought not for filthy lucres sake It cannot then be lawfull to obey this act So writing to the Philippians cha 3 2. He sayeth beware of dogs beware of evil workers beware of the concision by whom the false teachers of these times are to be understood Now he commandeth to beware of those that is shun them forbear to hear them follow them not And againe v. 17 18 19. he sayeth Brethren be followers together of me Marke them which walk so as ye have us for ensample for many walk of whom I have told you oftin now tell you even weeping that they are enemies to the crosse of Christ whose end is destruction whose God is their belly who minde earthly things So he would have them following such as taught as he did walked as he walked not such as were enemies to the crosse of Christ And certanely when Paul would have the Ephesians cap. 4 14. No more carryed about with every winde of Doctrine by slight of men cunning craftinesse whereby they lie in waite to deceive he would not have them following or attending the Ministerie of such concerning whom the question is So when he willeth the collossians cap. 2 v. 8. to beware least any man spoile them through Philosophy and vaine deceit after the tradition of men after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ he would not have people give obedience unto this Act to attend the Ministery of such who teach false Doctrine By slight cunning craftinese whereby they lie in waite to deceive seek to spoile people of the truth by their Philosophie such as it is vaine deceit after the traditions of men not after Christ seek to beguile with enticeing words So in his first Epistle to Timothie cap. 4. v. 1 2. He sayeth that in the later times some shall depaire from the faith giving head to seduceing spirits speaking lies in Hypocrisie having their consciences feared with a hote yron It must then be hazardous most dangerous to give head to such seduceing spirits as speak lies have their consciences seared with an hote yron as being the cause of departing stom the faith so that such as will guaird against departing from the faith would take heed whom they heare So in his second Epistle to Timothie cap. 3 v. 5. he speaketh of some whom he would have all honest people turne away from these he describeth first from their corrupt conversation v. 2 3 4 5. thus men shall be lovers of their own selves covetous boasters proud blasphemers disobedient to parents unthankfull unholy without naturall affection false accusers incontinent fierce despisers of these that are good treatours heigh minded heady lovers of pleasures more then lovers of God much time needs not be spent in shewing how fitly all these agree unto the persons now spoken of such as know them can best judge But then secondly he describeth them from their Doctrine v 6 8 13. They creep into houses and lead captive silly women us Iaâ—…es and Iâ—…mbres withstood Moses so do these also resist the truth men of corrupt mindes reprobat concerning the faith evil men and seducers all which particulars without contradiction agree to these now spoken of And therefore the Apostle's command standeth in force from such turne away By all these passages It is clear that the Ministerie of false corrupt teachers should not be attended 7. If it were lawfull to hear these in obedience to this Act it would be also lawfull upon an Act to attend the Ministerie of Anabaptists Antinomians Socinians Arminians or Iesuits And if it would not be lawfull to do this no more can it be lawfull to attend the Ministerie of these in question who seek to pervert the right wayes of the Lord labour to subvert the simple people to turne them away from the truth 8. Such as their Doctrine is such are the prayers not only stuffed with errour but larded with blasphemy as might easilie be shown were it fit here to mention what their expressions are As their Doctrine tendeth to reproach the work of reformation the power of godlinesse so do their publick prayers as such as hear them can showe They pray for a blessing on the prelats under the name of Reverend right Reverend fathers on their wayes courses which God will curse blaste not to mention their unsound parasitick expressions concerning the King's supremacy calling him head of the Church c. Now seing tender consciences can not joyn with them in those prayers how can they attend their Ministerie Are not all present bound to joyn in prayer with them who should be the mouth of all the congregation unto God pray with them when out of the corruption of their heart they ordinarily utter expressions savouring of blasphemy errour can godly tender consciences goe alongs with them And seing they cannot how can they be bound to attend their Ministerie There are snares in Prayer no lesse then in preaching Yea particular persons concurre more with the minister in prayer then in preaching there fore they may more saiflie hear errour preached then joyne in an erroneous prayer for in the one they are purely passive But in the other they are some way active therefore unquestionably there is sin in constant attending the Ministerie of such with whom if they concurre in prayer they must sinne 9. Yeelding obedience unto this Act were upon the matter a consenting unto the great incroachment made upon the privileges of the Church The Church hath this power privilege from the Lord to make choise of her own officers as the frequent examples thereof in the dayes of the Apostles do cleare this would be the greater sin now after the Lord hath graciously delivered that Church from that yoke put her in possession of her power privileges after that the power of patrons which was a piece of cruell bondage oppression unto the Church is removed to consent againe unto wreething of that yoke about her neck were no small transgression And it is clear that the attending of the Ministerie of such must be an accepting of them as Ministers lawfully called notwithstanding that they want the election of
that both they the Minister whom they heare may be apprehended punished according to the pleasure of these persecuters And thus the honest Zealous servants of Christ are either put from making mention of the name of the Lord at all whether in publick or in private Or brought into great trouble hazard thereby Is it not a very sad astonishing thing that when whole countrey sides are almost laid waste people wandering from place to place seeking the word of the Lord Thousands are perishing for want of knowledge multitudes deluded with false teachers such Ministers as were driven from their own flockes might not lay out themselves for the good of perishing souls do what they could for instructing strengthening comforting of the poor afflicted persecuted people of God May not this be matter of admiration that any upon this account should be put to suffer And certanely none with any shew of reason will condemne those Ministers if they take notice of these few particulars following 1. Though they were banished by the sentence of a civill judge Yet they remained still Ministers no such sentence of a civil Magistrat can depose a Minister from his office The spirit of the prophets as to this is subject to the Prophets only It is true it followed upon their banishment as a necessary consequence that they could not exerce the Ministeriall function in that place out of which they were banished But notwithstanding of any Act of banishment they remained Ministers for there is no such connexion betuixt their being Ministers their being in such a place And all the sentence of the Magistrat reached only to their being or not being in such a place All this will be beyond disput with such as are not grosse Erastians for no reformed divine will acknowledge that the civill Magistrat can immediatly depose a Minister far lesse can he do it by the sole Act of banishment So then this is clear that those Ministers who were banished from their owne parishes remained still Ministers of the gospell yea as hath been said in the fore-going section Ministers of the Church of Scotland 2. It is no lesse clear unto all such as have not drunken in independent principles That all such as are Ministers have a relation unto the Church universall and unto the nationall Church wherein they are and so may wherever they are discharge the duty of Ministers in preaching administrating the Sacraments 3. Not only may they do so but there is a necessity laid upon them to preach the gospel woe is due unto them if they do it not 1 Cor. 9 16. If once they have given up themselves unto Christ as servaâ—…ts to him they must resolve to be imployed for him to the out most of their power must not think of laying up their talent in a napkin lest they get the wicked slothfull servant's reward They have a divine command to preach in season and out of season to lay out themselves to the yondmost for Christ and his interest This will also be undenyable especially considering in the next place 4. That there was never greater necessity for their bestirring of themselves as faithfull Ministers of the gospel then now when there are so many thousands left destitute so many led away with false guides who make it their work to deceive people to pervert the right wayes of the Lord so many ready to faint under persecution sore affliction Is not the harvest now great are not the labourers few when a man shall goe many miles before he shall heare any honest Minister And should such on whom God is calling aloud to teach exhort comfort be silent now Is not Saâ—… bussy leading some away to Atheisme others to Prophanity some to popery others to Quakerâ—…sme And doth not this call aloud on all who would be faithfull to their master to be actively bestirring themselves now for the good of sâ—…uls for the glory of God Are there not many honest followers of Christ lying under sore oppression bondage their spirits being grieved their souls wasted with hearing seeing what they do hear see And have not these need to be comforted cheered up under the crosse Doth not God allow consolation to such is he not calling on his servants to speak comfortably to such Are there not many almost fainting by reason of their weaknesse the continuance of the tryall should not Ministers minde that command 1 Thes. 5 14. Comfort 〈◊〉 feeble minded supporte the weak Are there not many in hazard to be led away with the temptations of the time hath not Satan many instruments wearying themselves in this service of seduceing poor people drawing them into their nets snares should not Ministers be doing what in them lyeth to keep out of the snare such as are in hazard to recover such as are already insnared out of the hand of the devil Great then is the necessity that poor people are into double must the woe be that abideth such Ministers as are silent at such a time when all things call upon them to lift up their voice like a trumpet to shew people their transgressions their hazard to be burning shineing lights that such as walke in darknesse may see their way be comforted 5. Such a practice is aboundantly warranted by the Apostles other Church officers in the primitive times For they went to severall places preached the Gospell When they were persecuted in one city they went unto another still preached the gospell where ever they came The history of the acts of the Apostles aboundeth with instances of this kinde so that it is needlesse to cite any If it be said that these were extraordinary officers Apostles propâ—…ets 〈◊〉 who were not fixed to any one place as the ordinary officers were It is answered That preaching of the Gospell was not the Charactersticke of unfixed officers but common to them with fixed pastors doctors preaching unfixedly was not alwayes their note essentiall mark because in times of persecution pastors doctors might have preached wherever they came as the officers of the Church of Ierusalem did who being scattered abroad upon the persecution of Stephen act 8. 1. Did goe every where preaching the word v. 4. Those who were scattered behoved to be the fixed officers of the Church of Ierusalem for it is not probable that the Apostles would have left that Church of Ierusalem so long without preaching officers fixed for preaching administrating the sacraments seing they had instituted Deacons who were lesse necessarie Act 6 1 2 3 4. seing themselves were not fixed there but were to goe thorow the world according to Christ's appoyntment the direction guideing of the Spirit 6. So is it warranted by the practice of the faithfull honest servants of Christ
in all ages who through persecution being thrust from one place went preached the gospell in another both in the time of the first ten persecutions through occasion of which the Gospell was spread far thorow the world at severall times since The honest servants of Christ in Queen Mary her dayes went abroad preaching the Gospell So did the zealous servants of Christ in Scotland when banished or compelled to flee preach in England â—…rance Holland without any new ordination or any thing like it 7. There is some necessitie lying upon them to preach as occasion offereth that they may not stumble the poor ignorent people who upon their silence are ready to think that the civil Magistrat hath power to depose Ministers formally And therefore if there were no more but this it were enough to provoke them to preach that the world might see that they put a difference betwixt the power of the Magistrat the power of the Church And that when they submit unto the Magistrat keeping within the compasse of his calling exerciseing that power which formally agreeth to him though he should mistake as to the application They will not submit any further to the wronging of the privileges of the Church And so will let the world see that they are still Ministers of the Gospell though banished from their particular flocks 8. Their silence in such a case would be stumbling unto others who look upon it as an evidence of fainting fear in them who dar not open their mouth nor appear for Christ speak to the edification encouragement of sufferers least it offend the Magistrat And when such are so faint-hearted how doth it discourage others strongly prevaile with some to goe over the belly of their own light conscience yea moreover it hardeneth the wicked in their evil courses encourageth them to persecute more more when they see such fainting discouragment among the followers of Christ. So then when these particulars are considered It will be found that such Ministers do but their duty that they would come short in their duty if they did not so preach the Gospell If it be Objected here That to preach in such a disorderly way would be a breaking of the established order of the Church viz. a preaching within such a Bishops dioecy without his license so it would be a course not approved by the God of order It is Answered 1. That ceremonies or matters of mere order must be passed by in times of necessitie such as this is 2. Such an established order as tendeth to the ruine of religion is but iniquity established by law for that is not an order of God's appoyntment which is destructive to the maine bussinesse viz. the edification of souls therefore such an order which is to destruction not to edification is not to be regairded 3. Where is there any warrand for such an order or appoyntment in all the Gospell Did the Apostles ever aske liberty from the corrupt Clergy among the Iewes to preach Christ in such or such a place Where is there any warrant for such as are Ministers called of God ordaâ—…ned to suspend the exercise of that function till they have the license good will of a prelate This is that popish leaven which the former English Prelats had from Rome preaching the Gospell is immediatly commanded to all who are Ministers there is not the least syllabe for their going to a Bishop who is nothing else but a creature of man to seek license And certanely none can think that these Ministers might have gone to the prelat to obtaine liberty seing that would have been a cleare acknowledging of them their power contrare to their vow covenant So then it was better to take the way of the Apostles c to obey God rather then men to preach at God's command when man forbiddeth as well as to preach truth when man commandeth the contrary seing he hath no power from God for that effect more in the one case then in the other 2. It may be possibly further objected That how ever they remaine Ministers so may preach as they have a call yet to seek corners hideing places to preach in to separated congregations cannot be allowed in a constitute Church Ans. If they be Ministers of the gospell they may lawfully preach the gospell where God in his providence giveth them a call to preach 2. Since they cannot have liberty to preach the gospel in publick they may must do it in private when the necessity of the people calleth for it Christ his Apostles did not alwayes get the publick places to preach in but were content of privat roomes Many a time did Christ preach by the sides of mountaines by the sea side in such by-wayes And so did the Apostles Paul could get no better at Ephesus then the school of Tyrannus and two full yeers he preached in his own hired house at Rome Act. 28 30 31. therefore this practice of theirs cannot be condemned for 3. As the Church was then in fieri so is it now in a decaying condition therefore though it were granted which is not yet clearly proved that in a Church rightly constituted such private preachings were not lawfull yet when a Church is fallen from her right constitution is upon the decaying hand at without all doubt the Church of Scotland is this day many things may be allowed as they are in a time when the Church is but in fieri as to this particular in question a time of persecution as this is is alwayes excepted so that it is lawfull enough now so long as this persecution lasteth to preach the gospell in private when no liberty can be had to do it openly 4. These Ministers are gathering no separated congregations but only preaching to all who will come hear the word of truth in such quiet retired places where they may get it done most saifly may be most free from distraction trouble of their enemies who are waiting to finde them out that they may haile them to prisons Who then can condemne their cariage in this 3. If any should further object say That this would be an open contempt of the Magistrat's lawfull authority disobedience to his lawfull commands For though it be true that he cannot take away the office of a Minister or the power of order so degrade him yet he may take away the exercise of his Ministeriall function at least he may discharge the exercise of the same within any part of his Kingdome or dominions Ans. Whether there be such an expresse prohibition or not is not certanely known nor whether or not the objection doth suppone that the Magistrat's Act of banishing of them out of their own parishes or out of the bounds of their respective presbyteries doth include a discharge of exâ—…erceing the Ministeriall
The grounds ends of this undertaking SECTION 1. Pag. 5. Sheweth When the Christian religion began first in Scotland That Palladius was the first prelate in Scotland No prelats among the Culdees How when reformation from popery began Superintendents no prelats Nationall Assemblies from the beginning of the reformation How the Tulchan Bishops came in over the Church her belly The Church wrestleth till these be put away presbyterian Government be setled in all her judicatories Anno 1592. The King thereafter incroacheth upon the privileges of the Church Prevaileth with some of the Ministers who betray the Church yeeld to Parliament-Bishops hinder the Church from enjoying her privileges liberties in her free Assemblies The faithfull Zealous are persecuted Parliaments carry on the King's designe with violence Corrupt Assemblies are convocated to further his Maj. designe to give Church power unto these Parliamentary Prelats Parliaments ratifie all The Church protesteth striveth against all this what she can The prelats being now inthroned tyrannize over oppresse the faithfull laboure to have ceremonies imposed upon the Church with force acts made in Parliament for bringing in the surplice Corner cap unto which some worthy nobles could not assent Anno 1633. Who are therefore accounted rebels traitours And Balmerino is condemned The prelats rage without all law draw up a service book book of canans c. SECT 2. Pag. 44. Sheweth How the use of the service book was hindered in Edenburgh Ministers people from all parts of the Kingdome petitioned against it The King favoureth not the petitioners They not withstanding continue in petitioning against the service book high Commission prelats c. Renew the nationall Covenant thorow the whole land The King intendeth a war An Assembly is indicted at Glasgow Nov. 21. And opened up This Assembly condemneth anulleth severall pretended Assemblies the book of common prayer the book of canons the book of consecration ordination the high commission court the ceremonies excommunicateth some deposeth all the prelats War is prepared against them They defend themselves A pacification is concluded another Assembly promised a Parliament thereafter The Assembly is opened up The Parliament is convocated but quickly adjourned Commissioners are sent to London imprisoned A new war is raised by the King Scotland prepareth for defence A new pacification The Parliament meeteth ratifieth all which the Covenanters had done Those acts are againe ratified The Parl. of Engl. beginneth a work of reformation entereth into a Covenant with Scotland the two nations joyntly proceed in the begun work of reformation A party in England strengthen themselves alter the judicatures take away the King's life Scotland bringeth home the prince who sweareth the Covenants is overcome by the Englishes in battell keeped in bondage ten yeers till the exiled King returned Anno 1660. SECT 3. Pag. 69. Sheweth Why these Ministers others who met Agust 23. 1660 were incarcerated what their supplication was And how unjustly they suffered upon that account SECT 4. Pag. 77. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the Marquise of Argilâ—… suffered how insufficient in poynt of law from severall considerations SECT 5. Pag. 83. Sheweth What were the grounds upon which the life of precious Mr Guthry was taken how insufficient Either in law or conscience SECT 6. Pag. 86. Sheweth Upon what account other Ministers were persecuted And how unjustly Some banished for righteousnesse sake some indictâ causâ An extract of the sentence was refused to thosâ—… to all others SECT 7. Pag. 88. Sheweth The grounds why conscientious Ministers could not observe the anniversary day SECT 8. Pag. 91. Sheweth The reasons why Ministers could not observe the prelatâ—… meetings The author of the seasonable case c. Answered SECT 9. Pag. 101. Sheweth The reasons why ministers could not seek presentations from patrons nor collations from prelats The author of the seasonable case answered SECT 10. Pag. 114. Sheweth The true sense of the oath of alleagiance which was tendered Anno 1661. c. Compared with the former how it holdeth forth a great civil supremacie in the King cleared by the act 11 parl 1661. Which at least is much to be questioned from nine severall grounds And cannot lawfully be acknowledged because of ten dreadfull consequences which shall necessarily follow thereupon The former proceedings of the Church state of Scotland vindicated cleared SECT 11. Pag. 140. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of Scotlands defensive war first from the former practices of Scotland other Kingdomes King Iames King Charles confessions of adversaries next from a true clearing of the state of that war in Six Particulars which obviat all the objections of adversaries And lastly from lawyers adversaries the law of nature the law of nations the law of God sound reason SECT 12. Pag. 169. Sheweth What is the meaning of the oath of alleagiance as to its Ecclesiasticall part What way the King's supremacy over Church persons in Church causes began was carryed on in England How the same was advanced to a great height in Scotland What sense this King the late Parliament did put upon the oath of alleagianee by their Acts Actings How it were sinfull to acknowledge by taking the oath That so much Church power belongeth unto the civil Magistrate cleared by Nineteen particulars SECT 13. Pag. 200. Sheweth The groundlesnesse of Mr Stilling fleet 's notion concerning the divine right of formes of Church governement by making it appear how he overturneth his owne grounds how he misstateth the question the practice of the Apostles ground a jus divinum here Christ's institution the institution of the Apostles is for a particular species Christ's faithfulnesse in his office speaketh much for this The hazard is great in leaving the species undetermined The confession of the faith of severall Churches for a Species How he misseth his pretended end arme And how unseasonable his book is at this time uselesse so long as the league Covenant standeth in force though his notion were true in thesi SECT 14. Pag. 254. Sheweth How weak the Reasons are which plead for the taking of the oath of alleagiance by answereing Sixteen of them SECT 15. Pag. 270 Sheweth How unlawfull it is to owne acknowledge the curats foâ—… lawfull Ministers by fourteen reasons Foure objections answered SECT 16. Pag. 298. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers banished from their owne flocks by a sentence of the civil Magistrate to preach in publick or private as God calleth by Eight reasons Thrâ—… objections are answered SECT 17. Pag 305. Sheweth That it is lawfull for Ministers though censured by the pretended prelate to preach as God giveth a call whether in publick or in private by Six reasons Foure objections are answered SECT 18. Pag. 310. Sheweth That it is lawfull for people to meet together for hearing honest Ministers preach publickly or privately And for other Christian duties notwithstanding of Acts made against it by severall reasons One objection answered SECT 19. Pag. 316. Sheweth How unlawfull it is to acknowledge the high commission court by compeering before it by Eleven reasons Foure or five objections are answered SECT 20. Pag. 327. Sheweth How dreadfull a sin it is to abjure the Covenant a sin aggravated by twelue particulars SECT 21. Pag. 347. Sheweth What judgements perjury hath brought on in all ages out of history sacred prophane SECT 22. Pag. 359. Sheweth The lawfulnesse binding force of the solemne league Covenant notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. hath said against it SECT 23. Pag. 391. Sheweth The lawfulnesse of the nationall Covenant as it was sworne subscribed Anno 1638 1639 c. Notwithstanding of all which the author of the seasonable case c. Hath said to the contrary The CONCLUSION Pag. 416. Sheweth What the now afflicted Church of Scotland expecteth from strangers what use they should make of this sad dispensation c. FINIS Whence may not men destruction feare Who with deceitfull hearts do sweare This age wherein we live is void of faith For writes are signed twelue witnesses before The notar writt'th both time place what more Yet come'th a man of words who all deny'th King's words have weight great respect More then all oaths which men exact
confusion yeeld that a Church as a Church should be 〈◊〉 commonwealth a commonwâ—… 〈◊〉 ipso that it is a commonw shoud be a Church because a supreme governour in Church matters hath reference unto a Church a supreme governour in civil matters hath reference unto a commonwealth so make the supreme governour of the commonwealth upon that account that he is such a supreme governour the supr gov of the Church then â—…o ipso that he is the supreme governour of the commonwealth he should have reference unto the Church so a Church should be a commonwealth a commonwealth a Church which is most false Moreover this new commission court is another speaking evidence of this mixture flowing from this supremacy for in that court Church officers meddle with civil matters state officers meddle with Church matters both do so as they are such such officers as his Maâ—… commissioners and therefore they could not assent unto this That which Luther sayeth in responso ad Melanth de ceremonijs cited by Voetius ubi supra pag. 174. Is worth the marking Seing it is certane that these administrations are distinct viz. the ecclesiastick and politick which Satan did confound by Popery we must watch and see that they be not againe confounded and if we suffer this we should be guilty of sacrilege and we must rather choise to die then sinso see further what he citeth out of Olevianus pag. 179. and 180. 11. By taking of this oath they should grant that the magistrat as such is a propper competent judge in Church matters a propper competent judge of ministers of their doctrine of other Church matters because it was upon this ground of faithfull ministers their declineing of the King 's his councell their judgement in Church matters that the Parliament 1584. Did grant unto the King this supremacy It was intended for this end that he might have power to call convent judge sentence Ministers for the faithfull discharge of their duty exoneration of their consciences as their lawfull formall competent judge in Church matters though under the notion of treason sedition Moreover he is made propper judge of what is the best forme of Church Government of what is the best constitution of a Church judicature what are the most sit lawfull acts conclusions or canons of Synods he is made propper judge in matters deserving excommunication suspension deposition all these are Church matters Now the falshood of this is so satisfactorily discovered by divines that none can be blamed for refuseing an oath which would import an assenting unto these things as truths Sure every Magistrat is not fit for such matters should no other be a Magistrat but he who is fit for such questions Where is there any precept or precedent for thiâ—… What need is there then for Church Officers for Church matters if the civil Magistrat may do all see learned Voet polit Eccles pag. 146. Arg. 12. yea if they had taken this oath they had condemned their worthy predecessours who took their hazard declined the judgment of the civil Magistrat in Church matters should justifie the severe sentences of imprisonment consinement banishment which passed against them should assent unto the lawfulnesse of all these acts which established iniquitie tyranny by law And how could they have done this with a good conscience 12. By taking of his oath they should grant that Ministers in the discharge of their Ministeriall function were not under Christ immediatly but under the Magistrat for as his commissioners they sit in the high Commission court are accountable to him for their mal administration so are immediatly under him as their immediat superiour Master But this they could not grant Seing 1. As was said these two powers are toto genere distinct so there cannot be a subordination amongst them 2. There is no warrand for Ministers receiving of instructions from the Magistrat 3. Nor for any civil Pope more then for a Church Pope 4. Ministers in scripture are said to have immediat relation unto commission from God not from the Magistrat therefore they are called priests of God 2. Chron. 13 9 12. Men of God 2. Pet. 11 2. Tim. 3 17. And are commissionated from Christ Luk. 10 2. Mat. 20 2. 21 34 25. 22 2 3 10. 24 45. Isa. 6. v. 8 Ioh. 20 21. Gal. 1 1. not from the Magistrat They acte in the name of Christ by power from him 1. Cor. 5. But there is enough spoken to this by judicious Wallaus others writting against Vtenbâ—…gard other Erastians which will abundantly justifie the refuseing of this oath see further learned doct Voetius de polit Eccles. pag. 145. Arg. 10. 13. By the taking of this oath thus tendered they should grant that the supreme Magistrat is exempted from subjection unto the Ministery of the messingers of the Lord for if Ministers in their Ministeriall function acte as commissioners from him as accountable to him then in the same administration they cannot be above him a commissioner in the particular wherein he is a commissioner cannot be over him whose commissioner he is But this they could not grant because there is no warrand for this exemption Kings of old were not exempted from rebukes all are commanded to obey such as are set over them Heb. 13 17. no King is excepted Emperours have submited unto discipline Therefore they could not take this oath 14. By taking of this oath they should yeeld unto many palpable into lerable incroachment made upon the liberties privileges of the Church of Christ Which could not be done without great sin iniquity As 1. That there could be no Church judicatories or assemblies without his warrand or expresse consent for in the act concerning the acknowledging of the royall prerogative among other things annexed to the crown this is one the conveening of his subjects this is explaned Act 4. Where it is ordained that none of his subjects conveen for holding of Assemblies to treat Consult determine in any matter ecclesiasticke And upon this ground doth the act concerning the nationall Synod goe And upon this ground did King Iames take upon him to prorogate assemblies either to definite or indefinite times as he thought good Now no faithfull Minister or Christian could assent to this Because 1. Whatever may be said upon the grounds of prudence at some times yet when the bussinesse is spoken to as a case of conscience according to the rule of the word this is true that though the Church be in the commonwealth yet she is a distinct society from the common-wealth hath power from Christ to hold her own meetings Assemblies for her own government as she did while she was under heathen Emperours in the dayes of the Apostles 2 It hath been showne
before what is the judgment of the Church of Scotland in this particular in their preface to the confession of faith 3. There is no expresse command either for seeking or having his expresse consent The reformers of the Church of Scotland never once thought of this but as oft as conveniently they might as necessity urged they keeped Assemblies not only without the consent of the supreme Magistrat but oftimes against their will thinking it their duty to Assemble for the relief of the Church ay untill some difficulty were laid in their way which they could not win over untill some phisicall restraint or some what equivalent were laid upon them 5. It would neither be fit nor saife for them to condemne the worthies who stood so zealously for the truth keeped that Assembly at Aberdeen which occasioned their banishment 2. That the power of convocating indicting of Synods Assemblies doth belong only unto the Magistrat The act for the National Synod doth abundantly cleare this But to assent to this were a palpable wronging of the Church which hath intrinsick power for this needeth not goe out of her self to seek it The Synod which did meet 〈◊〉 15 was not indicted by any civil Magistrat The Church should then be in an irremediable case when the civil Magistrat is an enemy but God hath provided meanes for the saifty preservation of his Church Even when the higher powers are but small friends unto her as oftimes it falleth out see the judicious learned doct Voet de Pol Eccles Pag. 184. Quaest 5. 3. That the power of delegating unto assemblies doth belong to him alone so as he may appoynt all the constituent members thereof according as he pleaseth as the Act for the nationall Synod sayeth he doth that by vertue of his supremacy But this were a grosse wronging robbing of Churches of their power privilege of delegating such as they think fit according to the Example of Antioch sending Paul Barnabas to that Synod Act 15. the practice of the Church in all ages see Voet ubi supra Pag. 187 Quaest. 7. 8. Yea if so the persones delegated should vote in his name not in the name of Christ or of the Church the meeting should not be a pure Church meeting but either wholly politicall or else politico-ecclesiasticall 4. That he might dissolve Church assemblies Synods when he pleaseth for the fore mentioned Act for the Nat. Synod warrandeth them to meet only at such times as he pleaseth But this were a great wrong done unto the Church privileges See Voet. ubi supra Pag. 190. Qâ—… 13. 14. Synods should be no helps unto the poor Church if they might sit no longeri what ever necessity might urge then his Maj thought good to suffer There is no warrand for any such dependence of Church judicatories upon the civil Magistrat's discretion If Christ hath allowed Synods to his Church for determineing in Church affaires he hath allowed them to sit untill they finish the bussinesse for which they did assemble Yea if they should yeeld to this they should condemne the assembly at Glasgow 1638. which did sit untill they had ended their bussinesse notwithstanding of a command to dissolve 5. That his presence or the presence of his commissioner is necessary unto each nationall assembly for the Act of Parliament ratifying the Act for the nationall Synod sayeth expresly that without the presence of the King or of his commissioner no nationall Synod can be keeped But 1. there is no law of God for this 2. The Synods in the primitive times were held without his presence 3. There were many generall assemblies held in Scotland without his presence 4. The Magistrat as such is no constituent member of the Synod therefore his presence is not necessarily requisite see Voet ubi supra Pag. 188. Quaest. 9. 5. If there be such a necessity for his presence at nationall Synods he must not be absent from lesser assemblies thus there shall be no Church judicature held without his presence which were most absurd See what the learned famous Voetius sayeth to this pol. Eccles. Part. 1. Pag. 199. 200. 6. That Ministers have no proper decisive fuffrage in Synods because the forecited Act sayeth That matters are to be setled only by their advice So that in their Synod they are only the King's counsellers conveened to advise consult a power only to advise is no decisive fuffrage so the Act concluded is the deed of the supreme Magistrat following their advice is not their deed Now this is most absurd destructive to all Synods of all their power thus it should be far worse with Synods now when Magistrats are Christians then when they were heathens Moreover there is no warrand for his having with the rest of 〈◊〉 the commissioners a voice in those Synods far lesse for his having the whole power It is clear that as a Magistat he can have no suffrage or voice in these Synods for then heathens who are no way qualified for such a bussinesse should have it likewise Yea if it were so all the determinations of Synods should be civil Acts no Church Acts being done by one who is no Church officer yea nor a Church member as such let be a Church judicature This was Episcopius the Arminian his judgment in disput de jure Magistratus circa sacra Thes. 16. viz. that he may convocat assemblies choose members prescribe lawes unto them the way of prâ—…cedour aske the suffrages either peremptorily enact or approve what is done that it may passe into a law see Voet. ubi supra pag. 191. Qâ—… 16. 7. That the judicatories of the Church be prelimited for nothing may be enacted by the nationall Synod which is contrary to his Maj. royal prerogative or to the lawes of the land so sayeth the Parliaments ratification of the Act for the nationall Synod But what if iniquity be established by a law what if Christ's royall prerogatives be taken from him given to the King shall the Church in her judicatories do nothing for the truth shall she give no testimony against these usurpations shall the lawes of the land the King's prerogatives be her Cynosura what use shall be made of the word of God then where is there any such caution or limitation given to the Church But enough of this 8. That Church judicatories may not so much as consult debate about any Act matter or cause but what shall be allowed approved by his Maj. or his commissioner for these are the very words of the Act of Parliament But who can assent unto this intolerable jncroachment destructive of all Church judicatures making them no judicatories at all but a company of men conveened for giving advice But where was there ever the like of this Church judicature The nameing of those things is sufficient to discover their vanity see