It is a most false consequence to inferre that because all Bishops are equall in power therefore Synods have no power to judge and as false it is to inferre that because the Keyes were given to all the Apostles therefore there is no Ecclesiasticall power to judge the actions of a particular Congregation In summe Mr Canne doth most ignorantly and grosly abuse all these Papists against their words their writings and their continuall profession and practise For though there be this maine difference betwixt the Papists that some of them doe asscribe the greatest authority unto the Church that is unto a Generall Synod or Councell maintayning that they have infallibility of judgement above the Pope power to depose the Pope others of thē asscribing more authority and infallibility of judgement unto the Pope rather then unto the Church or a Generall Councell representing the same yet doe they all agree in this that there is a superiour power above particular Congregations to judge the same The University of Paris and the Doctours of Sorbon have in speciall manner from time to time maintayned the authority of a Generall Councell above the Pope they (p) De Eccl. Polit. Pot. pag. 1. c. edit 1612. Paris bring many arguments from Scripture and other reasons to prove the same They alledge the sentence of Pope (q) Ibid. p. 16. Zozimus confessing himself to be inferiour unto the Councell They avouch that (r) Ibid. p. 19. the frequent edebrating of Synods is simply and absolutely necessary for the better and more holy guiding of the Church Whereas a certaine Frier Ioannes Sarrazin had by word and writing under his hand preferred the authority of the Pope above the Synods they (ſ) Ibid. p. 46-56 record at large and publish in print a most solemne decree made by the Theologicall faculty of that University whereby he was appointed to revoke his opinion and a forme of recantation was prescribed according to which he confessed his fault acknowledged the power of Synods above the Pope The (t) Acts Monum p. 546 547. An. D. 1414. c. Councell of Constance did not onely exercise Ecclesiasticall authority in condemning of Iohn Husse and Hierome of Prage but also decreeing the authority of Synods and Councells to be above the Pope did actually depose divers Popes as Iohn the 23th and Benedict who was likewise excommunicate by them even as the Councell held at (v) An. D. 1083. Act. Mon. p. 164. Brixia had in former time by their sentence condemned Pope Hildebrand and judged him to be deposed So in like manner did the Clouncell held at (x) Ibid. p. 632.634 Bafile depose Pope Eugenius put another in his place By all which it is evident what the Papists then judged of the authority and power of Synods As all these so the other faction of Papists and the Iesuites in speciall that maintaine the authority of the Pope to be above all Synods Councells whatsoever that their decrees are not of force unlesse they be approved by the Pope these doe evidently teach that the affaires and controversies of particular Congregations are subject to the judgement of superiour judicatories out of themselves This is to be observed in Bellarmine throughout his writings where he shewes (y) Tom. 2. Contr. 1. de Concil l. 1. c. 9 10 11. l. 2. c. 2. c. the causes the necessity and the authority of Generall and Provinciall Synods the (z) Tom. 2. Contr. 2. l. 1. de Cler. c. 7 8 9 10. 14. c. power of elections and the distinction of a Bishop from a Presbyter The same is maintayned by him in his (a) Tom. 3. Contr. 4. de Indul. l. 1. c. 11.14 l. 2. c. 1 c. treatise of Pardons or Indulgencies plenary or for a certaine number of dayes for the living or for the dead And the like is to be found in (b) Tom. 3. Contr. 5. de Sacr. Ord. l. 1. c. 11. Tom. 1. Contr. 1. de Verbo Dei l. 3. c. 3 c. Tom 1. Contr. 3. de Sum. Pont. l. 4. c. 1 2 3 c. sundry other of his writings And to these might be added more then an hundred of other witnesses of the Romish Church acknowledging that there is a due and lawfull power of Synods and of other judges to decide the causes controversies of particular Churches Instead of many other the Councell of Trent called by (c) Concil Trid. Bul. Indict p. 8. Pope Paulus the third continued by (d) Bul. Resumpr p. 66.67 Pope Iulius the third and confirmed by (e) Bul. Confirm p. 243 c. Pope Pius the fourth together with the consideration of many conclusions and decrees made in severall Sessions of that Councell doe give plenteous testimony hereof throughout that whole book of their Acts. Onely to conclude this Section let it be remembred how of old in our owne countrie the like testimony hath bene given to shew the authority of Synods We read (f) Act. Mon. p. 112. col 2. art 7. of a Provinciall Synod at Thetford in the time of Theodore Archbishop of Canterbury Anno D. 680. where it was ordained that Provinciall Synods should be kept within the Realme at least once a yeare Another Synod (g) Ibid. p. 155. was held at Winchester Anno D. 1070. where Stigandus Archbishop of Canterbury was deposed for receyving his pall from Benedict the fift And another (h) P. 157. was after held at London where many decrees were made in the time of Lanfranck the Archbishop c. This being the continuall and universall practise of the Papists what sense was there in Mr Canne to alledge their testimonies in such a poynt wherein they are so full and pregnant against him It is the fault of Papists that they give too much authority unto Synods and it is as grosse a fault of these my opposites to pervert their testimonies contrary to their meaning practise further then their words will beare SECT II. Touching the Testimonies of Lutheranes IN their first allegation taken from Lutheranes they say It is affirmed by the Centuries of Meydenburg that from Christs ascension unto Trajans time which is about a 100 yeares every particular Church was governed by the Bishops Elders and Deacons of the same Cent. 1. c. 4. To this I answer This allegation comes short of the question in hand and is therefore insufficient and perverted to prove that the Churches then did not stand under any other Ecclesiasticall authority for it is not affirmed by them of Meydenburgh in their Centuries that the Churches were governed by them alone or that there were no Synods in those times to judge of the actions of Bishops Elders and Deacons in cases of controversy which could not be well ended in particular Churches but the contrary is expressely taught by the same (i) Magdeb. Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 9. de
were come from other places c. Therefore when we alledge this example Act. 15. to shew the authority and power of Synods in judging of controversies those that to frustrate elude this example doe plead and except that the Apostles had extraordinary power they are here reproved by Iunius who shewes that though the Apostles had extraordinary gifts in judging which might procure the more respect in that regard yet the power it self by which they did judge Act. 15. was not extraordinary and peculiar to the Apostles but ordinary and common to Ministers Elders other Deputies of the Churches therefore commonly perpetually to be observed used as occasion requireth Mr Can's Exceptions touching Act. 15. answered BEfore he comes to the point he intreats me to resolve five Questions the two latter whereof I have answered (c) Pag. 34. before the other with their answers are as followeth I. CAN. I. (d) Churches plea p. 32 33. Whither the Assembly mentioned in Act. 15. there a Synod or Classis ANSVV. The Assembly mentioned Act. 15. was a Synod and not properly a Classis according to the usuall acception of the word in these places Classes are Assemblies of Ministers comming often together out of neighbour Churches within a lesser circuit Synods have a larger extent comprehend many Classes under them come more seldome together I. CAN. II. How it can be manifested from that place that both are divine institutions as here is affirmed ANSVV. This place Act. 15. or any other that yeelds warrant for one of these Assemblies yeelds it for both because both are of like nature and differ not essentially but in circumstantiall matters of time place number of persons In both these is a superiour Ecclesiasticall authority over particular Churches in respect of both there appeareth a mutuall dependence of Churches that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited unto a particular Church which is the Question betwixt us I. CAN. III. How he can naturally from thence rayse this doctrine viz. Excommunications and elections of Ministers are actions belonging unto Classes and Synods ANSVV. When I rayse such a doctrine from Act. 15. as he mentions which I have not done any where then is it time for me to manifest how the same ariseth naturally from the Text. Election of Ministers is an action belonging to severall Congregations and not to Classes and Synods but if any particular Churches doe offend in choosing unlawfull and unfit persons then are Classes and Synods to judge thereof and to hinder such elections Had the Church of Antioch gone about to elect for a Minister among them one of that Sect which taught the brethren there Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses ye cannot be saved Act. 15.1.5 then had the Synod at Ierusalem authority to have hindred that election which appeareth because they had power to make a decree against such false doctrine Act. 15.28 And thence also it followeth that if any of the Christian Pharisees had stood obstinately in such errours tending to the subversion of soules to the bringing in of another Gospel and making Christ become of no effect unto men Act. 15.24 Gal. 1.6 7. 5.2 3 4. then after due conviction that Synod at Ierusalem had authority as well to censure the person as to condemne his errour having in readines a revenge against all disobedience 2. Cor. 10.6 with Gal. 1.8 9. especially if the particular Church whereof such a person was a member should refuse to doe the same according to their direction I. CAN. To the point now I doe deny that this place Act. 15. proveth any such thing for which it is alledged For I. Here was no combination of many Ministers of divers Churches but onely a few messengers sent from Antiochia unto the Congregation at Ierusalem about a controversy there specifyed Hence it is affirmed by many learned men (e) D. Brid pag. 1224. that as this was an assembly of one onely particular Church so it binds (f) D. Whit. de Conc. qu. 2. p. 6. 67 onely but in a speciall or particular meeting ANSVV. I. It is untrue which he sayth that here was no combination of many Ministers of divers Churches because here were the Ministers of all Churches even the Apostles that had the care of all the Churches of whom all Churches might say these are our Ministers Act. 15.6.2 Cor. 11.28.1 Cor. 3.21 22. Mat. 28.19 This was the noblest combination of Ministers that ever was II. It is without warrant that he saith onely a few messengers were sent from Antiochia for besides Paul and Barnabas the deputies and messengers of that Church which might stand for many other it is sayd that certaine other of them were sent Act. 15.2 but how many or how few it is not specifyed III. That which he alledgeth from D. Bridges is unsound viz. that this was an Assembly of one onely particular Church As it is expressely against the text so I may oppose against in the testimony of Iunius * Pag. 68. before noted who speaking of them that judged in this Synod reckons up first the Apostles and Apostolick men then the Elders that laboured in the ministery of the Word as well them of the place in Ierusalem as those of Antioch and if any moreover were come from other places c. IV. Whereas he citeth D. Whitaker as if he affirmed of this Synod at Ierusalem that it bindes onely but in a speciall or particular meeting he doth herein falsify the testimony of D. Whitak for though he distinguishing Synods into Particular Provinciall or Nationall Universall doth in (g) De Concil Qu. 1. c. 2. p. 6. that place call this a Particular Synod yet hath he no such assertion as though it should binde onely in a speciall or particular meeting and it had bene against the text Act. 15.23 16.4 where it is noted that the Synodicall Epistle was sent unto the Churches of the Gentiles in Antioch Syria Cilicia that they might observe the decrees thereof As for that (h) Ibid. p. 67. other place out of D. Whit. it is misalledged there being no such matter at all there mentioned Instead of that mistaken place let him consider what Mr Cartwright saith hereof (i) Confut. of Rhem. Annot. on Act. 15.6 We will not strive whether the Councell were Generall or Provinciall but it may be counted a Generall Councell in respect of the presence of the Apostles which were Governours of all the Churches of the world I. CAN. II. As Mr Cartwright saith (k) Refut of Rhem. on the place Paul and Barnabas went not up to Ierusalem to submit their judgement to the judgement of the Apostles for that had diminished the authoritie of their doctrine then which there was no greater in the world they being both infallibly directed by the Holy Ghost Onely they went up to conferre with them and for countenance of the truth in respect of men
as appeares (p) Act. Synod Nat. Dordr Sess 4. Art 3. in the lawes orders prescribed by the Illustrious LL. the States Generall c. III. Even of those which by a lawfull election deputation are sent unto Synods whether they be Ministers and Elders or other members of the Church there ought to be a limited and certaine number for if every Church in a whole nation might send as many as they would or could there might be thousands and ten thousands gathered together into some Synods whereby great confusion and disorder in the discussing and judging of many causes would apparently follow D. Whitaker saith (q) De Cōc q. 3. p. 81. Certainly confusion cannot be avoyded when too many meet together And as for that Synod at Ierusalem he saith * Ibid. q. 1. c. 6. That assembly could not be great because they were compassed about with the Priests and Pharisees And therefore also in the practise of these Churches there is a certaine number determined of such as are to be sent unto Synods as appeareth likewise in (r) Act. Synod Nat. Dordr Sess 4. Art 3. those lawes before mentioned If Mr Canne will allow any limitation of number and can therein satisfy himself that he doth not deprive the people Churches of their right he may thereby also satisfy himself for any thing that he objecteth unto us in this behalf IV. We doe further grant this liberty even unto such as are no Delegates or Deputies of the Church that though they be not allowed for judges yet many of them (ſ) Inn. Animadv in Bell. de Concil l. 1. c. 15. n. 2.3 9. as hearers may for their edification be present at the cōmunication conference in the Synod that they may profit in godlines This also is the practise of these Churches both in Provinciall and Nationall Synods so farre as the place will conveniently receive a competent number and so also it was observed in the Nationall Synod at Dort V. This liberty of hearing in Synods is so moderated restrained that though they which have no calling unto the Synod may heare questions touching doctrine and religion discussed yet such are not allowed to be present and to heare when personall matters of scandall and offence come to be examined because as Iunius saith (t) Ibid. c. 15. n. 9. contra charitatem fuisset Nam veritatis cognitio ad omnes pertinet infirmitatum minime that is It had bene against charity for the knowledge of the trueth belongs unto all the knowledge of infirmities not so VI. Touching the right and liberty of Synods there are many other things to be further observed When Mr Cartwright had spoken very much for the liberty of the people in Synods yet for prevention of mistaking and by way of correcting himself after a sort he saith (v) Confut. of the Rhemists Ann. on Act. 15. V. 6. n. 5. Yet write we not this as though the peoples presence either in all Councels where the doctrine is not in controversy were * The negative particle added there seemes to be the Printers fault being concrary to that which went before and followes after making no good sense in his words is therefore to be omitted needfull or that in those Councels where they were present they have like right with those Bishops and Elders For they we mean Bishops and Elders may first by a severall and foreset deliberation take counsell whether it be expedient to propound any such matter as is in cōtroversie in that Councell where the people shall be present Whereby if they perceive any generall and obstinate opposition of them against the truth they may hold that poynt of doctrine back This we see to have been done by Iosias who or ever he assembled the people first of all assembled the Elders of Iuda and Ierusalem 2. King 23.1 Also by Iames who at Pauls arrivall to Ierusalem first assembled the Elders to debate of the matter or ever he was presented before the Church Act. 21.18 19. Secondly if the people should bewray a wilfull stubbornesse against the truth not suspected by them yet the Governours being sound without whom there can nothing be concluded there should not follow any prejudice of the Councels authority against the trueth albeit the number of the people assembled were greater then of those Bishops and Elders Hereupon it commeth that the Decrees of the Councell are after called the Decrees of the Apostles Elders leaving out the brethren which Luke had first set downe And upon the same ground in the decision of doubtfull matters Moses Deut. 17. commandeth that they should have recourse unto the Priests of the Leviticall stocke for that they bare the principall sway in those deliberations Lastly the case of Councels being as it hath bene declared it is no marvell although Augustine call a Generall Councell in some respect the consent of the whole Church considering that not onely those Bishops and Elders but some of the people were in all likelyhood there assembled That which Mr Cartw. sayth of the severall and foreset deliberation agreeth with that which Beza (x) Ann. in Act. 15.12 writes of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or foregoing consultation The same is acknowledged by (y) S. Theo. l. 7. p. 277. Mr Fenner also And hereunto accordeth that which Gersom Bucerus fitly noteth concerning the meaning of Cyprian who writing unto the Elders Deacons that he had determined from the beginning of his government to doe nothing by his owne judgement privately (z) Cyprian l. 3. ep 10. without their counsell and without consent of the people Bucerus explaineth his speech distinctly on this manner (a) Dissent de Gub. Eccles p. 145. Behold first he mentions the counsell which was to be borrowed from the Presbytery and then the consent whereby the judgement of the Presbytery was publickly approved of the people And this he applyes also to the order of that judgement described 1. Cor. 5. But concerning the judgement of Cyprian we have occasion to speak more hereafter I. CAN. V. Howsoever the Church at Antioch sent some Brethren with Paul and Barnabas unto the Church at Ierusalem notwithstanding and let it be well observed they did not this as being a dependent body and standing under another Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves For as Mr Parker (b) Poli. Eccl l. 3. c. 20. p. 301. 314. excellently proves it the Church at Antioch at this time had absolute power in and for her self to have ended the controversy and might have done it I say in respect of authority without acquainting therewith any other Congregation at all To the same purpose another saith (c) D. Whit. Conc. qu. 1. c. 1. The Church of Antioch sent not to Ierusalem as being bound in duety thereto But in regard it was the chief place of Religion therefore they made choyse freely of that Congregation as knowing them to be best
at home And in matters of judgement seeing justice is to be done to one person as well as to a multitude Ier. 21.12 22.3 Esa 58.6 Amos 5.12.24 therefore if one person think himself oppressed by a particular Church the liberty of appeale is not to be denyed him III. Whereas they say Hence our Divines teach c. whom do they meane by this phrase our Divines Doth W. B. mean the Arminian Divines unto whom he hath declined and is become one of their disciples Doth Mr C. mean the Divines of the Separation The communion of other Divines is renounced by them And these also are such that if a whole Church together should agree to referre their controversies unto the judgement of a Synod they hold it to be an Antichristian bondage Doe they mean Mr Parker whom they alledged immediately before and unto whom they seem to have reference by that ambiguous quotation so set downe in the margine as if it belonged unto that which went before Yet he is but one and none of theirs Mr Parker saith indeed * Pol. Eccl. p. 338. there that this delegation and power of delegating is not in one Bishop but in the Churches themselves He speakes of that communication of Churches when some deale with others concerning any Ecclesiasticall busines by sending their delegates or messengers unto them which power of sending delegates in Ecclesiasticall affaires he proves to be in the Church it self and not in any one Bishop in opposition unto the Hierarchy who will have such businesses to be done by themselves and in their owne name That which Mr Parker sayth is no way contrary unto the practise of the Classes and Synods where the Deputies and Delegates of the Churches appeare in the name of those severall Churches from which they are sent acknowledging the power of their delegation to be derived unto them from the same Mr C. and W. B. confound these two things which are to be distinguished viz. the dealing in Church affaires in the name of the Church which they onely are allowed to doe who are chosen of the Church and designed thereunto and the propounding of personall grievances in case of appeale or complaint touching any thing that is amisse which as we sayd before is free unto every Officer and member of the Church when he cannot otherwise be satisfyed he doing it still in his owne name Now both these may be understood by that their phrase of bringing things from one Congregation to another whereas Mr Parker meant onely the former as is plaine by his whole discourse in the place mentioned though Mr C. and W. B. would faine apply it unto the latter as appeares by the inference which thence they make against me But for this their opinion they cannot shew any one word of God nor any one Divine whereas I have the * Pag. 37.41 witnesse of both IV. Touching the accusation of me in particular that I have brought matters to the Classis without consent of the Consistory or any one of them c. how earnest soever they be both in the line and in the margine to load me with double rebuke yet their owne words fall upon them and while they seek to accuse they excuse me rather for if it be as they say then it appeares that the matter I took in hand was such as might stand firme upon tryall and examination by the Deputies Ministers and Elders of many Churches when as the contrary proceedings were all undone and came to nothing And yet it is also false which they say of the Churches consent the matter being never propounded unto the Church nor their consent required or asked notwithstanding all that was done by some particular persons The complaints and reproaches with which they make up their 6 Exception are not worth the answering The testimony of the English Church at Franekford is afterward to be considered I. CAN. VII The thing then and there concluded was divine Scripture imposed upon all other Churches of the Gentiles although they had no delegates there v. 22 28. ch 16.4 ANSVV. I. The Argument is not taken from the infallibility of trueth that was in the decrees of this Synod but from the order according to which they were made and the persons determining the things that were then and there concluded being such as did not all belong unto that particular Congregation where the controversy was raysed II. Though the decrees in that Synod were grounded upon the Scriptures as I granted * Pag. 66. before yet they could not be sayd to be divine Scripture untill they were by Luke recorded among the Acts of the Apostles neither was it manifest unto all that they were according to the Scriptures untill it was concluded in the Synod for els it had bene in vaine to have repaired thither for this resolution III. He that would seem to say * Pag. 69. before out of D. Whit. that this assembly did binde onely but in a speciall or particular meeting doth now acknowledge that the thing then and there concluded did binde all other Churches of the Gentiles being imposed upon them all to be observed by them It is true indeed that the decrees of this Synod were directed and delivered unto severall Churches of the Gentiles where the observation of them was judged to be necessary not onely because they were by infallible direction from the holy Ghost which reason is implyed by Mr Robinson from whence this and the substance of most of the former exceptions is borrowed when he addes (k) Iustif of Sep. p. 199. and so imposed upon all other Churches c. but besides because the Apostles were chief judges in this Synod who as I have shewed often * Pag. 62 72. before were as Delegates from all the Churches in which respect as was also noted * Pag. 69. out of Mr Cartwright this Synod may be accounted a Generall Councell I. CAN. VIII It is observable how Mr Paget stumbleth at the same stone and misapplyeth the very same place of Scripture as the Papists (l) Rhem. on the place c. have done before For thus they write Paul and Barnabas condescended to referre the whole controversie the determination thereof to the Apostles and Ancients at Ierusalem that is to say to commit the matter to be tryed by the Heads and Bishops and their determination in Councill And indeed such application of it better serves the turne of Iesuits and Priests that seek to set up the Popes Supremacie and a Tyrannicall Hierarchie then those that desire to stand for the Rights and Priviledges which Christ hath given unto his Church ANSVV. There is nothing sayd here but either it is refuted by that which I have sayd already or els it is a mere begging of the question by avouching that which remaines by him to be prooved and which I am to disprove when I come to the examination of his Arguments Though the Papists abuse and
same is to be referred unto such judges who as is before noted may either (r) S. Theol l. 7. p. 243 244. confirme or make voyd the Election A plaine acknowledgmēt of a lawfull power out of a particular Church to judge the cause thereof IV. He omitteth that which Mr F. writes in the description (ſ) Ibid. p. 245 246. both of the Elders office in generall and of the Ruling Elders in particular where the warrant and authority of their office is derived from the Elders in Israel and from the government of the Jewish Church as appeares in those testimonies of Scripture which he alledgeth for proof thereof as namely these beside other Lev. 4.13 14 15.2 Kin. 6.32 Ier. 19.1 Ezek. 8.1 Neh. 8.5.8.10 Act. 4.5 6.12 5.21 Now seeing he derives their offices from that forme of government which is confessed not to have bene a single uncompounded policie this is an evidence that he also did not hold jurisdiction to be limited unto a particular Church V. He omitteth that which Mr F. writes in distinguishing the Presbytery or Eldership of many Churches (t) Ibid. p. 281. into a Synod or a Generall Councill And not to speak of other things he omitteth that description of a Generall or Vniversall Councill viz. that it is a Presbyterie consisting of the deputies of many Synods to determine and compound those things that may be profitable for the whole Church or for the greatest part thereof The word which he useth to expresse the authority exercised therein when he saith ad ea statuenda t.i. to determine to make a statute or decree imports more then a bare admonition or counsell and therefore it is manifest from hence that Mr F. did not allow of this new Discipline which denyes the authority of Synods II. His unfaithfull translation of Mr Fenner is also to be observed in divers points I. When speaking of the Eldership of one particular Church (v) Apol. reply p. 238. he tells how Mr F. saith it is properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The words of Mr F. are that it is (x) S. Theol l. 7. p. 279. proprio nomine sie dictum so called with the proper name His meaning is that in common use of speech it had the proper name given unto it even as it comes to passe oft times that a part is called by the proper name of the whole and one species or one sort receives the proper name of the whole kinde as when in speaking commonly of the Ministers and Elders of a Church the ruling Elders are so called with a proper name that belongs to the whole kinde seeing Ministers of the word are Elders as well as they 1. Tim. 5.17 so when the ruling Elders are called with the proper name of Governours 1. Cor. 12.28 though Ministers of the word are governours also as well as they And unlesse we thus understand Mr Fen. there should be no trueth in his words for as he himself saith (y) Ibid. p. 245. there is a Synecdoche in the name of Elders when it is given to Ecclesiasticall Governours and therefore there must be a double improper or figurative speech a double Synecdoche when the assembly of some Officers in a particular Church is called with the proper name of the Eldership whereas but some of them are elderly or aged men and whereas the assembly of such men in a Synod is an Eldership as well as the other II. It is a notable falsification of Mr Fenners testimony when as he distinguishing the Ecclesiasticall Eldership into the Eldership of a particular Church and into the Eldership of many Churches and giving before-hand in the first place a generall definition of the Eldership common to both those kindes Mr Dav. comes and restraines that generall definition to one kinde and brings in Mr F. speaking on this manner The Eldership of the first sort he sayth is a compound office wherein all the Elders doe in the name of the whole Church administer all the businesses c. But this Mr F. hath not sayd I desire the Reader to look on the (z) S. Theol l. 7. p. 276. place as also on that which followes in his * Pag. 279. transition from the generall unto the species and severall sorts of the Eldership and there to behold how grosly Mr D. corrupteth the words of Mr F. and abuseth the reader and that in a point of maine consequence touching our question for while Mr F. gives the same generall definition to the Eldership of many Churches viz. to Classes and Synods which he gives unto the Eldership of a particular Church thereby the same authority and jurisdiction which he gives herein unto a particular Church is also given by him unto a Synod the Eldership of many Churches and then are not Synods for counsell onely or admonition but they are to exercise a jurisdiction and power as well as particular Churches III. Another instance of his unfaithfull translation is to be observed from those words of Mr F. (a) Ibid. p. 278. postea autem auditis assentientibus decernenda pro decretis Ecclesiis proponenda sunt which he translates thus (b) Apol. reply p. 239. and afterwards the opinions and assent of all being declared matters are to be concluded Those last words should have bene translated thus matters are to be decreed and to be propounded unto the Churches for decrees and being thus translated they import an act of authority and a power of jurisdiction in making decrees which are more then counsell or admonition especially when those matters so decreed are propounded unto the Churches for decrees But the word of concluding which Mr D. useth is ambiguous and is applyed sometimes to the reasonings of men either in private or publick where there is no authority to give definitive sentence or to make decrees for the Churches Mr Canne himself though he condemne the Classes and Synods of the Reformed Churches yet doth he allow Ministers and brethren of divers Churches to come together (c) Churches plea p. 95. to conferre of things yea and to conclude if they can what they judge meet c. This use of the word conclude serves to elude and frustrate this pregnant testimony of their power IV. Another mis-translation is when in the same page those words of Mr F. leges maximi momenti constituendae are thus translated by him orders also of the greatest moment to be made This I doe therefore note the rather because Mr D. keeps so great a quoile about the strict difference betwixt orders and lawes and saith (d) Apol. rep p. 257. 258. that orders lawes are ill confounded by me and is large in declaring his minde therein His friend also that made the Alphabeticall Table for him and prefixed it before his book notes this as a remarkable matter therein * Letter L. Lawes and orders differ Now if these things be so then hath he done very ill
in confounding lawes and orders by translating the word leges orders when he should have translated it lawes according to the right and proper signification thereof If he had disliked Mr F. for using the word leges or lawes and would correct it by putting in the word orders this was more then an exact and faithfull Translatour might doe He should rather have translated the word truely according to the right signification and then have given warning to the Reader touching the fault of Mr Fenner in the ill confounding of lawes and orders and putting one for the other After these unfaithfull omissions and mistranslations Mr Dav. hath not bene afraid to say confidently of himself Thus have I faithfully translated the words of this eminent light in his time Mr Dudley Fenner who was joyned with Mr Cartwright c. To his commendation of him I doe willingly assent he was indeed an eminent light and why then hath Mr Dav. gone about to obscure his light by depraving his testimony and labouring to put this bright-burning candle under a bushell that men should not see his light Whether he make strongly for him or against me let others judge III. Moreover after these omissions and mistranslations come we to consider his miscollections from him which without any just deduction or inference upon the lame and imperfect recitall of his words he thus propoundeth (e) Ibidē The Reader may see how he leaveth the wholl power of jurisdiction in the particular Church c. How untrue this is it may appeare I. By Mr F. his alledging those (f) S. Theo. l. 7. p. 276. Scriptures Deut. 17.9 with 2. Chron. 19.8 11. Matt. 18.18 1. Tim. 4.14 to shew what authority there is in a Classis or Synod comprehended by him under that generall definition of a Presbyterie as well as the Eldership of a particular Church thereby he confesseth that there is a power of judgement censure and jurisdiction in Synods because those testimonies of Scripture speak of such jurisdiction and judgement of binding and loosing of imposition of hands or ordination c. II. Though Mr F. speaking of excommunication and absolution from it sayth that they are to be done in the assembly by the authority of the whole Church which last words Mr D. for speciall observation causeth to be printed in great capitall letters yet this doth not prove that he left the whole power of jurisdiction in the particular Church seeing in the same (g) Pa. 277 place speaking of Ecclesiasticall judgements administred by the Synod or Presbytery in deciding of doubts he saith also etsi authoritas communis sit ministris tamen sententiam dicendi eam exponendi maxima facienda potestas that is though the authority be common yet the greatest power of giving sentence and declaring it is to be yeelded unto the Ministers Therefore did he not leave the whole power of jurisdiction in a particular Church III. Mr F. a little after againe speaking of Ecclesiasticall judgements and censures and still of administring them by the Ecclesiasticall Senate or Presbytery which contained the Synod as well as a particular Eldership he sayth of them (h) Ibidē In quibus per omnes Ecclesias summa Ecclesiastica potestas Presbyterio demandata est that is In which throughout all Churches the highest or chiefest Ecclesiasticall authority is committed to the Presbytery And hereby also it appeares that he did not leave the whole power of jurisdiction in a particular Church But these passages Mr D. omitted when he translated other parts of the same periods He thought it not to be for his advantage to have his Reader take knowledge of them IV. Whereas Mr F. requireth that in matters of greatest moment after the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or fore-consultation of the Presbytery comprehending both Classis and particular Eldership their counsels be told unto the Church that thing ordinarily is thus performed in these Reformed Churches viz. after that in the Classicall assembly of Ministers and Elders it hath bene found just and requisite that any persons should be excommunicated or any Ministers called these censures and elections are then first solemnely propounded unto the particular Church whom these things specially concerne and so accomplished with their consent and not otherwise if the greater part of the Church dissent and allow not the excommunication or election then for the avoyding of strife the matter is againe referred ad majorem Senatum unto a greater Ecclesiastical Senate Classis or Synod to judge thereof and to compose the dissention V. Mr F. in the same chapter (i) Pag. 278 279. shewes from the Scriptures that in these Presbyteriall assemblies there ought to be a mutuall office performed in the same in speciall manner towards one another not onely for counsels but also for the censures of such as are members of those assemblies And this is also agreeable to the order prescribed both in the (k) Kercken-Ordeninge Art 43. Nationall Synod at Dort and in divers others for the censure of such faults as are committed in those meetings or by contempt of the admonitions of inferiour assemblies Hereby also it appeares that he allowed an Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in Synods and Classes and did not limit all jurisdiction unto a particular Church VI. After Mr F. had spoken in generall both of the Presbytery of one and of many Churches joyntly together then he comes to speak of each of them severally and there againe speaking of the Presbytery of many Churches that is of Classes and Synods he saith (l) S. Theol. l. 7. p. 280. Hic autem leges Ecclesiasticae condendae sunt Here are Ecclesiasticall lawes to be made This was a power of jurisdiction more then of admonition or counsell This Mr D. passeth over also it was no pollicy for him to draw collections from such testimonies VII That one testimony of Scripture which Mr F. oft (m) Ibid. p. 280 281. alledgeth 2. Cor. 8.19 23. not to speak of others alledged with it is an evidence of the authority of Synods It is there specifyed that the brother who was chosen to be a messenger of the Churches was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 elected by saffrages now this election was an act of authority exercised by sundry Churches in one businesse touching one person and hence it appeareth that a combination of Churches may exercise jurisdiction together touching such as are no peculiar members of one particular Church And if such election may be made by many Churches then may censures be decreed by many Churches together as occasion requires Lastly Mr F. having spoken of the first part of Ecclesiasticall politie touching such as administer the same both by a simple and compound office in the Presbytery both of one or more Churches in Synods or Generall Councils he comes at last to speak of the duety of the Saints other members of the Church which are not promoted unto any Ecclesiasticall office and (n)
for counsell both because he allowes a distinction of them in the Synod which had the authority of a determining voyce from them that did onely dispute or consult and because he intimates a judiciall proceeding in the Synods by mentioning parties accused their citing or calling of them the condemning of them which imports a further matter then onely of admonition or counsell Whereas Bellarmine accuseth us that we allow any learned men though Laicks to have a determining voyce let their office be what it will Junius answereth (m) N. 4. These things have none of us sayd or thought as they are here layd downe This is that which we say such are to be taken into the Synod which are furnished with gifts and calling which for gifts are godly honest learned for their calling which are either ordinarily appointed to teach or extraordinarily sent for and brought by just authority Now this necessity of a calling which he so (n) See c. 16. n. 10. 18. 20. c. 17. n. 1. often urgeth and requireth to be in the members of a Synod doth argue a speciall power and authority belonging unto them by vertue whereof they may give sentence in the judgement of causes whereas to admonish or counsell requires no more power then that which every Christian hath in another for his good as Mr D. himself confesseth To the same purpose Junius shewes against Bellarmine that the meaning of Theodosius and Valentinian was not to admit Bishops onely but that (o) Ibid. c 15. n. 13. those onely might heare examine and give sentence in a Synod which being sent from the Churches unto the Synod were reckoned up of the Bishops according to their letters of publick authority which they were wont to exhibit Againe he sayth (p) N. 15. They which are present without the authority of the Church of them some may onely heare as the laicks or common people some may be used in consultations as the learned men especially Ecclesiasticall persons but they may not give definitive sentence And thus still by distinguishing those that gave counsell from those that gave sentence in the Synod it appeares he acknowledged a power of jurisdiction in Synods and that they were not onely for counsell So when Bellarmine sayth it was a fault in the Councell of Basill that Presbyters or other learned men besides Bishops were allowed to have not onely a consulting voyce but a deciding suffrage affirmeth that this was against the custome of all antiquity c. Junius answereth (q) N. 19. This we denye for it was the first institution Act. 15. and not onely the manner and custome Seeing therefore there was such an institution of the Apostles in their assembly what need was there to alledge custome c. When Bellarmine chargeth the Protestants as holding that a Synod is nothing but an inquisition and that Christ alone and his written word hath a determining voyce Junius sayth (r) Ibid. in c. 18. n. ◠It is false for Synods have both an inquisition of that which is true just holy by religious communication and also a ministeriall giving of sentence Though he shew there and in many annotations following that it is not lawfull for Christians to obey them further then they agree with the Scriptures that their sentence of it self is but a persuasion and not a constraint a ministeriall judgement not of absolute authority of itself c. yet he (ſ) N. 3. grants the Lord hath commanded that we should obey the sentence of a lawfull Synod assembled together in his name c. He sayth (t) N. 14. Synods have true judgements so farre as they are of God according to the tables of his trueth and commandement of themselves they are not judgements but declarations publications and ministeriall pronouncings of the trueth and judgements of God And more then this cannot be yeelded to any Ecclesiasticall judicatory whatsoever Herein he fully grants as much jurisdiction to Synods as belongs to any particular Congregation or Eldership either apart or joyntly together When Bellarmine blames the Protestants for their exception against the Councell of Trent Junius answereth (v) Ibid. in c. 21. n. 1. It is the ordinary way of right in every appeale that the judgement of Synods and the exequution of their sentence be suspended and stayed so long untill the matter be againe examined in another more free or greater Assembly c. This answer had bene needles and impertinent unlesse Synods had more power then of counsell and admonition onely He sayth (x) N. 7. Certainly in every just Synod Hereticks being cited heard present or willfully hiding themselves have bene condemned c. When Bellarm. objects that Protestants will have nothing to be determined in Synods and so strifes to be never ended Junius answers (y) N. 23. that he perverts their meaning and referres us to his preface nota 40. where the Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction of Synods is plainely avouched IUnius proceeding to the examination of his second book touching Synods where Bellarmine repeats that Synods of Bishops may judge all controversies both of faith and manners Junius answereth (z) Animadv in Bell. l. 2. deCōcl c. 1. n. 1. We have granted it of those that are lawfull Synods When Bellarmine had sayd that nothing is greater then a lawfull and approved Generall Councell Junius answereth (a) Ibid. c. 4. n. 2. It is false for Christ is greater and the Scripture is greater seeing Christ and the Scripture are great of themselves the Church is great by them c. But this answer had bene insufficient not direct enough if my opposites opinion were true For then according to their opinion he might more fitly have answered that the authority of a particular Congregation is greater then the authority of a Generall Synod because though the counsell and advise of the Synod was more to be reverenced in respect of many excellently learned and godly men from many Churches that were in it yet seeing Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is limited to a particular Congregation therefore the same is greater in the power of censuring and in the use of the keyes for binding and loosing of impenitent sinners seeing Synods have no jurisdiction at all over any other Churches Againe when Bellarmine sets downe this insolent proposition that the Pope cannot commit neither unto a Synod nor to any man the coactive judgement over himself but onely the discretive Iunius answereth (b) Ibid. in c. 18. n. 1. The proposition is most true he cannot commit because God hath committed it to the Synod and lawfull Councell Wherefore we say on the contrary neither can he commit it for if he be the servant of God God hath committed the judgement concerning him unto his Church neither can he reject it but though he be unwilling yet both the Church is bound to judge concerning him and he to undergoe the judgement thereof discretive and coactive howsoever it
deeds Ambrose is ill joyned with Austine seeing in the place alledged he hath not the same but another more large definition containing under it Originall sinne also when he sayth (t) Tom. 4. lib. de Paradiso c. 8. What is sinne but a praevarication against the Law of God c. This praevarication is as well in the nature and disposition of man as in actuall sinnes The judgement of Aquinas and such Popish Schoolemen is not to be much esteemed in this poynt while they teach that originall corruption in those that are baptised justifyed is not properly any sinne at all therefore are rejected herein of all Orthodox Divines ARGVM VI. If the Apostle gave commandement unto the Eldership of Ephesus for the whole administration of all Ordinances in that Church Then may the Eldership of every particular Congregation administer among themselves all Gods ordinances But the first is true Therefore the second The Major is proved two wayes 1. By Scripture Act. 20. vers 17.28.2 By the testimony of the learned Whitaker c. The Minor is undenyable For as Mr Brightman sayth there was one forme c. ANSVV. I. Mr Canne here againe wanders from the question goes about to prove that which I never denyed viz. that the Eldership of every particular Church may administer all Gods ordinances among themselves Even those solemne acts of communion with other Churches both in things spirituall and corporall being the ordinances of God are to be performed by the direction of the Eldership This hinders not but that any Eldership or Church it self being found in errour or other unfaithfull dealing may be subject to the censure of many Churches united in their Synods II. If it belong to the Eldership of every particular Church to administer all Gods ordinances then how can the ordinances of God be duely administred in that Church of the Brownists whereof Mr Canne is Bishop alone where there is no Eldership where there is neither teaching nor ruling Elder beside himself Seeing there is no Ruler in his owne Company but himself he denyes all other rule over him by Synods doth he not make himself a kinde of Ecclesiasticall Monarch or sole Governour of the Separation III. Mr Canne doth here againe bewray his notorious ignorance of Logick whereof he professeth so great skill in the framing of so many Syllogismes and yet like the children that know not the right hand from the left cannot discerne betwixt the Major and the Minor of his Syllogismes This appeareth here when he calles that his Major which he proves by Act. 20.17.28 and by the testimony of D. Whitaker viz. that the Apostle gave commandement unto the Eldership of Ephesus c. which is his Assumption or Minor and againe by calling that his Minor for which he cites Mr Brightman and other treatises which serve to prove one forme of Church-government common to all Churches as any Logician that lookes upon his Argument may easily discerne When he propounded Simple or Categovicall Syllogismes then was he not so deceyved in his guessing at a Major or Minor But so oft as he useth any Hypotheticall Syllogisme so oft he is as a man wandring in a wood or wildernes And the reason hereof seemes to be this whereas in a Hypotheticall Syllogisme the Antecedent of the Major is assumed usually in the Minor and that which is but a part of the Major comes to be the whole Minor he mistaking a part for the whole doth therefore call that which is onely the Antecedent of the Major by the name of the whole Major Proposition when as indeed it is the whole Minor Proposition and so to be called Had not W. Best bene a Simplician as the Brownist noted him to be he would never have placed his confidence in the skill of this simple Logician nor rested under the shadow of his Syllogismes ARGVM VII (v) Churc plea. p. 72. Such Offices and callings without which the Church of God is complete and perfect for Government are superfluous and humane But the Church of God may be complete and perfect for Government without Classicall and Synodicall Offices and callings Therefore these Offices and callings are superfluous humane This Argument the Protestants have used against the Pope the Reformists against Bishops Arch-Bishops Chancellours c. Now the same is every-way as firme good against Synods and Classes for without them the Church of God is fully brought to complete perfection and unity D. Fulke (x) Learn Disc Eccl. Gov. p. 10.11 confidently affirmeth so much That which D. Whitaker (y) De Cōc qu. 1. p. 22.23 writes of Generall Councills is by Mr Parker (z) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. p. 133. applyed and rightly unto particular Synods The Church of God sayth he can wel subsist without them for she was sometimes without them besides we are not bound by any speciall commandement of God to have them ANSVV. I. This Argument concludes nothing against us neither toucheth it the Question When did I ever speake of any Synodicall offices And what are those Offices that here he intends The members of Classes and Synods are no other then the ordinary Officers or Deputies of particular Churches considering together and determining so as they judge best for the edification of their flockes II. If he imagine or conceive that the Praesident which propoundeth matters in Synods or the Scribe that recordeth them be distinct Synodicall Officers he might as well think and we might as well say that the Brownists also had other distinct Ecclesiasticall Offices besides Pastours Teachers or Elders namely Praesidents and Scribes because heretofore in the dayes of Mr Iohnson and Mr Ainsworth they with their Elders did by course propoūd matters in their Church had also a Scribe to write downe their speciall businesses now in Mr Cannes time when they have no Eldership if he alone propound matters and keep record of them in writing it may then be sayd that he hath two or three Ecclesiasticall offices as well as so many Mechanicall trades III. If propounding of matters as the Praesident and writing them as the Scribe doe constitute new offices then many other members of the Brownists Church may be reputed for Ecclesiasticall Officers for Praesidents and Scribes For Mr Canne being now their onely Governour if it fall out that any among them shall make complaint against his doctrine or practise then those members of the Church that shall propound the same to the Church and moderate the action or keep record thereof in writing in behalf of the Church he being unfit to doe it himself in his owne cause must then be accounted new Officers Praesidents Scribes of the Church IV. That which he sayth of Classes and Synods that without them the Church of God is fully brought to complete perfection and unity comparing them to Lordly Prelates Chancellours c. it is utterly false He onely affirmes it and no word of Scripture is
observe 1. How little Mr Canne understands what the Authors be whom he alledgeth not knowing whether they were Papists or Protestants placing Saravia in the number of Papists so well is he acquainted with the Authors he alledgeth at second hand such injury he doth to his witnesses So afterward (i) P. 93 98. againe in this same book he wrongeth Saravia by setting him among the Popish Writers and making him of their profession and religion by accusing me to make the same objection and to use the same reason that Papists doe and then giving instance in Saravia for one of them What a blindenes and inconsideratenes is this in Mr Canne 11. He perverts the meaning both of Saravia and Schola Parisiensis for what though they grant that all Ecclesiasticall authority belongeth to the Church primarily c. doth it follow hence that the power of Classicall and Provinciall Synods is an undâ—â— power as W.B. and Mr C. accuse them doth it not rather follow that there is a due power secondarily and by delegation in Synods where the Deputies of the Churches meet together in their name Mr Parker (k) Pol. Eccl l. 3. p. 29.30 42. from whom he hath both these testimonies doth not so alledge them against the authority of Synods He might have seen these words in the same place cited by Mr Parker out of Saravia whereby authority is asscribed not onely unto the Church but also unto Synods when he is (l) Ibid. p. 42. brought in saying Bishops Arch-bishops have no authority but what is conferred and bestowed upon them by the Church and Synods III. He perverts the meaning of Schola Parisiensis which speakes not of particular Congregations but of the Universall Church and specially as it is represented in a Generall Councell This is plaine and evident throughout that whole writing IV. He doth deale deceitfully in his translation of that testimony of Schol. Paris for the Doctours of Sorbon doe there say that all Ecclesiasticall authority doth belong to the Church primarily properly essentially but unto the Romane Pope and other Bishops instrumentally ministerially and for execution onely c. instead of the Romane Pope and other Bishops he puts in the word Officers onely to blinde the eyes of the Readers who if those words had not bene left out might easily have seene that they spake of such transcendent and usurped authority as is exercised by the Pope and his Bishops c. Hence it may appeare what is to be judged of that which he inferres from this testimony to make it serve his purpose in oppugning of Synods As for Alphonsus de Castro and Franciscus Victoria 1. It is an errour to approve their testimony there (m) Ch. pl. p. 78.79 alledged viz. that all Bishops doe receive jurisdiction and power immediately from God for then should they all have an extraordinary calling such as the Apostles had Gal. 1.1 15 16. whereas all ordinary Ministers have their jurisdiction not immediately from God but mediately by men and from the Church How erroneously doe W.B. and Mr C. put light for darknes and darknes for light when they avouch that thus God ordered these mens tongues to give witnesse unto his trueth 11. All the shew of help which they pretend to have from this testimony is grounded upon that groundlesse consequence whereby they inferre that Classes Synods have no authority over particular Congregations because all Churches Elderships and Officers are equall This their assertion remaines yet to be proved which we doe expressely deny as I have (n) P. 159. shewed in my answer unto his first Reason The testimonies of the three next Popish Authors viz. Cusanus de concord Cathol l. 1. c. 11 c. Sanders de visib Mon. l. 1. c. 6. Scultingius Hierarch Anarch l. 4. pag. 103. are all of them before alledged by (o) Pol. Eccl l. 3. c. 1. p. 2. c. 3. p. 11. Mr Parker from whence it seemes Mr Canne hath taken them but without judgement not applying them aright for 1. When they affirme that Christs promise of giving the keyes unto Peter must be referred unto the whole Church as also that Peter in person presented the body of the Church though these speeches shew the power of binding and loosing to be in the Church yet can it not hence be inferred that a particular Congregation ought not to be subject unto the censure of Classes and Synods or to stand under the authority of any Ecclesiasticall judicatory out of itself when that Congregation is complained of for errour or wrong doing It is a perverting of these speeches and a false consequence which is drawne from hence that because a Congregation hath power to judge the members thereof therefore no other have power to judge of it 11. When Mr Canne inferreth hence that the power of electing Ministers is not in Classes or Synods he beates the ayre erres from the Question When did I ever affirme any such matter or when did the Classis ever offer to obtrude a Minister upon us III. These testimonies touching the Keyes given unto the Church shew what power is in the Church originally and primarily but yet they doe not import that the execution and exercise of this power is in the whole Church Preaching and administration of the Sacraments are a part of that Ecclesiasticall authority comprehended in the power of the Keyes and yet the exercise thereof is not permitted to the whole Church by the confession of the Brownists themselves For his next witnesse having alledged the words of Ferus upon Act. 11. that the Church may not onely exact an account of her Ministers but also depose them and reject them altogether if they be not fit c. he insulteth hereupon and gloryeth saying What can be more for us then this I answer This might have bene more for you if he had sayd that when a Congregation hath deposed their Minister there is no other Ecclesiasticall judicatory that may judge whether they have done well or ill This had bene to the purpose then had he absolutely granted you the thing which the Brownists stand for but this he doth not When Mr Canne was deposed from his ministery by them of the Separation and when they rejected him altogether and left both his ministery and the fellowship of all that took part with him was it not his their misery that there was none to judge betwixt theÌ„ When he alledgeth the names of Gratian Gregorie P. Aeneas Sylvius Pope Anacletus Sixtus Senensis Thomas of Aquine Alexander of Ales Iohn Scot c. some of them affirming that the greatest authority is in the Church that the keyes were given to all the Apostles others that all Bishops are equall in power and the like these and the like speeches being alledged to prove the undue power of Classes and Synods they are all perverted neither can the question in controversy be ever concluded from hence against us
He calles those decrees of the Councell of Basile (k) P. 1218. Catholick or universall trueths whereby it was enacted 1. That the power of a Generall Councell representing the whole Church is above the Pope and everie other person 2. That the Pope cannot dissolve a Generall Councell without their consent c. 3. That he that doth obstinately oppose the foresaid trueths is to be accounted an Heretick He relates coÌ„mends the speeches of (l) P. 1010. c. Marsilius Patavinus (m) P. 1232 c. Petrus de Alliaco and divers others shewing the power of Councels in judging and censuring the Pope the necessity of them both Provinciall and Generall for the correcting of abuses and amending of all sorts of persons and things with greater authority He approves and defends (n) P. 1341. the renowned Italian Martyr Hieronimus Savanorola for seeking that a Generall Councell might be called for reformation of the Clergie and degenerate estate of the Church c. Besides this he being in his time a principall favourer maintainer of the Discipline in the French Churches where the causes of particular Congregations were judged and determined by Synods could therefore be no favourer of the Brownists opinion which count such government to be a miserable bondage and slavery of the Churches Tilenus that is also called to be one of their Jurie against me doth most expressely give his verdict on my side against the Brownists He teacheth (o) Syntag. Disp Theol. par 2. Disp â—0 thes 1. that the fourefold power of the Church is to be exercised not onely in Presbyteries but also in Councels or Synods that (p) Thes 4. Synods according to the power granted of God unto his Church may take knowledge of Ecclesiasticall causes and by their judgements conferred together according to the word of God may define c. (q) Th. 19. give ministeriall sentence c. And further he saith (r) Th. 38. As it is not to be hoped for that the body of the Church militant on earth shall be free from divers diseases so we may not think that it can want this remedy of Synods which we therefore affirme to be not onely lawfull but also necessary Bastingius shewing how Excommunication pertaineth to the whole Church saith nothing but that which is practised both in our and other Reformed Churches of these countries especially if it be marked how he explaines himself in the leafe following where he addes that (f) Expos Catech. Qu. 85. Ecclesiasticall discipline and excommunication itself ought to be administred by them who are ordained thereunto of the Church such as are Ministers of the Word and Elders the rest of the Church consenting thereunto yet with this correction that the multitude of the people doe not rule the action but provide as watchmen that nothing be done by a few as they list themselves Besides he being a member Minister of these Churches and Regent of a Colledge in Leyden there is no reason from these his words to conclude against the authority of Synods in judging the causes of particular Congregations if they either could not agree among themselves or should agree in evill For then he should have condemned his owne estate and practise which yet cannot be inferred from this his testimony Vrfinus also though he teach that the unrepentant are to be excommunicated by the common consent of the Church c. yet doth he not thereby deny or exclude the power of Synods in judging of that which is done in particular Congregations but doth plainly give testimony with me For (t) Tom. 2. Admo Chr. de lib. Concord c. 12. col 686. having shewed the conditions and necessity of Synods he saith of them This remedie for the healing of the wounds of the Church is not to be neglected which the holy Ghost hath shewed unto us by the counsell and example of the Apostles which all reason of divine and humane right requires which being lawfully used experience hath proved to be most wholesome for the Church in many most grievous confusions of opinions Neither was this his private opinion but (v) Ibid. Tit. Col. 478. written in the name of other Divines Ministers in the jurisdiction of Prince Casimir and approved by them Piscator saith Excommunication is a decree of the Church therefore ought to be done of the Church (x) In 1. Cor. 5. Obs 1. Art 3. or of the Eldership judging in the name of the Church We grant as much or more in the practise of our Church while the Eldership never exerciseth such power alone without the knowledge and consent of the Church by propounding the same divers times unto them But it is a perverting of this testimony to gather from hence that the actions of the Church or Eldership are not subject to the judgement of Synods if they be complained of for wrong And that Piscator alloweth the authority of Synods (y) In Act. 15. Obser in V. 6. to judge the controversies of Religion and to (z) Thes Theol. Vol. 1. Loc. 23. de Eccl. th 68. 72. make decrees by gathering of voyces in order it is evident from other of his writings Calvine requiring the (a) Instit l. 4. c. 1. sec 15. cognition of the whole Church before any be excommunicate requires no more then is held and practised by us And this is no empeachment to his and our opinion with him that in case of doubt or controversy (b) Ibid. c. 9. sec 13. there is no better nor more certaine remedie then that a Synod of true Bishops meet together where the controversy may be discussed For such a definition shall have much more weight where the Pastours of Churches in common doe agree together c. And this he there confirmes both by Scripture and sundry examples of ancient Churches shewing that from the beginning it was the ordinary way of preserving unitie in the Church so often as Satan began to attempt any thing Besides this not to speak of other testimonies afforded by Calvine to this purpose when as Mr Canne (c) Ch. pl. p. 94. afterward notes the assertions of divers pleading for the Hierarchie of Bishops and oppugning Ecclesiasticall government by Classes and Synods as a weed of later growth saying that at Geneva subjecting of Churches first began And before Calvine came there everie Congregation was free in itself If these assertions be true and that none is able to disprove them as Mr Canne there supposeth how comes it that he thus perverteth Mr Calvines testimony against his profession and practise Let the Reader observe that if these assetions were sound Mr Canne might as well have written a booke to prove the miserable bondage and slavery of the Church at Geneva procured by the tyrannicall government and corrupt doctrine of Mr Calvine as he wrote the like title of an unjust complaint upon the like ground against me Paraeus
of that order which for election of Church-officers is practised at Geneva saying (q) Ibid. p. 105. that it is religiously and prudently observed Mr Canne might there have seen himself condemned under the name of Morellius even by this Replyer also as well as by Beza seeing it is as true of him as of the other that which is there sayd that he hath presumed by word and writing to reprehend that order c. our course being in substance the same and opposed by Mr C. in like manner as theirs was by Morellius Againe in the (r) P. 106. next page the sayd Authour doth expressely reject and detest that popular government practised among the Brownists and pleaded for by Mr Canne when having sayd that the peoples consent is not to be neglected in causes of greatest moment according to that which we teach and practise he addes withall Notwithstanding a meere Democracie wherein all matters are handled of all aequato jure by an equall right we doe no lesse detest then that usurped Monarchie of Lordly Prelates which other reformed Churches have abolished And afterwards (Å¿) P. 113. when he allowes a preheminence for orders sake unto some one to be the mouth of the rest in executing that which was by the whole Presbytery decreed and then explaines that one to be the President of the Presbyters that is to say in each Congregation the Pastor and in a Synod or assembly of the Pastors and Presbyters of many Churches that one which with the consent and choyse of his brethren moderates the action there is no reason why we should not hence conclude his approbation of Synods such as are and have bene celebrated in well ordered Churches even such as doe not onely advise but also decree what is meet as he had sayd of the Presbyterie in generall As for the other places alledged out of this Authour I referre the Reader unto that which I have sayd (r) P. 116.117 before touching the same in my answer to Mr Davenport Mr Parker next alledged speakes downe right in this thing saith Mr Canne The words cited out of Mr Parker are these All Ecclesiasticall power is alwayes in the whole Congregation from hence it flowes as from the fountaine and to the same it returneth as to the Sea For answer hereunto 1. This Testimony here alledged by Mr C. is not onely cited amisse viz. Pol. Eccl. l. 3. c. 6. instead of c. 8. p. 28. and some words also unjustly added by him unto the testimony to make it seeme more full for his purpose but being taken as he sets it downe it doth not infringe the authority of Classes and Synods For though all Ecclesiasticall authority be sayd to flow from the Church as from a fountaine this hinders not but rather shewes how power may be and is derived unto Classes when particular Churches as fountaines doe by deputation and delegation send forth a streame of authority and power in Classicall and Synodall Assemblies in such manner as Mr Parker himself doth afterward (v) Pol. Eccl l. 3 c. 13. c. 23 24 25 c. often shew unto his Reader II. For the downe-right speech of Mr Parker wherein Mr Canne glorieth I desire the Readers that understand to review those passages which I have (x) P. 89-105 before noted at large out of Mr Parkers booke them that are able to looke upon those places in the booke itself and then to judge whether Mr Canne be not either very blinde in alledging the testimonies of learned men when he knowes not what they say or els very impudent and dishonest in corrupting and perverting their testimonies contrary to their meaning As for Mr Baines he is confusedly alledged viz. Dioces Tryall Conclus 4. for whereas in that booke there is often mention of Conclus 4. who can tell what place he meanes The trueth is that none of those fourth Conclusions in any part of his booke doe by any word empeach the authority of Classes or Synods But on the contrary in that his writing he gives plaine and evident testimonies of his agreement with us as I have (y) P. 111-116 already sufficiently declared Come we now to the testimony (z) Chu pl. p. 23. alledged in the name of D. Fulke whom Mr Canne praiseth to be a man famous and of rare learning They object unto me that he saith (a) Learned Discours of Eccl. Gov. p. 84. There ought to be in every Church an Eldership which ought to have the hearing examination and determining of all matters pertayning to the Discipline Government of that Congregation Hereunto I answer that such authority is to be exercised by the Eldership yet so as that the judgement and consent of the Congregation in weightier matters be not excluded and so also that the judgement of the Classis or Synod be not refused or denyed This Author will have the Eldership to determine all matters if they be able to doe it so he expounds himself shewing afterward that there be divers matters which the Eldership is not able by themselves to finish without help of a Synod And because Mr Canne in the margine of his booke sets his marke over against this place desiring us to Note this so I desire both him and others to note wel what this Author writes concerning the authoriy necessity and use of Synods I am glad to heare Mr C. to give so great commendation unto this indeed Learned Author who is so pregnant a witnesse for me and for Synods against the Brownists This is that which he (b) Ibid. p. 82.83 saith Seeing our Saviour Christ promised his presence and authoritie to every Church indifferently Matt. 18.19.20 None may challenge any such prerogative afore other but as the Churches are limited out for order and conveniencie so is every one of them of like authority in itself but because they make all but one Church and one body of Christ therefore there is but one authority in them to determine of matters concerning them all By which there appeareth to be a double authority of the Pastor one with the severall Congregation in which he is Pastour the other with the whole Synod or assembly whereof he is a member and both these authorities we finde sufficiently authorised in the Scripture c. Againe (c) Ibid. p. 111. 112. There is a double authority of the Pastour the one joyned with the Elders of the Church whereof he is Pastour the other with the Synod or holy assembly whereof he is a member There ariseth oftentimes in the Church divers Controversies which cannot otherwise be expressed pertayning to the state of the whole Church then by a generall assemblie of all the Pastours of that Church which is called a Synod or Generall Councell Also there be divers cases wherein the severall Churches are driven to pray the ayde of the Synod where matters cannot be determined among themselves For this cause the Holy Ghost
that no man be excommunicated without the consent of a Classicall assembly (z) Art 63. that the deposition of Ministers be done by the judgement of a Classicall assembly and consent of the Magistrate These and the like Articles there concluded doe shew how farre the Nassovian Churches were from that opinion of the Brownists and some other in denying the subjection of particular Congregations unto any Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves Where could Mr C. finde more pregnant testimony against himself then in such resolutions of Reformed Churches as these be With the former Reformed Churches alledged by Mr Canne doe agree all the other so farre as I can learne by any enquiry For the Church of England B. Jewell testifveth (a) Def. of Apol. of Ch. of Engl. par 6. c. 17. div 1. 2. that we have had ere now in England Provinciall Synods and have governed our Churches by home made lawes and he maintaineth that without wayting for a Generall Councell it was rather thought good to doe that which both rightly might be done and hath many a time bene done as well of other good men as also of many Catholick Bishops that is to remedie our Churches by a Provinciall Synod And besides other examples there is a (b) Syntag. Confes p. 125 136 speciall monument recording the Acts and Articles agreed upon in the Synod holden at London Anno D. 1562. and againe of another Synod Anno 1571. confirming the Articles of the former Synod ratifyed by the approbation of Qu. Elizabeth to be observed through the whole Kingdome c Now howsoever there be great difference in divers Churches touching the manner of celebrating these Synods yet herein which is the poynt of our present controversy they doe all agree viz. that there is a superiour Ecclesiasticall authority of Synods to judge and determine the affaires of particular Congregations The testimony of the Church of Scotland for the authority of Presbyteries and Synods in judging the causes of particular Congregations is most cleare In the admission of Ministers to their offices there was (c) First book of Discipline p. 29. ed. 1621 required not onely the consent of the people and Church whereunto they should be appoynted but also approbation of the learned Ministers appointed for their examination Touching all sorts of Synods among them it was concluded that (d) Sec. b. of Discip ch 7. p. 80. they have power to execute Ecclesiasticall discipline and punishment upon all transgressours and proud contemners of the good order and policie of the Kirke and so the whole Discipline is in their hands Touching Provinciall Synods which they call the lawfull conventions of the Pastors Doctors and other Elders of a Province gathered for the common affaires of the Kirkes thereof c. they (e) Ib. p. 81. say Thir assemblies are institute for weightie matters to be intreated by mutuall consent and assistance of the brethren within that Province as need requires This Assembly hath power to handle order and redresse all things committed or done amisse in the particular assemblies It hath power to depose the office-bearers of that Province for good and just causes deserving deprivation And generally thir Assemblies have the whole power of the particular Elderships whereof they are collected Besides these Canons and rules of their Discipline there be also divers Actes of their Generall Assemblies prefixed before the foresayd First and Second bookes of their Discipline which by many instances doe shew how that power of Synods was exercised and put in practise in the Church of Scotland For example we read (f) P. 14. Edinb Iul. 5. 1570. that there was an Excommunication directed against Patrik called B of Murray to be executed by M. Robert Pont Commissioner their with the assistance of the Ministers of Edinburgh We finde there in another Assembly (g) P. 15. Edinb Aug. 6. 1573. that Alexander Gordoun B. of Galloway being accused of divers offences it was concluded that he should make publick repentance in Sackcloth three severall Sundaies first in the Kirk of Edinburgh secondly in Halyrudhous thirdly in the Queenes Colledge under the paine of Excommunication We finde in another Assembly (h) P. 16. Edinb Mar. 6. 1573. that the B. of Dunkell was ordained to confesse his fault publickly in the Kirk of Dunkell for not exequuting the sentence of the Kirk against the Earle of Athol For the confirmation of this Synodall authority there is added in the same place an Act of Parliament (i) P. 19. 20 c. The 12 Parl. at Edinb Iun. 5. 1592. prefixed also before the sayd bookes of their Discipline having this Title Ratification of the liberty of the true Kirk of generall and Synodall Assemblies of Presbyteries of Discipline c. The Confession of fayth made by the Church of Scotland both for the Doctrine and for the Discipline thereof is yet further confirmed unto us both by generall Subscription and by a most Solemne Oath The formall words of that Subscription and Oath are thus recorded unto us (k) Syntag. Confes p. 158 160. We beleeve with our hearts confesse with our mouth subscribe with our hands c. promising and swearing by that great name of the Lord our God that we will continue in the Doctrine Discipline of this Church and that we will defend the same according to our calling and power all the dayes of our life under paine of all the curses contained in the law danger of body and soule in the day of that dreadfull judgement of God Hereunto is annexed in the same place the Mandate of the Kings Majestie whereby he enjoyneth all Commissioners and Ministers of the Word throughout his kingdome that they require this confession of all their Parishioners c. And so farre as I can learne even unto this day there is still observed this substantiall and maine poynt of Discipline namely a power in Synodall assemblies to judge the controversies that doe arise in particular Congregations Here Mr Canne instead of a Iurie of 24 men to condemne my position for an errour and untrueth as he (l) Ch. pl. p. 83. speakes may see a Iurie of more then thrice 24 Congregations in Scotland maintayning my position and condemning his errour by their example The Reformed Churches in Savoy as that of Geneva (m) Kerckel Ordon der gemeēte van Geneven p. 9 10 c. and the Churches in the villages thereabout standing under the jurisdiction of the Magistrates in Geneva were combined together for their mutuall guidance and the Ministers of those Churches meeting weekly together were subject to the censure of such Ecclesiasticall assemblies and the affaires of those Churches judged therein The knowledge of this is so common a thing that in appearance hereupon grew the reproach reported by Mr Canne himself that (n) Ch. pl. p. 94. at Geneva subjecting of Churches to this order first began The Evangelicall Churches in the greater
Elders which represented the person of the Church Christ fitly sayth that those which had offended should then at length be brought publickly to the Church if either proudly they contemned or scurrilously rejected private admonitions We know that from the time that the Jewes returned out of the captivity of Babylon the censure of manners and of doctrine was committed to that chosen Councell which they called Sanhedrin and in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This government was lawfull approved of God and this was the bridle to keep in order the froward untractable Thus hath he fully expressed himself that this commandement of Christ Mat. 18. is no new rule but taken from the Ecclesiasticall Policie of the Jewes Beza in like manner confirmeth this interpretation saying (h) Annot maj in N. Test in Mat. 18.17 This power jurisdiction was in those which are therefore called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers of the Synagogue Mark 5.22 an example of this custome is found Ioh. 9.22 12.42 c. And speaking of this word Church mentioned Mat. 18. he sayth It is to be observed that they doe foulely erre which would prove from this place that all things are to be referred unto the assembly of the whole multitude They say the name of Church is never otherwise taken which from this very place is convinced to be false for certainly it appeares that these things are spoken as of the Jewes at least from this which he addeth Let him be unto thee as an Heathen and Publicane But all writers of these things doe testify that the judgements of these matters among the Jewes were in the Elders and that the whole multitude of the people was not alwayes wont to be assembled And certainly unlesse Christ had applyed his whole speech unto the custome of his times who could have understood what he spoke Afterwards againe in the same place he addeth this Sed doceo Aristocratiam Christianam non esse novum aliquod institutum c. I teach that the Christian government of the Church by an Eldership is no new institution c. no new rule D. Whitaker to prove the authority of Synods brings warrant evidence not onely from the new Testament but also (i) Cont. 3. de Conc. qu. 1. de necess Concil c. 3. p. 15. from the Church of Israel and from the Ecclesiasticall Policie of the Jewes before Christ in the times of David Ezekias Iosias other godly Princes by which it appeares that he held this part of Church-government not to be a new ordinance but a practise common both to Jewish to Christian Churches And besides from this very place Mat. 18. he drawes a double warrant for Synods first from the commandement given to Peter as well as to others to tell the Church vers 17. from thence he argueth against the Papists that the Pope may be judged of a Councell (k) Ibid. de Concil qu. 5. c. 3. p. 169. 170. If saith he every particular Church hath greater authority in judgement then Peter or any particular man then much more the universall Church which is represented in a generall Councell or Synod Herein he is directly opposite to our opposers who grant a power of jurisdiction to a particular Church but none to any Synod whatsoever further then to counsell and direct Againe he (l) Ibid. qu. 1. c. 3. argueth from the promise of Christ Mat. 18. Where two or three are met together in my name there am I in the midst of them applyes that sentence to the maintenance allowance of Synods particular or generall Iunius in like manner as he is plentifull in giving allowance unto the authority of Synods so he derives this authority from this place Mat. 18. both from the (m) Animadv in Bellarm de Concil l. 2. c. 19. art 8. commandement of telling the Church vers 17. and from the (n) Ibid. in lib. 1. c. 3. promise made unto Ecclesiasticall assemblies to be in the midst of them vers 20. while he allowes that promise alledged by others to be a just ground thereof though he adde other warrant also And further speaking of the Councell or Ecclesiasticall Senate he shewes what reference it had unto the Politie or government of the Jewish Synagogues he saith That which (o) Ecclesiast l. 2. c. 3. the Church of the Iewes called the Synagogue that Christ in like manner called the Church in that place Mat. 18. for as the Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall Counsell was a certaine Epitome of the Church so also is the Presbytery Mr Cartwright above many other is very pregnant in giving plaine testimony that this rule of discipline is no new ordinance and this for that part of the rule in speciall which is most controversall He disputing about the interpretatiō of Mat. 18. saith (p) First Reply to D. Whitg p. 176. edit 2. It is commanded of our Saviour Christ that in such a case when a brother doth not profit by these two warnings it should be told the Church Now I would aske who be meant by the Church here if he say by the Church are meant all the people then I will aske how a mā can conveniently complaine to all the whole congregation or how can the whole congregatiō conveniently meet to decide of this matter I doe not deny but the people have an interest in the excommunication as shall be noted hereafter but the matter is not so farre come he must first refuse to obey the admonitiō of the Church or ever they can proceed so farre Well if it be not the people that be meant by the Church who is it Thē shewing that by the Church one person alone cannot be meant he concludes Seeing then that the Church here is neither the whole congregatiō nor the Pastour alone it followeth that by the Church here he meaneth the Pastour with the Ancients or Elders Or else whom can he meane And as for this manner of speech wherein by the Church is understanded the cheef governours Elders of the Church it is oftentimes used in the old Testamēt from the which our Saviour borowed this manner of speaking For instances he alledgeth Exo. 4.29 30. Ios 20.4 6. 1. Chr. 13.2 4. c. After this he is yet more plaine in respect of the censure saying (q) Ibid. p. 183. Now that this charge of excommunicatiō belongeth not unto one or to the Minister but cheefly to the Eldership Pastour it appeareth by that which the authors of the Admonitiō alledge out of S. Matth. c. 18.17 which place I have proved before to be necessarily understanded of the Elders of the Church And further in the same place It may be the clearlyer understanded that the Presbytery or Eldership had the cheef stroke in this excommunication if it be observed that this was the Polity or discipline of the Jewes and of the Synagogue from whence our Saviour Christ took this and translated it unto
this Church that when any man had done any thing that they held for a fault that then the same was punished censured by the Elders of the Church according to the quality of the fault as it may appeare in S. Matthew ch 5.22 c. A little after he addes And if the fault were judged very great then the sentence of Excommunication was awarded by the same Elders as appeareth in S. Iohn cha 9.22 And this was the cause why our Saviour Christ spake so shortly of this matter in the 18. of S. Matthew without noting the circumstances more at large for that he spake of a thing which was well knowne and used amongst the Jewes whom he spake unto To the same purpose he writes in his answer to the Rhemists where speaking of the Governours of the Church which were set over every severall assembly in the time of the Law he saith (r) Confut. of Rhem. transl on Mat. 18.18 Those governing Elders are divers times in the story of the Gospell made mention of under the title of the Rulers of the Synagogue And this manner of government because it was to be translated unto the Church of Christ under the Gospell our Saviour by the order at that present used amongst the Jewes declared what after should be done in his Church Neither doth he speak these things touching the Elderships of particular Congregations onely but applyes the same unto Classicall Synodall Presbyteries also and doth allow of appeales unto them and thereby acknowledgeth a dependency of Churches mutually one upon another It is to be observed here sayth he (ſ) First Reply to D. Whitg p. 187. that both in this part of the Discipline viz. touching excommunication and also in all other parts of it as I have shewed as in harder and difficulter causes things were referred unto the Synods Provinciall Nationall or Generall as the case required so if the Elders of any Church shall determine any thing contrary to the word of God or inconveniently in any matter that falleth into their determination the parties which are greeved may have recourse for remedy unto the Elders and Pastours of divers Churches that is to say unto Synods of Shires or Dioceses or Provinces or Nations of as great or of as small compasse as shall be thought convenient by the Church according to the difficulty or weight of the matters which are in controversy Which meetings ought to be as often as can be conveniently not onely for the decision of such difficulties which the severall Presbyteries cannot so well judge of but also to the end that commō counsell might be takē for the best remedy of the vices or incommodities which either the Churches be in or in danger to be in And as those things which cannot be decided by the Eldership of the Churches are to be reserved unto the knowledge of some Synod of a Shire or Diocese so those which for their hardnes cannot be there decided must be brought into the Synodes of larger compasse as I shave shewed to have bene done in the Apostles times and in the Churches which followed them long after And thus it appeares that according to the order and practise of the Jewes under the Law he allowes and maintaines a liberty of appeales for parties greeved and a superiour judicatory above particular Churches an use of Synods not onely for counsell but for decision of controversies for censuring of offenders even unto excommunication according to divers instances thereof given by him in the precedent pages of which more is to be sayd hereafter Mr Traverse agreeth fully with the former and witnesseth plainly that the Rule of Christ Mat. 18. is no new rule but taken from the Jewish Policie and this both in respect of the persons judging called the Church and in respect of the censure sentence of excommunication there described For the first he sayth speaking of the assembly of Elders (t) Eccles Discipl p. 87. edit 1617. In Mat. 18. our Saviour calleth them by the name of the Church because they rule and governe Church matters under the name and authority of the Church So likewise the name of all the Assembly by Moses is given to the Elders of the Jewes that is to say unto certaine chosen picked out men who were assigned by all the Congregation to the government of the affaires Thus plainly it is taken in Numb 8. where the Lord appointeth the Congregation shall lay hands upon the Levites but I think no man will say this is to be understood of all the congregation that so many thousands should lay their hands upon them as are rehearsed then to have bene in the host of Israel but the Elders and Princes onely as Aben Ezra doth rightly interpret it Which is to be noted the rather because some will have the word of our Saviour to be expounded of all the Church whereas according to the manner of speaking which the Hebrewes use the Consistory or Councell of the Church is called the Church Where also it is to be observed that together with the name the thing it self is translated from the Jewes unto us that looke what a Councell the Jewes used for the government of the Church we ought to understand by this name that such a one is appoynted by our Saviour to be used in the Church Therefore in the same place he attributeth to this Councell the chief government of all Church matters that all such things as cannot otherwise be agreed and ended be at the last brought unto them and ended by their authority judgement As for the second the censures of the Church having spoken before of Suspension and proceeding to speak of Excommunication he saith (v) Ibid. p. 92. This part of Ecclesiasticall censure as also the first were translated unto us from the Jewes for the Church of Christ in all this matter of Discipline hath received all her lawes decrees from the Jewes for as it hath bene shewed before it is plaine manifest that our Saviour in Mat. 18.17 alluded to the manner of the Jewes because that otherwise his speech should have bene very obscure and such as no man had bene able to understand But this appeareth most manifestly by the excommunication of the blind man in the 9. of Iohn c. And further that which he sayth concerning the government of a particular Church he extends also unto the (x) Ibid. p. 98. Synods for the governing of more Churches of which there shall be more occasion to speake againe hereafter Mr Fenner in his Counterpoyson touching the certaine forme of Ecclesiasticall government declares himself to be of the same minde viz. that the Rule of Christ Mat. 18. is no new rule when as he writes (y) Part of a Register p. 479. Our Saviour Christ in setting downe the Ecclesiasticall Presbyterie speaketh according to the Iewes for otherwise the Apostles could not have understood him when he sayd Tell the Congregation or
so that the 120 persons met together at this time Act. 1.15 cānot be sayd to have bene a distinct particular Church of persons dwelling in Ierusalem but an occasionall assembly or Synod upon such ground as the story of the Scripture doth manifest II. In respect of the busines it self here performed viz. the election of an Apostle it was such a work as did not appertaine unto any one particular Church but all Churches had interest therein seeing the care of all the Churches was cōmitted unto the Apostles 2. Cor. 11.28 All Churches were alike bound to beware of false Apostles that could transforme themselves into the Apostles of Christ 2. Cor. 11.13 It had bene a presumption in any one Church and a wrong unto all the rest if without their consent one alone should have chosen an Apostle especially considering there were even at this time a multitude of the faithfull in other places whom this work concerned Many had bene lately converted by the ministery of Iohn Baptist Matt. 11.12 and now immediately before the Ascension of Christ we read of more then 500 brethren at once which were witnesses of the Resurrection of Christ 1. Cor. 15.6 These 120 had done injury unto them save that these generall persons the Apostles called of God for the service of all Churches did for them by divine appointment appeare in this Synod III. In respect of the manner of this election which was made with a threefold limitation 1. Unto one of those men which had companyed with the Apostles all the time that the Lord Iesus went in and out among them beginning from the baptisme of Iohn even untill that same day that he was taken up from them Act. 1.21 22. Now these Disciples that thus waited on Christ such as Barsabas and Matthias were being no inhabitants of Ierusalem what power had a particular Church to determine and dispose of them that were no members of their particular society 2. There was a restraint from absolute electing of any one of these they were onely allowed to present two and to offer them unto the choyse of the Lord. vers 23.24 3. The way and meanes of inquiring the will of God herein was determined and restrained unto a Lot whereby the judgment and definitive sentence of God was declared unto the Synod that rested therein And by these extraordinary directions it pleased God to honour this first Synod of the new Testament It is here also to be observed that although some Writers have spoken of this election as made by a particular Church yet we have sundry learned men consenting with us in the exposition of this story who labouring to shew the profit and necessity of Synods (a) Whitak de Concil qu. 1. c. 3. doe argue from this place Act. 1. and affirme that in the New Testament the Apostles and whole Church did celebrate a Synod for the choosing of Matthias into the place of Iudas The Professours of Leyden to the same purpose (b) Synops pur Theol. Disp 49. alledge this example Act. 1. and call it the first Synod at Ierusalem II. The example of that renowned Synod which is recorded Act. 15. is a sufficiēt warrant wherein the use and authority of Classes and Synods is commended unto us and this not onely for counsell and admonition but also for the judgement of causes and for the exercise of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction As that which went before the Synod namely the great dissention about a dangerous errour with seeking of redresse by a solemne deputation of messengers from the Church of Antioch Act. 15.1 2. did call for help in the most effectuall manner so the things done in the Synod are an evidence of the authority which they used therein both by a definitive sentence which they pronounced concerning that controversy which was brought unto them vers 28 29. and by an authentick ambassage of chosen men sent from that Assembly of Apostles Elders and brethren both to carry the Epistle that was written and by word of mouth to declare the same things vers 22 23 25 27. That also which is noted to have bene done after the Synod in the publication of the acts thereof doth also beare witnesse touching the authority of those acts in that they are called the decrees ordained of the Apostles and Elders c. Act. 16.4 The fruit also which by the blessing of God followed hereupon in being a meanes of great consolation and establishment of the Churches in the faith Act. 15.31 16.5 is to be considered as an argument whereby the H. Ghost doth further commend unto us the authority of such Synods in the right government of the Church Upon this example doe generally all judicious Writers build the authority of Synods as upon a sure foundation groundwork Calvine saith that (c) Cōment in Act. 15.6 here is prescribed of God the forme and order of gathering Synods c. Beza upon this place (d) Annot. maj in Act. 15.12 V. 23. having shewed that here was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or foregoing consultation of the Apostles and Elders which was related unto the whole Church and ratifyed in the common assembly thereof he affirmeth that this was the right forme of a lawfull and true Apostolick Synod c. And both these are to be understood of such Synods as exercised authority of Ecclesiasticall censure according to the practise of those Churches wherein they lived of which more hereafter Bullinger observeth here as is noted by (e) Expos Eccles in Act. 15.6 Marlorate that this custome was in old time diligently kept of the holy Bishops in imitation of the Apostles and complaineth of the neglect thereof D. Rainolds when as the Papist objected unto him that there must be a chief Iudge to end controversies to keep the trueth of faith peace of the Church that it be not pestered with heresies and schismes he answers thereunto (f) Conf. with Hart. c. 6. div 2. p. 206. that The wisedome of God hath committed that chieftie of judgement so to call it not to the soveraigne power of one but to the common care of many For when there was a controversy in the Church of Antioch about the observation of the law of Moses some Iewes teaching contrarie to that which Paul and Barnabas taught they ordained that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them should goe up to Ierusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question Act. 15.2 And so by their common agreement decree the controversy was ended the trueth of faith kept and peace maintained in the Church After which example the (g) Euseb hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 14. 21. 22. lib. 7. c. 26. 28. Cypr. epist 6. 14 31. 53. 72. 75. Concil Ancyr Gangr Antioch Laodic c. Bishops that succeeded them made the like assemblies on the like occasions and by common conference took order for such matters both of doctrine and discipline
as concerned in common the state of their Church So did the Apostles and Apostolike men provide against schismes and heresies Their wisedome reached not unto the policie of one chiefe judge Thus D. Rainolds doth many wayes acknowledge the authority of Synods he calleth that power which they have the chieftie of judgement he avoucheth that they have it by divine right that the wisedome of God hath committed it unto them he pleadeth from the forenamed warrant Act. 15. he extendeth this power unto matters both of Doctrine and Discipline the testimonies which in his margine he alledgeth out of the Ecclesiasticall history to shew that the like assemblies were kept in succeeding times are such as speak of their excommunicating wicked Hereticks viz. Euseb hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 14. c. l. 7. c. 26 28. c. whereby it appeares that he allowed unto Synods not onely counsell or admonition but a power of exercising Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction censure Those Councels mentioned and poynted at by him for instances of this chieftie of judgement were such as did not onely admonish but also determine and judge of causes The Synod of (h) Barthol Carranza Summa Concil p. â—3 c. Ancyra in Galatia made most severe Ecclesiasticall lawes for the excluding of such as did fall in time of persecution The Synod of (i) Magdeb. Cent. 4. c. 3. col 111. c. 6. col 463 Gangris in Paphlagonia exercised Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction in deposing Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia for his errours and the like might be noted for the rest Whatsoever particular errours were in any of these yet the authority and jurisdiction it self is approved of him as proceeding from the wisedome of God declared in this place Act. 15. D. Whitaker in his disputation against Bellarmine touching Councels layes downe this Text Act. 15.6 for a ground of that which he takes occasion to intreat of and (k) De Concil Qu. 1. c. 1. p 1 3 4 c. often repeats that text applying it to each of the questions which he discusseth And whereas our Opposites doe grant a lawfull use of Synods for counsell but not to judge nor to give judiciall sentence for the deciding of causes D. Whitak describing the State of the Question betwixt us and the Papists touching the persons that are to be called to a Synod shewes that (l) Ibid. qu. 3. c. 1. p. 79. the Papists will have onely the Bishops or greater Prelates to be allowed for judges and the Presbyters or inferiour Clergie to be onely inquisitors disputers or consulters to give counsell but not to have suffrages in giving definitive sentences This is the opinion of the (m) Bellar. Tom. 2. Contr. 1. de Concil l. 1. c. 15. Romish Church Now D. Whit. in the refutation of the Papists doth as wel refute the Brownists and other opposites while he proves (n) De Concil qu. 3. c. 3. that all who have a lawfull deputation and calling are to be allowed for judges and not for counsellers onely and that their suffrage is not onely for consultation but for decision as is hereafter shewed more at large Observe onely at this time that the first argument in that dispute is taken from this very place Act. 15. G. Bucerus pleads from this same ground of Scripture and writes (o) Dissert de Gub. Ecc. p. 65. that not onely severall particular Churches had their proper distinct Presbyteries but that the history of the Apostles witnesseth that when greater controversies did arise which could not be ended in lesser Colleges then more Churches under the new Testament did runne unto a Generall Synod Act. 15. And what power they were wont to exercise therein he shewes by a distinction of persons comming to the Synod As D. Whit. refuting the popish distinction of greater and lesser Clergie shewes that there was a right and power of suffrages judgement in the Synod so Bucerus (p) Ibid. p. 107. 108. c. confirming the distinction of Iunius viz. that some persons came to the Synods as Delegates sent from the Churches which therefore did give definitive sentence of matters propounded that others comming without such deputation and commission might give their advise and counsell but without suffrages doth hereby acknowledge a power of jurisdiction in the Synod by those that were peculiarly called to be judges therein Zepperus (q) Polit. Eccl. l. 3. c. 8. de Syn. p. 713. 714. 715. c. alledging Act. 15. for a patterne of Synods declares that after the Apostles the primitive Church in the new Testament being most studious of this consociation or combination in Synods did not onely communicate by letters but meeting together in Nationall or Generall Councels did heare the causes of Hereticks others that appeared before them so convinced condemned and excommunicated them sent their decrees unto all Churches with the names heresies of those that were excommunicate c. Thus did he acknowledge the right of Synods not onely for counsell admonition but also for jurisdiction in censuring Piscator (r) Thes Theolog. vol. 1. Loc. 23. p. 361-364 writing of Councels and Synods and of the seven questions concerning them doth seven times alledge this place Act. 15. for a ground of direction in each of them And for the authority of Synods he plainly expresseth his meaning when speaking of the government of the Church in generall he sayth * Thes 62 63. it consisteth chiefly in Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and againe distinguishing this jurisdiction into two parts he sayth that the one part consisteth in the power of making lawes potissimum spectatur in Conciliis that is it is chiefly seen in Synods Bucanus (f) Loc. CoÌ„ Loc. 43. qu. 21 22 25 27. writes much to the same purpose and asscribeth unto Synods authority of making lawes of deciding controversies and this from the example of that Synod Act. 15. often mentioned by him Mr Fenner (t) S. Theol. l. 7. c. 7. p. 278-281 briefly and methodically describing the nature of Synods the kindes the use authority of them doth derive their authority from this ground Act. 15. which even in that short description is more then tenne times alledged by him Many other such Testimonies might be produced to shew the consent of judicious and learned Divines in this poynt of which somewhat more is to be sayd when I come to give answer touching that multitude of Authors which Mr Canne alledgeth against me Let us now heare what my Opposites say concerning this Example Mr Dav. his Exceptions touching Act. 15. answered I. DAV * Apol reply p. 254. 255. This Text Act. 15. is alledged by Bellarmine to prove the binding force of the decrees of Councills and by the Answerer to shew the authority of the Classis whereunto Iunius giveth 2 answers also 1. Non sequitur ex particulari si custodienda fuerint decreta Concilii Apostolici ergo omnium servari oportere It
Ibid. p. 242 with p. 282. sets this downe for a common law unto them all that they be subject in all those things aforesayd and further the same according to their power with their gifts labour and whatsoever way they are able Hebr. 13.17 This peculiar bond of speciall obedience and submission unto such Officers even in Synods as well as in other ordinances is an argument that he thought them to have speciall authority more then of admonition counsell The judgement of Mr Fenner this worthy Writer being thus cleared and vindicated from those unfaithfull omissions mistranslations and miscollections of Mr D. his demand is hereby answered and hereby he may see why I referred him to this book As for those matters of fact which he addes the untrueth thereof is elswhere to be declared We will now proceed to Mr Dav. his third allegation SECT III. His Allegation of Mr Parker examined IO. DAV (o) Apol. reply p. 240 241. For Mr Parker He largely and strongly proveth this position (p) De Polit. Eccl. l. 3. c. 1 Potestas Ecclesiastica essentialiter primariò in ipsâ Ecclesiâ tanquam in subjecto proprio residet The power Ecclesiasticall doth essentially and primarily reside in the Church itself as in its proper subject The sense wherein he thus spake to prevent all suspicion of his pleading for popular confusion he declareth out of Zanchy who saith toti Ecclesiae dedisse Christum claves Zanch. in praecept 4. qu. 3. sed ita ut in Ecclesiâ certi essent qui clavibus utantur ad salutem Ecclesiae honoremque Dei That Christ gave the keyes to the wholl Church but so that there should be certaine men that should use the keyes to the good of the Church and glory of God For the proof of the former that the right of power is in every particular Church he useth five Arguments in the 6. 7. chapters and then in the 8. chapter he commeth to speak of the exercise and ordinary execution of this power which is he sayth in the Church-officers or rulers yet with this moderation that this dispensation of the Churches power in the Officers be according to a well tempered forme partly Aristocraticall partly Democraticall the Church committing those things to the Presbytery which it cannot commodiously performe by it selfe and retaining that exercise of power which belongs to the dignity authority and liberty which it hath received from Christ Thus he wholy destroyeth that Democraty or popular Anarchy which Beza justly condemneth in Morellius and is by some unjustly imputed to those that plead for a due reformation of Churches according to the rules of the word and the primitive patternes Of the first sort of things which the Church committeth to the Rulers because it cannot commodiously performe them by it selfe he speaketh in cap. 9.10.11 ANSVV. Mr Dav. professed and promised touching Mr Parker and these other Writers that he would shew them to be strongly against me but though he make a long discourse of his writing and doe alledge in grosse eleven chapters at once out of Mr Parker yet doe I not finde that he applyes any thing to the question against me for I. Suppose it be granted which yet some godly and learned men deny that all power Ecclesiasticall is essentially and primarily in the Church as the proper subject thereof and from thence derived and communicated to other either particular persons or assemblies of Classes and Synods what is this to our question doth it follow from hence that Synods have no power to judge Ecclesiasticall causes or that they are onely for counsell or admonition This is the poynt of our question but this neither Mr Parker affirmes neither doth Mr D. offer to conclude it by any just consequence from his words and so all that he alledgeth is not to the purpose II. This very derivation of power from particular Churches unto Classes and Synods is an argument of the power of judgement that is in them for what great need was there of a derivative power to consult or to admonish onely Mr D. confesseth that (q) Apol. reply p. 47. every Christian hath power of admonition in another for his good And shall Synods have no more power then particular and private persons III. Whereas Mr Parker distinguisheth betwixt the power of the Church and the exercise of that power and acknowledgeth that the execution of this power in the administration of the Word and Sacraments is not in the whole Church but in some speciall persons appoynted thereunto it followeth hence that in some things the Ministers and Governours of a Church have a power which the Church cannot exercise without them and therefore in some respect a greater authority then the whole Church beside them This is confessed in the practise of the Brownists themselves who keep their children sometimes unbaptised for many yeares together while they want Ministers that have authority to baptise IV. The Authors alledged by Mr Parker to shew that Ecclesiasticall power is originally in the Church did never draw any such consequence from thence that therefore there is no power of jurisdiction in Synods but made the contrary conclusion that therefore there was a power of jurisdiction in them And this conclusion was made not onely by the Councell of Constance and Basill Ioh. Gerson Schola Parisiensis but by D. Whitaker also whom Mr Dav. (r) Ibid. p. 237. 238. alledgeth as if he made for him who yet reasons strongly against him saying (ſ) De Cōc qu. 5. p. 170. If a particular Church have greater authority in judgements then Peter or any particular man then much more the universall Church which is represented in a generall Councell or Synod V. For Mr Parker himself though he be very large touching the originall power of particular Churches and the derivation thereof unto Ministers Synods yet he never concludeth from hence a want of jurisdiction in Synods but declares the contrary in many (t) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 20. 23 24. c. places as is to be shewed hereafter In the meane time let us consider how Mr Dav. proceeds in alledging Mr Parker I. DAV Of the second sort of things which the Church retaineth in it self because it can commodiously exercise them by it selfe he speaketh in cap. 12. Wherein by 22 Arguments he proveth the Churches superiority over her Pastors and rulers in 3 respects 1. of the end the power which they have being given them for her aedification 2. in respect of the application of it to the persons 3. in respect of regulating the use of it if it be abused ANSVV. I. If those 22 Arguments of Mr Park be good and effectuall to prove the Churches superiority over her Rulers then have we so many sound Arguments to prove the authority of Classes and Synods This is evident because Mr P. applyes those 22 Arguments to prove the jurisdiction of Synods as well as of particular Churches
controversies that arise in the same and according to Mr Parker doe exercise a lawfull jurisdiction herein From this Communication of Churches he commeth to speak (k) Ibid. c. 23. p. 345. 340. of their Combination from whence ariseth a combined Church derived from other Churches This combination he notes to consist either of two or more Churches An instance of this combination of two he gives in the Synod at Ierusalem Act. 15. and sayth It was a Councell and Synod and that properly and that of two Churches to wit of Antioch and Ierusalem for the Messengers sent from Antioch were present which represented the Church of Antioch as is usuall in Councels And notwithstanding an objection made against the Church of Antioch yet he sayth that Church was also judge in that Councell because their Messengers brought the judgement of the same with them Hereupon he reproveth two Spirits of errour the one of Grotius who 〈◊〉 sayd to reject the use of Synods altogether for who would write this saith Mr Parâ—… 〈◊〉 be that is bewitched with errour seeing the Church of God hath alwayes held that Sâ—… are here instituted of God to endure for ever c. The second spirit of errour wiâ—â—â—he reproves is that of the Hierarchy (l) P. 347. because they condemne the Reformed Synods as if they were degenerate quae tamen ad hunc typum accuratissime efformantur which are notwithstanding most exactly framed according to this patterne Hence it appeareth that Mr Parker held the Synods of divine institution to be not onely for counsell and admonition but for jurisdiction also for otherwise he could not have sayd with truth that the Reformed Synods all which exercise jurisdiction doe answer exactly thereunto otherwise he might rather have sayd that the Synods of the Reformed Churches swarving from the primitive patterne were indeed adulterare and degenerate usurping authority and jurisdiction which did not belong unto them The combination of more Churches Mr Par. describes in divers kindes or degrees also (m) IbideÌ„ and first that which is of many Churches into one Eldership The reason of this is because some little Churches knowing their owne weaknes doe joyne themselves unto the neighbour Churches and so make but one Eldership onely among themselves He gives an instance of this in those small Churches about Geneva which not being sufficient for themselves doe joyne themselves unto the Church in the next City so that they come together weekly into the neighbour-Consistory of the City This combination of lesser Churches into one Eldership or Consistory Mr Parker approves and justifyes and declares his judgement touching this kinde of consociation 1. He sayth It is grounded upon the communion of Churches and derived from the wisedome of the Spirit and complaines of the Hierarchy that doe so virulently impugne the same 2. (n) P. 348. Whereas nothing is more objected against the Reformation in England then that many Churches or Parishes are unable for it wanting fit men to governe and to exercise discipline in Elderships Mr Parker answereth hereunto If it be so let them joyne themselves unto the next Eldership or erect a common Eldership among themselves and so from common counsell and help let them seek remedy for their weaknes Now it is recorded (o) Calvin Epist 167. that in the Discipline at Geneva the right of Excommunication is in the power of this Consistory or common Eldership and hereby then it appeares that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited unto a particular Church onely and that Mr Parker allowing of this government at Geneva is not against the jurisdiction of many Churches over one Againe whereas D. Bancroft and D. Field object that the Churches at Geneva and the villages of the Netherlands have not the power of Excommunication and whereas my opposites complaine that Churches are brought into bondage and loose their liberty when they may not excommunicate without the consent of others Mr Parkers answer is (p) P. 349. that the power of Excommunication ordination and other jurisdiction remaines pure in them saving that communion which ought to be among Churches every Church in greater matters useth the consent and counsell of her neighbours as of the Classis or Eldership in the City quod ego Ecclesiis vel perfectissimis non indigâ—um reor which I judge saith he not to be unmeet even for the most perfect Churches Thus he requires not onely counsell but consent of other Churches in weightier matters which is that we stand for This doth not as he saith (q) P. 390. import any Hierarchicall subjection in the parishes at Geneva unlesse happily any can be subjected unto himself for these parishes each for their part and that equally are this very Eldership What subjection is it where all as well City-churches as the Country-churches are equall for the country-churches are no more subject unto this Eldership then are the city-churches The next combination of many Churches which Mr Parker speaks of (r) Ibid. c. 24. p. 353. c. is when they are united into one Classis And of these he giveth instance in the Churches of the Netherlands and in Scotland where the 52 Presbyteries so called by them were nothing els but so many Classes For the warrant of these he bringeth both divers grounds of holy Scripture and the example of antiquity He there answereth 10 Objections made by the Hierarchy against these Classes And it is to be observed that he doth not simply speak of Classes in generall but of these Classes of the Reformed Churches in these Countries of our Classes as he useth to call them not onely for that he approved them but because together with us he was a member of this communion and lived under the jurisdiction of the Classis with us If he had not allowed their jurisdiction which he knew and saw to be exercised by them how could he with good conscience have praised them as he doth Speaking of the ancient Discipline used in the Primitive Churches he saith (f) P. 357. Omnia his in politeia nostra in Classibus nostris similia O quantum peccat Hierarchia quae hanc suavissimam Ecclesiarum combinationem eliminavit that is All things in our government and in our Classes are like unto these O how much doth the Hierarchy offend which hath banished this most sweet combination of Churches And as well might we cry out O how much doe the authours of the single uncompounded policie offend who likewise seek to banish and overthrow this combination of Churches in Classes while they allow them onely for counsell and regard not their consent but allow the Churches in combination to proceed in the weightiest affaires without or against the consent of Classes Whereas it is objected not onely by my opposites but by some of the Hierarchy themselves that these Classes doe take unto themselves that jurisdiction which they seeme to condemne in the Hierarchy Mr Parker in his answer
prevaile to take away the offence either immediately or mediately for a meanes is so farre good as it makes to the obtaining of his end As though God did not blesse his owne ordinance above our hope and reason above all that we can thinke or as though we were not to use his meanes and leave the successe unto him He that begins a good work and proceeds so farre till he be stopped by others is accepted of God as if he had finished it SECT V. His Allegation of Mr Baynes examined IO. DAV (r) Apol. reply p. 242. Dioc. tryal p. 13. â—â— To him I may adde Mr Paul Baynes a man of singular noate for learning and piety in Cambridge where he succeeded Mr Perkins who freely expresseth his judgment for the right of particular Churches and their independence in this sense in his Diocesans tryall ANSVV. As Mr Baynes was a man of singular note for learning and piety so is his testimony of singular note to shew the right use power of Synods not onely for counsell but for authority to censure and judge Ecclesiasticall causes so that particular Churches may not doe within themselves what they would without their consent 1. After he had set downe 4 conclusions wherein we agree with the opposites he comes to speak of the poynt of difference and sayth (f) Dioces tryall p. 13. That wherein we contradict one another is we affirme that no such head Church was ordained either virtually or actually but that all Churches were singular congregations equall independent each of other in regard of subjection Secondly we say were there a Diocesan granted yet will it not follow that Parish-Churches should be without their government within themselves but onely subject in some more common and transcendent cases As it was with the Synagogues that Nationall Church of the Iewes and as it is betwixt Provinciall and Diocesan Churches This doe I willingly assent unto And this is no other thing then that which is practised in these Reformed Churches with whom we are united Here is no one head-Church that hath more authority then another all Congregations are equall independent each of other here is no subjection to any one Diocesan all are equally and mutually subject to the Synod consisting of many their dependency is not upon one more then another but it is onely in regard of many combined notwithstanding which combination they have their government within themselves being subject to the Synod onely in some more weighty and difficult cases II. As for that other place when some had pleaded from the example of the Reformed Churches as if they had not bene distinct Churches c. Mr Bayes so explaineth their estate and practise as Mr Parker (t) Pol. Ecc. l. 3. c. 23. p. 348 349. c. more largely had done before that therein he doth not at all prejudice their subjection to Synods for speaking of the 24 Churches at Geneva and of their combination and subjection unto one Presbytery he sayth (v) Dioc. tryal p. 21. They have power of governing themselves but for greater edification voluntarily confederate not to use nor exercise their power but with mutuall communication one asking the counsell and consent of the other in that common Presbyterie Secondly it is one thing for Churches to subject themselves to a Bishop and Consistory wherein they shall have no power of suffrage Another thing to communicate with such a Presbytery wherein themselves are members and judges with others After that againe he addeth Geneva made this consociation not as if the Prime Churches were imperfect and to make one Church by this union but because though they were intire Churches and had the power of Churches yet they needed this support in exercising of it and that by this meanes the Ministers and Seniors of it might have communion Thus he notes not onely the counsell but the consent of others required And as at Geneva a particular Church proceeded not without or against the consent of many Churches concurring by their Deputies in a common Presbytery so in these Low-countries in weightier affaires they proceed not without or against the consent of many Churches concurring in their Classis III. Mr Baynes having shewed how every Church being an Ecclesiasticall body and having Governours every way equall there is yet no feare of confusion seeing Aristocracie especially when God ordaines it is a forme of government sufficient to preserve order hereupon he propounds this objection (x) Dioc. tr p. 68. But every Church might then doe what ever it would within it self And hereunto he answers thus Not so neither for it is subject to the censure of other Churches Synodically assembled and to the Civill Magistrate who in case of delinquencie hath directive and corrective power over it And thus we have his expresse testimony and confession that Synods have authority not onely to counsell and advise but to censure that particular Churches are subject to the censure of other Churches that consequently there is a double Ecclesiasticall Aristocracie one in particular Churches severally another in many Churches Synodically assembled that if a particular Church erre in matters of faith and religion that it is subject not to the power of the Magistrate alone but both to him and to another superiour Ecclesiasticall jusridiction arising from the combination of many Churches contrary to that assertion in the English Puritanisme chap. 2. IV. Speaking of Presbyters that is of Ministers and Elders and of their government he saith (y) Ibid. p. 67. There is nothing found belonging to the power of the keyes in foro externo but the Scripture doth asscribe it to them power of suffrage in Councell Act. 15. power of excommunication which is manifest to have bene in the Church of Corinth c. While he alledgeth Act. 15. for an evidence of the Presbyters power in Synods or Councels he doth hereby acknowledge that in Synods there is a lawfull exercise of jurisdiction and of the power of the keyes and that therefore they are not onely for counsell and advise To like purpose he saith afterwards againe (z) P. 82. The Apostles did not offer alone to determine the question Act. 15. but had the joynt suffrages of the Presbyterie with them Not because they could not alone have infallibly answered but because it was a thing to be determined by many all who had receyved power of the keyes doing it ex officio and others from discretion and duety of confessing the trueth And a little after he there addeth It is manifest by Ecclesiasticall writings of all sorts that Presbyters had right of suffrage not onely in their owne Presbyteries but in Provinciall Synods and therefore in Oecumenicall Synods which doth arise from a combination of the other to which their mindes went in the instruction of Bishops receyved from their Churches V. Whereas one errour useth to accompany another and commonly those that deny the authority of Synods doe also in
certaine as it is certaine that he which by force repelleth force is armed with publick authority He distinguisheth their jurisdiction in respect of the causes judged by them and repeats this their authority againe in the (e) N. 28. next animadversion And though these two kindes of government Civill and Ecclesiasticall doe use a different manner of compulsion he sayth (f) N. 29. Nihil refert nos de rei substantia agimus coactionem uterque habet sed hic spiritualem ille temporalem c. It skilleth not we intreat of the substance of the matter both of them have a coactive power or a compulsion but the one spirituall the other temporall c. A most evident assertion of Synodall jurisdiction and that they are not to direct onely by way of counsell but to correct also by way of censure To these I might adde many other testimonies of Iunius but these evidences already cited may be sufficient to shew that he was not of this strange opinion touching the independency of Churches and that Mr Daven therefore hath abused his Readers and sought to blinde their eyes when for the credit of his cause he would have it thought that Iunius was of his minde while he professeth that he doth fully agree with him SECT X. His pretence of agreement with Dr Whitaker examined M R Dav. to colour his opinion as if it were no singular conceit of Mr Iacob and some few others makes mention of the Centuriatours as if they were of the same minde yet he alledgeth not their words to prove the same But instead of others he chooseth out Dr Whitaker as if he had bene a favourer of this opinion which it is likely that he never heard of and sayth (g) Apol. reply p. 237. 238. Whit. de Cōci quest 5. Argum. To these I may adde those who have handled the controversies concerning the necessity and authority of Councills amongst whom I will instance in Dr Whitaker who speaking of the fullnes of that delegated power which Christ hath given to the Church not to the Pope which he applyeth to the Keyes in binding and loosing shutting and opening retaining and remitting finnes sayth that this power belongeth primarily principally and essentially to the Church but to the severall Bishops onely accidentally secundarily and lesse principally and explaineth himself by a rule in Philosophy which is that when any power is in two in one necessarily essentially in another contingently and accidentally it is more principally in him in whom it is necessarily and essentially then in him whose it is onely contingently and accidentally As the heat is more principally in the fire then in the water because it is in the water by reason of the fire So sayth he seeing this jurisdiction and fullnes of power is given to the Church necessarily and primarily but to the Pope onely secundarily and by the Church it is manifest that it is more in the Church then in the Pope What that learned wrighter sayth of the Churches power in comparison with the Pope holds in all other parallell instances ANSVV. First had Mr Dav. repeated this Argument of D. Whitaker fully and justly as it is set downe by himself then might the Reader have seen therein a plaine evident testimony for the authority of Synods but divers things being omitted in the beginning middle and end of it thereby the trueth is obscured and hidden from his Readers In the beginning of it D. Whitaker propounds it thus If the fullnes of power be in the Church not in the Pope then it is evident that it hath more authority then the Pope but the first is true therefore the second also Now by the Church in this place he meaneth the Generall Synod or Councell as appeares by the title of this Question noted in the beginning of it viz. (h) DeConcil Qu. 5. c. 1. with c. 3. Arg. 5. Whether the Synod be above the Pope and if he had not so meant it this his Argument had bene beside the Question And therefore while D. Whitaker here directly concludeth a fullnes of power in Synods and as he further calles it in this same place that highest authority and jurisdiction which Christ hath left unto his Church it is manifest hereby that he did not hold them to be onely for counsell admonition and so was farre from limiting all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction unto a particular Congregation In the middle in the confirmation of this Argument D. Whit. saith For if all this power were in the Pope or in any one man principally and essentially then he dying it should perish and so the Church should altogether loose it But it is not lost though the Pope dye a thousand times but it remaineth with the Church without which the Pope though living could have no part of this authority Now to argue on this manner against the authority we asscribe unto Synods by comparing them with particular Churches as he doth against the Pope compared with Synods would be inconsequent unequall and no parallel instance because the title of the Church is no where given unto the Pope or unto any one person as it is unto an assembly of Ministers Governours or Deputies of Churches met together in the name of Christ in Synods because though we asscribe unto Synods some jurisdiction yet we doe not say that all power is in them originally and so to be derived unto others as is sayd of the Pope and consequently because there is no such danger that the power of the Church should be lost and perish by the death of such as are members of the Synod as might be by the death of the Pope if all power were primarily and essentially in him alone And therefore it is a vaine assertion of Mr Dav. touching this argument of D. Whit. viz What that learned wrighter sayth of the Churches power in comparison with the Pope holds in all other parallell instances In the end of this Argument prosequuted by D. Whitak he concludeth thus Wherefore seeing it is certaine that this power is given unto the Church primarily and not unto the Pope but secondarily and by accident and seeing the Church is represented in the Synod it is of necessity that the Synod must be above the Pope And thus most evidently he grants unto the Synod as being a representative Church a power jurisdiction above the Pope a power which consists in binding and loosing shutting opening retaining and remitting of sinnes as himself here explaines it and so is directly contrary to them which allow no more unto Synods but counsell and admonition Why did Mr Davenp omit and refuse to name the Synod which D. Whit. so expressely mentioneth applying yeelding unto the Synod that power which he there pleades for Secondly as for that similitude of fire and water though it be granted that heat is more principally in the fire then in the water because it is in the water by reason of the
acknowledge one another to be in that way IV. This company of Brownists whereof Mr Canne is the sole Governour was formerly governed by an Eldership and now since their division they have no Eldership to rule them Whether it be because they thinke they have none among them fit to be Elders or whether they doe wilfully refuse such as they cannot deny to be fit or whether there be any other cause I leave it to themselves Alwayes this we know that there be some Churches in remote countries that want the benefit of Classicall government because there be no other neighbour Churches neere unto them with whom they may combine themselves for their mutuall guidance and edification But now if the want of an Eldership among the Brownists such as they once had doe not warrant us to say that they hold two distinct formes of Church-government to be lawfull one with an Eldership another without an Eldership consequently that they hold two wayes unto heaven then much lesse can the want of a Synod in respect of the different consideration of the times places occasions and oportunities of severall Churches be any warrant for Mr Canne to object unto us two formes of government or two wayes to heaven c. REAS. V. Let it be observed that for this reason among others the Learned (x) Whit. Cont. 4. qu. 4. Chamier l. 6. cōject 2. say the Pope is Antichrist viz. because he will have men to appeale from their owne Churches unto him and to stand under his sentence and decree And doe not the Classicall assemblies and Synods take upon them an authority much like to it in subjecting many Congregations to them requiring appeales to be made to them and that the Judicatory as Mr Pagets * In his Letter c. phrase is belongeth to them as if their power above all Churches ANSVV. I. Let it be observed how Mr Canne speaking here against appeales made unto Classes and Synods brings no Scripture no word of God to condemne them but onely the testimonies of men he needed not to have reserved hereafter a peculiar Section onely for humane testimonies when he uses them so oft before II. Let it be observed how notably he abuseth even these testimonies also against the meaning of his Authors D. Whitaker (y) DePont Rom. qu. 4. p. 470. pleads for appeales as being both of divine and naturall right Chamier whom Mr Canne doth misquote without the title of the book alledged sayth that appeales (z) Panstrat Catho tom 2. l. 13. c. 17 are of common equity and truely without them the Church could hardly or not at all subsist speaking of appeales unto Synods That which learned and orthodox Writers blame in appeales made unto the Pope is this that they are made unto one man and not unto a Synod asscribing unto him infallibility of judgement giving him power over Churches that are not combined with the Church of Rome and in speciall for this that the Pope allowes no appeales to be made from him unto a Synod This is the Antichristian pride that they condemne in the Pope And herein the Church of the Brownists doth plainly resemble the Pope seeing their Congregation also their Democraticall judicatory allowes no appeale to be made from them unto Classes or Synods unto any Ecclesiasticall judges besides themselves These are two of the most monstrous propositions of the Papists touching the Popes authority viz. that (a) Bellarm. de Conc. l. 2. c. 17. 18. the Pope is above a Generall Synod and acknowledgeth no judgement on earth above him and againe that the Pope cannot commit the coactive judgement over him neither unto a Synod nor unto any man but onely the discretive this discretive judgement they expound to be such a kinde of arbitrement as doth not binde him further then it pleaseth him Now so farre as concernes Ecclesiasticall judgement the Brownists and the maintainers of the single uncompounded policie doe likewise hold that there is no judgement on earth above their particular Congregation and that they may not commit any controversy of theirs unto the censure and decision of any Synod What stronger reason could Mr C. have alledged against himself to shew their unlawfull government then this their denyall of appeales III. Let it be observed how foolishly Mr Canne cavills at my speech touching Classicall assemblies and Synods when he relates it thus the judicatory as Mr Pagets phrase is belongeth unto them for this relation is false that was not my phrase but I sayd the judicature did belong unto them It was the simplicity of his informer or of some ignorant scribe that put judicatory for judicature as may appeare by the writing I made which is yet to be seene Note Mr C. his rashnes in receyving such things REAS. VI. What more meet and reasonable then that every mans case be there heard and determined where the fault was committed So sayth (b) Cypr. li. 1. Epist 3. Cyprian It is not fit that they over whom the Holy Ghost hath made us overseers should goe too fro He speaketh of carying matters away from their owne Church unto others ANSVV. I. Though it be meet and reasonable that every mans cause be first there heard where the fault was committed yet is it as reasonable that if either an unjust sentence be there given the innocent may in the second place have liberty of appeale from their oppressours or if the case be difficult and weighty that the matter be at first brought unto Classicall assemblies according to the order of Reformed Churches II. For confirmation of this reason he brings no word of God but onely the testimonie of Cyprian which also according to his manner he doth most palpably abuse For Cyprian doth not simply blame those that appealed unto Synods but onely such as did inordinately run too and fro such as were not content with the Synods in Africa but sayled over the sea unto the Church of Rome Of such he there speakes And even in the same Epistle Cyprian shēwes both the use of Synods allowed in the Churches of Africa and the authority of Synods in censuring offendours He there gives (c) Lib. 1. e. 3. § 11.12 instances of Privatus condemned in an assembly of 99 Bishops of Foelix of Iovinus Maximus excluded from the communion of the Church by a Synod of Repostus also censured in like manner Their Synods were not onely for counsell but exercise a jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall And as they exercised the power of the keyes in binding obstinate sinners so also loosing and absolving those that repented as appeares in (d) Lib. 1. Ep. 2. § 1. another Epistle going immediately before this alledged and written by the Synod itself In the inscription of that Epistle are prefixed the names of Cyprian Liberalis Caldonius Nicomedes and Caecilius c. as being speciall members of that Synod and writing joyntly together that Synodicall Epistle (e) Ibid. n. 6.
be pronounced by them (n) Sleid. Comment lib. 1. he appealed from the Pope to a Councell or Synod The compleat forme of his Appeale is recorded (o) Tom. 1. f. 231. edit 1545. among his workes wherein he doth plainly acknowledge the Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction of Synods both by the whole drift and substance thereof and when he saith that a sacred Councell being lawfully assembled in the holy Ghost representing the holy Catholick Church is in causes concerning the faith above the Pope c. This his Appeale was repeated and further urged in the yeare 1520 when the Pope had condemned and excommunicated him Among other reasons which he useth to reenforce his Appeale he alledgeth this (p) Tom. 2. f. 52. Sleid. CoÌ„m l. 2. that the Pope most wickedly preferred his owne tyranny above the power of the Councell c. and therefore he beseecheth the Emperour and other Magistrates that for the glory of God and for the maintaining of the liberty of a Councell they would admit of his Appeale and represse the others tyranny c. In the yeare 1539 he wrote a booke in the German tongue de Conciliis concerning Councels or Synods where though he inveigh severely and not without cause against the Pope for his frustrating the desires of those that sought a Generall Councell admitting of none but where he might sway all by his owne authority and command yet he doth fully approve of that Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which had bene formerly exercised in Synods Councells lawfully assembled and rightly ordered A Councell saith (q) Oper. German Tom. 7. f. 260. edit 1562. he is nothing els but a Consistory a Court of justice an Imperiall Chamber or the like where the Iudge having heard the parties pronounceth sentence but with this condition that it be according to Law c. Thus a Councell condemnes an Heretick not according to their owne opinion but according to the Royall law that is according to the holy Scripture as they professe which is the Law of the holy Church Speaking of the right and power of Councells having shewed (r) Ibid. f. 257. c. Sleid. CoÌ„m l. 12. that it is not lawfull for them to make new Articles of faith to command any new work to binde mens consciences to new ceremonies nor to intermeddle with Civill government he declareth withall that it is their duety to condemne new doctrines contrary to the Scriptures and to censure the persons to remove and condemne new ceremonies that are superstitious or unprofitable for the Church and to examine and judge of those things that are controverted as it is prescribed in the word of God Moreover demanding what the office or work of a Councell is he answeâ—s (Å¿) Ubi supra f. 260. Anathematisamus we pronounce Anathema so is their office called Anathematisat Ecclesia the holy Church condemnes or excommunicates So farre was Luther from denying the authority of Synods that he allowes them the power of pronouncing this heavie sentence of Anathema or Excommunication To proceed unto his other witnesses there is nothing in the words alledged out of Chemnitius and Polycarpus Lyserus who is the Authour of that part of the Harmony quoted under the name of Chemnitius that by any just consequence can be opposed unto our doctrine and practise touching election excommunication examination of sentences c. Onely observe how Mr Canne here abuseth his Authour and his Readers by his imperfect allegation setting downe this testimony of Chemnitius in such manner as if that which was sayd with an expresse condition had bene uttered simply and absolutely without any such restraint Chemnitius sayth indeed that election or calling doth belong unto the whole Church but how that Mr Canne leaves out as unfit for his purpose which his Authour addes immediately in the same period saying that it belongs unto the whole Church certo quodam modo in such wise that both the Presbytery and the people have each their owne share in the choyse or calling Chemnitius in that (t) Exam. Conc. Trid. par 2. de Sacram Ord. Can. 7. learned discourse touching the calling of Ministers intends principally to prove against the Councell of Trent that the consent of the people and of the Christian Magistrate is requisite in elections but withall he gives as full and plaine testimony for the judgement examination and approbation of the Presbytery under which he comprehends the Ministers of other Congregations called Bishops and Clerkes in the places alledged by him And this kinde of election he shewes to be agreeable unto the practise of the Apostolick primitive ancient and their owne moderne Churches Besides Chemnitius doth sufficiently declare his judgement touching the authority of Synods which is our maine question in divers pregnant passages of that book which he wrote against the Councell of Trent He (v) Exam. Conc. Trid par 1. praef alledgeth commendeth the words of Augustine saying that most wholesome is the authority of Councels in the Church while they judge according to the rule and square of the holy Scripture c. He saith (x) Ibid. Exam. Decret 1. 2. that many have often wished and long waited for a true lawfull free and Christian Councell as the right medicine for the curing of those manifold errours and abuses that were crept into the Church He doth frequently alledge and approve the acts of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction exercised in former Synods throughout that whole booke He saith indeed in one of the places cited by Mr Canne (y) Ibid. praef that the decrees of Councells are to be examined by the rule of the Scripture but this doth no more empaire that authority of Synods which we asscribe unto them then it doth the power of all Church-acts and sentences whatsoever concerning which Chemnitius (z) Exam. par 1. de bon op qu. 2. sayth the same thing and Mr Canne cannot deny but that they are to be examined and tryed by the word of God though they be made in such manner as he himself (a) Ch. pl. p. 95. requireth There is another allegation of Chemnitius touching the distinction betwixt power and the administration of it which Mr Canne hath taken at all adventures as it seemes from Mr Parker or rather from the Scribe or Printer that caused that quotation Exam. c. 6. to stand so defectively (b) Pol. Eccl l. 3. p. 26. in his booke and as he is thus briefe and obscure in the quotation so he is as sparing in the application of this testimony unto his purpose bidding us onely observe what is attributed to the Congregation what to the guides thereof to the first power to the latter the administration of it For the thing it self we grant that there is such a distinction alledged out of Luther and explained by Chemnitius teaching (c) Exam. Conc. Trid. par 2. de Sacram in geÌ„ Can. 10. that Christ hath delivered and commended the Keyes that is the
on 1. Cor. 5.5 doth thus interpret the words Let such a one be delivered to Satan to wit by the Church or by the Pastours and Elders of the Church which are the mouth of the Church For by these the Church speaketh and dealeth Without this order there would be confusion if in a publick action every one might speake and deale which undoubtedly the Apostle would not bring in This we grant and it is not against us but against the confused practise of the Brownists But for the poynt in hand that Classes and Synods have power to judge of the actions of particular Congregations Paraeus is a plaine witnesse for us in (d) Colleg. Theol. Decur Coll. 9. Disp 8. Auccar 1. Co. 10. Disp 22. th 1-10 Disp 24. th 9. other of his writings And againe speaking of a lawfull Synod and the authority thereof in deciding of controversies in the Church he saith that therein (e) Eirenic cap. 5. men renowmed in regard of their learning understanding and piety whether they be of the Laity or Clergy have not onely a voice of delibertion and counsell but also of judgement and power of defining And hereunto accordes his (f) Act. Sym. Nar. Dordr Ses 98. Epistle written unto the Nationall Synod holden last at Dort wherein excusing his absence that he could not come in respect of his age as he much desired yet he shewes his approbation of such a meeting as being the ordinary medicine for healing the wounds of the Church and rejoyceth greatly in the spirit for the benefit exspected from that Synod which judged censured the errours of particular men in divers Churches What reason then had Mr Canne thus to abuse the words of Paraeus against his meaning and publick profession Keckerman also agreeth with the former witnesses touching the poynt in controversy For in the book alledged by Mr Canne when as the parts of the government of the Church are there described he shewes that (g) System Theo. l. 3. c. 6. p. 401.402 the convocation of Synods belongeth unto Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and is contained under the same Hemmingius though more sound and moderate then other Lutheranes yet being a disciple and follower of Melancthon there was no reason why he should not have bene joyned with his Master in the foregoing ranke of Testimonies if Mr Canne had either knowne his Authour or regarded the order which he had set downe to himself But for his judgement touching the jurisdiction of Synods he hath witnessed his consent with the Writers mentioned both in this the former Section and testifyed against Mr Canne in this cause For speaking of that part of Ecclesiasticall Discipline unto which he referres the deposition and excommunication of Ministers he commends the order of the ancient Church where he saith (h) Enchir. Theo. Clas 3. c. 11. the execution of this discipline was chiefly committed to the Bishops who therefore sometimes twise sometimes oftner in the yeare called Provinciall Synods where the matter was handled not by the censure of one Bishop but by the sentence of the whole Clergy assembled Tossanus mentioned in the next place hath plainely declared himself to be of the same minde with us in allowing Synodall and Classicall assemblies to judge determine the causes of particular Churches and persons He (i) Pastor Evang. p. 61 edit 1603. maintaines against Thyraeus that which he had formerly written in these words In controversies of religion we appeale from Luther and from the censures and judgements of private men unto the judgement of the Catholick Church and of a Synod He proves this to be sound and orthodoxe from the Apostles referring the decision of the controversie concerning Iustification and the Ceremonies of the Law unto the Councell at Ierusalem Act. 15. Speaking of somewhat that was wanting in most of the German Churches about the ordaining of Ministers he saith that (k) P. 40. godly Pastours and Overseers doe dayly bewaile the scarsitie of faithfull labourers and that the Presbyteries and well ordered Ecclesiasticall Senates doe indeavour that both in Synods and yearely visitations and in Classicall meetings the failings of Ministers may be amended according to their power In which words he hath reference unto the practise of the Churches in the Palatinate concerning which we are to speake (l) Sect. 7. hereafter where he joyned with them in the exercise of the sayd government being (m) D. Toss Vita p. 38. at Neustadt a moderator of the Ecclesiasticall counsels of the Consistory and sometime also President of a Synod and afterwards at Heidelberg (n) Ib. P. 44. a member of the Ecclesiasticall Senate How unjustly therefore untruely hath Mr Canne dealt with Tossanus and his readers in reckoning him among those who as he saith (o) Ch. pl. p. 83. have condemned for an errour untrueth that position touching particular Congregations standing under other Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves As for Polanus to grant Mr Canne that he was of the same minde with the former Authours touching the Churches power in excommunicating though so much can hardly be manifested out of the (p) Synt. Theol. l. 7. c. 18. place alledged yet what is that to our question The Churches power in excommuncating doth not exclude the authority of Synods in judging of a particular Congregation Polanus speaking of Synods expressely confesseth that (q) Ib. c. 14 the liberty or power of those Ecclesiasticall assemblies is a right given of God unto his Church c. that An Ecclesiasticall Synod is a publick assemblie of godly men lawfully sent and gathered together from divers Churches also of divers Provinces that they may handle and determine according to the power that is granted unto them of God touching holy affaires c. He alledgeth sundry Scriptures and examples of the Ancient Churches for declaration hereof And againe in the same place he notes it for a condition of a lawfull Synod that those which are chosen and deputed of the Churches may have a deliberative or consulting and also a deciding voyce or giving of sentence c. When he requires another condition of a lawfull Synod that every one may have free accesse and recesse yet he addes this withall that whosoever is convicted of heresy or any crime and remaineth obstinate should undergoe Ecclesiasticall censure that is deposition from his Ecclesiasticall office or Suspension or Excommunication And to like purpose he writes in (r) Ib. c. 16. Syllo Thes Theol. par 1 de Concil other places This being the judgement of Polanus touching the authority of Synods how uncircumspect was W. Best his abettour to call for a Iurie of such Divines as have given such pregnant sentence and so peremptory verdict against them Hyperius next alledged though he deny not the power of particular Congregations yet in his writings it is evident that he holdes the power of Synods consisting of the Deputies of many Churches to be a
superiour power above one particular Church and that they may judge of the affaires thereof and of the persons therein either Ministers or people This he declares at large in a peculiar treatise touching yearely Synods (f) DeSyno Annuis Opusc Theol. p. 768-870 Bas 1570. wherein after he had shewed the necessity and use of Synods by many divine and humane testimonies he then describes their power not for counsell onely as the Brownists and my opposites doe but for the exercise of all kinde of Ecclesiasticall censures as Rebukes of offenders Suspension Excommunication and Deposition or deportment of Officers from their ministery Of all the men of the Iurie before mentioned there is none that gives a more full and cleare verdict against Mr Canne then this Hyperius doth Oecolompadius another of his Authors hath declared his judgement touching Synods and the authority exercised in them to be such as argues his thstimony alledged by Mr Canne to be perverted while it is produced against the same For in his answer to Luther inserted among the workes of Zuinglius (t) Tom. 2. fol. 491. he doth highly commend the Councell of Nice and specially for decreeing that none should afterwards attempt to adde any new articles unto that Confessiō of faith which they had set downe Which Nestorius being found guilty of Oecolompadius approves of that Act of the Councell of Ephesus whereby he was excommunicated saying For which cause being condemned of the crime of heresie he was by common consent shut out of the Church which was sensible of peace restored unto her by this meanes Hereby it appeareth that the acknowledged Ecclesiasticall jurisdictiō censure to be a power due unto Synods and that which may lawfully be exercised by them Beza next alledged upon 2. Thes 3.14 though he there call Excommunication an Ecclesiasticall judgement yet doth he not thereby infringe the authority of Classes and Synods neither can any such thing by any just consequence be gathered from his Annotations on that place But on the other side he shewes (v) Epist 83. De Ministr gradib c. 23 p. 155. c. 24. p. 176. 177. elswhere that Synods have their Ecclesiasticall judgements grounded upon the word of God and a profitable use in the Church of God and that the fanaticall opinion of Morellius much like unto the Brownists hath bene worthily condemned in many Synods And according to his writing so was his practise both at Geneva where he was one of them that had their voyce in the government of that Church by a joynt Presbytery or Classis and in France where he himself was President of that famous (x) Harmo Confes p. 112. edit 1612. Synod at Rochell where the Confession of their faith was subscribed by divers Princes and many Ministers and Elders assembled together And therefore if Mr Canne and W. Best their accusation of me were sound and just they might as well complaine of Beza for bringing the Churches of God into miserable slavery and bondage by his tyrannicall government and corrupt doctrine Bucer last alledged accordes with the foregoing Authors and his words in commendation of Synods may serve to close up this kinde of Testimonies being an advise unto King Edward the Sixt for the constant celebrating of them In his Admonition given to the King for the restitution of the Kingdome of Christ in his dominions amidst other wholesome counsels out of the word of God he saith (y) De Regno Christi Lib. 2. c. 12. It shall be the duety of the Bishops of each Province to celebrate two Synods every yeare as it is ordained by so many Canons and Lawes of godly Emperours At which Synods must be assembled and heard not onely the Bishops of the Cities but also inferiour Bishops and other Presbyters and Deacons that are endued with a larger measure of knowledge and zeale for the kingdome of Christ that so the more effectually both the faults crept into the Church may becorrected and the pietie of all repaired He had also spoken before of other inferiour and more frequent assemblies like unto our Classes requiring that all the Ministers within the compasse of about 20 Parishes should often meet together for their mutuall assistance in removing offences advancing the kingdome of Christ Touching Synods he speakes also in (z) De vi usu S. Min. tit de Disci Cler. Opuse f. 582. another place to the same purpose approving the ancient constitution whereby it was ordained that the Bishops of every Province should assemble together with the Presbyters and Deacons as often as the need of the Churches should require but without faile twise in the yeare that they might inquire concerning the doctrine and discipline of Christ how it were administred and did flourish in severall Churches that where any default was discovered they might correct it and where they found things in good state they might confirme and promote the same By that correction spoken of here and in the former testimonie he understands not onely counsell and admonition but the judiciall exercise of authority in Ecclesiasticall censures For he doth plainly distinguish betwixt admonition and correction when in the following words concerning Metropolitanes he saith If any thing were done amisse by the Ministers of the Churches or by the common people which by their admonitions they could not amend that then for the correcting of it they should call a Synod of Bishops for there was no power of judgement allowed unto them which by their owne authority they might exercise in the Churches c. Thus Bucerus also as well as the former hath condemned Mr Cannes position viz. that particular Congregations must not stand under other Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves And these are all the Authors here alledged by Mr Canne except onely Morell Praedirius and Munster either not seen at all nor to be procured for the present as the two former or not seen to touch this controversie in the writings at hand as the latter Having now heard what these chosen men of the Iurie all nominated by W. B. his Advocate have testifyed concerning Classes or Synods let the Reader judge whether they have given verdict for or against Synods whether every one of these Authors alledged had not just cause if they were living to complaine of great abuse done to them in perverting their testimonies and making false consequences from their words contrary to their meaning And forasmuch as all these witnesses here examined are so farre from testifying ought against us that they have on the other side witnessed the trueth of that which we maintained against Mr Canne hence it is evident that I had just cause to say that which he would seeme to disprove by alledging these Authors against me viz. that there were a multitude of learned and godly Ministers of the same judgement and practise with me For further proofe whereof it were easy if need were to produce another Iurie of approved
Authors more in number then those he hath specifyed and not inferiour for learning and piety unto some of those that he hath named all which in their severall writings Common places Commentaries and other Treatises have in like manner as the former described the use the necessity and the authority of Synods not onely for counsell but for judgement and decision of controversies divers of them alledging not onely examples of ancient Churches but the holy Scriptures also for the warrant of that which they teach and therefore shewing that they maintaine them lawfull jure divino and that their tenure of them is from the grant that Christ hath given unto his Church But the trueth of that assertion touching the multitude of those that consent with me will most plainly appeare when we come to speak of the publick and generall testimonies of whole Churches most solemne assemblies of learned godly men touching this controversie In the meane while let us follow Mr Canne according to his owne Method SECT IV. Touching the Testimonies of English Conformists IN the next place they proceed and in an homely phrase they say Touching the English Conformist the formablest of them are for us in this poynt And here they alledge B. Whitgift D. Bilson Whitaker Bell Willet and Taylor Touching these I answer First for B. Whitgift though he confesse that in the Apostles time the state of the Church was popular See Def. ag T. C. p. 180. 182. because the Church had interest almost in every thing yet this proves not that he thought particular Congregations to be independent and uncontrolable by the Deputies of other Churches assembled in Synods The ordinary practise of B. Whitgift in judging the causes of other Congregations shewed that he was farre from the meaning of the Brownists in this poynt His words are wrested by an unjust consequence to prove independency of Churches and the undue power of Synods For D. Bilson there is notable wrong done to him in clipping his words and defacing his testimonie by omitting that which is most materiall in this controversy For when D. Bilson had sayd (a) Perpet Gover. c. 15 p. 360. Though the Presbyters had more skill to judge yet the people had as much right to choose their Pastour if the most part of them did agree they did carrie it from the Clergie Thus farre Mr Canne reciteth his words but here in the midst of the sentence before the period be ended he breakes off and leaves out this exception that is added viz. so the persons chosen were such as the Canons did allow and the ordainers could not justly mislike In this exception D. B. acknowledgeth that there may be just cause to disanull the election of the people if it be found worthy to be misliked And his meaning is yet more evident by the story which in the sentence immediately preceding he alledgeth out of (b) Lib. 7. cap. 35. Socrates touching the election of Proclus who being chosen by the greater number was yet refused because the election was sayd to be against the Canon of translating Bishops and so the people were forced to hold their peace That which is practised in these Reformed Churches is in this poynt the very same thing that D. B. testifies of the Primitive Church for Classes and Synods doe not use to impose or choose Ministers If particular Congregations doe choose a Minister neither Classes nor Synods can disanull the election if there be no just cause of exception against the person elected And if upon just exception the election be hindred yet then also is the new election of another permitted to the free choyse of the particular Church neither doth the Classis deprive them of their just power and liberty therein That it may more plainly appeare how unjustly and unreasonably D. Bilson is alledged as agreeing with my opposites let it be further observed that in his Dispute against Beza such as approve the Discipline of these Reformed Churches he doth not as my adversaries complaine of the undue power of Synods that judge and determine the causes of particular Congregations He acknowledgeth that (c) Perpet Gover. c. 16 p. 370. the necessity and authority of Synods is not so much in question betwixt us as the persons that should assemble and moderate those meetings c. He would have (d) P. 378 c. Metropolitanes to be the Moderatours and rulers of Synods he would have (e) P. 387 c. lay-Elders thrust out from assembling with Ministers in Synods he complaines (f) P. 386 387. of the intolerable charges and expences of having frequent Synods c. Herein he differs from us and we from him But that there is a superiour Ecclesiasticall authoritie in Synods to decide the causes of particular Churches which is the poynt in question herein he agreeth with us He saith of such Synods and their power to judge as followeth (g) P. 372. Their warrant so to doe is builded on the maine grounds of all divine and humane societies strengthened by the promise of our Saviour and assured unto them by the example of the Apostles and perpetuall practise of the Church of Christ Afterwards he saith of their meetings in Synods (h) P. 374. This hath in all Ages as well before as since the great Councell of Nice bene approved and practised as the lawfullest and fittest meanes to discerne trueth from falshood to decide doubts end strifes and redresse wrongs in causes Ecclesiasticall yea when there were no beleeving Magistrates to assist the Church this was the onely way to cleanse the house of God as much as might be from the lothsome vessels of dishonour and after Christian Princes began to professe protect the trueth they never had nor can have any better or safer direction amongst men then by the Synods of wise and godly Pastours And many other things to like purpose are written by him complayning that the denyall of this order is (i) P. 376. an heathenish if not an hellish confusion c. That which they bring out of Scultingius a Papist before alledged is idle impertinent untill they heare me avouch such things as he doth for change of the order of Christ let them refraine their surmises and conjectures of imaginary arguments which they guesse that I will use Having brought such Authours against me mark how Wil. B. or Io. Ca. for him doth triumph against me before the victory in these words (k) Chu pl. p. 85. To say that this superiour power of Classes and Synods is Jure Divino I thinke he will not any more doe it there being in the Scriptures no proofe yea I may boldly say nor shew of any proofe for it I confesse indeed it is boldly spoken of him for who so bold al 's blinde B. But whether there be at least shew of proofe in the Scriptures for the superiour authority of Synods in judging the causes of particular
inferreth from hence this common law that other members of the Church which have no Ecclesiasticall office are to be subject to this government and ought to advance the same according to their power c. it is thereby evident that he could not like the course of W. B. or any such other schisming from the Church for this cause and complayning that they were not a free people if they were subject to Classes and Synods Mr Udall in the Demonstration of Discipline pag. 24 25. in that edition thereof which I have hath no such matter as is alledged before out of that treatise of English Puritanisme against the authority of Classes and Synods neither is it to be found in any part of that Demonstration that Christ hath not subjected any Congregation unto any other superiour Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction then unto that which is within itself c. And therefore it is untruely affirmed of Mr Canne that there is nothing there sayd but Mr Vdall with others above mentioned hath sayd the like On the contrary in that writing asscribed to Mr Vdall there be sundry testimonies shewing the authority of Synods to judge the causes of particular Congregations As it was (m) P. 204. before noted out of D. Fulke that there is a double authority of the Pastour one with the severall Congregation in which he is Pastour the other with the whole Synod or Assemblie whereof he is a member and both these authorities sufficiently authorized in the Scriptures so saith Mr Vdall to like purpose (n) Demōst of Discip c. 1. The word of God hath described sufficient ministers ministeries for doctrine exhortation overseeing distributing and ordering of every particular Church or generall Synod And againe he saith of Bishops or Pastours that (o) Ib. c. 10 they are of equall authority in their severall charges and in the generall government of the Church And in the same chapter he alledgeth the decrees of divers * 2. Concil Carth. tom 1. c. 10. 3 Conc. tom 1. cap. ◠Councels shewing how the causes of one Church or Congregation were judged by many Bishops of other Congregations meeting together In speciall when some (p) Demōst of Disc c. 14 objected that there would be so many Elderships so many divers fashions seeing one may not meddle with another Hereunto he answers The Government desired is uniforme for every Church and admitteth no change no not in outward ceremonies without a Synod of the choyce men of severall Elderships Hereby he plainely declares his meaning what he judged concerning the power of Synods for alterations to be made in particular Churches The Agreement of the English Church at Franckford in Queene Maries dayes is also alledged as a proofe of the Non-conformists dissenting from me whereunto I answer I. Those three Articles of their Discipline objected the one that the Ministers and Seniours severally and joyntly shall have no authority to make any manner of Decrees or Ordinances to binde the Congregation or any member thereof But shall execute such ordinances as shall be made by the Congregation and to them delivered Another that none shall be excommunicated untill the matter be first heard by the whole Church And further that Ministers and Seniours and every of them be subject to Ecclesiasticall discipline as other priváe members of the Church be these doe not at all concerne the question betwixt us For these things being granted it doth not follow that then the authority of Synods is overthrowne that they may not judge of any ordinances made in such a Congregation or that such a Church where these Articles are agreed upon hath thereby denyed and condemned such a Classicall government as we submit ourselves unto II. These Articles of their Discipline are not rightly and plainly but darkly and confusedly cited In the quotation of the first the page 115. is put for pag. 125. The two next are alledged without any quotation at all either of page or number of Article specifyed in the booke and both are joined together as if they were but one Article And in the second Article there is omitted that disjunction which affords an exception touching the strict observation thereof For whereas Mr Canne alledgeth it simply thus None shall be excommunicated untill the matter be heard by the whole Church the (q) Disc of troubl at Frankf p. 129. booke itself admitteth the liberty of a different practise by adding this clause or by such as it shall specially appoynt thereunto This falsification is so much the greater in that Mr Horne objecting against this Article and arguing that thereby (r) P. 163 164. the authority of the Pastour and Seniors is all wiped away for every thing is referred to the confused multitude of the Congregation Mr Whithead in the same booke answereth him on this manner Where he saith all things is referred to the confused multitude it is manifestly false For it is alwayes added by such as the Congregation shall appoint thereto as it is also in the 54 Article added in plaine words Let the Reader observe this deceitfull allegation both against the expresse words of the Article against the plaine explicatiō thereof by Mr Whit. in the name of that English Church at Frankford Whereas Mr Canne (ſ) Chu pl. p. 36. objecteth further from Art 26. 67. that in some cases the forenamed English Church agreed that appeales should be made unto the body of the Congregation I answer that in such cases as are there specifyed If the Ministers and Seniours which have authority to heare determine c. as it is elswhere specifyed though not in this Article be suspected or found to be parties that then they had reason to appeale rather to the body of the Congregation then that parties should be suffered to be judges in their owne cause And no marvell considering what I have noted (t) P. 121-125 before touching the state of that Church where the Reader may see a further answer unto these objections But then he askes me what I say to this and hopes I will not say that they were Brownists I answer His hope is right in this poynt I may not say they were Brownists nor their practise the same with the Brownists 1. Because they made this agreement through necessity when they wanted a Classis whereas the Brownists wilfully oppugne and refuse Classicall combinations 2. Because the Brownists deny authority of judgement unto Ministers and Elders in such cases where they are no parties which this (v) Art 59.63 Church at Frankford did not 3. Because the English Church at Frankford did not teach the doctrine of Separation as the Brownists doe but when they could not obtaine the reformation desired did (x) Disc of troub Frākford p. 187-191 still hold one another brethren in the Lord though greeved for the defects among them But it is wonder that Mr Canne is not ashamed to alledge the example of this English Church
that (i) Ibid. p. 109 110 c. book and approved by these Ministers are most of them and generally the very same that are observed in the Classes and Synods of the Reformed Churches in these United Provinces of the Netherlands where we live and where our English Church is combined with them in the same Ecclesiasticall government The agreement and consent of these men in their desire of Classes and Synods according to the order and practise observed also in Scotland at Geneva is therefore by the Recorder thereof noted stiled over the head of many pages in that book English Genevating for Reformation And againe English Scottizing for Discipline by practise Even these reproaches doe justly serve for the reproofe of Mr Canne who denyes that which other opposites doe willingly acknowledge Thirdly the very Brownists themselves were wont of old to acknowledge that the not-conforming Ministers in England did stand for Classes and Synods Though with great skorne reproach they speak of Synods yet that very skorne and reproach is a witnesse against Mr Can. and W. B. to shew the consent of former times with me Hen. Barow speaking of the censures of evill and condemning both Conformists and Non-conformists together he saith (k) H. Bar. Discov of False Chur. p. 165. Yea all the Priests of the land both Pontificall and Reformists agree in this poynt conclude that the lay people as they terme them ought not to intermeddle either with the deposing their Minister or reproof of his doctrine The one sort saith he sendeth them to their Lords these Bishops the other referreth them over for these and many other cases under hand to a Provinciall or Classicall Synod or permanent Councell of Priests c. Amongst whom all these affaires must be debated and after they are agreed upon the poynt then their decrees to be brought forth solemnly published and pronounced to the people who must attend upon wait and receave these Oracles as most holy and Canonicall They have no remedy if they also be contrary to the trueth but to appeale to a Councell c. And this he calleth a devilish forgerie c. After that to like purpose he saith (l) Ibid. p. 169. These Priests they will not onely not submit their persons and doctrine to the censure of the Church where they administer for they must have a Jurie of Clarkes a Classis of Priests to goe upon them but they binde their poore Church to their lippes build it upon themselves and with their blazing light strike all the rest of their hearers followers stark blinde Againe (m) P. 169 170. By their Propheticall Conventicles and Classicall Synods they assume into their owne hands the key of all knowledge and shutting up the Scriptures yea all Gods graces even the Holy Ghost itself among themselves in these their Schooles of Prophets as also into their Classes of select Priests the scepter of Christ and absolute government of all Churches to whom it is left but to receive and execute the reverent decrees of this famous Classis of Priests In another place having told how the Pontificals have opened their mouthes unto accursed blasphemy then he returnes unto the Reformists and speakes on this wise (n) P. 189 190. The Pharisees of these times I meane these your great learned Preachers your Good men that sigh and grone for Reformation but their hands with the sluggard denie to worke These counterfaites would raise up a second error even as a second Beast by so much more dangerous by how much it hath more shew of the truth These men instead of this grosse Antichristian government which is now manifest and odious unto all men would bring in a new adulterate forged government in shew or rather in despite of Christs blessed government which they in the pride rashnes ignorance and sensualitie of their fleshly hearts most miserably innovate corrupt and pervert c. The thing itselfe they innovate and corrupt in that they adde new devises of their owne as their Pastorall suspension from their Sacraments their set continued Synods their select Classes of Ministers their setled supreme Councell c. That which Mr Iohnson and others with him doe require is more generall and ambiguous viz. (o) Apol. of Brown Pet. 3 pos 9. p. 64. that the Church be not governed by Popish Canons Courts Classes Customes or any humane inventions but by the lawes and rules which Christ hath appoynted in his Testament But that which H. Barow writes is more plaine and more particularly applyed to the Ministers of England whom he calleth the Reformists Of them he saith (p) Discov p. 191. Their permanent Synods Councels also which they would erect not here to speak of their new Dutch Classes for therein is a secret should onely consist of Priests or Ministers as they terme them people of the Churches be shut out neither be made acquainted with the matters debated there neither have free voyce in those Synods and Councels but must receave and obey without contradiction whatsoever those learned Priests shall decree These Synods and Councels shall have absolute power over all Churches doctrines Ministers to erect ratifie or abrogate to excommunicate or depose at their pleasures Their decrees are most holy without controulement unlesse it be by the Prince or the high Court of Parliament Not here to speake of their solemne orders observed in these Councils and Synodes as their choice by suffrage amongst themselves of their Archisynagogon or Rector Chori their President as they call him propounder or moderator of their Councell about which their predecessours have had no small stir untill their holy Father the Pope put an end to the strife by getting the chaire This stuffe they would bring in againe under colour of Reformation these and many more their leavened corrupt writings of Discipline and their supplications unto the Parliament declare c. Againe he saith (q) Ib. P. 193 These Reformists howsoever for fashion sake they give the people a little libertie to sweeten their mouthes and make them beleeve that they should choose their owne Ministers for further right in the censuring their Ministers or in the ordering the affaires of their Churches they allow not as hath bene sayd yet even in this pretended choice doe they coozen beguile them also leaving them nothing but the smoky windy title of election onely injoyning them to choose some Universitie Clarke one of these Colledge birds of their owne brood or els comes a Synode in the necke of them annihilates the election whatsoever it be They have also a trick to stop it before it come so farre namely in the ordinatiō which must forsooth needs be done by other Priests for the Church that chooseth him hath no power to ordaine him And this makes the mother Church of Geneva and the Dutch Classes I dare not say the secret Classes in England to make Ministers for us in
subject unto one another and unto that which is concluded by all Yea this equality is confirmed by the Synodicall decree in this very Article Whereas there be many evidences of the Reformed Churches in France which shew what their judgement and practise is touching the subjection of particular Congregations unto a superiour Ecclesiasticall power yet instead of many one for the rest may suffice which is from the (y) Oordeel en uyrsprake met den Eed vā Approbatie vā het Synode Nation der Gereform Kerckē van Vrancrijck gehoudē tot Ales in de Cevennes besloten en̄ gearresteert den 6. Oct. 1620. Nationall Synod of Ales translated and published in divers languages containing a most pregnant testimony touching this poynt of our controversie Mr C. and W. B. doe falsely tell me of a Iurie of more then 24 men which condemne my position for an errour and untrueth but as we have seene before in the Ministers of the Palatinate so loe here againe a Jurie indeed of more then twise 24 men and of the most choyse Ministers and Elders of all the French Churches and all sworne to submit unto the resolution and sentence concluded by authority of that Synod After a proposition (z) P. 3. ◠made in this Synod by Monsr Turretin touching some meanes to hinder the Arminian Errours c. the Assembly liking wel of that motion and much commending the Synod of Dort as an effectuall remedie to purge the Church and to root out the heresies touching the poynt of praedestination c. after invocation of the name of God they agreed that the Canons of the forenamed Synod of Dort should be read in their full assembly which being done and every Article seriously weighed they were then by universall consent approved as agreeable to Gods word c. Hereupon all the Ministers and Elders deputed unto this Assembly did each of them severally sweare and protest that they consented and accorded with this doctrine and that they should maintaine and defend it with all their might unto the last breath And to (a) P. 4.5 make this concordant agreement the more authentick and to binde all the Provinces thereunto the Assembly ordained that this present Article should be printed and joyned with the Canons of the mentioned Synod and that the same should be read in the Provinciall Synods and in the Universities that there it might be approved sworne and subscribed unto by the Ministers Elders and Professours of the Universities as also by those that desired to be admitted unto the holy Ministery or unto any Academicall profession And if (b) P. 5. any man should reject either in whole or in part the doctrine contayned in the foresaid Synod and defined by the Canons thereof or should refuse to take the Oath of consent and approbation the Assembly ordained that the same should not be receaved unto any ministery in the Church or unto any office of Schoolemaister The forme of oath taken first in the Nationall Synod afterward to be taken in the Provinciall Synods was (c) P. 6. this I N. sweare and protest before God and this holy Assembly that I receave approve and embrace the whole doctrine taught and decided in the Synod of Dort as being wholy conformed unto the word of God and the Confession of our Churches I sweare and promise during my life to continue in the profession of this doctrine and to defend the same according to my utmost power that I neither in preaching nor teaching in the schooles nor in writing will ever depart from this Rule I declare also and protest that I reject and condemne the doctrine of the Arminians seeing it doth hang the election of God upon the will of man diminisheth and disannulleth the grace of God exalts man and the strength of his free will to cast him downe from above brings in againe Pelagianisme excuseth Popery and overthrowes the certainty of salvation So truely let God help me and be mercifull unto me as I doe before him sweare that which is aforesayd without any equivocation or evasion or inward mentall reservation After this followes the (d) P. 7 8 9 10 11. subscription of the names of the principall lights starres of the French Churches the Ministers and Elders deputed and sent unto that Nationall Synod from the Churches in the severall Provinces of France as of Picardie Champagne the French Iland Normandie Bretagne Dauphine Burgundie Languedoc Guienne Poictou Aniou and many others Hereby the Reader may perceave what power and authority is exercised in the Reformed Churches of France that they doe not observe their Synods for to conclude matters by way of advise and counsell onely but by their decrees and ordinances doe binde men to submit unto their sentence and judgement excluding those from the ministery professions in Universities or Schooles that refuse to consent and yeeld unto their resolutions Hereby it appeares how vainely Mr Canne alledgeth their Confessions perverteth them quite contrary to their meanings That which is alledged out of the Confession of Ausburgh comes not neere the question betwixt us For what though it be there affirmed (e) Confes August Art 14. that no man ought to teach publickly in the Church or to administer the Sacraments unlesse he be lawfully called This proves not that calling to be unlawfull which is directed by an Ecclesiasticall authority out of a particular Congregation or that Classes and Synods have no right to hinder the disordred callings of unfit persons when particular Churches doe offend therein And that the Authors of that Confession did approve of the authority of Synods for the judgement of Ecclesiasticall causes it appeareth both by (f) Syntag. Confes par 2. p. 7. their Appeale unto a generall free Christian Councell which they humbly request and seek in their preface unto the Emperour Charles the fift and afterwards againe speaking of the meanes to purge the Church from abuses they say that (g) Ib. p. 28.29 Confes August Art 21. now long agoe all good men in all nations doe desire a Synod And further This is the usuall and lawfull way to end dissensions namely to referre Ecclesiasticall controversies unto Synods This manner the Church hath observed even from the Apostles And the most excellent Emperours Constantine and Theodosius even in matters not very obscure and in absurd opinions would yet ordaine nothing without a Synod that they might preserve the liberty of the Church in the judgements of doctrines And it is most honourable for the Emperour to imitate the example of those the best Princes c. And therefore as in the times of Constantine and Theodosius particular Churches were subject unto another superiour Ecclesiasticall power that judged their causes and censured offendours so they of the Ausburg Confession desired the like of Charles the fift The publick order set forth in these Low countries is in the next place alledged against me But the (h) Art
what was before (i) P. 204. alledged out of D. F. whom he had cited for his witnesse who speaking of the authoritie of Synodes sayth Which authoritie we know to be granted to the Church by our Saviour Christ practised by his Apostles cōtinued by their successours 300 yeares before there were any Christian Emperours Afterwards falling againe to the point of Popular Government he sayth (k) Ch. pl. p. 95. Mr Beza is very streyt to the people hardly granting the liberty which the very Iesuits doe he should have shewed wherein for the Iesuites are knowne to (l) Bellarm. de Verbo Dei l. 3. c. 5. Mariana Em. Sa in Mat. 18.17 expound the word Church by Prelates in the place whereunto he sends us in Maldonate To evince the late rising of Presbyteriall authoritie in elections he argueth from the 13th Canon of the Synod of Laodicea mentioned (m) Respōsi ad Tract de Ministr Evang. grad c. 22. p. 154 155. by Beza where it was ordered that the election of Ministers should not be permitted to the multitude or people but 1. He doth not rightly interpret the Canon when he saith that this Synod prohibited the body of the Congregation from using that liberty and power which they before alwayes had in Ecclesiasticall government For as Beza saith in the place by him quoted the manner of election here forbidden was not essentiall but accidentall Chemnitius also (n) Exam. Concil Trident par 2. p. 411 412. ed. 1606. shewes that the people were not thereby excluded from the election but that their consent was still required that this Synodall decree was occasioned by the peoples abusing their right unto tumults seditions and diverse confusions 2. By a like inference he might conclude that other erroneous opinions and disordered practises condemned in the Councils and Synods of those times were before allowed and used in the Church THat which he pretends to answer in the third place is taken from this expression which the Authour used in his Preface saying That which some will have to be the slavery bondage of a Church that I esteeme to be the liberty safety and preservation of Churches That which they count a Tyrannicall government that I beleeve to be a Sanctuary against Tyranny and afterwards in the book itself (o) Pag. 83. If I should in doctrine oppugne and in practise deny unto the members of this Church this liberty of appeale unto the Classis as they doe here condemne it in me then might they justly complaine of tyrannicall government and corrupt doctrine then had they cause to bewayle their slavery and bondage Thus he declared his judgement touching the benefit of this kinde of government in opposition to the Title prefixed unto the printed Complaints which Mr C. knew best who framed The matter of Argument couched in these words is sufficiently explained and vindicated (p) P. 36 41. before where the libertie of Appeales suitable to common equity and instituted in the Law is prooved to be agreeable unto the doctrine of the Gospel I. C. ANSVV. I. It is a strange course when there ariseth a controversy touching two contrary opinons which of them is true to be embraced to draw the resolution hereof to the consideration of the usefulnes of the opinions or practises questioned As if because a thing is usefull therefore it is to be concluded it is true c. REPL. 1. It is strange Mr C. did not discerne that there is no other course of reasoning in the Authours holding Classicall government to be a Sanctuary against Tyranny the denyall of Appeales a matter of slavery bondage then in Mr Cannes others accounting Independency to be the libertie freedome of a Church subjection to Classicall government slavery bondage What is here sayd unto the one may as fitly be applyed against the other If his answer be found he doth plainely overthrow his owne (q) Ch. pl. p. 71. 76. Arg. 9. Reas 7. Arguments built upon the same foundation which here he seeks to destroy There was no usefulnes mentioned in the Authours words nor any other to be understood then such as is implyed in the sayd other the like expressions and reasonings of Mr C. 11. Though it be certaine that every trueth of God is usefull to be used without gainsaying when it appeareth to be such yet when this trueth is denyed and the point controverted it is no strange course to proove it to be law by the agreement which it hath with that which is confessed to be law This the Authour hath done in the place above mentioned And besides seeing according to that * Salus populi suprema lex esto law of lawes commonly received the safetie of the people is the highest law and that Appeales are (r) Luth. Tom. 1. f. 231. for the relief of the oppressed and a remedy against wrongs injuries why may we not conclude that such a government where they are in due manner admitted is a Sanctuarie against Tyranny and in this respect rather to be embraced then Independency where the same are denyed I. C. ANSVV. II. The Papists and Hierarchie for their Discipline give the very same reason viz. that there may be no Tyranny and oppression among brethren c. REPL. And so doth Mr C. for Independencie (ſ) Ch. pl. p. 76. that a particular Congregation may not of a Mistres become a servant instead of being a superiour wilfully vassall enslave herself c. I. C. ANSVV. III. I doe deny that this government by Classes Synods serves better for the Churches welfare then that which the Apostles instituted c. REPL. And so wil we when he hath prooved that Independency is the government instituted by the Apostles I. C. ANSVV. IV. If it should be granted that particular Congregations by this kinde of government shall have peace profit credit other worldly respects yet this is no sufficient reason c. REPL. The Defendant never used such a reason this is a skarre-crow of his owne setting up and therefore we must give him leave to please himself in that fivefold shot which he makes as it THe fourth reason which he supposeth he hath found in the Authours book is the mention which he made of the determinations of Nationall Synods concerning the power exercised by the Classis and the consent of all Reformed Churches Hereunto he answers I. Councils may erre c. II. These testimonies are all humaine c. III. This reason is the same which the Papists use c. REPL. I. The Decrees of Synods were not alledged to proove the lawfulnes of this government but to shew the established exercise of it before the Author either knew the Classis or they him that therefore he hath not subjected the Church to this power II. Though Coūcils may erre yet it doth not therfore follow that they do alwayes erre that they may