a gift bestowed on all those who serve Tables and are not to give themselves to continuall praying and the Ministery of the Word I thinke papists will not say so much of all their priests and we can say it of none of our pastors nor doth Chysostome say that Steven as a Deacon and by vertue of the office of a Deacon wrought miracles but onely that his miracles and disputing was a meere consequent of laying on of hands Faâ—ther laying on of hands was taken from the cusâ—ome of blessing amongst the Jewes Christ layd his hands upon young children and blessed them yet did hee not thereby designe them to any office The fourth councell of Carthage saith Deacons should administer the Sacraments but times were growing worse then and two things in ancient times made the office degenerate 1. The lâ—zinesse of pastors who layd preaching and baptizing on the Deacon 2. The Deacons having in their hands aerarium Ecclesiasticum the Church Treasury as the Church became rich the Deacons were exalted and then came in their Archiliaconi Archdeacons and Deacons and so some Deacons were above pastors whereas Acts 6. in their first institution they were inferior to pastors this moved Spalato to tell us of two sorts of Deacons the apostolick Deacons which we assert and the ecclesiastick Deacons popiâ— and of the newest cut which we disclaâ—me As concerning the perpetuity of Deacons I conceive that Deacons must be as permanent in the Church as distribution and shewing mercy on the poore Ob. 13. How doe those words Act. 6. v. 7. and the word of God grew and the number of Disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly c. follow upon the institution of Deacons v. 2 3 4. 5 6. if Deacons were not according to their primitive institution and Office ordained to be Preachers of the word by whose paines the word grew Answ. The cohesion three wayes is good 1. Because the Apostles being exonerated of serving Tables and giving themselves to continuall praying and the ministery of the word v. 2. Through the constituting of the seven Deacons the word thereby did grow 2 Satan stirred up a schisme betwixt the Grecians and Hebrewes which is prejudiciall to the growth of the Gospell and Church yet the Lord being superabundantly gratious where Satan is exceedingly malitious will have his Gospell and Church to flourish 3. These words v. 7. doe cohere kindly with the last verse of the foregoing Chapter v. 41. And dayly in the Temple and in every house they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ and Ch. 6. v. 7. And the word of God increased c. God blessing the labours of his persecuted Apostles and the story of the ordained Deacons is cast in by Luke upon occasion of the neglected Grecian Widdowes and the growth of the word could not arise from the appointing of such officers who were not to labour in the word and prayer but imployed about Tables to the end that the Apostles might labour in the word and prayer Ob. 14. But doth not the faithfull administration of the Deacons office purchase to the Deacon a good degree that is doth it make him â—â—â—ter in a preparatory way to be a Pastor Answ. The word of God 1 Tim. 3. and elsewhere setting downe the qualification and previous dispositions of a Teacher doth no where teach us that none can be a minister but he who is first a Deacon 2. Didcclavius saith many are faithfull Deacons who are never Teachers nor apt to be Teachers and many in the ancient Church were of lay men made Teacheâ—r Ambrosius heri Catechumenus hodie Episcopus and Estius granteth many good Deacons can never be Teachers because of their ignorance Hugo Cardinal saith this is onely against these qui subito ascendunt in prâ—lationes who suddainly ascend to prelacies Cornelius a lapide saith ut promereantur altiùs promoveri in sacerdotia they are to serve so as they may deserve to be promoted to higher places but this doth not infer that none can be presbyters who have not first beene Deacons As Chrysostome saith we use not to place a novice in an high place antequam fidei suae vitae dederit docâ—mâ—nta before hee have given proofe of his faith and good conversation And Cyprian writing to Antonianus commendeth Cornelius that hee came not by a leap and suddainly to be a Bishop sed per omnia ecclesiastica officia promotus being promoted by degrees to all Church-Offices and Bernard followeth the same meaning Lyra merebuâ—tur quod fiant sacerdotes acquirunt altiorem gradum saith Salmeron Now it is cleare that the fathers and papists could extort no more out of the Text but that hee who useth the office of a Deacon well doth deserve of the Church to be promoted to an higher office but there is no ground for papists or others to make the Deacons office a necessiary degree without the which none can be a Teacher Sozomenus saith the Deacons office was to keepe the Churches goods Epiphanius Diaconis in ecclefia non con creditum est ut aliquod mysterium perficiant sed ut administrent solùm exequantur commissa then they might neither teach nor baptize Eusebius saith the care of the poore and the keeping of the Church and the vessels thereof were committed to the Deacons Ruffinus saith Deacons disputed in Synods and Athanasius when hee was a Deacon helped his Bishop Alexander at the Nicen councell but this came as I suppose because about the fourth century they were admitted to be scribes in Synods Ambrose saith at the beginning Deacons did preach and baptise but after when the Church was well furnished with officers they durst not presume to teach The Canon of the councel of Nice saith Diaconi ne sedeant in concessu presbyterorum aut illis praesentibus Eucharistiam dividant sed illis agentibus solùm ministrent if there was not a presbyter present Ruffinus saith then the Deacon might distribute the Elements I conceive the place 1 Tim. 5. saith that Widowes were in the Apostolick Church both poore aged Women who were to be mantained by the Church and also auxiliary helps for meere service to helpe the Deacons in these hot Countries Both is apparent from the Text honour Widowes that are Widowes indeed that is as Hugo Cardinalis expoundeth it who want both the comfort of an husband and of Children to maintaine them and so also Chrysostome before him expounded it and Hugo Cardinalis the honour that is due to them is say Chrysostome Theophylact Anselmus that they bee sustained by the oblations of the Church Ecclesiae oblationibus sustententur say Salmeron and Estius and Cornelius à lapide saith as honour thy Father and thy Mother doth include hâ—norem sustentationis that children are to give the honour of maintenance to their indigent parents no lesse then the honour of obedience and reverence so are Widowes to have
this honour 2 It is said if any VVidow have children or nephewes let them learne first to shew mercy at home and to requite their Parents Ergo the children or grand children of these VVidowes were to sustaine them and not to burden the Church with them and so they were poore Widowes and this 3. The Text clearely holdeth forth while the Apostle proveth that the children who are able are to helpe the Parent being a desolate Widow because v. 8. all are to provide for these of their owne house and to maintaine them in their indigence else they be in that worse then Infidell children who by natures love doe provide for their poore parents 3. This is cleare from v. 16. if any man or woman that believeth hath widows let them relieve them and let not the Church be charged that they may relieve them that are widowes indeed Ergo these widowes called also v. 3. widowes indeed did some way burden the Church with their maintenance and they were not to be layd upon the Churches stock to be maintained thereby except they were desolate and without friends But some may object if these widowes had a charge and did any worke or service to the Church as it is cleare from the Text v 9. they did in overseeing the poore and the sick were not wages due to them for their worke for the labourer is worthy of his hire the Scripture saith not if a Preacher have a father who is Rich and may sustaine his Son let not the Church be burdened with his wages but on the contrary the Preacher is to have his wages for his work as an hire ad modum debiti non ad modum eleemoâ—ynae as a debt not as an Almes I answer the reason is not alike of the preaching Elder and of the Widow for the pastors service requiring the whole man was of that nature that it was a worke deserving wages as any worke-man a dresser of a Vineyard deserveth wages 1 Cor. 9 7. or a plower or one that Thresheth v. 10. Therefore the Preachers wages is so wages that its debt not almes but a Widow of sixty yeeres being weake and infirme cannot acquit her selfe in such a painfull office as doth merit poore wages and therefore the reward of her labour was both wages and an almes Againe that this Widow had some charge or service in the Church I meane not any Ministeriall office for she was not ordained as the Deacon Acts 6. with imposition of hands I prove from the Text. 1. Because this Widdow was not to be chosen to the number or Colledge of Widowes except shee had beene 60. Yeares this is a positive qualification of a positive service as if it were an office for else what more reason in 60. Yeares then in 61. or 62. or in 58. or 59. if shee was a meere eleemosynary and an indigent woman or can godlinesse permit us to thinke that Paul would exclude a Widow of 50. or 54. or 56 Yeeres from the Colledge of Widowes who were desolate and poore nor 2. Would Paul rebuke the Widow taken into the society of these Widowes because shee married an husband except she had entered to this service and had vowed chastity nor is marrying the second time which is lawfull Rom. 7. 1. 2. a waxing wanton against Christ and a casting off of the first faith as the marrying of these widowes is called v. 11. 12. therefore this Widow had some charge and service in the Church 3. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let a Widow be chosen of such an age and not younger and with such morall qualifications as is required in the Deacon c. doth also evidence that it was an election to some service or charge as is she be of good report if she have brought up her children if she have lodged strangers if she have washed the saints feete which qualifications not being in a Widow poore and desolate cannot exclude her from the Churches almes and expose her to famishing for want this also doth Ambrose Augustine tract 58. in Ioan. Chrysostomus Theophylact. Hieronymus observe on this place It is not unprobable to me that Phaebe called a Deacon or servant of the Church of Cenchrea was such a Widow seeing she is Rom. 16. 1. expresly so called how shee came to Rome if shee was a poore Widdow and now 60. yeares old I dispute not seeing Gods Spirit calleth her so We can easily yield that VVidows of sixty yeares entring to this service did vow not to marrie againe so teach Cyprian l. 1. epist ad Pomponium Hyeronym contr Joviaâ— Epihan 48. The last Canon of the councell of Nice as Ruffinus l. 1. c. 6. saith denieth Widowes to be Church-officers because they were not ordained with imposition of hands Hyeronimus in c. 16. ad Roman saith Diaconisses in the Orientall Church had some service in Baptisme Epiphanius l. 3. tom 2. Heres 79. saith they were in the Church non ad sacrificandum sed propter horam Balnci aut visitationis quando nudatum fuit corpus â—â—lieris Constantine placed them amongst the Clergy to governe the Corps of the dead but Papists then have no warrant for their Nuns CHAP. 8. SECT 8. Of Election of Officers HEre the Author teaches that Election of Officers belongeth to the Church whose officers they are 2. That the Church of believers being destitute of all officers may ordaine their own officers and Presbyters by imposition of hands in respect that the power of the keys is given to the Church of believers Mar. 18. Answ. Election of Officers no doubt belongeth to the whole Church not in the meaning of our Brethren but that this may be cleared whether a Church without officers may ordaine Elders there be diverse other questions here to be agitated as 1. Whether the Church be before the Ministery or the Ministery before the Churches 1. Dist. There is an ordinary and an extraordinary Ministery 2. There is a mysticall Church of believers and a ministeriall Church of Pastors and flock 3. A Church may be so called by anticipation as Hos. 12. Jacob served for a wise or formally because it is constituted in its whole being 4. A Ministery is a Ministery to these who are not as yet professors but only potentially members of the Church 1. Concl. There is a Church of believers sometime before there be a ministeriall Church 1. Because a company of believers is a mysticall Church for which Christ died Eph. 5. 25. And such there may be before there be a setled Ministery As there is a house before there be a Candlestick because conversion may be by private meanes as by reading and conference yea a woman hath carried the Gospell to a Land before there was a Ministery in it 2. Adam was first and Evah by order of â—ature a Church created of God before there was a Ministery So Adams Ministery is founded upon a nature created according to Gods Image 2. Concl. A publick ordinary
weake p. 297 298 299 seq Mr. Coachmans arguments dissolved p. 305 306 307. seq The way of Church judging in independent congregations examined p. 308 309. That there be no peculiar authority in the Eldership for which they can be said to be over the people in the Lord according to the doctrin of independency of Churches and their six ways of the Elders authority confuted p. 311 312 313 314 315. seq That independency doth evert communion of sister-Churches and their seven wayes of Churches-communion refuted from their own grounds p. 324 325 326. seq The divine right of Synods Ten distructions thereanent p. 331 332. seq The desinition of a generall or Oecumenick Synod p. 332. 333 The place Acts 15 farther considered p. 334 335. Synods necessary by natures Law p. 336. Papists no friends to councells p. 336 337 338. seq 340 341. Three ways of communion of sister-Churches according to the doctrin of independent Churches confuted p. 346 347. seq How the magistrate hath power to compell persons to the profession of the truth p. 352 373. seq Six distinctions thereanent 2 part p. 352 353. The Magistrates power over a people Baptized and over Pagans who never heard of Christ in this poynt of Coaction to profession not alike p. 353 354 355. The magistrates compelling power terminated upon the externall act not upon the manner of doing sincerely or hypocritically p. 355 356. The magistrates power over hereticks with sundry distinctions thereanent p. 356 357 358. seq Socinians judgement and Arminians hereanent p. 359 360 A farther consideration of compelling or tolerating diverse Religions p. 361 362. Some indirect forcing lawfull p 362. Erroneous opinions concerning God and his worship though not in Fundamentalls censurable p 363 364. Diverse non Fundamentalls are to be believed with certainty of Faith and the non-believing of them are siâ—nes punishable p. 365. 366 367 seq Arguments on the contrary dissolved and the place Philip. 3. 15. cleared p 316. seq How an erring conscience obligeth p. 378 379 380 381 seq Arguments on the contrary answered p. 383 384. seq The Princes power in Church affairs Ten distinctions thereanent p. 391 392. 393. How the Magistrate is a member of the Church p. 392 393. The Prince by his Royall Office hath a speciall hand in Church-affaires p 393 394. The intrinsecall end of the Prince is a supernaturall good to be procured by the Sword and a coactive power and not only the externall peace of the State Spalato resuted p 396 397 398. seq How the Magistrate is subordinate to Christs mediatory Kingdome p 402 403 404 seq The ordinary power of the Prince is not Synodicall teaching or making Church-Lawes p. 403 404 405 406. seq The influence of the Princes civill power in church-Church-Canons p. 409. 410 411 seq The government of the visible Church spirituall and not a formall part of the Magistrates Office p. 417 418. seq The power of Ordination and Deprivation not a part of the Magistrates Office p. 427 428. seq Instances from David Salomon Ezechiah c. answered and our Doctrine and Iesuites differenced p. 438 439. seq Difference betwixt the Princes commanding Church-duties and the Churches commanding these same p. 417 418 seq The Kings ordinary power to make Church-Lawes examined p. 438 439 440. seq The intrinsecall end of the Magistrate a supernaturall good p. 442 443 446 447 448. The Popes pretended power over Kings protestants contrary to to Papists herein what ever the author or Popish libeller of the survey and the night-Author of Treason Lysimachus Nicanor say on the contrary p. 449 450 451 452. seq The way of Reformation of Congregations in England according to the independent way examined p. 457 458. The originall of Church-Patronages p. 459. And how unwarrantable by Gods Word p. 462 463. Other wayes of Reformation of England according to the way of independent Churches modestly considered as about maintenance of Ministers and replanting of visible Churches there p. 464 465 466. seq Errata THe Author could not attend the Presse therefore pardon errors of the Printing Observe that the Author was necessitated to make some occasionall addition to the mids of this Treatise which occasioned-variation of the Figures of the Pages and therefore stumble not that when the Booke commeth to page 484 the next page not observing due order is page 185. 186 and so forth to the end of the Treatise page 60. title of the page 60 c. page 61 62. 64. dele not and for not of the same essentiall frame c. read of the same essentiall frame c. page 484 line 22 Churches their persecution read Churches through their persecution for page 229 read 209. for page 259. read 269. for p. 484. r. p. 498. יהוה THE Way of the Church of Christ In NEW ENGLAND Measured by the Golden Reed of the SANCTUARY Or The way of Churches walking in brotherly equality and independence or coordination without subjection of one Church to another examined and measured by the Golden Reed of the Sanctuary Propositions concerning the supposed visibility and Constitution of independent Churches examined CHAP. 1. SECT 1. PROP. 1. THe Church which Christ in his Gospell hath instituted and to which he hath committed the keys of his Kingdome the power of binding and loosing the Tables and Scales of the Covenant the Officers and Consures of his Church the Administration of all his publick worship and Ordinances is coetus fidelium a company of Believers meeting in one place every Lords day for the administration of the holy ordinances of God to publick edification 1 Cor. 14. 23. 1 Because it was a company whereof Peter confessing and believing was one and built on a rock Mat. 16. 18. a Such as unto whom any offended brother might complaine Mat. 18. 17. 3 Such as is to cast out the incestuous Corinthian 1 Cor. 5. Which cannot agree to any diocesian provinciall or Nationall assemblie Ans. From these we question Quest. 1. If a company of believers and saints builded by faith upon the rock Christ and united in a Church-Covenant be the only instituted visible Church of the New Testament to the which Christ hath given the keys Let these considerations be weighed 1. Dist. The matter of an instituted visible Church is one thing and the instituted visible Church is another as there be ods betwixt stones and timber and an house made of stones and timber 2 Dist. It is one thing to govern the actions of the Church and another thing to governe the Church the Moderator of any Synod doth govern the actions of the Synod but he is not for that a Governour Ruler and Pastor of the Synod Or ordering actions and governing men are diverse things 3. Dist. A thing hath first its constituted and accomplished being in matter forme efficient and finall causes before it can performe these operations and actions that flow from that being so constituted a Church must be a Church before any
that is the speaking and commanding Church let him be as a heathen he must speak of a representative Church for a collective body of all believers even women and children cannot command nor soeak in the Church and it were confusion that women and children should bind and loose on Earth as Christ doth in Heaven and when Paul sayth that the convened Church 2 Cor. 5. should cast out the incestuous person he meaneth not that they should all Judge him by the power and authority of Christ and the pastorall spirit of Paul therefore your doctrine is false that as many are Judges in the Judiciall acts of excommunication as did not mourn for the sin as were Saints by calling and to whom Paul writeth 1 Cor. 2. and as met together for the publick worship for it is as great confusion for women and children who are true parts of the Church to be Iudges cloathed with Christs authority and Pauls Ministeriall spirit as for women to speak or for twelve Apostles to pray all at once vocally in the Church and the whole Church is said Acts 15. 22. to send messengers and Canons to Antioch to be observed and yet that whole Church are but in the act of governing and decerning and judiciall passing of these acts only Apostles and Elders Acts 15. 2. v. 6. Act 16. 4 Act. 21. 5. Ergo it followeth not that we exclude women and children from being parts of the Church or that all are excluded except Elders all are parts of the mysticall and redeemed Church officers are only the ministeriall Church and Mat. 18. Christ speaketh only of a ministeriall Church in the judiciall act of excommunication though if you speak of excommunication in all the acts of it we doe not exclude the whole multitude Mat. 8. nor 1 Cor. 5. from a popular consenting to the sentence and a popular execution of the sentence of excommunication and therefore though the whole Church convene yet the whole Church conveneth not with Pauls ministeriall spirit to excommunicate judicially either must our brethren here acknowledge a Synocdoche as well as we yea and a representative and select Church in the judiciall act of excommunication else they must say that women and children Ex officio by a ministeriall spirit doe Judge and so speake in the Church for he who Judgeth Ex officio in the Church may and must speake and excommunicate in the Church Ex officio but more of this hereafter CHAP. 3. SECT 3. QUEST 4. WHether or no is there a necessity of the personall presence of the whole Church in all the acts of Church-censures The Author giveth us ground for this question whiles as he holdeth the company of believers cloathed with the whole power of the keys and these meeting all of them even the whole Church to be the only visible instituted Church And Ainsworth sayth with what comfort of heart can the people now excommunicate him if they have not heard the proceedings against him Let wise men Iudge if this be not spirituall tyranny that Elders would bring upon the conscience of men Also it would seemâ— if the people be to execute the sentence of excommunication that they cannot in faith repute the excommunicated man as a Heathen and a Publican and eschew his company except they be assured in conscience that he is lawfully cast out now how shall they have this assurance the Elders say he is lawfully cast out and the cast out man sayth no but he is wronged therefore it would seem that all the people must be personally present to heare that the processe be lawfully deduced against him else they punish upon a blind faith now the like question is if Souldiers can make war if they be not present at the counsell of war to know the just reasons of war which the Prince and States doe keepe up to themselves upon grave considerations And the same is the question if the Lictor and executioner of the Judges sentence be obliged in conscience to know if the Judge have proceeded orderly and justly or if he upon the testimony of the Judge may execute the sentence of death 1. Distinction There be oddes betwixt a free willing people executing the sentence of the Church and meere Executioners and Lictors 2. Dist. There is a doubting of conscience speculative through ignorance of some circumstance of the fact and a doubt of conscience practicall through ignorance of something which one is obliged to know and so there is also a speculative and a practicall certainty of a thing 3. Dist. There is one certaeinty required in questione Juris in a question of Law and another in questione facti in question of fact 4. Dist. There is and may be an ignorance invincible which a man cannot help in a question of fact but Papists and Schoole-men erre who maintaine an invincible ignorance in questione Juris in a question of Law and in this they lay imperfection on Gods Word 5. Dist. There is a morall diligence given for knowledge of a thing which sufficeth to make the ignorance excusable and there is a morall diligence not sufficient 6. Dist. There is a sentence manifestly unjust as the condemning of Christ by witnesses belying one another and a sentence doubtsomely false 1. Conclu The members of the visible Church are not meere Lictors and Executioners of the sentences of the Elder-ship 1. Because they are to observe warne watch over the manners of their fellow members and to teach exhort and admonish one another and are guilty if they be deficient in that 2. Because by the Law of charity as they are brethren under one head Christ they are to warne and admonish their Rulers And by the same reasons the people of the Jewes were not meere executioners though they were to stone the condemned Malefactors yet were they not Judges as Ainsworth sayth It is true Levit. 20. 2. they were to kill him who offered his seed to Moloch but the precept is given first to Moses the supreme Magistrate the accused for innocent blood stood before the children of Israel Num. 35. 22. but their Gnedah signifieth the Princes Iâ—s 20. 4. The slayer shall declare his cause before the Elders of that City 2 Sam. 7. 7. there be Tribes who are feeding or governing Tribes or 1 Chron. 17. 6. Judges there is no reason to understand by the children of Israel or the Congregation only the common people when the word doth include a Congregation of Princes so Num. 8. 11. the Levites are the children of Israels shake-offering Ainsworth saith the people are put for the Princes the sins of unjust Judges are peoples sinnes not because they judicially exercise unjust acts for they should not judge at all but because they mourne not for the publick sins of Judges Eze. 9 9. and because the people love to have it so Jer. 5. 31. 2. Concl. When the sentence of the Judge is manifestly unjust the executioners and Lictors are not to
from Galilee Acts 1. 14. and some from Jerusalem v. 15. 3. No particular Church had power Ecclesiasticall as this Church had power to choose an Apostle who was to be a Pastor over the Churches of the whole World as our brethren teach so Mr. Paget sayth well These Disciples who waited upon Christ such as Barsabas and Matthias were no members of the Church of Jerusalem and so what powâ—r had a particular Church to dispose of them who were no members of their Church 3. That which concerneth all must be done by all and that which concerneth the feeding and governing of the Church of the whole World must be done by these who represent the Church of the whole World but that Matthias should be chosen and ordained an Apostle to teach to the whole World concerned all the Churches and not one particular Church 〈◊〉 Therefore there was here either no Church which no man dare say for â—here is here a company of believers where there is preaching and Church government v. 15. 16. 26. or then there was here a Congregation which is against sense and Scripture or there is a Church Provinciall Naturall or Oecumenick call it as you please it is a visible Church instituted in the New Testament after the ascension of Christ and not a Parishionall Church Some answer this was extraordinary and meerely Apostolick that an Apostle should be ordained and is no warrant for a nationall Church now when the Churches of Christ are constituted But I answer this distinction of ordinary and extraordinary is wearied and worne to death with two much employment 2. Beza Calvin Piscator Tilenus Whittaker Chamier Pareus Bucanus professors of Leyden Walaeus VVillet P. Martyr Ursinus c. and all our Divines yea Lorinus the Jâ—suite Cajetan alledge this place with good reason to prove that the ordination and election of Pastors belongeth to the whole Church and not to one man Peter or any Pope Yea Robinson and all our Brethren use this place to prove that the Church to the second comming of Christ hath power to ordaine and exanthorate and censure her officers 2. We desire a ground for this that the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church which is ordinary and perpetuall to Christs second comming should joyne as a collâ—terall cause in ordination and election of an Apostle which ordination is extraordinary temporary apostolick see for this Pet. Martyr VVhittaker Bilson Chamier Pareus Beza Calvin Harmonie of the confessions Iunius Cartwright Fulk Ursinus Zwinglius Munsterus and Theodoret would have us to rest upon Apostolick demonstrations like this And Irenaeus speaketh against rectifiers of the Apostles in this Cyprian sayth the like 2 Acts 6. A Church of Hebrewes and Graecians together with the twelve Apostles is not a particular Ordinary Congregation and a governing Church choosing Deacons therefore they are a nationall Church though the first ordination of Deacons be meerely Apostolick and immediately from Iesus Christ yet the ordination of these seven persons was a worke of the Churches power of the keys Now let our Brethren speake if this was a Congregationall Church that meeteth ordinarily to the word and Sacraments such as they say the Church of Corinth was 1 Cor. â—1 18. So say I of the Church Acts 15. 22. called Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church this could not be a particular Church for no particular Congregation hath Ecclesiasticall power to prescribe Decrees and Canons to all the Churches of the Gentiles and that this was done by an ordinary Ecclesiastick power that remaineth perpetually in a Church such as this was is cleare because our Brethren prove that the whole multitude spake in this Church from vers 12. Then all the multitude kept silence and therefore the multitude say our Brethren spake from v. 21. all the Church voyced in these Decrees and Canons say they 3. Sister Churchers keepe a visible Church-communion together 1. They heare the word and partake of the Seales of the Covenant occasionally one with another 2. They eschew the same excommunicated heretick as a common Church-enemy to all 3. They exhort rebuke comfort and edifie one another as members of one body visible 4. If one sister Church fall away they are to labour to gaine her and if she will not be gained as your Author sayth they tell it to many sister Churches if shee refilse to heare them they forsake Communion with her 1. Here is a visible body of Christ and his Spouse having right to the keyes word and seales of grace 2. Here is a visible body exercising visible acts of Church-fellowship one toward another Hence here a visible Provinciall and Nationall Church exercising the specifick acts of a Church Ergo Here is a Provinciall and Nationall Church For to whom that agreeth which essentially constituteth a Church visible that must be a visible Church You will say they are not a visible Church because they cannot and doe not ordinarily all meete in one materiall house to heare one and the same word of God and to partake of the same Seales of the Covenant joyntly but I answer 1. This is a begging of the question 2. They performe other specifick acts of a visible Church then to meete ordinarily to partake joyntly and at once of the same ordinances 3. If this be a good reason that they cannot be a Nationall Church because they meete not all ordinarily to heare the some word and to partake of the same Ordinances then a locall and visible and ordinary union joyntly in the same worship is the specifick essence of a visible Church but then there was no visible Nationall Churches in Iudea for it was impossible that they could all meete in one materiall house to partake of the same worship 4. These who for sicknes and necessary avocations of their calling as Navigation Traffiquing and the like cannot ordinarly meet with the congregation to partake joyntly with them of these same Ordinances loose all membership of the visible Church which is absurd for they are cast out for no fault 5. This is not essentiall to a nationall Church that they should ordinarily all joyntly meet for the same worship but that they be united in one ministeriall government and meet in their chiefe members and therefore our Brethren use an argument à specie ad genâ—s negativè a provinciall or nationall company of believers cannot performe the acts of a particular visible Church Ergo such a company is not a visible Church just as if I would reason thus A Horse cannot laugh Ergo he is not a living Creature or it is an argument à negatione unius speciei ad negationem alterius such a company is not such a congregationall Church Ergo it is no visible Church at all an Ape is not a reasonable Creature Ergo it is not an Ape 3. Conclu There ought to be a fellowship of
Church communion amongst all the visible Churches on Earth Ergo de jure and by Christ his institution there is an universall or catholick visible Church I prove the antecedent 1. Because there ought to be mutuall fellowship of visible Church-duties as where there is one internall fellowship because Eph. 4. 4. we are one body one spirit even as we are called in one hope of our calling v. 5. one Lord on Father one Baptisme v. 6. one God and Father of all There also should there be externall fellowship and Church fellowship of exhorting rebuking comforting and Church-praying and Church-praising in the behalfe of all the visible Churches on earth even for those whose faces we never saw Coloss. 2. 1. and when one nationall Church falleth away the visible Churches of the Christian world are obliged to rebuke and to labour to gaine such a Church and if she will not be gained to renounce all the foresaid communion with such an obstinate Nation 2. As the Apostles had one publicke care of all the Churches and accordingly kept visible fellowship as they had occasion to preach write to them pray and praise God for them so this care as Apostolick I grant is gone and dead with the Apostles but the pastorall and Church-care and consequently acts of externall fellowship are not dead with the Apostles but are left in the Church of Christ for what Church-communion of visible fellowship members of one particular congregation keepe one with another that same by due proportion ought nationall Churches to keepe amongst themselves 3. This is cleare Act. 1. where particular Churches with the Apostles did meete and take care to provide a Pastor and an Apostle Matthias for the whole Christian Church and why â—ut particular Churches are hereby taught to confer all Church-authority that God hath given them for the rest of the visible Churches and the Churches conuened in their speciall members Acts 15. 12. extended their Church-care in a Church-communion of Ecclesiastick canons to all the visible Churches of the Jewes and Gentiles Hence Oecumenick and generall councells should be jure divino to the second comming of Christ Neither need we stand much on this that our Brethren say that one Catholick visible Church is a night dreame because no Church is visible save only a particular congregation the externall communion whereof in meeting in one materiall house ordinarily and partaking of the same word and Sacraments doth incurre in our senses whereas a Church communion and visible fellowship with the whole Christian Churches on Earth is impossible and no wayes visible But I answer if such a part of the Sea the Brittish Sea be visible then are all the Seas on earth visible also though they cannot all come in one mans senses at one and the same time so if this Church particular be visible then all the Churches also in their kind are visible 2. There be acts of Church-communion externall with all the visible Churches on earth Ergo the whole Catholick Church according to these acts is visible I prove the antecedent we pray in a Church-way publickly for all the visible Churches on earth we praise Church-wayes publickly for them we fast and are humbled Church-wayes before God when they are in trouble and so ought they to doe with us we by preaching writing and Synodicall constitutions proclaime the common enemie of all the Churches to be the Antichrist his doctrine and the doctrine of that body whereof he is Head to be false and hereticall by writings we call all the people of God to come out of Babâ—l and we renounce externall communion with Rome in Doctrine Discipline Ceremonies and Rites all which are Church-acts of externall communion with the reformed catholick visible Churches neither to make a Church visible to us is it requisiâ—e that we should see the faces of all the members of the Catholick visible Church and be in one materiall Church with them at once partaking of the same visible worship yea so the Church of Iudea should not be one visible Church which our Brethren must deny for they had one Priest hood on Temple one Covenant of God visibly professed by all yet could they not all meete in one materiall Temple to partake together at once of all Gods O dinanceâ— For I partake in externall worship with these of New England who are baptised according to Christs institution without the signe of the crosse though I never saw their faces Hence all may see that Oecumenick councel's are de jure and Christs lawfull Ordinances though de facto they be not through the corruption of our nature yet such a visible Church-fellowship in externall Church-communion is kept in the whole catholics Church visible as may be had considering the perversity of men and the malice of Satan It is constantly denied by our brethren that the Church of the Iewes was a congregationall Church and of that frame and institution with the Christian Church but that it was peculiar and meerely in laicall to be a nationall Church yet let me have liberty to offer a necessary distinction here 1. a nationall Church is either when a whole Nation and all the Congregations and Synogogues thereof are tied by Divine precept to some publique acts of typicall worship in one place Which the Lord hath chosen so all Israel were to sacrifice at Jerusalem onely and the Priests were to officiate in that kind there onely and they to pray toward the Temple or in the Temple and they to preseâ—t the male children there as holy to the Lord Luke 2. 23 c. this way indeed the Church of the Jewes in a peculiar manner was a Nationall Church and thus farre our brethrens arguments doe well conclude that the Jewish Church was Nationall in a peculiar manner proper to that Church onely But a Nationall Church is taken in another sense now for a people to whom the Lord hath revealed his statutes and his testimonies Whereas he hath not d alt so with every Nation Psal. 147. 19 20. which Church is also made up of many Congregations and Synagogues having one worship and government that doth morally concerne them all Thus the Iewish Church was once Nationall and that for a time God chose them of his free grace to be a people to himselfe Deut. 7. 7. and Deut. 32. 8. When the most high divided to the Nations their inheritance Iacob was the lot of his inheritance Amos 3. 2. You onely have I chosen of all the families of the earth But the Jewish Church was in this sence but Nationall for a time Now hath God Act. 11. v. 18. also granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life and called the Gentiles and made them a Nationall Church Hos. 1. 11. 1 Pet. 2. 10 11. Esay 54. 1 2 3. that is he hath revealed his testimonies to England to Scotland and He hath not done so to every Nation So if a false Teacher should goe through Israel and call himselfe the power
because of the apostasie of the whole Church and judgements upon them for their apostasie v. 38. And because of all this we make and write a sure covenant saith the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in toto hoe vertit Arias montanus nos excidentes fidelitatem Iudaei excudentes faedus fidele Iunius pro toto hoc pepigimus constitutionem now sinnes back-slidings and judgements may be and often are in all the Christian Churches 2. To sweare to the true religion the defence and maintenance thereof is a lawfull oath as to sweare to any thing that is lawfull and to lay a new band on our soules to performe holy duties where we feare a breach and finde by experience there hath beene a breach is also a dutie of morall and perpetuall equity therefore such a sworne covenant is lawfull I say not from this place that it is necessary that all subscribe with their hands a covenant because I thinke onely the Princes Levites Priests and heads of families did subscribe the covenant Nehem. 9. 38. but Nehem. 10. 28 29. The whole people all who had separated themselves from the Lands sinne and their strange wives even their wives their sonnes their daughters every one having knowledge and having understanding V. 29. They clave to their brethren their Nobles and entered into a curse and into an oath to walke in Gods Law If it be replied that there was in Israel no written covenant drawne up by a man and put in a mans stile language method and frame they did sweare to keepe Moses his Law I answer when we sweare a covenant our faith doth not relie upon words characters stile of language or humane method or any humane respects but upon the truth of God in that platforme and suppose we should swear and subscribe the Old and New Testament translated into our vulgar Language we doe not sweare to the translation characters and humane expression but to the matter contained in the translation and that because Iehovah our Lord hath spoken it in his Word And if this be a good argument why we cannot sweare a platforme then should none sweare a covenant at all or make any holy vow but those who understand the originall Languages in Hebrew and Greeke and yet the characters and imprinting is humane even in the original so all religious covenants and oathes should be unlawfull 4. Argum. What a Church or person is to suffer for or to believe and obliged to render account of to every one that asketh account of us that we may sweare and seale with our hands because what we are to suffer death for and the losse of temporall life for which we owe a reckoning to God by vertue of the â—ixt Commandement that is a matter of truth which we professe before God and men and our dying for the truth is a sort of reall oath that we are before God professing that truth is to be preferred to our life But we are to suffer if God call us even death for the true Religion Revel 2. 13. Act. 7. 57 58. Luk. 21. 15 16. Phil. 1. 20 21. â—nd the truth and we are obliged to believe and to give account thereof before all men and a reason of our faith and hope 1 Pet â— 15. Ergo we may sweare it Argum. 5. If an oath to the true Religion and forme of wholesome Doctine be a speciall remedy against backâ—iding and a meane to keepe off false and heretical doctrine then is such an oath lawfull but the former is true Ergo The Proposition is cleare Gods people say Nehem. 9. 38. Because of all this that is because they had done wickedly and were tempted still to doe more therefore they write and seale a Covenant and if false teachers teach Circumcision must be if weâ— would be saved then the Church may according to Acts 15. condemâ—e that false doctrine by the VVord of God and set downe Canons which the Churches are to observe and what they are to observe as warranted by Gods VVord layeth on bands upon the Conscience and what layeth on such a band that wee may binde our selves by oath to performe it being a speciall remedy lawfull against backsliding from the truth 6. Arg. Our brethren have their grounds and reasons against the swearing of confession common to them with the Arminians and Socinians and their Arguments are all one for Arminians censure the Belgick confession and the Palaâ—ines Catechisme and propound thirteene questions against it as the third question is An quaecunque dogmata in confessione Catâ—chisme tractantur talia sunt ut cuilibet Christiano ad salutem creditu necessaria sint And their seventh question is If such confessions may be called secundaria fidei norma a secundary rule of faith also all Confessions say they declare That Confessions serve not to teach what we ought to beleeve but what the Authors of these Confessions did beleeve Hence they reject all the determinations of the Orthodox Councels condemning the heresies of Arrius Eutiches Macedonius Apollinaris Sabelliâ— Samosateâ—us Pelagius and all the Oxthodox Confessions of the reformed Churches Secondly also upon these grounds they alledge in their Apologie There be few things to be beleeves that every sect may be the true Church so they beleeve some few Articles not controverted amongst Christians such as these Thâ— there is a God and that the Word of God is true c. Thirdly they will not condemne the Macedonians Arrians Anti-trinitarâ—â— Pelagians or others of fundamentall herefies Fourthly that one Church of Christians may be made up of Papists Protestants Anabaptists Macedonians Sabellians c. and all sects so they leade a good life according to the few Articles necessary to salvation may be saved and all may be saved of any sect or Religion Fifthly that to sweare Declarations Confessions Canons of Orthodox Councels is to take away the liberty of prophesying and growing in the knowledge of the Word of God and the praying for grace and light of the holy Spirit for the right meaning of Gods Word Sixthly that Athanasius spake amisse when he said of the Creed that it was to be beleeved of every one who is to bee saved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the same is the doctrine of the Socinians who doe in all these oppose all Confessions of Faith and all Orthodox Decisions Canons and determinations of Sinods So Socinus rejecteth all Synods all Confessions and Decisions even of the Church universall So Smalcius calâ—eth it a rejecting of the Word of God And Theol. Nicoâ—aides saith That it is enough to know things absolutely necessary for salvation and that the Churches determination cannot remove errours and heresies Our brethens first Argument against a Nationall Covenant â— If the doctrine contained in your platforme of Confession â—warve from the Scriptures then the imposing thereof is so farre unlawfull if the doctrine be according to Scripture the platforme is â—eedlesse the
Persis oriens India omnes Barbarae nationes uâ—um Christum adorant unam observant regulam veritatis What were all these but such as after were called VValdenses And in the first ages Pius 2. saith ante concilium Nicenuâ—â— parvus respectus babitus fuerat ad Romanam ecclesiars before the Nicen councill little respect was â—ad to th Church of Rome See this learnedly Demonstrated by the learned Voetius and his reason is good Ignatius Ireneus Iustin. Martyr Clâ—m Alexandr Tertullian Cyprian speak not one syllable of popery or popish articles also Lucian Porphyrius Trypheâ— Cellus Sosymus Symmachus Iulian mockers of Reiligon would have spoken against transubstantiation one body in many thousand places worshipping of dead bones the worshipping of a Tree Crosse and dumbe images and bread a Pope who could not erre and they would have challenged and examined miracles and I adde if they scoffed at the Doctrine of these called after VValdenses as the confession beareth then were the Church of Waldenses though not under that name in their time The Jewes objected against the Fathers Tatian Theophilus Athenages Iustin Tertullian Alexand. Cyâ—rian Chrysostome Isiodorus Hispalensis Iulianus Poâ—nerius They objected all they could devise against the Christian Faith but not a word of poynts of popery now controversed Ergo popery hath not beene in the World then an 188. In the Time of Victor many opposed victors Tyranny and as Plessaeus and Doctor Molineus saith were called Schismaticks therefore and excommunicated Neither can Gretserus nor Bellarmine defend this but by lies and raylings Yea from the 4. to the 7. age saith Voetius produce one Martyr professor or Doctor See Augustine de side ad Petrum Ruffinus his exposition of the Creed Gâ—nnadius of the Articles of the Church Theodoret his Epitome Divinorum decretorum Cyrillus his tract de fide and produce one holding the popish Faith Clemens Romanus and Elutheriâ—s in the Epistle to the Bishops of France maketh all Bishops pastors of the Church universall Any who readeth Greâ—serus against Plâ—ssie may see in the 4. age that Baronius and Bellarmine cannot desend that appeale was made to the Pope in the councell of Carthage yea the Popes Legate brought Apiarius to the Councell that his cause might be judged there becausâ— the Pope could not judge it and that the Councell of Chalcedon was per precepta Valentiniani convened and that Canstantinople was equall with Rome That Simplicius Gâ—lasius and Symmachus were Judges in their owne cause and that Hormisda an 518. had no command over the Oâ—ientall Churches as may be seene in Baronius So Pelagius the 1. Ioan. the 3. and Pelagius the 2. were refused the honour of universall Bishops and could not helpe the matter See Gretser and Honorius must be defended as not denying two wills and two natures in Christ. See what saith Bâ—ronius of this The councell of Constantinople would not receive the worshipping of Images The best part of the Western Churches were against it The Churches of France Germany Italy Brittaine The councell of franckford of Paris so did they all refuse the power of the Pope So Occam Gerson Scotus in most poynts were not papists Nor Cajetan Contaren Almâ—in Ioa Major Caranza Therefore said Thuanus the Doctrine of the VValdenses were now and then renewed by 〈◊〉 and Hus and when Hildebrand came in all know what wicked new poynts hee brought in as in the Tomes of the councells may bee seene and Onuphrius sayth quod major pars antea parum in usu fuerit The greatest part of his novelty not heard before or little in use His Tyranny upon the consciences of Church-men forbidding marriage and over the Lords people may be seene in Sleidan In Lampadius and his forme of excommunicating the Emperour as it is written by Beruriedenses and Sigonius also Aventinus Gerochus Reicher spergeâ—sis Orthuinus Gratius and others can tell But ere I speake of this monster head I should not have omitted humble Stephanus the 5. To whom Lodovick the Emperour descending from his Horse fell down upon the Earth thrice before his feete and at the third time saluted him thus blessed be the Lord God who commeth in the Name of the Lord and who hath shined upon us As Theganus saith that Pashalis excuseth himselfe to the Emperour Lod. That hee had leapen to the Popedome without his authority which saith this headship is not supreame as Aimoinus saith who was a murderer of Theodorus The Roman Churches Seale-keeper and of Leâ— for having first put out their Eyes hee then beheaded them say the same Aimoinus Gregory the 4. caused Lodovick the Emperours sons to conspire against the Father and was upon that plot himselfe Sergius the 2. made an act that a Bishop should be convinced of no fault but under sevety and two witnesses Siconulphus a Prince desiring to have this Popes blessing came to Rome and kissed sayth Gretserus after Anastasius his precious feete Anguilbert Archiepisc. Mediolanensis departed out of the Roman Church for the pride of Rome and Simon of Sergius sayth Sigonius It was ordinary for all sayth Anastasius to kisse the seate of Leo the 4. Platina saith hee was guilty of a conspiracy against Gratianus a godly and worthy man to expell the French-men out of the Kingdome and bring in the Grecianeâ— Gretser the Jesuite saith their owne Platina is a Lyer in this Wee all know there was an English Woman-Pope called Ioanna betwixt Leo the 4. and Benedictus the 3. Bellarmine Baronius Gretser Lipsius will have it a fable Platina a popish writter is more to be believed then they all for hee affirmeth it as truth A great schisme arose in the Church because Benedictus the 3. was chosen Pope without the Emperours consent The Emperour did hold the bridle and lead the Horse of Nicolaus the 1. Gretser cannot deny this hee defended and maintained Baldvinus who was excommunicated by the Bishops of France because he ravished Iuditha the daughter of Câ—rolus Calvus Hee pleaded that there was no reason but the decretalls of the popes should be received as the Word of God but because they were not written in the bookes of church-Church-Canons for by that reason some bookes of the old and New Testament are not to be received as Gods Word Grets said these Epistles were equall with Gods Word and said they had neither these Epistles nor the Scriptutes authority from the holy Spirit but from the Church That the church was foure hundred yeeres ignorant of the authority of the Scriptures that hee himselfe was Jehova eternall and that Gratianus had inserted it in his distinct 96. That hee was God Adrian the 2. approved of Basilius his killing of Michael the Emperour his Father Onuphrius who observeth 26. Schisms of antipopes thinketh Schismatick Popes no popes as Benedict 5. and
transact within their owne Congregations but doe ex aequo belong to them all As 1. That they doe not give offence one to another that one Church doe not hold the Doctrine of Balaam to the effence and scandall of other Churches 2. That one Congregation make not Acts and Canons against the Word of God and against the Acts of another Congregation agreeable to the Word of God 3. That one Church admonish rebuke comfort provoke another to love and to good works in such and such poynts now though a Congregation make acts and constitutions for governing this or that member of the community yet they doe not nor cannot make acts that oblige the community and the Church as the Church the Church as the Church being a part is to be regulated by the whole and if there be things that ex aequo concerne all and doe not concerne one particular Church more then another one particular Congregation cannot governe in these And by the like reason particular Churches and classicall Presbyteries and Provinciall and Nationall Churches are parts of the whole Catholick visible Church 6. Because Christ hath not given the power of Ministery and Ordinances and Jurisdiction to the single Congregation as to the first subject upon the ground that our Brethren speake to wit because the single Congregation is that Spouse to which Christ is referred as an Husband and that body to which hee carrieth the relation of an head communicating life to all the members Eph. 1. 22. Col. 1. 18. nor is it that adequat number of ransomed persons of sheepe of lost ones of fellow-citizens of spirituall stones c. To the which Christ doth carry that adequat and compleat relation of a Saviour of a good Shepheard of a Seeker of lost ones of a King and Governour of the chiefe câ—â—ner-stone Therefore that visible Church for whose salvation Christ hath given the Ministeriall power must be the larger visible Church just as the God of Nature hath given to the whole race of sheep a power to seeke their own food and because of their simplicity a power to be ordered and led by the shepheard and secondarily this power is given to this or this flock feeding on Mount Caermel or elsewhere so hath the God of Grace given a power to the whole visible Catholick flock to submit themselves in the Lord to other guides and he hath given to the whole company of Shepheards as to the first subject the power of the Keys and secondarily the power is given to this or this visible Church and company of Pastors 7. When any scandalous person is delivered to Satan he is cast out of the whole Catholick Church Ergo he was before his ejection a member of the whole catholick Church for hecannot be cast out who was never within And when he is excommunicated his sins bound as in Heaven so on Earth that is not only in that Tract of ground where a handfull of a little Congregation independent as they say of 10 or 20 or an 100 doth ordinarily feed but in all the visible World where God hath a Church and all both within the little Congregation where hee is and without are to repute him as an Heathen and a Publican It is true some of our Brethren say he is excommunicated onely out of that Congregation whereof hee is a member antecedentèr because Christ hath given the power of excommunication onely 1 Cor. 5. 4. To the congregated Church when they are met together to deliver to Satan and they must do it in collegio in consessu coram tota Ecclesia before and in presence of the Church congregationall which is to give their consent and hath a certaine power of interest in the busines but he is cast out and excommunicated to all other Churches onely consequentèr by consequent and by vertue of the communion of Churches I answer the plaine contrary hee is antecedentèr and formally delivered to Satan by the power of the catholick visible Church which is put forth in exercises and in act before that Church whereof he is a neerest member Even as the left hand doth cut off a finger of the right hand which otherwayes should infect the whole body Now it is not the left hand onely that cutteth off the contagious and infectious finger but the whole man deliberate reason and the will consenteth it should be done for the preservation of the whole man the left hand is a meere instrument and the losse of the finger is the losse of the whole body and the finger is cut off the right hand not antedentèr and onely off the right hand by that power intrinsecall onely in the right hand but intrinsecall in the whole body it is true the contagion should creepe through and infect the right hand and right arme first and therefore incision is made upon the right hand So if the Eldership of a Congregation deliver to Satan it is not done by that power that is intrinseally onely in that Congregation but by the power intrinsecall in the whole universall Church who shall keepe communion with him that Eldership cuts him off as the instrument or hand of the Church catholick and the incision as it were is performed there in that meeting I will not say of the whole Congregation that is to be proved because the contagion shall come first upon these with whom the delinquent is to keepe the nearest fellowship and that Excommunication be performed in a meeting I grant and the place 1 Cor. 5. 4. saith so much and a meeting of the Church But that that is a meeting of the congregation with favour of the learned cannot be proved cogently though I thinke excommunication when it is actually performed it should be done before the Congregation but that is for the edification and nearest and most immediate practice of that Congregation for the contagion is nearest to them but the reason why the presence of the Congregation whereof the Delinquent is a member is requisit is not because this Congregation hath the sole intrinsecall power in her selfe and because shee onely doth formally and antecedentèr Excommunicate and the rest of the Churches consequenter and by vertue of a communion for the sister Churches are to debarre this excomunicate person from their communion with Christ in the Seales of the Covenant and that by an intrinsecall authoritative and Church power where as if he were not excommunicated they should have received him to a Communion with them in the Seales and that by an intrinsecall authoritative and Church power for one man cannot receive another to the Seales of the Covenant with him because no one man hath a Church authority If therefore the Church as the Church is consociated by an intrinsecall Church-power should have admitted him if he had not been excommunicated it is evident that hee was a member not onely of the Congregation out of which he is excommunicated but also of the whole consociated congregations 2 The man
clearely insinuate that their commandement as Apostles de jure should have ended the controversie but now for the edification and after-example of the Churches they tooke a Synodicall way 13. The way of the Apostles speaking seemeth to mee Synodicall and not given out with that divine and Apostolicall authoritie that the Apostles may use in commanding it is true they use lovely and swasory exhortations in their writing but this is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a decree not an exhortation now James saith 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is set downe as his private opinion with reverence to what Peter and Paul saith and v. 7. Peter when many had disputed and spoken before him standeth up and speaketh and v. 12. Barnabas and Paul after the multitude is â—â—nt doth speake which to mee is a Synodicall order and the whole Synod v. 28. say It seemed good to us They answer 1. Consociated Churches have some power in determining of dogmaticall points but this is no power of jurisdictim The seventh Proposition to which almost all the Elders of New England agreed saith The Synod bath no Church-power but the cause enimeth with the Church Corpus cum causa the Church-body and the cause which concerneth the Church-body doe remaine together â—nd therefore quaestio defertur ad Synodum causa manet penes eccleiam the question is brought to the Synod the cause remaineth with the Church Another Manuscript of Godly and learned Divines I saw which saith That the ministeriall power of applying of the rules of the word and Canons to persons and things from time to time as the occasions of the Church shall require pertaineth to and may be exercised by each particular Church without any necessary dependance on other Churches yet in difficill cases wee ought say they to consult with and seeke advise from presbyteries and ministers of 〈◊〉 Churches and give so much authoritie to a concurrence of judgements as shall and ought to be an obligation to us not to depart from any such resolutions as they shall make upon any consideration but where in conscience and hence our peace with God is apparently concerned Answ. I perceive 1. That our brethren cannot indure that a Synod should bee called a Church but 1. I verily thinke that when Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1 2. had much dissention with those who taught you must bee circumcised after the manner of Moses that the Church of Antioch resolved to tell the Church that is the Synod while as they fall upon this remedy v. 2. They determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine other of them 〈◊〉 goe up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question that is that the Church of Antioch when the subverâ—ers of soules would not heare their brethren of Antioch did tell the Synod convened at Jerusalem that is according to our â—viours order Maâ—â—â— 18. 17. they did tell the Church and my reason is if the Church at Antioch could not satisfie the conâ—câ—enâ—es of some who said you must bee circumcised else you cannâ—x in saved they could not nor had they power in that cast not to goe on but were obliged to tell the Synod that is the Church whom it concerned as well as Antioch for if they had sent the matter to the Synod as a question not as a cause proper to the Synod or Church then when the Synod had resolved the question the cause should have returned to the Church of Antioch and been determined at Antioch as in the proper court if that hold true the question is deserred to the Synod the cauâ—e remaineth with the body the Church but the cause returned never to the Church of Antioch but both question and cause was determined by the Synodicall-Church Act. 15 v. 22. 23 24. and the determination of both question and cause ended in the Synod as in a proper court and is imposed as a commandement and a Synodicall Canon to bee observed both by Antioch v. 25 26 27 28 29. and other Churches Act. 16. 4 5. Ergo either the Church of Antioch lost their right and yet kept Christs order Matth. 18. 15 16 17. or the question and cause in this case belongeth to a Synod 2. It is said expresly â— 22. It pleased tâ— Apostles Elders and the whole Church to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch c. What Church was this the whole Church of â—â—leevers or the fiaternitie at Jerusalem say our brethren but with leave of their godlinesse and learning no say â— 1. What reason that the Church of all beleevers men and women of Jerusalem should de jure have beene present to give either consent or surfrage there because it concerned then practise and conscience but I say it concerned as much if not more the conscience and practise of the Church of Antioch if not more for the cause was theirs say our brethen and cause ad corpus say they quaestio ad synodum and it concerned as much the practise and conscience of all the Churches who were to observe these decrees Act 16. 4. 5 Act. 21. 25. yet they were not present If the multitude of â—â—leevers of Jerusalem was present because they were 〈…〉 to the Synod whereas Antioch other 〈…〉 were nor off were not present but in their commissioners then I say the Church â—â— the multitude of Jerusalem whose commidicâ—â—â—s were here 〈◊〉 I say the multitude was present â—uely de 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 nor was there more law for their presence then â—or all other Churches who also in conscience were obliged to obey the councells determinations but I deare a warrant that the fact of the Synod such as was sending of the decrees and Commissioners with the decrees to Antioch should bee â—â—â—â—ibed to the multitude of beleevers at Jerusalem who by no Law of God were present at the Synod and by no Law of God 〈◊〉 more consent then the Church of Antioch and were present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by accident because they dwelt in the 〈◊〉 where the Synod did sit therefore say I the 〈◊〉 Church in the whole Synod 2. By what Law can Jerusalem a sister Church have influence or consent de jure in sending binding Acts as these were as is cleare v. 28. Ch. 16. 4 5. Ch. 21. 25. to the Church of Antioch for this is an authoritative sending of messengers and the Canons to the Church of Antioch as is evident v. 2 2. 3. It is utterly denied that the Church of Jerusalem I meane the multitude of beleevers could meet all at one Synod 4. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 12. which is said to hold their peace is referred to the Apostles and Elders met Synodically v. 6. and is not the multitude of beleevers 5. Where are these who are called Elders not Apostles they are ever distinguished from the Apostles as Act. 15. 2. v. 6. v. 22. Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. â—are is no reason that they were all
principally seated in the Presbytery in regard of the latter Synods are the first subject of the occasionall Church-power in things which â—e in common belong to many Presbyteries or to a nationall Church But to returne if the Synodicall power bee different in essence and nature and not gradually onely from the counsell and advise of Christians then first it is not a determination that bindeth by way of counsell and brotherly advise onely but under some higher consideration which is as like a Church-relation of Church-power as any thing can bee seeing here bee Pastors acting as Pastors 2. formally gathered in a councell 3. speaking Gods Word 4. by the holy Ghost But this shall bee against the Church-government of New England 2. If it bee essentially different from an advise and councell and warranted by divine institution why doe not our brethen give us Scripture for it for if they give us Act. 15. then can they not say that the Apostles in this Synod did determine and voyce as Apostles by an Apostolick and immediatly inspiring Spirit for the spirit Synodicall is a spirit imitable and a rule of pertually induring moralitie in all Synods and must leade us for an Apostolick spirit is not now in the world 3. As they require a positive divine institution for the frame of a Presbyteriall Church in power above a Congregation and will not bee satisfied with the light of nature which upon the supposall of a spirituall government instituted by Christ in a Congregation which is a part may clearely by the hand lead us to the inlarging of that same spirituall government in the whole that is to a number of consociated Churches which are all interessed as one common societie in a common government so they must make out for their Synod endued with dogmaticall power a positive divine institution 4. We desire a warrant from the Word why a colledge of Pastors determining by the Word of God as Pastors having power of order and acting in a colledge according to that power should not bee a formall and ordinary great Presbytery 5. How can they by our brethrens determination exercise such pastorall acts out of their owne Congregations towards those Churches to which they have no pastorall relation virtute potestatis ordinis 6. How can the wisedome of Christ who provideth that his servants bee not despised but that despisers in a Church way should bee censured 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. cloth his messengers in a Synod with a power dogmaticall and deny all power of iâ—â—â—diction to them upon the supposall that their determinations be rejected I feare there bee something under this that none are to bee censured or delivered to Satan for heterodox opinions except they erre in points fundamentall But farther it may bee made good that a power dogmaticall is not different in nature from a power of jurisdiction for we read not of any societie that hath power to meet to make Lawes and decrees which have not power also to backe their decrees with punishments if the Jewish Synedry might meet to declare judicially what was Gods Law in point of conscience and what not and to tie men to it they had power to conveene and make Lawes farre more may they punish contraveners of the Law for a nomothetick power in a societie which is the greater power and is in the fountaine must presuppose in the societie the lesse power which is to punish and the power of punishing is in the inferior judicature so a nomothetick power ministeriall cannot want a power of censuring It is true a single Pastor may ministerially give out commandements in the authoritie of Christ but hee cannot his alone censure or excommunicate the contraveners of those commandements but it followeth well in an assembly hee hath power to censure and excommunicate now here Pastors and Elders are in an assembly It is objected Pastors in a Synod have no jurisdiction as Pasters for what they doe as Pastors that they may doe there alone and on of a Synod but they doe not nor cannot determine and give out Canons there alone and they cannot there alone determine juridically therefore they doe not wholly and poorely as Pastors in relation to those Churches give out these decrees yet doe they not give out the decrees as privite men wholly but in some pastor all relation for Pastors as Pastors have something peculiar to them in all Churches whither they come to preach so as a speciall blessing followeth on their labours though they be not Pastors in relation to all the Churches they come to even as a Sermon on the Lords day is instamped with a more speciall blessing bâ—â—â—use of Gods institution imprinted on the day then a Sermon preached in another day Answ. This argument is much for us it is proper to acts of jurisdiction ecclesiasticall that they cannot bee exercised by one onely but must bee exercised by a societie now a Pastor as a Pastor his alone without any collaterally joyned with him exerciseth his pastorall acts of preaching and of administrating the Sacraments but those who give out those decrees cannot give them out Synodically but in a Synod and Court-wayes as forensicall decrees and so in a juridicall way and because Pastors whither so ever they come doe remaine Pastors 1. The Apostles are not in this Synod as Apostles Secondly nor yet as gifted Christians to give their counsell and advise nor thirdly as this answerer granteth meerely as Pastors then it must follow that fourthly they are here as such pastors conveened Synodically by divine institution and that this is the patterne of a Synod Object 2. But there is no censuring of persons for scandalls in this meeting because there is nothing here but a doctrinall declaration of the falsehood of their opinion who taught a necessitie of circumcision and that all is done by way of doctrine and by power of the Keyes of knowledge not of jurisdiction is cleare from the end of this meeting Act. 5. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent from the Church of Antiocâ— unto Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning this question and v. 6. the Apostles and Elders came together to consider 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of this matter consideration of questions being the end of the Synod is a thing belonging to doctrinal power meerely so Mr. Mather Answ. 1. It is false that there is no censuring of persons here for to say nothing that Peter accuseth those of the wrong side as personally present at the Synod either being summoned or comming thither by appeale v. 10. Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoake upon the necke of the Discip'es c. which reproofe comming from one man onely cannot be called a Synodicall reproofe It is more then evident that the publick Synodicall censure of rebuke is put upon those who held and urged the necessitie of circumcision and why not excommunication also in case of obstinacy for the Synodicall censure
principles for sometime they say the Apostles gave out this decree as Apostles and sometime there is nothing here done by a meere doctrinall power such as Paul had over Peter or one single Pastor hath over another now it is sure that Paul had no Apostolick power over Peter and that one Pastor have not Apostolick power over another 2. When our brethren say here that the Apostles as Apostles by an infallible spirit gave out this Decree they doe in this helpe the Papists as Bellarmine Becanus Grâ—â—rut and in particular the Jesuit Lorinus who saith decrâ—um authenticum cujus inspirator spiritus sanctâ— and so saith Cornelius a lapide visiâ—m est nob is inspiratis decretis a Spiritu sanctus therefore saith hee the councell cannot erre and so Salmeron and Cajetan say and expresly Stapleton saith this Apostosack definition flowed from the instinct of the holy Ghost observandum saith Stapleton quanta habenda sit ecclesiae definienth authoritâ—s hence our brether here must yeeld either that all Synods are infallible as Papists say this Synod the patterne of all Synods being concluded by an Apostolick spirit could not erre and so neither can councells erre or they must with Socinians and Arminians say there is no warrant for Synods here at all And certainly though wee judge our brethren as farre from Popery and Socinianisme as they thinke wee detest Anti-Christian Presbytery yet if this Synod bee concluded by an Apostolick spirit it is no warrant to bee imitated by the Churches and wee have no ground hence for lawfull Synods Whittakerus Calvin Beza Luther and all our Divines do all alledge this place as a pregnant ground not of Apostolick but of ordinary and constant Synods to the end of the world and Diodatus good to the holy Ghost because they did treat of ecclesiasticall reders concerning the quietnes and order of the Church wherein ecclesiasticall authoritie hath place the Assembly used this tearme it seemed good to us which is not used neither in articles of faith nor in the commandements which meerely concerned the conscience and to shew that authoritie was with holy reason and wisedome there is added and to the holy Ghost who guided the Apostles in these outward things also 1. Cer. 7. 25. 40. 2. If our brethren meane that the Elders and brethren were in this Apostolick and immediatly inspired Synodicall determination not as collaterall penners of Scriptures joyned with the Apostles but onely as consenters and as consenters by power of an ordinary holy Ghost working consent in them more suo according to their capacitie as ordinary Elders 1. They yet more helpe the Papists because they must say onely Apostles and so onely their successors the Prelates had definitive voices in this Synod the Presbyters and Brethren did no more then Papists and Prelates say Presbyters did in generall councells of old and therefore the Presbyter is to subscribe Ego A. N. Presbyter consentiens subseribo whereas the Prelate subscribed say they Ego A. B. Episcopus definiens subscribo wee crave a warrant in Gods Word to make an Apostle or a Prelate a Synodicall definer having a definitive voyce and the Elder Brother or Presbyter to have a consultative voyce for here all the multitude if there was a multitude present doe make Synodicall decrees by consulting and consenting yea all the nation may come to a nationall Synod and both reason dispute and consent because matters of doctrine and government of the Church concerneth all therefore all have an interest of presence and all have an interest of reasoning and 3. by consequent all have an interest of consenting yea of protesting on the contrary if the Synod determine any thing against the Word of God If they say there is a threeford consent in this Synod 1. an Apostolicall 2. a second Synodicall agreeing to Elders as Elders and a third that of the people or a popular What a mixt Synod shall this be but 1. then as the Epistle to the Tlxssalonians is called the Epistle of Paul not the Epistle of Silvanus and Timotheus though Silvanus and Timotheus did consent so these dogmata or decrees should not be called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders as they are called Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 6. Act. 21. 25. but onely the decrees of the Apostles seeing the Elders did onely consent and had no definitive influence in making the decree by this doctrine as Silvanus and Timotheus were not joynt pen-men of Scripture with Paul 3. When as it is said the specification of actions must not bee taken from the efficient cause but from the formall object and all that a done in this Synod might have beene done by a single Pastor I answer wee doe not fetch the specification of this rebuke and of these decrees from the efficient causes but from the formall object for an Apostle might his alone have rebuked these obtruders of circumcision and made this decree materialiter for Paul did more his alone then this when hee wrote the Eâ—istle to the Romans but yet one Pastor could not have Synodically rebuked and given out a decree formally Synodicall laying an Ecclesiasticall tie on moe Churches then one there is great ods to doe one and the same action formally and to doe the same action materially and I beleeve though actions have not by good logick their totall specification from their efficient cause yet that ordinances of God as lawfull have their specification from the efficient causes in part our brethren cannot deny For what made the difference betwixt Aaron his fire offered to the Lord and Nadab and Abihu their strange and unlawfull fire that they offered to the Lord but that the on fire had God for its author the other had men and the like I say of Gods feasts and the feasts devised by Jeroboam else if a woman preach and administrate the Lords Supper in the Church that preaching and sacrament administrated by her should not have a different specification and essence if wee speake morally or Theologically from that same very preaching and celebration of the Supper performed in the Church by a lawfull Pastor it is as I conceive of the essence of an action Synodicall I say not its totall essence that it cannot bee performed by one in a Church-way and with an ecclesiasticall tie but it must be performed by many else it is not a Synodicall action and it is true that Paul Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. hath in substance the same Canon forbidding scandall which is forbidden in this Canon prohibiting eating of meats offered to Idolls and blood in the case of scandall but I pray you is there not difference betwixt the one prohibition and the other yea there is for Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 10. it hath undenyably Apostolick authoritie here it hath onely Synodicall 2. There it is a commandement of God here it is a Canon of the Church 3. There it commeth from one man here from a
colledge of Apostles and Elders conveened and yet materially it is the same prohibition Object 4. The Acts of this Synod are finaliter acts of government because they are rules conducing for the governing of the Church but formaliter they are acts of dogmaticall power and not formally acts of jurisdiction for there is no rebuking of subverters of soules inordine to excommunication no penall power is exercised here sub poona under the paine of excommunication and therefore there an here no formall acts of government Answ. 1. The acts of Church-government finaliter that is government because to prescribe rules and directive Lawes for they are not properly Lawes which the Church prescribeth Christ is the onely Law-giver are formall acts of governing and one power doth not make Lawes for governing the Church and another power different in nature punish the contraveners And what power disposeth and ordereth the meanes doe also dispose and order the end Canons of the Church tending to the edification of the Church are meanes tending to the government of the Church and I appeale to the judgement of our reverend brethren if wee suppose that one single Congregation should doe all that this Synod doth if they would not call it a formall governing of that particular Congregation for example in the Church of Pergamus one ariseth and teacheth the doctrine of the Nicolaitans suppose that fornication is indifferent is the eating of blood and is no sinne the Angels of the Church of Pergamus preach against this doctrine in private they deale by force of arguments from Scripture that it is a wicked doctrine and destructive to holinesse as Paul and Barnab as disputeth Act. 15. 1. 2. with the obtruders of a necessitie of Circumcision yet they prevaile not now suppose this independent Church following the Apostle Pauls way thinke good to convene a Synod or a parishionall assembly to determine Synodically that this is a wicked doctrine and shall in their decree call the holders of this doctrine subverters of soules and forbid fornication in their Synod now supposing Pergamus to be a single Church in a remote Iland consociated with no neighbouring Churches who could in reason deny that this Synodicall power so inacting were a power formally governing the Church of Pergamus it is true some of our brethren say that it is even to us a received tenent that the power that disposeth of the meanes of governing doth not for that governe in respect that we teach that the classicall presbytery doth decree and in act and the Congregation doth execute these Decreed but I pray you doth this prove that the power ordering the meanes of governing is no formall act of governing yea the contrary is true because the Congregation executing the acts of the classicall presbytery as subordinat in that act to the classicall presbytery by their authority therfore while they give out these acts or Canons doe formally governe that Congregation executing their acts in this particular Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson against Mr. Herle c. 1. p. 9. teach that there is a power of clearing truth dogmatically and that 〈◊〉 ‑ 〈◊〉 ultimately where the controversie is ended but they will have this ultimate power not in a Synod onely but also in a Congregation But 1. they seeme to make this dogmaticall power a Church-power and the exercise thereof formally an act of Church-government and so it must bee Church-power and Church-government in the Synod as well as in the Congregation 2. The last period and conclusion of the controversie cannot bee both in the Congregation de jure by right onely and in the Synod by right onely for two last powers cannot bee properly in two subordinate judicatures for if Antioch appeale to a Synod as they doc Act. 15. 2. then Antioch is not the sole last and ultimate and finall judge and 3. If the controversie concerne many Churches as this doth Act. 15. 2. 23. 24. I see not how a Congregation except they transgresse their line can finally determine it And here while as our brethren doe all edge that a Synod hath a power to decree and make lawes but hath no power at all to execute these Lawes or to punish the contraveners but power of punishing is all in the single Congregation â— They tie all governing power to a punishing power as if there were no other wayes to governe but upon supposall of scandalls whereas all Scripture and polliticians make a power of giving Lawes formally a governing power 2. When one societie and Synod maketh the Lawes and another must execute them and punish the contraveners the single Congregation that punisheth is more subjected by a truely prelaticall bondage then if the Law-makers had onely the power of punishing the contraveners at they onely have the power of making the Lawes I take not here Lawes for Lawes properly so called but for ministeriall directories having ecclesiasticall authoritie and here in effect our brethren lay truely a prelaticall bondage on the Churches of Christ for they teach that a Synod may make a Law by a pastorall power and that this Synod is an ordinance of Christ by Act. 15. and that as Prelates did they send those Synodicâ—ll decrees to bee obeyed and put in execution by the Churches and ordaine the contraveners to bee punished by the Churches and here is a power above a power and mandates for government sent by the Synod to the Churches to bee obeyed and a Synod governing by Churches this they call prelaticall in us But 3. there is no penall power here say they and nothing decerved to bee obeyed sub paena under the paine of excommunication therefore no power of jurisdiction But this consequence is justly denyed for no politician no reason in the world can say that all power of jurisdiction is included in the power of excommunication What hath the Church a Church-power to threaten and no Church-power to pardon the penltent I think if the Church as the Church Matth. 18. receive a power from Christ to bind in heaven and earth doth not Christ in that same patent give to her also a power to loose in earth and heaven and when hee saith if bee refuse to beare the Church let him be to thee â— aubeâ—hen and publican doth hee not give to the Church a power to command if hee command to heare and obey the Church hee must give a power of jurisdiction to the Church to command and a power to command not penall onely but promissorie also to loose and absolve upon condition of prosessed repentance Now suppose the Church make a Law that theresurrection of the dead is a truth of God to bee beleeved and professed upon occasion that in the Congregation Hymeneus Alexander den yeth that Article in that very Commandement doctrinall the Church doth governe the whole Congregation and exerciseth a power of formall governing though in their act they say nothing of the censure of excommunication to those who shall deny that Article
of the resurrection for I hope a simple sanction maketh a Law though no penaltie bee expressed in it and though there had beene in the Decree Act 15. 28. an expresse punishment this should to our brethren prove no power of jurisdiction exercised by many for this which is said Gal. 1. 8. Though wee or an Angel from heaven preach unto you another Gospel then that which wee have preached let him bee accursed and that 1 Cor. 9. 16. Woe unto mee if I preach not the Gospel and many other threatnings in Scripture though a punishment bee annexed expressely cease not to bee meerely doctrinall and are not threatnings importing formally any power of Church-jurisdiction and therefore though mention should have beene made of a censure if there bee not here a Synod 2. Having power and authoritie from Christ. 3. Commanding by the holy Ghost as these indeed are all here the name of censure should prove no power of jurisdiction Object 5. The laying on of the yoake spoken of v. 28. is a meerâ— doctrinall yoake and it importeth no more a poner of jurisdiction then we can conclude that the obtruders of circumcision bad a power of jurisdiction because they are said to lay on a yoake also and to tempt God in so doing vers 10. Answ. I retort this reason for we can then no more conclude that the Apostles by an Apostolick authoritie layd on this yoake then wee can conclude that the obtruders of circumcision did lay on this yoake because they are said to lay on a yoake and to tempt God v. 10. It is a most unequall reasoning to argue against a iust Synodicall power from a sinfull and unjust power for these obtruders of circumcision had no lawfull power at all to lay a yoake on the Disciples but sinned and tempted God in laying on that yoake but it is not denyed by our brethren but the Apostles and Elders had a lawfull power to lay on a yoake in this Synod onely it is controverted whether it bee a meere dogmaticall or doctrinall power or if it bee a power of jurisdiction nay the obtruders of circumcision by neither of these two powers layd on a yoake upon the Dsciples Object 6. These decrees which did no other wayes bind the Church of Jerusalem then they did bind all the Churches of the world cannot bee decrees of power of jurisdiction over the Church of Jerusalem and over the Church of Antioch But these decrees did no otherwise bind the Church of Jerusalem then they did bind all the Churches of the world for the decrees of Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem Act. 6. 4 5. were sent to all the Churches of the world to bee observed and seeing they could not as Synodicall Canons obliege all the Churches of the world by an ecclesiasticall tie because all the Churches of the world sent not Commissioners and all the Churches of the world couldnot be represented in this Synod but onely the Churches of Jerusalem and Antioch yea wee see not that this Synod is any more then the Church of Antioch seeking counsell from the sister Church at Jerusalem as one Church may advise another Church that is weaker in knowledge in a matter of such difficultie because the Apostles were at Ierusalem and that 〈◊〉 1. The whole Canons are ascribed to the Church of Jerusalem onely to the Apostles Elders and the whole Church Act. 15. 22. and Act. 15. 22. and Act. 16. 4 5. and Act. 21. 25. the Elders of Jerusalem take this act or canon to themselves 2. It cannot be proven that the Churches of Syria and Cilicia had any commissioners heâ—â— farre lesse had all the Churches of the Gentiles who yet are commanded to keepe those decrees by commissioners there C. 15. 19. Act. 21. 25. Act. 16. 4 5. 3. It cannot bee proven that Antioch sent Elders to this meeting but onely Commissioners Act. 15. 2. Answ. This answer is much contradicent to what our brethren other waies hold for if it be a patterne of a sister Church giving advise and counsell to another this is imitable to the worlds end and if the Canon come from the Apostles as Apostles it is not imitable 2. That one sister Church can lay burdens on another and give out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees to bee kept is unwarrantable now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as they are called by all that understandeth Greeke are not friendly advises of brethren the Seventie Interpreters use the word Daniel 6. 26. to expresse a Law made by Darius Luke useth the word c. 2. 1. saith a decree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came from Augustus Caesar to taxe all the World 2. It is a graver businesse then we can thinke of to beleeve that these who onely give advise and counsell and must conveene in a Synod as Apostles and Elders doe here v. 23. 2 that they can say as it is v. 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us to lay no other burden on you then tâ—â—se necessary things for a counsell or advise can never amount to the burden imposed by the holy Ghost speaking in a Synod 2. It is denied that this decree oblieged the Church of Jerusalem no other way then it oblieged all the Churches of all the world for here bee three sorts of Churches and three sorts of Churches are under a tie by this Synod first Jerusalem secondly Antioch Syria and Cilicia thirdly universally all the Churches of the Gentiles The Church of Jerusalem have formall commissioners here under an ecclesiasticall tie as concerning the faith of the things contained in the decree that it is lawfull for the Gentiles to abstaine from things offered to idolls from things strangled and from blood and they were simply under a tie both of the seventh Commandement and by the fifth Commandement to abstaine from fornication because the Synod had forbidden it 2. They were under a tie by due proportion not to keepe the Law of Moses and not to bee circumcised by any necessitie of a Divine Law but onely by permission to use these ceremonies for feare of scandall 3. They are tied by proportion also to give no offence in things indifferent 4. Not to reject the Gentiles whom the Lord had called to his heavenly kingdome as well as the Jewes 2. These Churches of the Gentiles who never heard of the Synod and so were not oblieged to bee there in their Commissioners or not tied at all by this Decree by vertue of any ecclesiasticall tie but are onely tied by the Law of Nature not to abuse their libertie in the use of things in their owne nature indifferent and so this is false that the Church of Jerusalem was tied no other way by these acts then all Churches of the world for some of the Churches of the world were not tied at all by any ecclesiasticall bond but onely for the necessitie of the Law of Nature 3. Jerusalem Antioch Syria and Cilicia were tied by an ecclesiasticall tie because Jerusalem
nor being a witnesse of the life death and resurrection of Christ then the authoritie of James and Peter who werâ— eye-witnesses of Christs life doctrine and sufferings and saw him visibly ascend to heaven and the believers doubted if hee was an Apostle and the Synod was convened to have theresolution of the Apostles and so it was meerely Apostolicall Ans. Though I grant there beesome truth in this that Pauls Apostolick calling was now more question 〈◊〉 then the rest of the Apostles and I easily yeeld that these who disputed with him could not rest upon his authority yet I deny that hence wee can inferre no Synod for if the Apostles had convened in Synod to satisfie those who doubted of Pauls authoritie as an Apostle then they would have reterred the matter to James and Peter who to these beleevers were undoubtedly the Apostles of the Lord but if the Apostles had had no intent but to end the controversie in a mere Apostolick way and not intended a Synodicall and an â—clesiasticall and perpetuall remedy in such cases of controversies in particular Churches I shall not beleeve that the Apostles when they were to determine by a superior an Apostolick and infallible light they would have joyned with them the Elders as Act. 15. 16. to consider of the question and that the Church of Auâ—ioch doubting if Paul was an Apostle would have decreed to seeke a resolution from Elders and that in an Apostolick way for they sent to the Elders at Jerusalem for a resolution as well as to the Apostles Act. 15. 2. and judge yee if the Apostles being to determine infallibly as Apostles would joyne the falliblo and inferiour light of Elders v. 6. and Brethren v. 22. if tlloy had not had a mind to determine the question in a Synodicall way Object 9. But it is not cleare that in this act they either censure persons or doe any thing in order to Church-censure but onely exercise a naked doctrinall power Answ. A doctrinall power was in a higher measure in the Apostles then in all the Elders of the world who were all but fallible men and James and Peter to these beleevers who moved the question were undenyably Apostles and what doctrinall power could they seeke in the Elders to whose determination by intention both of Antioch ch 15. 2. and by the Apostles intention v. 6. the question is referred as well as to the Apostles if the matter was not to bee ended by a formall Synod 2. Nor can they deny a power of jurisdiction though there were no persons rebuked and censured in this Synod for the object of a juridicall power is not onely persons but things of order decencie circumstances questions of doctrine as is cleare Reâ—el 1. 14. 15. officers to be ordained Act. 6. 3 4 5 6. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2 3. 3. Our brethren cannot deny but the sentence of non-Communion is a censure and a great one yea and of kindred and blood most neare to excommunication and that if any Churches should have refâ—â—sed those Canons by this Canon the Churches might have pronounced the sentence of non-communion against them and to pronounce this sentence is an act of government as properly so called as to pronounce the sentence of excommunication for it is the formall halfe of the sentence of excommunication Object 10. It seemeth that Apostles here determine as Apostles for they condenme the obtruders of circumcision because they taught these things without any Apostolick Commandement v. 24. They teach that you must bee circumcised and keepe the Law to whom wee the Apostles gave no such commandement Answ. This is no more a good argument to prove that the obtruders of circumcision did teach false doctrine and were not condemned by the Apostles and Elders Synodically then if one should say this is not a Synodicall decree of the Church because it is proven and made good by the Word of God for Synodicall decrees exclude not Gods word though they bee not formally Scripture for in some part of the Epistle the Apostles may well speak of themselves as distinguished from Elders and as Apostles and yet the assembly is an ordinary Synod and not an Apostolick meeting for if wee should argue thus the whole Church men and women v. 22. sent messengers to Antioch as the Church and not as Apostles our brethren would thinke it a weake consequence to inferre Ergo this was nothing but a Congregational not an Apostolical meeting Yet our brethren contend that the whole Church and single Congregation of Ierusalem did concurre in this meeting as consenters and having power also though not of jurisdiction but I wonder why our brethren should so contend that there was no power of censuring put forth in this Assembly seeing one of their speciall answers whereby they would prove that this it not a patterne of an ordinary Synod and such a Synod as wee contend for having power of jurisdiction is that this was an ordinary meeting of the Elders and Church of Ierusalem giving counsell and advise with the Apostles to the Church of Antioch but I am sure the businesse of not scandalizing did as much concerne the Church of Ierusalem and therefore in the Synod they ought to put forth power of jurisdiction if any of their members hearing that the Apostles contended that the ceremoniall Law did not lay a tie on the conscience of either Jew or Gentile in foro dei before Gods court as the places cited by Iames prove v. 15 16 17. Peter saith expresly that God now putteth no difference betwixt Iewes and Gentiles v. 9. but 〈◊〉 are saved through the grace of our Lord Iesus v. 11. should ab â—aine from blood to the offence of the weaker should not this Congregation all Church condemne such in ordine ad censuram in order to excommunication yea the Eldership and Congregation of Jerusalem here convened as our brethren say should have failed in this first Synod and also the Apostles with them if they neglected to exercise juridicall power over their owne Congregation in the case of scandall and a scandall as possible to them to fall in as the Gentiles and therefore either this assembly consisting of Apostles and of the particular Church of Ierusalem erred which wee cannot say or then they did exercise power in order to excommunication towards their owne Church and so there is some juridicall power put forth in this meeting Object 11. Though the Apostles in this Synod proceed by way of disputing and borrow light one from another it followeth not thâ—â— they goe not on here as Apostles yea though Peter and Paul dâ—e not say all the truth nor fall upon that which is the conclusion of the Assembly as I ames doth it doth not hinder but they are led in all these Synodicull debaâ—eâ— by the infallible and Apostolick spirit because some things are revealed to one Evangelist and to one Prophet which is not revealed to another Iohn the
is essentially an act of preaching the Word Object 14. This Synod declares only in a doctrinall way what is necessary what is scandalous the same way that Paul doth Rom. 14. 14 15. i Cor. 8. 1 Cor. 10. Answ. This Synod and Paul declare one and the same thing Ergo with one and the same authoritie it followeth not Paul writeth 1 Cor. 5. that the incestuous man should bee excommunicated and this hee wrote as canonicall Scripture by the immediat inspiration of the holy Spirit if then the Church of Corinth should have excommunicated him shall it follow that they gave out the sentence of excomunication by the immediate inspiration of the holy Spirit I thinke not their Churches sentence had been given out by a meere ecclesiasticall authoritie according to the wch Churches of Christ to the worlds end doth excommunicate following the Church of Corinth as a patterne Obj. 15. Though these obtruders of ceremonies did pervent soâ—ks v. 24. yet the Synod doth not summond them before them nor excommuncite them but remit them to the particular Churches to whom it properly belonged to censure and not to any Synod or superiour Judicature Answ. There was no need to summon them for these subverters of soules were personally present at the Synod and rebuked in the face of the Synod as perverters of soules v. 24. for if they were not present 1. to whom doth Peter speake v. 10. Now therefore why tempt yee God to put a yoake on the necke of the disciples c. the Apostles and Elders did not impose the yoake of Moses Law upon the beleeving disciples nor any other save onely the obtruders of circumcision 2. Who were they in the Synod who made much disputing v. 7. note the Apostles not any save these obtruders Ergo they were personally present at the Synod nor needed they to excommunicate them for I judge that they acquiesced to the determination of James which was the sentence of the Synod and the great dispute spoken of v. 7. ceased v. 13. and the conclusion is agreed upon 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and whole Church and there was reason why these obtruders should acquiesce so that there was no need of further censure for there was satisfactiou in part given to both siddes The question was whether or no are beleevers now to keepe the Law and the ceremonies of Moses his Law It was answered by the Synod by a distinction which favoured in part both sides 1. There is no necessitie that the beleeving Gentiles who are saved by grace as well as the Jewes bee troubled to keepe all the ceremonies and this satisfied the Apostles who taught that the Gentiles were now made one people with the Jewes and both are freed in conscience from Moses his yoake the other part of the distinction it was this yet there bee some ceremoniall commandements as not to eate things offered to Idols blood and things strangled for fornication is of another nature and abstinence therefrom is of perpetuall necessitie 1 Cor. 6. 13 14 15 16. 1 Thess. 4. 3. Col. 3. 5. these must bee avoided for scandals sake by all the Jewes but especially by the Gentiles lest the weake Jewes who take these to be divine commandements yet in force take offence and this was satisfactorie to the obtruders and wee heare no more of their disputing and there is an end of the controversie by the blessed labours of a lawfull Synod 3. I could easily yeeld that there is no necessitie of the elicit acts of many parts of government such as excommunication ordination admitting of heathens professing the faith to Church-membership in Synods provinciall nationall or oecumenicall but that Synods in the case of neglect of presbyteriall-Churches command these particular Churches whom it concerneth to doe their dutie and in this sense the Synod Act. 15. is to remit the censure of excommunication to the presbytery of Antioch and Jerusalem in the case of the obstinacie of these obtruders of circumcision but so some power of government is due to the Synod as prescribing of Lawes and Canons for presbyteries and Congregations Object 16. Therefore was the Synagogue of the Jewes no compleat Church because all the ordinances of God cannot bee performed in the Synagogue and therefore were the Jewes commanded onely at Jerus salem and in no other place to keepe the passeover and to offer offerings and sacrifices which were òrdinary worship Deut. 12. but there is not any worship or sacred ordinance saith that worthy Divine Dr. Ames of preaching praying Sacraments c. prescribed which is not to bee observed in every Congregation of the New Testament Nor is there any ordinary minister appointed who is not given to some one Assembly of this kind So also Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson teachers in New England Others say because there was a representative worship of sacrificing of all the 12. Tribes at Jerusalem therefore all the Synagogues were dependent Churches and Jerusalem was the supreme and bighest Church but there is no representative worship in the New Testament and therefore no need of Synods as higher Churches Answ. Surely the aforesaid reverend Brethren of New England have these words But it seemeth to us that the power of a Synod is not proporly a power and exercise of government and jurisdiction but a power of doctrine and so a Synod is rather a â—aching then a governing Church from which I inferre 1. That out Brethren cannot deny a power of governing to a Synod but it is not so proper governing as excommunication and ordination performed in their Congregations but say I it is more properly governing as to make Lawes and rules of governing is a more noble eminent and higher act of governing as is evident in the King and his Parliament then the execution of these Lawes and rules 2. Our brethren incline to make a Synod a teaching Church but I inferre that Synodicall teaching by giving out decrees tying many Churches as our Brethren of New England and the forenamed authors teach is an ordinance of Christ that can bee performed in no single Congregation on earth for a doctrinall Canon of one Congregation can lay no ecclesiasticall tie upon many Churches Ergo by this reason our Congregations shall bee dependent as were the Jewish Synagogues 3. With favour of these learned men it is a begging of the question to make Jerusalem the supreme Church and the Synagogues dependent Churches because it was lawfull onely at Jerusalem to sacrifice for I hold that Jerusalem was a dependent Church no lesse then the smallest Synagogue in all the tribes for in a Catholick meeting of all Judah for renewing a Covenant with God Ierusalem was but a sister Church with all of Iudah Benjamin Ephraim Manasseh who 2 Chron. 15. 9. 10. 11 12. made up one great Church which did sweare that Covenant Ordinances doe not formally make Churches visible nor divers ordinances divers
and Jeremiah had prophecied yet not being sent of God they should have beene false Prophets and after the Spirit is entered unto Ezecbiel ch 2. 2. and so he is gifted yet is there another sending v. 3. then said the Lord unto me c. And might I pray you Baruch have preached all his Master Jeremiahs Prophecies But I thinke that should not have made him a Prophet yea and Christ in whom was all fulnesse of gifts and grace Job 1. 16. Col. 2. 9. yet tooke not on him to be a Priest of the New Testament till he was called of God as Aaron Heb. 5. 4 5. Job 1. 18. and Calvin Musculus Gualter expone the Prophets and Pastors prophecying peace Isa. 52. to be the Prophets who not onely were gifted to preach but sent with speciall authority to prophecie the peoples deliverance out of Babylon And lastly by this also have the gifted Prophets a calling of God to administrate the Sacraments because if to be gifted be to be sent of God certainly they are gifted to administrate the Sacraments no lesse then to preach and so saith the Arminians with their Socinians as Socinus and Smalcius If they say Christ requireth a particular Minister to the Sacraments but not so to the word I answer to pastorall preaching he requireth also a peculiar minister as our brethren teach from Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5 4. 5. but to teaching by vertue of a gift any gifted man is sufficient the same distinction may as well hold that there is a pastorall administration of the Sacraments and a common administration of them by vertue of a gift yea and Gerardus observeth well that to the calling of the ministery belongeth the administration of the Sacraments as a speciall part thereof 1 Cor. 12. 29. Ephes. 4. 11. Jam. 3. 1. 7. yea and if ministers bee stewards 1 Cor. 4. 12. are they not dispensators of the Sacraments by their office as of the Word 5. Robinson giveth for shame a sort of calling to the unofficed Prophets to wit that the Church requireth them if they have a word of exhortation to speake on as Act. 13. But 1. not his Church but the rulers required Paul and Barnabas to speake 2. The Rulers knew them to be Apostles and Pastors by office for there were Prophets there Chap. 14. 1. but the Apostles would have none to preach as Pastors by office but such as are proved and authorized by the Elders 1 Tim. 3. 10. ch 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2 3. 3. This calling of the Church is onely for orders cause in the constitute Church but a thing not necessary by divine institution and so the Socinians So Smalcius teach us that the Churches sending and calling in the Apostolick Church was a custome 〈◊〉 decorum arbitramur saith Smalcius u◠id observaretur and and so saith Andr. Raddecius and the Arminians have also the same distinction But this place approveth not that every by person so to speake might preach in the Jewes Synagogues 2. Argum. If Christ ascending on high led captivitie captive and gave gifts unto men some to be Apostles and some Pastors and Doctors and that for the gathering of Christs body and if some not all are Prophets 1 Cor. 12. 29. then hath God appointed Pastors in office to bee the ordinary gatherers of soules in to Jesus Christ and if this bee not said when hee ascended on high hee made all private Christians de jure preachers to edifie publikely the whole Church and if any bee not gifted it is their owne fault for they are obliged to bee such 3. Argum. He who Matth. 10. 42. contradistinguisheth the prophet and the righteous man as different persons and having different rewards he doth not acknowledge a righteous man to be a Prophet hoc ipso because he is a righteous man But Christ doth contradistinguish them v. 41. He that receiveth a Prophet in the name of a Prophet shall receive a Prophets reward and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous mans reward Ergo Christ acknowledgeth them to differ Now if a righteous man hoc ipso because hee is a righteous man and a member of the Church should exercise these same specifice acts with a Prophet that is if hee should publikely preach to convert soules he should by this place bee a Prophet and the reward of a Prophet should be given to the receiver of the righteous man yea and more then the reward of a Prophet in respect he is both a righteous man and a Prophet 4. To all Prophets a speciall promise of Gods assistance and presence is made in the word as Jerem. 1. 18 19. Matth. 28. 20 Luk. 21. Verse 14. 15. Act. 9. Verse 17. But to these who are not prophets by office there is no such promise in the word Ergo 5. All that are sent of God as ordinary converters of soules from the kingdome of darkenesse to the kingdome of Jesus Christ must seeke out fit words as the Preacher did Eccles. 12. 11. 12. hee must convince and judge the hearer and make manifest the secrets of the heart as 1 Cor. 14. 24 25. he must cut the word aright as a Timothy 2 Tim. 2 15. he must give every one of the house meate in due season Matth. 24. 46. he must know and try the wayes of the people Jerem. 11. 18. When he seeth the sword comming he must warne the wicked to turne from his evill way Ezech. 3. 18 19. Hee must watch for soules as one who is to give an account Heb. 13. 17. Hee must exhort the people to bee reconciled to God and this hee must pray and request in Christs stead 2 Cor. 5. 20. And hee must give himselfe wholly to reading 1 Tim. 4. 15 16. And not intangle himselfe with any 〈◊〉 calling 2 Tim. 2. 4. All these cannot be done by Prophets not in office And all these are duties of Pastors in office and to ty private Christians who are commanded to attend their owne callings were unreasonable and repugnant to the Word of God The proposition is cleare no man can preach but hee who must give himselfe to reading and must watch and speake to the present case of the hearers but especially such Preachers as are the onely ordinary converters of soules to Christ must give warning that the unrighteous die not in his sinne now to say that all these were duties incumbent to merchants artificers fashioners carpenters cloathiers were to mocke the word of God and to say these and these onely were the gatherers of a Church and Kingdome to Christ were unknowne Divinity 6. All Prophets are set downe in Christs roll of lawfull officers 2. The rules and canons for the right exercise of their ministery is set downe especially seeing these pretended prophets are presumed to be the greatest part of the visible Church 3. The onely ordinary gainers of
place is to be such as so aboundeth in the knowledge of God as to teach rebuke admonish and comfort mutually one another in a private way not to preach publikely in the Church for the ordinary conversion of soules for which sort of Prophets you do contend Robinson addeth The Apostle cannot meane extraordinary Prophets 1 Cor. 14. there could not bee such a number of extraordinary Prophets now when extraordinary Prophets were beginning to cease in the Church Answ. 1. When the Church of Corinth abounded in every thing in all knowledge and utterance and came behind in no gift 1 Cor. 1. 5. 7. and so much grace was given them in Jesus Christ v. 4. It is cleare there were abundance of Prophets even then in Corinth 2. It is not to purpose for lay-Prophets whether they were ordinary or extraordinary Prophets They were Prophets as the Spirit of God calleth them 1 Cor. 12. 29. set in the Church as officers even as Apostles and Governors and Teachers who are officers And there is no reason that you should impose significations on words at your owne pleasure without warrant of the Word Now shew us in all the old or new Testament when the word Prophet signifieth a naked gifted man out of office in the Lords house for you have as good warrant for you to say there were lay-Apostles lay-Teachers lay-Governors who were gifted persons not in office as you have for lay-Prophets 3. Multitude of Prophets may consist with the time when Seers and foretellers of things revealed in visions were beginnings to cease even as the gifts of the holy Ghost given abundantly at the Pentecost Act. 2. 17. 18. Ioel 2. 28. did consist with the time when things concerning Christ must now have an end Luk. 22. 37. Luk. 24. 44. Robinsons 3. Argument is The Apostle in forbidding women to prophesie in the Church licenceth men 1. The Apostle in and for the worke opposeth the men to the women Sexe to Sexe and in forbidding women hee must license men when the holy Ghost opposeth faith and workes in the cause of justification and denyeth that we are justified by workes is not then the consequence good we are justified by faith 2. If in prohibiting women he gave not libertie to men where were the prerogative of men above women which is the onely ground upon which hee buildeth the prohibition 3. Ver. 34. 35. Women are not permitted to speake in the Church yet may they speake to their husbands at home now if the husbands might not speake in the Church more then the women what reason can be rendred of the Apostle his so speaking 4. The Apostle in the whole Chapter taketh order that some should prophesie in the Church and debarring women therefrom he must either admit men or then we have a third sort of Persons to prophesie who are neither men nor women Answ. Here is a great noyse of Arguments for just nothing and a faire sophisme concluding that secundum quid which should be concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for we deny not but some men in office are permitted yea and commanded to prophesie in publick and we grant that Sex and Sex are opposed but the opposition made by Robinson is creeple and throwne-backed for all and every one of mankind are not permitted to prophesie as all and every woman is forbidden to prophesie or teach in the Church by the Lawes of France a woman may not sit on the Throne and sway the Scepter but friend can you say then the Lawes of France doth license any Frenchman whatsoever he be to sit on the throne and be King Mr. Robinson proveth men are licensed to preach Sed indefinita propositio in materia contingente â—quipollet particulari but he knoweth all men are not licenced to prophesie in publick for ungifted men are not sent of God and we say neither all gifted tradesmen never called by the Church nor educated in Schooles or sent of God to preach in the Church This he covereth and proveth never onely he setteth downe foure armies of Arguments to prove I know not what to prove forsooth that men may prophesie in publike and not women but who denyeth that And the similitude of faith and workes crooketh here for saving faith is opposed to all good workes whatsoever both in kind and individualls for wee are neither justified by good workes in specie nor by any one good worke in individuo but though all women be debarred from teaching in the Church yet are not all men licensed to teach in the Church but onely those say we who are called of God as was Aaron 2. I would bandy the Argument thus It is not permitted to women to administer the Sacraments Ergo It is permitted for any man though not a Prophet by office to administer the Sacraments The Antecedent is Pauls the consequence is yours and so all these foure Arguments prove not what is in question to with that Ergo a gifted person not in office may preach publickly Mr. Robinson addeth In restrayning women he sheweth his meaning to be of ordinary not of extraordinary Prophets because women immediatly and extraordinarily inspired might speak without restraint Exod. 15. 20. Jud. 4. 24. Luk. 2. 36. Act. 2. 17 18. Answ. Robinson cannot show that the same kind of prophecying in women v. 34. is taxed by Paul which is regulated in men v. 26 27 28. and therefore that connexion is denied hee restraineth women from ordinary prophecying in the temple Ergo he speaketh of the ordinary prophecying of men for 1. he compareth prophecying with tongues extraordinary with extraordinary and he desireth them to covet to prophesie ordinary he cannot meane for in all the Word you find not private professors are commanded to desire to bee ordinary Prophets for so God should command them to pray that they might leave their callings and stations contrary to 1 Cor. 7. 20. and give themselves to study sciences and tongues for if the holy Ghost command the meanes he must command the end and if hee command the end hee must command the meanes But v. 34. he setteth downe a new canon about women who tooke on them to prophesie publickly and hee inhibiteth so much as ordinary prophecying yea so much as speaking in the Church and I deny not but Irenaeus Eusebius yea and Tertullian Cyrill Chrysostome Theophylactus with warrant teach that alwayes women extraordinarily inspired may prophesie for in that God immediately exalteth them above men But for ordinary prophecying in publick it is of morall equitie and perpetuall that the women should not teach for Adam was first formed this Paul bringeth as a morall argument against womens preaching His fourth Argument is from 29 and 32. verses Let the Prophets speake two or three and let the rest judge The Apostle cannot saith Robinson speake of extraordinary Prophets for they cannot erre but are infallible but the Prophets here spoken of are not infallible because they are to be censured
a Christian he is a member of the Church 5. The Kings power as King in things ecclesiasticke is not serviâ—e and meerely executive as the Churches servant to put their decrees in execution but it is regall princely and supreame 6. The object of the Kings power is not simply a peaceable life and externall peace of humane societies but also honesty and godlinesse but to be procured by a civill politicke regall and coactive way by the Sword of the secular arme as the object of the Church power is honesty and godlinesse to be procured by a ministeriall ecclesiasticall and spirituall power without any forcing of men by externall power 7. The end of Kingly power de jure by Gods right and divine Law exintentione Dei approbativâ is godlinesse but the end of Kingly power according to its essence and de facto is a quiet life though it attaine not Godlinesse as it doth not attaine that end nor can it attaine it amongst Pagans and yet there is a Kingly power in its essence whole and intire amongst Pagans where there is no godlinesse or Christian Religion 8. There is in Heathen Kings a regall and Kingly power to establish Christian Religion and adde regall sanctions to Christian Synods though there neither is nor can be during the state of Heathen Paganisme any Christian Religion there this power is essentially and actu primo regall yet as concerning execution it is vertuall onely 9. There is a difference betwixt a royall command under the paine of 〈◊〉 punishment with a royall power to punish the contraveners 〈◊〉 ecclesiasticke and a nomotbeticke power to make Church Lawes 〈…〉 hath the former power but not the latter 10. If the royall power be of that transcendent and eminent greatnesse as to make Lawes in all things belonging to Church 〈◊〉 and so as Camero must be heard saying that the â—ing is the supreame ruler and Church-men be as servants and instruments under him and doe all in the externall government of the Church by vertue of the Kings supreame authority the King is not much honoured by this for they must say that the King in the Physitian giveth dregs to the sicke in the Plow-man laboureth the earth in the fashioner seweth and sâ—aâ—eth garments whereas Paraeus who without reason also giveth to the Prince a nomothetick power in Church-matteâ—s doth except some things that the Prince cannot doe sometimes for want of right and law other sometimes for want of knowledge sometimes because it is against the dignity of his Majesty as in sordid and base arts 11. The power of governing the Church of the Jewes though it was ordinarily in the Priesthood the Sonnes of Aaron whose â—ippes did preserve ex officio knowledge Mal. 2. yet as the Prophets were raised up by God extraordinarily to teach they 〈◊〉 by that same extraordinary power did governe and therefore though the Kings of Israel were not Priests yet without doubt some of them were Prophets and as Prophets they did prophecy and as Prophets determine many things of Government by that same extraordinary power by which some of them to wit David and Solomon did prophecy and pen Caâ— niâ—k Scripture 12. There is one consideration of abuses and heresies manifestly re 〈◊〉 to Gods word and another of those things that are ordinar◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the former there is no neede of the Churches ministeriall power of condemning them and therefore Ezechias Josâ—as Asa â—â—osaphat did manifestly by the light of nature and Gods word 〈◊〉 abuses and Idolatry in Gods worship without the Churches 〈◊〉 seeing the Church representative was guilty of these cor 〈◊〉 us themselves but in the latter seeing the Kings place is to com 〈◊〉 and compell by externall force and bodily punishments and it is the Churches part to teach inserme binde and loose therefore the King can make no Church Canons Hence our first conclusion The Christian Magistrate as a Christian is a member of the Church but as a Magistrate he is not formally a member or part of the Church 1. Because he is neither a Pastor Doctor Elder nor Deacon as is cleare to any for these offices were compleate in the Church without the Magistrate Ephes. 1. 11. else Christ ascending to heaven should have given Kings for the edifying of his body Neither is hee as a Magistrate a part of the company of beleevers 1. Because then all Magistrates as Magistrates should bee professors of the faith which is knowne to bee false 2. Because the Magistrate as such is the head of an externall politick civill societie not of Christs body 2. The Magistrate as a Magistrate wanteth such things as essentially constituteth a member of the Church as a Magistrate onely hee hath neither baptisme profession nor faith because then heathen Magistrates should not bee Magistrates the contrary whereof the Word of God saith Jeremiah in Gods name commanded to obey the King of Babylon and Paul commanded to pray for Kings and heathen Magistrates 1 Tim. 2. 1. Hence let us have leave to deny these Hee who is the Churches nurs-father is the Churches father and a part of the family 2. Whose office it is to cause all in the visible Church to professe the truth obey God and keep his Commandements hee is a member of the Church 3. Hee who is a keeper and preserver of Law and Gospell by his office hee is by his office a member of the Church For the first hee is a father metaphorically and doth by an externall coactive power and by the sword nourish the Church and therefore is not the Church nor a part of the Church ex officio by his office as the nurs-father is not the child nor a part of the child whereof hee is nurse-father and this and both the other two are to bee denyed because the Magistrate doth neither nurse the Church nor cause the Church doe their dutie nor desend the Law and Gospell by any power that is intrinsecally Church-power but by the sword and coactive power which in no sort belongeth to Christs kingdome as a part thereof either as it is internall and invisible or externall or visible which is not of this world Joh. 1â— 36. 3. By no word of God can Salcobrigiensis and Weemes prove that the Magistrate as the Magistrate is a mixt persen and his power a mixt power partly civill partly ecclesiastick for â—â— the ruler commeth in amongst the ordinary Church-officers â— m. 12. Ephes. 4. 11. 1 Tim. 2. 2. which the Word of God doth â—â—ver insinuate and hee should no lesse watch for soules as â—â—e who is to give an account to God then other Church-officers Heb. 13. 17. for the Magistrates office may bee performed by himselfe alone hee himselfe alone may use the sword in all things which hee doth as a Magistrate as is cleare Rom. 13. 1. and 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14 the King judging his alone and the Kings deputie sent by him judging his alone is to
the magistrate procureth is not onely a naturall happinesse and the quiet life of a civill societie but also the good and well doing of Christians as Christians to wit publick praying praysing preaching hearing of the word religious administration and receiving of the Sacraments all which the King as King is to procure for what ever good externall Pastors as Pastors doe procure that same also but in a civill and coactive way is the King as the King to procure and therefore his end as King is godlinesse and eternall life but he is busied about this end after a farre other and more carnall way then the pastor the weapons of whose warfare are not carnall 3. That the Kings end intrinsecall as King is more then externall and naturall peace is cleare because ill doing against which he as the Minister of God is to execute vengeance and wrath Rom. 13. 3 4. is not onely that which is contrary to externall quietnesse of the commonwealth and the naturall happinesse of civill societies but also that which is contrary to the happinesse supernaturall of the Church as beleevers in the way to life eternall for hee is to take vengeance upon blasphemy idolatry professed unbeleefe neglect of religious administration of the seales and the eating and drinking damnation at the Lords Table which are ills not formally contrary to externall quietnesse but which are directly scandalls and morall ills hindering men as members of the Church in their journey to life eternall for though men should never falle oâ— sinne against the externall quietnesse of the naturall happinesse of the members of a commonwealth yet the magistrate as the magistrate is to execute vengeance upon all externall ill-doing as blasphemy adoring of idolls 4. The magistrate as the magistrate in the zeale of God is to set himselfe against sinnes as dishonorable to God and his glory seeing the judgement that hee executeth is not mans but the Lords 2 Chron. 1â— 6. and hee is a little God in the roome of God yea God â—â—tteth judging in and through him Psal. 82. v. 1. and therefore his end is not onely to punish sinnes as they trouble the externall peace of the commonwealth but all externall sinnes that may wound the honour of God and against which the magistrate as he is such is to be armed and cloathed with zeale 5. Those who with Spalato teach that life eternall is not the end of the magistrate as a magistrate but onely the extrinsecall end of the magistrate or the end of the person who is the magistrate must foulely erre so it is not in their meaning the end of the office or kingly art to maintaine religion and piâ—tie but this is the end of the person cloathed with the office and so they deny that God hath destined the kingly office to helpe men as Christians to heaven and to promove Christs kingdome mediatory and they must bee forced to say God hath ordained magistracie to helpe men as men or as they have a life common to them with the beasts and not to helpe them as Christian men to â—â—ie from the wrath to come and obtaine life eternall which certainly is against the honour of magistracie which of its owne nature is destined for the promoving of religion else the magistrate as the magistrate is not a nurs-father in the Church nor to bring his glory to the new Jerusalem nor to kisse the Sonne nor to exalt the throne of Jesus Christ contrary to the Word of God 6. Yea they were onely to promove the Church as a societie of men and to set up the throne of justice for the second table of the Law and not a throne for pietie and for the first table of the Law which is observed by Augustine who will have Kings to serve the Lord not onely â—â—men but also as Kings in such sort which none can doe who are not Kings and that â—â— onely in civill â—ffaires but also in matters concerning divine religion which passage as Bellarmine corrupteth it on the one hand making the King a Governour of men according to their bodies and his old father the Antichrist a governouâ— of men according to their soules so doth that virulent libeller Lysimachus Nicanor with no reason inferre that the King is head of the Church and hath a Nomothetick power to impose the service booke and booke of Canons upon the Church of Scotland But because the King as King is to promove religion therefore saith Junius Minos Lyâ—urgus Charondas Zeleuâ—us and Numa obliâ—ged men to their Lawes by some colour of religion 7. Nor doe I thinke what is said against this by some learned men of great weight see Guliel Apollonius Spalatensis Tilenus Daneus Buâ—anus Professor Leidens Some say the magistrates power and the ecclesiastick power differ in the objects the Magistrates powers say they object is things earthly and the externall man the power of the Church is things spirituall and the inner man I answer these two powers differ in the objects no question I meane in the formall objects not in the materiall for the magistrate as a magistrate is a nurs-father and keeper and avenger of both Tables of the Law and hath a coactive power about hearing the word administration of the Sacraments Idolatry blasphemy and the right serving of God in Jesus Christ and these things are not res terrenae earthly things or things of this life but spirituall things Yea the affaires of Jehovah and the Kings matters 2 Chron. 19. 11. saith Amesius are not so different non it a disparata sunt as that the care and knowledge of the things of God belongeth not to the King sed it a distinguuntur ut in modo procurandi rex politice suas partes agat sacerdos ecclesiastice suas the objects of the magistrates power and of the Churches power may be materially and are one the same but the King worketh in a coactive and kingly way and the Church in an ecclesiastick and spirituall way For doe not both the King as King and the Church as the Church command and forbid one and the same thing doth not the King command the right worship of God and forbid Idolatry and the Blasphemy of God and doth not the Church in their Synodical Canons command and forbid one and these some things yea certainly but the King doth command and forbid by a kingly and coactive power under the paine of boâ—â—lv punishment as incarceration exile proscription or death according to the quality of the fact And the Church commandeth also the right worship of God and forbiddeth Blasphemy and Idolatry but by a spirituall and ecclesiastick power and under the paine of spirituall and ecclesiasticall censures as open rebuke suspension and excommunication and they differ not so in their ends as some teach so as the end of the Church powes should be the communion of Saints and the edifying of the body of the
shall decree good or bad without examination also as Suarez the Councell of Paris their Law saith and Innocentius the first and Gregory the seventh doe teach Making Kings in their judgement slaves to the Pope and ' his determinations and to have no light but from their vertuall Church as the Moone hath all her light from the Sunne Our third distinction is that the Magistrate as Magistrate and a preserver of publicke peace may doe some thing when a Schisme and dissention is among the Church-men in a Synod 1. In this case he may punish perturbers of peace as Augustine answereth Gaudentius the Donatist and the separaters from the Church in which case the Magistrate indirectly condemneth one of the parties which the Church hath condemned but there be many other cases of dissention in this case therefore when the Magistrate findeth the Synod divided in two parties equally or three iâ— the corrupt part prevaile or foure in the case of the Churches aberration in one particular fact or five if there be an universall apostasie of the whole representative Church or sixe an universall defection of both the representative and essentiall Church all these being too casuall and of too frequent occurrence one and the same answer cannot be given and here be sundry subalterne distinctions considerable Hence our fifth Conclusion when there is an equall rupture in the body nothing extraordinary would be attempted if ordinary wayes can be had if Saul the ordinary Magistrate had at Gods Commandement killed Hagag Samuel the Prophet should not have drawne his Sword and therefore in this case the Magistrate would first seeke helpe from other Churches as that learned Apollonius saith But if that cannot be conveniently had as in a nationall Church it may fall out then the Magistrate as a preserver of peace and truth may command the sincerer part to conveene in a Synod and doe their duty as the good Kings of the people of God did 2 Chron. 15. Asa gathered together a people who entered in Covenant to seeke the Lord God with all their heart and layed an obligation of punishment to death on the rest v. 12 13. and Jehoshaphat 2 Chron. 23. 4. he layed charge on Hilkiah the High Priest and the Priests of the second order whom he knew to be better affected to the worke to bring out the Vessels made for Baal which proveth that the King should put the sincerest to doe that which in common belongeth to the whole in which case of the erring of the most part of the Church the Prince indirectly condemneth the erring part of the Synod because it is his place to forbid and to punish with the sword the transgressors of Gods Law But because his power is accumulative not privative under that pretence hee hath not power to hinder the sincerer part to meet and determine according to the Word of God 6. Conclusion In the case of the prevailing of the corrupt part of the Church or in the fourth case of the aberration of the Church in one particular the King hath a regall power to punish the Canonists if they shall decree in their Synod Popery and hereticall doctrine and so give to the Bride of Christ noysome and deadly milke the Prince as nursefather may punish the Canonists 1. Because hee is a keeper of both Tables of the Law and hath a royall power to inflict bodily punishment upon all sinnes even committed in foro exteriore ecclesiae as the King may punish false teachers 2. Because the Magistrates power is auxiliary accumulative as a tutor and nurâ—efather who hath law to helpe the Pupill and to adde to the inheriritance but hath no Law nor power to take away any part of the inheritance from the Pupill Ergo as a nursefather hee is to helpe the Church of Christ against the wicked Canons of the representative Church If any object then the King as King hath power to rescind and annull the ecclesiasticall Canons the contrary whereof that learned author of Altare Damascenum doth prove I answer that learned and worthy author proveth that the Prince cannot annull the Church-Canons and that the councell of Trent thought shame that the Pope should absolve any condemned by the Church-Canons and certainely the same power that maketh Canons should dissolve them but the Kings power cannot make church-Church-Canons for it is a part of the ministeriall calling to make Canons and therefore hee cannot annull and dissolve Canons but some greater Kingly power is due to the King in the case of the Churches aberring then in the case of the Churches right administration and as our Divines doe justly give to the Prince an extraordinary Kingly power in the case of universall apostasie of the Church as Jehoshaphat Hezekiah Josiah and other worthy reformers in the Church of the â—ewes did warrantably use their Kingly power when the Church-men were corrupted and negligent in their dutie so in a particular case of a particular error of the Synod the King as King may use his Kingly power in this fact that is secundum quid extraordinarie for the King is oblieged as King to adde his accumulative power of a civill sanction to all just and nâ—cessary Church constitutions and it the Canon or Church constitution bee wicked and popish he is oblieged to deny his civill sanction and not that onely for hee that is not with Christ is against him but hee is to imploy his kingly power against such Canons and so is to deliver the Church of God in that and in denying his accumulative power to unjust Canons hee addeth his kingly power accumulative to the true Church in saving them from these unjust Canons 2. Also it may bee objected If the King by a regall and coactive power may annull and rescind unjust Canons hee may by this coactive power make Canons for it is that same power to make and unmake Canons I answer if hee may annull unjust Canons that is liberate his subjects from civill punishment to bee inflicted for refusing obedience to such Canons and for bid the practise of wicked Church constitutions under the paine of the sword It will not follow that therefore hee may make Canons but onely that hee may adde his civill sanction to just Canons 2. Neither can the King properly annull the Canon but onely deny to adde his civill authoritie for the execution of such Canons But thirdly it is objected that the King bath a judgement that such Canons are wicked and superstition the Church-mens judgement at the assembly of Glascow Edenbrough an 1638 1639. is that such Canons are lawfull edificative and necessary then is the King obliged as King to deny his royall sanction and who shall bee Judge in the matter If you say the Word of God it satisfyeth not because both the King and the Synod alledgeth the Word of God as norm â— judicandi a rule of judging but the rule of judging is not formally the Judge
him all spirituall headship over the Church to the King and Burbillus also But Henric. Salcobrigiensis calleth the King primatem ecclesiae Anglicanae the Primate of the Church of England and â—ges oleo sacro uncti capaces sunt jurisdictionis spiritualis because they are annointed with holy oyle therefore are they capable of spirituall jurisdiction also may saith hee creat propria autoritate by his owne authoritie create Bishops and dâ—prive them See what Calderwood hath said and excerped out of the writings of these men the King as King 1. convocateth Synods 2. defineth ecclesiasticall canons 3. giveth to them the power of an ecclesiasticall Law 4. executeth Church Canons 5. appointeth commissioners who in the Kings authoritie and name may try heresies and errors in doctrine punish non-conformitie to Popish ceremonies may confine imprison banish Ministers 6. descerne excommunication and all Church censures and use both the swords 7. relax from the power and censures of all ecclesiastick Lawes give dispensations annull the censures of the Church upon causes knowne to them give dispensations against Canons unite or separate Parish Churches or diocesan Churches and by a mixt power partly coactive and civill partly of jurisdiction and spirituall the King may doe in foro externo in the externall court of Church discipline all and every act of discipline except hee cannot preach baptize or excommunicate And whereas Cartwright saith when a lawfull Minister shall agree upon an unlawfull thing the Prince ought to stay it and if Church ministers shew themselves obstinate and will not bee advised by the Prince they prove themselves to be an unlawfull Ministery and such as the Prince is to punish with the sword O but saith hee the author of the Survey how shall the Prince helpe the matter shall be compell them to conveene in a Synod and retract their mind but they will not doe this 2. By what authoritie shall the Prince doe this even by extraordinary authority even by the same right that David did eate of the Shew-bread if by ordinary authority the Prince would doe it yet doe you resist that authority also Answ. Though the Prince had not externall force to compell Church-men to decree in their Synods things equall holy juâ— and necessary yet it followeth not that the King as King hath not Gods right and lawfull power to command and injoyne them to doe their dutie force and Law differ much as morall and physicall power differ much 2. If they decree things good lawfull and necessary the Prince hath a power given him of God to ratifie confirme and approve these by his civill sanction but hee hath no power ordinary to infringe or evert what they have decreed 3. And if the Church bee altogether uncorrigible and apostate then wee say as followeth 7. Conclution When the representative Church is universally apostaticall then may the Prince use the helpe of the Church essentiall of found beleevers for a reformation and if they also bee apostatick which cannot be except the Lord utterly have removed his candlestick wee see not what hee can doe but heare witnesse against them but if there bee any secret seeker of God in whose persons the essence of a true Church is conserved The King by a royall power and the Law of charitie is oblieged to reforme the land as the godly Kings with a blessed successe have hitherto done Asa Jâ—siah Jehoshaphat 〈◊〉 in which case the power of reformation and of performing many acts of due belonging to the Church officers are warrantably performed by the King as in a diseased body in an extraordinary manner power recurreth from the members to the â—â—â—â—tick head and Christian Prince who both as a King 〈◊〉 â—â— in an authoritative way is oblieged to do more then ordâ—â—â—y and as a Christian member of the Church in a charitative and common way is to care for the whole body 8. Conclusion The influence of the Princes regall power in making constitutions is neither solitary as if the Prince his 〈…〉 could doe it nor is it 2. collaterall as if the Prince and Church with joynt concurrence of divers powers did it nor is 3. as some flatterers have said so eminently spirituall as the consultation and counsell of Pastors for light onely hath influence in Churches Canons but the Princes power hath onely the power to designe so as the Canon hath from the Prince the power of a Law in respect of us The Kings influence in Church Canons as wee thinke is as a Christian antecedent to exhort that the Lord Jesus bee served 2. concomitant as a member of the Church to give a joynt suffrage with the Synod 3. consequent as a King to adde his regall sanction to that which is decreed by the Church according to Gods Word or otherwise to punish what is done amisse Now that the Prince as a solitary cause his alone defineth Church matters and without the Church and that by his ordinary Kingly power wanteth all warrant of the Word of God 2. The King might have given out that constitution Act. 15. It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and to us which in reason is due to the ministeriall function for these are called Act. 16. 4. the decrees of the Apostles and Elders not the decrees of the King or Emperour either by Law or fact 3. Christ ascending to heaven gave officers requisite for the gathering of his Church and the edification of the body of Christ but amongst these in no place we finde the King 4. If this bee true heathen Kings have right to make church-Church-Canons though they bee not able and bee not members of the Christian Church and so without and not to bee judged by the Church nor in any case censured Matth. 18. 17. 1. Cor. 5. 11. and this directly is a King Pope who giveth Lawes by a Kingly power to the Church and yet cannot bee judged by the Church Burhillus and Thomson acknowledge that a Heathen King is primat and head of the Church and must hee not then have power aciu primo to make Lawes and to feede the flocke by externall government But Lancel Andreas Biship of Ely Tortura torti saith that a heathen King hath a temporall Kingly power without any relation to a Church power and when hee is made of a Heathen King a Christian King bee acquireth a new power But the question is if this new power be a new kingly power or if it be a power Christian to use rightly his former kingly power if the first bee true then 1. as learned Voetius and good reason saith hee was not a King before hee was a Christian for the essence of the Kingly power standeth in an indivisible point and the essence of things admit not of degrees 2. Then should hee bee crowned over againe and called of God to bee a Christian King and so hee was not a King before which is against Scripture for Nebucâ—adnezzar was to bee obeyed
and prayed for as King by the people of God at Jeremiahs expresse commandement 3. So a pagan husband becomming a Christian should by that same reason acquire a new husband-right over his wife contrary to the 1 Cor. 7. 13 14 15. the Captains or Masters who of heathens become Christians should obtaine a new right and power over their Souldiers and Servants and they should come under a new oath and promise to their Captaines and Masters 4. If the heathen King have onely temporall Kingly power he had no power as King to take care that God were worshipped according to the dictates of the Law of nature and Law of nations had power to punish perjury Sodomie parricid as sins against the Law of nature and the heathen King should not by office and Kingly obligation bee oblieged to be a keeper and a defender of the tables of the Law of nature which is against all sense But if the power which a heathen King becomming a Christian King acquireth be onely a Christian power to use for Christ the Kingly power that hee had while hee was a heathen King then a heathen King jure regali by a regall right is the head of the Church though hee bee a Woolfe and a Leopard set over the redeemed flocke of Christ yea though hee bee the great Turke hee is a Pastor called of God the Church though for his moralls hee bee a Woolfe and a hireling yet by office and Law hee is a feeder of the flocke Talis est aliquis qualem ius offiâ—ii requirit And certainly it is impossible that a heathen King can bee a member of the true Church hee wanting both faith and profession which doe essentially constitute a Church-membership if it bee said hee is ex officio by his office a member that is nothing else but hee ought to bee a member of the Church so all mankind are members of the Church for they are oblieged to obey Christ and submit to him upon the supposall of the revealed Gospel and the heathen King is no otherwise a member by the obligation regall that layeth upon him as King yea when the Gospel is preached and the heathen King converted to the faith hee is not a member of the Christian Church as a King but as a converted professor and so Christianitie maketh him not a Kingly head of the Church but what essentially constituteth him a King that also constituteth him a Christian King Christianitie is an accidentall thing undoubtedly to the office of a King 2. They doe no lesse erre who make the King and the Church officers collaterall Judges in Church matters so as with joynt and coâ—quall influence they should bee Canon makers 1. Because perfect Synods are and have beene in the Apostolick Church without any influence collaterall of Christian Magistrates as being against their will and mind who were Rulers of the people as Acts 1. 14 15. Acts 2. 46 47. Acts 4. 1 2. Acts 6. 1 2 3 4. Acts 15. 6 7 8. c. 2. What the Church decreeth in the name of Christ standeth valid and ratified in Heaven and Earth Matth. 18. 17 18. Joh. 20. 21 22. whether the Magistrate assent to it or not so that he hath not a negative voyce in it by any ecclesiastick power for Christ saith not What yee bind on earth in my name shall be bound in Heaven except the Magistrate deny as a collaterall Judge his suffrage Now if he be a collaterall Judge by divine institution no Church act should be valid in Christs Court without him as excommunication not in the name of Christ or performed by those who are not the Church but onely in civill offices is not excommunication also what ever the Magistrate doth as the Magistrate he doth it by the power of the sword Ergo if he take vengeance on the ill doer as his office is Rom. 13. 3. 4. his acts are ratified in Heaven though the Church as collaterall Judges say not Amen thereunto 3. The coactive power of the King and the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church differ as carnall and spirituall spirituall and not spirituall of this world and not of this world and are not mixed by the Word oft as Joh. 18. 36. 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. 2 Tim. 2. 4. and therefore it in one and the same Church constitution the King and the Church be joynt and coequall Judges and joynt definers the constitution must both be injoyned under the paine of bodily punishment which the Church whose weapons are not carnall cannot command and under the paine of Church censures as suspension rebukes and excommunication the King must command Now the Canon should neither be an Ecclesiasticall nor yet a civill Canon but mixt for the Canon makers injoyneth with powers and paines which are not due unto them nor in their power Now to make a Law saith Feild is to prescribe â—â—aw under the paine which the Law-maker hath power to inflict but neither hath the Church the power of the sword 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. Joh. 18. 36. nor hath the King by Gods â—aw the power of excommunication See Calderwood And one and the same Law should be backed both by a carnall and worldly power and not by a worldly and carnall power 3. The King as King must have a mixt power halfe kingly â—â—â— halfe ecclesiastick and by the same reason the Church must have a mixt power partly Ecclesiasticall and partly civill and this were to confound the two kingdomes the kingdome of this world and the spirituall kingdome of Christ which is not of this world Joh. 18. 36. condemned by Anselmâ— and Hilarius and Bernard and Augustin Put if they say that every one hath their influence partialitate causae non effâ—cii according to the nature of causes then is not one and the same Church constitution from both King and Church See Apollonius But the Kings Canon is civill the Churches Ecclesiasticall and every one of them without another perfect in their one kind See what the learned Gerson Bucer and Amesius saith further to adde light to this point Those who maintaine a third that the Church Canons hath all the power of being Church Lawes from the King and all Ecclesiasticall and oblieging authority from him and that they have onely some helpe of consulting power from the Church are grosser Divines See Joan. Weemes for so the King is the onely Canon maker and the Church-men giveth advice onely as the Kings Proclamation speaketh having taken 〈◊〉 counsell of our Clergy we command such a worship â— and so the Canon runneth it seemeth good to the holy Ghost and the King as the Canon speaketh Acts 15. 2. the King is made an Ecclesiasticall and ministeriall Prâ—acher to expone publikely the Scriptures to the Church of God for all lawfull Church Canons are but Ecclesiasticall expositions of Gods Word and so the Emperours and Christian Kings are the onely lawfull Canon
act of justice at the direction of a Minister commanding him in Gods name to execute judgement impartially yet the King doth not an act of justice in the name and authority of the Church And that is true which Beâ—anus saith What the instrument doth the principall cause may do where the Vicar or Deputy and the principall substitutâ—r of the Vicar are both civill persons or are both Ecclesiasticall persons for in a large and unproper sense the nurse is a sort of deputy under the nurse father the Father may take care that the nurse give milke and wholsom milke to his child yet cannot the Father give milke himself The King may take care actu imperato as one intending in a Kingly way that Christs body bee edifyed that the Priests and Prophets feed with knowledge the Church and sister of Christ and so are the Priests under the King and at his command to feed and to feed with wholsome food the flocke and in obedience to the King all are to do their duty and his care is universall over all and his end universall That which is the end of Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons Lawyers Judges c. is in an universall intention the Kings end even Gods honor by pâ—â—curing in a regall way that all do their duty in keeping the two Tables of the Law and so is hee the great politick wheel moving by his royall motions all the under wheeles toward that same end yet cannot the King without sinne and being like a Bird wandring from her nest do that which is properly Pastorall so that the Office is not subordinate to him but immediately from God yet are the operations of the Office and to Preach tali modo diligently sound Doctrine subordinate to him but in a generall and universall way as hee is a kingly mover of all to keep the two Tables of the Law Neither did the King as Suarez saith one and the same way appoint both the High Priest and the civill Judge And Cajetan saith he decerneth the two chiefe heads of Church and Common-wealth but hee appointed not both for God appointed Amariah to bee High Priest and not the King but here is nothing to prove the Kings headship Asa reformed the Church and renewed the Covenant Ezekiaâ— reformed Religion also and brake in peeces the Brazen Serpent and all these in the case of universall apostasie and the corruption of the Priest-hood did reforme the Lords house breake in peeces graven Images but all this giveth to them no mixt Ecclesiasticall power of making Canons of ordaining and depriving Pastors Whereas some object That the care both of temporall good and spirituall good belongeth to the Magistrate therefore hee must have a power to make Church Laws See Pareus For his care cannot bee supreme if hee must rule at the nod and beck of Church-men I Answer the connexion is weak hee who hath the care of both the temporall and spirituall good of the people hee hath a nomothetick power to procure both these two goods it followeth no way for then might hee have a power in his own person to Preach and administrate the Sacraments this power procureth the spirituall good but such as is the care such is the power the care is politick and civill Ergo the power to procure the spirituall good must bee politick and civill 2. Neither is the King to do all at the nod and direction of the Priesthood blindly and without examination That is the blind doctrine of Papists wee hold that hee hath a regall power to examine if the Decrees of the Church bee just Orthodox and tend to edification For hee is the Minister of God for good and to take vengeance on evill doing And there is no just obligation to sinne hee is not obliged to punish with the sword well-doing but evill doing and the Church can oblige the Magistrate to do nothing but that which in case there were no Church Law and in case of the Churches erring hee should doe 2. They object He to whom every soule is subject he hath a power to make Church Laws about all good but all and every soule without exception of Apostles or Church-men is subject to the civill Magistrate Ergo. The proposition is proved from the Law of relatives for he to 〈◊〉 we are subject he may give Lawes unto us for our gâ—â—d See Pareus Answ. He to whom we are subject may give any Lawes or command any manner of way for our good I deny the proposition in that sense for then he might in the Pulpit preach the Commandements of God for our good He might give Laws under the paine of excommunication It is enough that he may give Laws by sanction and civill enacting of Church Laws and pressing us by the power of the Sword to doe our duty for the attaining of a spirituall good He to whom we are subject he may give Laws that is presse in a coactive way obedience to Laws that is most true but it proveth not a nomothetick power in the King 3. They object What ever agreeth to the Kingly power concerning the good of Subjects by the Law of Nations that doth farre more agreeth Kings by the Law of God For the Law of God doth not desir 〈…〉 â—e Law of Nations But by the law of Nations a care 〈◊〉 Religion belong th to the King for Religion by the Law of nature is indâ—â—ed and brought in by the Law of Nations As Cicero saith And therefore to a Christian Kingly power the care of Religion must be due Answer we grant all for a care in a civill and politick way belongeth to the Christian Prince but a care by any meane whatsoever by Preaching or by making Church Canons is not hence proved by no light of nature or Law of Nations in an ecclesiasticall care of Religion due to the Christian Prince but onely in a politick and civill way 4. All beleevers even private men may judge of Religion not onely by a judgement of apprehension but also of discretion to try what Religion is true and to be holden and what is false and to be rejected Ergo farre more may the Christian Magistrate definitively judge of Religion so he doe it by convenient meanes such as are sound and holy Divines and the rule of Gods word The consequence is proved because the faithfull Prince hath supreame power which is nâ—mothetick and a power to make Lawes Answer it is true all private beleevers may try the Spirits whether they be of God or not but hence we may as well conclude therefore Princes may preach and administer the Sacraments as therefore the Prince may define matters ecclesiasticall For a eivill coactive power giveth to no man an ecclesiasticall power except he be called thereunto as Aaron was 2. The meanes alleadged are the judgement of holy and pious Divines and the word of God but Moses whom they alleadge for a patterne of a civill ruler who
cata-Baptistarum erroribus lib. 1. pag. 35. It is a vaine thing to say that teachers of all Israel remaining in Israel were non-residents that is Pastors not attending their charge a Iustific pag. b Confess of Separatists Art 21. c Bellarmin desacr ord lib. 1. cap. 9. d Concil Trident. Sess. 23. cap. 4. e Hosius in confes Polonica tit 50. f Martinus Ledesma in 4. quâ—st 36. art 4. ad 1. g Pet. a Soto de sacram ordinis Lect. 5. h Toletus com in Ioan. 21. an 21 i Cajetanus comment in Ioan. 21. ideo hoc loco instituitur promulgatur Sacramentum poenitentiae k Cyrillus lib. 112. cap. 56. l Chrysostome in Ioan. homil 88. m Joan. de Lugo tomo de Saram paenit disp 18. sect 1. n Suarez disp 7. de censura sect 6. not 6. o Sanchez in decalog lib. 2. c. 13. n. 13. p Aegidius Coniuk de Sacr. disp 24. n. 236. q Vasquez Tom. de excom dub 18. n. 9. r Panoâ—mit in dicâ— a nobis c. n. 10. s Avila de censur is part 2. cap. 7. disp 1. Dub. 9. t Sylvester verbo subsolvo 1. n. 8. u Ioan. Episcop Rossens de potest Papae in temporabus lib. 2. cap. 3. x Peoples plea pag. 42 43. Pag. 44. Pag 44 45 46. Pag. 46 47 48 49. Calvin Com. in Act. 11 21. Pag. 49. a Iunius annot in locum Apocalyps b Cooper on Revel 10. c Pareus comment in Apocalyps cap. 10. Pag. 52 53. d Iunius annot in cap. 14. e Paraeus in locum f Napper Comment on the Revel ch 14. Par. 54. 55. Pag. 97. pag. 59. and 63. Pag. 59. a Irenaus adversus Hares lib. 2 cap. 57. b Fusebius bistoria eccles l. 5. cap. 7. Tertullian Cyrill Chrysostom Theophylact. Robinson pag. 66 67. Parâ—us com ibi Pauls presbytery chap. 16. pag. 251 252. pag 69. 70. a Stapleton apud Whittaker de sac Script Authorit l. 3. c. 3. arg 3. sect Bellarmine Valentinian Gretserus b Transenius harmon c. 36. c Cajetan com in loan 5. in hoc ab hoâ—nine non accipio d Toletus in Ioh. 5. tom 1. e Rivetus tom 1. contrav trac 1. q. 6. f Whittakerus to 2. desac Scrip. authorit lib. 3. c. â—r 5. g Bucer in Ioan. 5. de testimonio Baptistae h Calvinus in art 17. v. 10 11. i Theaplâ—yâ— in aâ—t 1â— ibid. k Chrysost in Ioan. hom 39. l Beda in Ioan. cap 5. m Ambrosius in â— Tim. n Occam dâ—ale l. 5. ca. 2 par 1. c. 3. probatuâ— quod papâ— Canonice electus manens papa potest errare a fide bareticari quindecem rationâ—bus o Gerson de infallibilitat Papae consid 12 p Robinson Pag 70. 71. q Synod of England r Ambrosius com in 4 Eph. ut â—resecret plebs multiplicaretur omnibus inter initia concessum est Exangelizare Baptizaâ—e s Origenin Num. hom 11. cap. 8. t Hieronymus comment in Matth. in prcaemiâ— u Theophylact in art 20. x Augustin contr Faustum lib. 16. c. 12. y Coachman z Gerard. loc com tom 6. de Minister eccles c. 3. sect 1. n. 70 pag. 78 79. a Lutheâ—us tom 2. Com. in Ps. 8. fol 96 lat tradidiâ— quidem Dominus talenta servis sed non â—â—si â—â—catis expecta igitur â—u donec voccâ— is intereane ambâ—â—s b Fugeniâ— de 〈…〉 c Scotus in l. 4. d 24 q. 1. d Concilâ—i Tâ—i. dâ—ntine sâ—ss 14. cap. 1. e Lodo Meratius tom 3. trac de erdi disp 7. sect 1. Bishops preach not nor is it essentiall to their office and therfore Papists by contempt call our Ministers predicant preachers saith Gerard tom 6 q. 3. n. 294 pag. 336. f Bellarm. tom 3. de sacr ordin l. 1. c. 4. g Guliel Estius l 4. dist 24. s. 3. h Aquinas supplem q. 34. act 4. 5. i Canon Aposto lic 2. 9. 17 18. 25. 42. 43. k Clemens in Epist. 3. ad Iacob Manuscript The way of the Churches of Christ in New England In the Answ. 10 32. quest 9. 15. Answ. to the 15. quest Answ. to quest 15. a Arâ—in in declar sen. p. 57 b Armin. antâ—perkins pag. 224. quaâ—ndâ—u amâ—r Det in ipsoâ—uâ—n cordâ—bus vigebit impedâ—en ui ne â—ccedant â— Dâ—o c Remonstâ—an confess c. 18. Sect. 6. 7. d Episcopius disp 27. ch 9. e Socinus de justâ—â— â—â—l 10. quod si aâ— hac obedientia deficiamus c. f Smalcius 〈◊〉 7 in Ioan fol. 78. Answ to 32. quest q. 15. a Morton Grand Imposture Sect 5. Pag. 47. Arâ— 1547. 9. Sess. of Trent April 21. An. 1548. a Bellar. l. 1. de concil c. 12. b Harding 4. Article of Peters supremaâ—â—e as â—â—well saith c Suarez tâ— detriplâ—â— vitr disp 10. de sam â—onâ— Sect. 1. Num. 22. d Bellarm. de Pâ—nâ—â—f Rom. l. 1. c. 22. Peâ—â—us in concâ—lâ—â— primo 〈◊〉 lâ—quttur e Harding loco citaâ— f 〈◊〉 kerus tom 2. contrev 4 9 2 c. 14. Responde 〈◊〉 posse colligi ex hoc loco Petrum esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 citio primum naâ— constat ante 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis priâ—us 〈◊〉 su◠〈◊〉 evangelâ—sta tacuit g Gerson tâ— 4. in propos utâ—â—â— ad â—â—ter scbisma h Lyranus in 〈◊〉 i Carthusian in locum a Bellar. l. 1. de conc c. 12. b Suarez de tripl tra Theo. disp sect 3. c Pighius l. 6. c. 18. d Cajetan de â—uthorit Pap. â— 16. Also your unofficed Prophets may as well denounce judgement against an Apo staâ— Church as they may publikely preach mercy in the Gospel and sâ— this is no officiall act of authoritie The way of the Churches of Christ in New England a Answorth pag. 42. 43. in his Animadver b Best the Churches plea. pag. c Chap. 4. Ser. 5. d Chap. 4. Sect. 6. e Chap. 1. Ser. 2. Manuscript 6. It is true none should remove from one congregation to another without God goe before them nor can they change countries without Gods warranting 〈◊〉 Gen 12. 1. chap. 45. 4. but that such removall is a matter of Church-discipline and must be done by a ministeriall power is unwarâ—anted by any word of God a Fac de Almain de pâ—testa eccles et lav c. 15. est congregatio authoritate legitime facta ad aliquem locuâ— ex omni statu Hierarchico nulla persona fideli perente audirâ— exclusa ad nactandum ea quae concernunt publicam ecclesiae utilitatem et ipsius mares b Geâ—sâ—n de pâ—test eccles d Schola Paâ—sâ—râ— de poust Eccles. pag. 17. A Pastor may propone James the Apostles mind aneut fornication blood c. Act. 15. permodum consilii as a counsel to some other Pastor but it hath the power of a Synodicall decree not from Iames though an Apostle but from the joynt voyces of the Synod and it is not like that Iames as an Apostle said Wherefore my sentence is c. as an Apostle hee should have said as Paul doth what I received