or for him and that is loosing The former is called binding because it more strictly doth bind him to suffer that punishment to which he was liable upon the Transgression of the Law. There was an Obligation upon him 1. To Obedience 2. Upon Disobedience there follows a Guilt which is an Obligation to Punishment 3. Judgment doth continue this Obligation and makes the Punishment unavoidable The latter is a loosing because upon some condition performed it frees him from the punishment and the bond of guilt Of this binding there be several degrees For as in a Civil Government there be several degrees of punishment according to the several degrees of the offences so it 's in the Church One of the highest punishments and degrees of binding is to make one as an Heathen and a Publican These words are differently understood and expounded Grotius thinks that our Saviour in them did not intend Excommunication Many take it for granted that to be censured and judged an Heathen and Publican is to be cast out of the Church and excommunicated And from these two words Heathen and Publican divers and amongst the rest Quinquecclesiensis and D. Andrews do observe a twofold Excommunication The one is the greater and that is to be as an Heathen the other the less which is to be as a Publican The Heathen was out of the Church the Publican was not The Heathen might not the Publican might come into the Temple the Heathen were strangers to the Common-wealth of the Israel and were Loammi the Publican being a Jew was in the Church but like a scandalous Brother Whether this distinction be here intended or no it 's certain 1. That there are degrees of Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Penalties 2. That by this being as an Heathen and Publican is meant an Ecclesiastical not a civil punishment in matter of Religion 3. Both were deprived of Ecclesiastical Communion In the text If he will not hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican Three things are to be observed 1. The Penalty and the Execution 2. The Sentence to be Executed 3. The Crime or Cause The Execution is to account him as an Heathen and a Publican which is not to take away his House Lands Goods Civil Liberty Life but to separate from him and have no Communion with him in matter of Religion and Spiritual Society and to testifie their dislike of him by shunning his company 2. The sentence is the judgement of the Church whereupon this Separation and Non-communion is grounded For the Church must judge and pass the sentence before we can have any sufficient warrant for refusal of society 3. The crime or cause must be made evident before the Judge pass Sentence and it is not only the trespass or offence but impenitence manifested to the Ecclesiastical Judge Not to hear the Church is for the guilty Brother not to confess and reform upon the Churches publick admonition This puts him in an immediate capacity of condemnation and punishment But more of Ecclesiastical censures in the second Book section 8 The Ratification of this sentence of the Church which is the sixth thing followeth in these words Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. which are added as Hillary saith well in terrorem metus maximi to strike a terrour into the hearts of all such as shall make themselves liable to the censures of the Church Yet they are not only for terrour but for the sweetest consolation of the penitent absolved by the Church and so also for the encouragement of the Church to proceed in Discipline against the greatest For though she hath not the sword nor any coactive force to imprison fine banish put to death and the prophane and worldly wretches do not fear her censures yet her censures shall be executed from Heaven and be more terrible than any punishments inflicted by sword of civil Sovereigns This Ratification includes two things 1. That when this judgment is once past according to the Rules of Christ the supream Judge doth approve and decree it to be irrecoveverable 2. That he will by a Divine and never failing power execute it so that neither can any appeal or complaint of a nullity make it void nor any contrary strength or force hinder the execution In this respect Hillary saith its Judicium immobile and cannot be reversed Hierom that it s corroborated and cannot be infringed Tertullian that its Prejudicium ultimi judicii and stands good as that ever shall section 9 The means whereby this Ratification is obtained and the manner how it is effected come in the last place to be observed The means is their consent and prayer For if two of them shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask it shall be done for them by my Father which is in Heaven which words do signifie that they should agree upon the sentence and pass the same with prayer The manner how it comes to pass to be effected is that when two or three of them are gathered together in Christs name he will be in the midst of them ver 20. For it s not to be done in their own name or by their own power but they must assemble and proceed in Christs name and in his name give the definitive sentence According to this Law the Apostle gave direction in Christs name to gather together and with the power of Jesus Christ to deliver the scandalous person to Satan 1 Cor. 5.4 So that Christ will be present with them direct them and assist them and the work shall be more his than theirs section 10 Having 1. Examined two places not pertinent 2. Enlarged upon the words of the Institution I will thirdly confirm the proposition from such places as treat of the exercise of this power 1. These are such as speak of Legislation 2. Of making Officers 3. Of Jurisdiction The first of Legislation and making of Canons concerning matters controverted As for Canons concerning things not controverted we find single Apostles especially Paul and he most of all in his first Epistle to Timothy declaring and delivering them without any other joyned with them The exercise of this Legislative power we find in that famous Synod held at Jerusalem Acts 15. The difference of the interpretations of this text is no less than of the former For some question whether it was a formal Synod having power to bind or only an Assembly for advice Some make it not only a Synod invested with a binding force but judge it to be a most excellent pattern for all Synodical Assemblies in time to come yet these are not certain whether it was general in respect of all Churches then extant But let it be a Synod having a binding force it s doubted how the Canons could bind other Churches who sent no delegates to represent them and Act for them Whether did they bind because it was a general Council in
those thus Associated may have Communion in Divine Things and Actions and their Pastors with their Flocks before any form of Discipline be introduced or setled and these Believers may by Word and Sacraments receive Heavenly Comfort and attain Eternal Life without such Discipline and before it can be established amongst them and so I hope it is at this time in this Nation with many a faithful servant of God who by the benefit of a good Ministry with God's Blessing upon their Labours are truely converted and continue and go on in a state of Salvation as happily as many who are under a form of Government And here it is to be observed 1. That though the Apostles were extraordinary Officers infallibly directed by the Holy Ghost which Christ gave them yet ordinary Ministers lawfully called and succeeding them if they preach their Doctrine truly have a promise to convert and save the Souls of sinful Men. 2. That the Work of these ordinary Ministers is not only to feed the Flock of Christ already gathered but to convert and gather Sinners unto Christ and this not by the Rod of Discipline but the Word of God which is the Power of God unto Salvation 3. This gaining Souls to Christ is not the gathering of Churches out of Churches and Christians out of Christians to make a party of their own under pretence of a purer Reformation but it 's a far more excellent Work and of another kind tending directly to an higher end 4. After a Minister becomes a Pastour of a Flock and hath relation unto them as his Flock and they to him as his People he must needs have some Power over them and they must be subject unto him and obey him in the Lord and he hath power to remit Sins to shut and open and what he doth in this kind according to his Commission will be made good in Heaven Yet these Acts of his are not Acts of External Discipline but of his Ministerial Office as he is a Servant to Jesus Christ. This I speak not against Discipline which if agreeable to the word of God is a great Blessing but against all such who under pretence of this or that form of Church-Government disturb the Church and discomfort and discourage many a precious Saint of God. The end of this is to manifest that these places of Scripture Mat. 16.19 John 20.22 23. are no grounds whereon to build Church-Government section 5 Because former places are not so pertinent I proceed in the next place to the Words of Institution of Church-discipline you may read them Mat. 18.17 18. De exteriori foro ibi agitur Exterioris fori jurisdictio illo nec alio loco fundata est That 's the only place for the Institution and no other saith Dr. Andrews in that most learned and exact piece far above his other Works To understand this place we must observe 1. The Parties subject to this Tribunal 2. The Causes proper to that Court. 3. In what manner and order Causes are brought in and prepared for Judgment 4. The Judge 5. The Acts of Judgment upon Evidence of the Cause 6. The Ratification of these Acts and so of the Power 7. How this Ratification is obtained and the Judgment made effectual 1. The party subject to this Tribunal is a Brother If thy Brother offend thee verse 15. This may be explained from 1 Cor. 5.11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator or covetous or an idolater c. There are covetous Persons and Idolaters of the World verse 10. and Fornicators and Idolaters which are called Brethren The former are without the latter within the Church The former are subject to the Judgment of God but not of the Church the latter are subject to the Judgment of the Church Do not thou judge them that are within So that the Subjects in this Common-wealth are Brethren Disciples such as profess their Faith in Christ. 2. The Causes are Spiritual and Ecclesiastical and must be considered under that Notion For it 's a Trespass an Offence committed by a Brother as a Brother against a Brother as a Brother whether it be a wrong against a Brother or a sin whereby a Brother is offended grieved displeased For if a Brother be a Fornicator or Idolater c. he must tell the Church and not the State he must be made as an Heathen or Publican if he will not hear the Church this is no Sentence of the State or Civil Judge it 's made good in Heaven so is not the Judgment of the Civil Magistrate It must be the Judgment of a Brother as a Brother within the Church which the Church as a Church must judge and in the name of Christ not of the Civil Soveraign and the Party offending must be delivered up to Satan not to the Sword. Yet one and the same Crime may make a person obnoxious both to the temporal Sword of the Magistrate and the spiritual Censure of the Church and may be justly punishable and punished by both though some of our English Lawyers have delivered the contrary who might ground their Opinion upon Ecclesiastical Supremacy of the King For tho' the Laws of England might determine so yet the Laws of God and Christ do not 3. The manner and order of proceeding is 1. Privately to admonish and if that take effect to proceed no further 2. If upon this the party will not reform he must be charged and convinced before two or three Witnesses and if he shall persist impenitent then he must be convented before the Ecclesiastical Tribunal upon Information and Accusation and the same once made good and evident the Cause is ripe prepared for Judgment section 6 The Judge in the fourth place is the Church Tell the Church where we must know what this Church is The word in the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and we find it used in the Old Testament about seventy times by the Septuagint who so often turn the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by that name Upon perusal of the places we shall find that it signifies Assemblies and of many kinds as good bad holy prophane greater less festival civil military Ecclesiastical and Religious occasional standing orderly confused ordinary extraordinary It 's observable that very seldome some say but once as Psal. 26.5 it signifies a wicked and prophane Society Sometimes not often it 's a Military body But most of all by far a few Texts excepted it notes an holy and religious Convention or Assembly For sometimes it 's a National Polity of Israel under a sacred Notion and very often a religious Assembly for Prayer Fasting Dedications renewing their Covenant with God Praises Thanksgivings and such like Acts of Worship so that the word seems to be appropriate unto Religious Assemblies and though it signifie other Societies yet these most frequently and principally And this is confirmed from the
there be ingrafted so there be natural branches of these Communities as well as of the great and Universal Society for such there have been and that by divine Ordination and never any yet could evidently prove out of Scripture that this Law and Ordinance which made the Children part of the Parents and one Person with them in matter of Religion was abrogated or reversed to this day Therefore Children born of Christian Parents who were Members both of the universal and particular Communities and not disfranchised are members of a Christian Community by birth at least in Charity and they must needs be presumptuous Dictatours who exclude them It 's true that Infants born of men as men are men of such as are free are free of such as are noble are noble And so such as are born of Mahometans are Mahometans and such as are born of Jews are Jews such as are born of Heathens are by their birth Heathens and aliens to the Common-wealth of the Christian Israel and strangers from the Covenants of Promise Eph. 2.12 And shall not such as are born of Christians be Christians That Covenant which God made with Abraham though accidentally different is essentially the same with that of the Gospel as appears Rom. 4. and Gal. 3. yet in that Covenant God promised to be a God to him and his seed after him and this part of it which includes the Children with their Parents must needs remain in force if there be no clause of exception in the new Testament If there be Where is it As for the example and instance from the Apostles baptizing only such as professed their Faith. 1. It doth not follow that only such persons were baptised because that none but such are expresly named 2. When it s written that whole Houses were baptized no wit of man can prove that none of these were Infants 3. Those expresly mentioned were adult sui juris such are not Children and their Baptism was but Matter of Fact not of Law shall the children be first seminally and virtually in their Parents then after extraction by Birth part of their Parents and one person with them both by the Laws of God and Men even so far as they may be punished for the sins of their Parents and shall their Parents be bound for them and they bound in their parents in matter of Religion And shall not Gods promise extend so far as their Obligation surely it must This manner of Incorporation by birth is from God who 1. by his Divine providence brings them forth into the light of the World within the bosom of the Church so that they are born of Christian Parents who are members of a Community Christian and 2. From his Institution For though an Infant should be born of Christian Parents Members of a Christian Community yet he could not be a Christian and have any priviledge spiritual except it had been God's will and pleasure to account and judge him to be such For its the Decree the Promise the Covenant of God that makes him a Christian For as born of his immediate Parents or by them of Adam or of them as godly or ungodly he cannot be a Member of the Church And to be so is not to have actual Faith or to be justified and sanctified as believers at age but to have a right unto the promise which no Heathen or any other born out of the Church can have And as part of his Parents and included in the Covenant by the will of God he hath this priviledge The Promise saith Peter is to you and your Children and to all afar off even to as many as the Lord our God shall call Acts 2.39 where observe that the promise was not only to them at age but also to their Children Again You are the Children of the Prophets and of the Covenant which God made with our fathers saying unto Abraham In thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed Acts 3.25 Where note 1. That the Covenant was concerning everlasting bliss by Christ the seed of Abraham 2. That this Covenant includes all Nations not only Jews but Gentiles 3. That this is the Covenant of the Gospel for substance 4. That the present Jews were within this Covenant by birth and that both for the obligation to duty and the right unto the promise For they were the children of the Prophets and of the Covenant which neither the Heathens nor their children could be before they were called and their children in them From all this it appears how the Original of these Communities are from God for He 1. makes them Christians 2. Multiplies them in the same Vicinity 3. Inclines their hearts to associate and stirs up some eminent persons to motion and endeavour the association 4. By his Divine providence brings some into the world in the bosom of the Church and includes by his gracious Covenant Infants with their Parents in this spiritual Society section 8 After the Explication of the Definition the Declaration of the Original of these Societies it remains we consider the degrees and distinction of the members For though the Community in respect of a Form of outward Government be an homogenical body yet considered in it self and in the qualities of the several members there is an imparity and something organical in it For they are so qualified and the gifts of God so variously disposed in them that they are several ways disposed for to contribute according to their several graces something to the benefit of the whole and one another This the Apostle makes clear 1 Cor. 12. and 14. Chap. These distinctions and degrees are like those in the members of civil Society For 1. Some are virtualiter diminute cives incompleat members as women children and many weak Christians 2. Some are so gifted and qualified as they are fit to act and give suffrage in business which concerns the whole These are formaliter cives compleat members 3. Some are endued with more than ordinary knowledge wisdom grace above the rest and most fit to introduce a form of Government and act in the highest businesses of Administration These are eminenter cives eminently members Such as being members of another Church and yet sojourn or inhabit in a Community distant from their own before they are incorporate though upon Certificate and Letters communicatory they may partake in sacris yet they are but diminute cives members incompleat and for a time For as such they can have no vote or suffrage of any power in things publick They may indeed advise and declare their mind and their counsel may be liked and accepted section 9 This Community Ecclesiastical hath the same inseparable adjuncts with the civil except propriety of goods which they have in another respect For the members have liberty and equality and an immediate capacity of a form of Government For 1. They are free from any subjection either to any other Communities or one
God was nothing but jus ad recte agendum a right to do right in matters of Religion If they did otherwise they abused their power they lost it not And if an Heathen Prince or State should become Christian they acquire no new Right but are further engaged to exercise their power in abolishing Idolatry and establishing the true Worship of the true God. This may be signified by the Titles of Nursing-Fathers of the Church Defenders of the Faith Most Christian Most Catholick King. All which as they signified their Right so they also pointed at their Duty which was to protect the true Church and maintain the True Christian Catholick Faith. 4. Though Regal and Sacerdotal power were always distinct and different in themselves yet they were often disposed and united in one Person Thus Melchisedeck was both King and Priest Thus Romulus was Prince and the chief Pontiffe For he is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Halicar Antiqu. Rom. lib. 2. The succeeding Kings took the same place After the Regal power was abolished it was an high Office. When Rome became Imperial the Emperours took the Title of Supream Pontiffe and some of them after they became Christian retained it Yet still as the Powers so the Acts were distinct For Melchisedeck as King ruled his People in Righteousness and Peace as Priest officiated received Tithes and blessed Abraham As they were sometimes united so they were divided For God entailed the Sacerdotal power upon the house of Aaron and afterwards the Regal power upon the family of David Neither did Christ or his Apostles think it fit to make the Ministers Magistrates or the Magistrates Ministers Yet in this Union or Division you must know that this Sacerdotal and Ministerial power was not this Civil power of Religion which always belonged to the Civil Governours even then when these two powers were divided 5. If Civil powers stablish Religion and that by Law call Synods order them ratifie their Canons divest spiritual and Ecclesiastical persons of their temporal priviledges or restore them yet they do all this by their civil power by which they cannot excommunicate absolve suspend much less officiate and preach and administer Sacraments In this respect if the civil power make a civil Law against Idolatry Blasphemy Heresie or other scandal they may by the same power justly punish the offenders by the sword and the Church censure them by the power of the Keyes 6. This jus Religionis ordinandae this power of ordering matters of Religion is not the power of the Church but of the State not of the Keyes but of the sword The Church hath nothing to do with the sword nor the State with the Keyes Christ did not say tell the State and whatsoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. Neither did he say of the Church that she beareth not the sword in vain Therefore he must needs be very ignorant or very partial that shall conceive that the State is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the power of the Keyes section 3 These things premised give occasion to consider how the Oath of Supremacy is to be understood especially in these words wherein the Kings or Queens of England were acknowledged over all persons in causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil all supream head and because that word Head was so offensive it was changed into Governour For the clearing hereof it 's to be observed 1. That by these words it was intended to exclude all foreign Power both Civil and Ecclesiastical especially that which the Bishops of Rome did challenge and also exercise within the Dominions of the Crown of England 2. That the Kings and Queens of Enland had no power supream in making Laws and passing judgements without the Parliament Therefore by supream Governour was meant supream Administratour for the execution of the Laws in the intervals of Parliament In this respect the Canons and injunctions made by the Clergy though confirmed by royal assent without the Parliament have been judged of no force 3. That by Ecclesiastical causes are meant such causes as are materially Ecclesiastical yet properly civil as before For matters of Religion in respect of the outward profession and practice and the Parties professing and practising are subject to the civil power For by the outward part the State may be disturbed put in danger of Gods judgements and the persons are punishable by the sword even for those crimes Yet neither can the sword reach the soul nor rectifie the conscience except per accidens That by Ecclesiastical is not meant spiritual in proper sense is clear because the Kings of England never took upon them to excommunicate or absolve neither had those Chancellours that were only Civilians and not Divines power to perform such acts Yet they received their power from the Bishops and it was counted Ecclesiastical 4. In respect of these Titles those Courts which were called Spiritual and Ecclesiastical derived their power from the Crown And the Bishops did correct and punish disquiet disobedient criminous persons within their Diocess according to such authority as they had by Gods word and as to them was committed by the authority of this Realm These are the words of the Book of Ordination in the consecration of Bishops The words seem to imply that they had a mixt or at least a twofold power one by the word as trusted with the power of the Keyes the other from the Magistrate or Crown and that was civil Such a mixt power they had indeed in the high Commission Yet though this may be implyed yet it may be they understood that their power by the word of God and from the Crown were the same The act of restoring the ancient jurisdiction to the Crown 1 Eliz. 1. doth make this further evident For it 's an act of restoring the ancient jurisdiction in Ecclesiasticals especially to the Crown for that 's the Title Where it must be observed that the power was such as the Parliament did give 2. That they did not give it anew but restore it 3. They could not had no power to give it if it belonged to the Crown by the Constitution but to declare it to be due upon which Declaration the Queen might resume that which the Pope had usurped and exercised 4. It 's remarkable that not the Queen but the Parliament by that act did restore it as the act of the Oath of supremacy was made by a Parliament which by that act could not give the King any power at all which was not formerly due In respect of Testaments temporal jurisdiction Dignities Priviledges Titles as due unto the Church by humane Constitution and donation all Ecclesiastical causes concerning these were determinable by a civil power How tithes are a lay-fee or divine right hath been declared formerly Hence it doth appear that the Oath of Supremacy was not so easily understood as it was easily taken by many and the Oxford Convocation I believe but that they
that they are Members of such a Church for every single Member is subject to the whole Here is no exemption of any though they should be Bishops Metropolitans Patriarchs The Patriarchs of Rome may challenge a transcendent power to be above all Laws and all Judgments he will command all judge all will be commanded will be judged by none But all this is but an unjust and insolent Usurpation For Christs Institution in those words Tell the Church excludes such powers dethrones such persons He that will sit in the Church of God as God must needs be the Son of Perdition From this subjection ariseth an Obligation to acknowledge the just power of the Church to be faithful unto it and by all means to seek the good thereof to obey the Laws and submit unto the just Judgment of the same section 2 This being the brief Explication of subjection whence a Christian is denominated a subject of a particular Church under a form of Government the next thing to be done is to enquire who are subjects how they may be distinguished and how they may be divided and how educated Subditi enim Ecclesiae distinguuntur distincti dividuntur educantur 1. They are distinguished both from others and also among themselves from others they are differenced for some are within some without some are Brethren some are not This is implied by the Apostle when he saith If any man that is called a Brother and what have I to do to judge them that are without Do not ye judge them that are within 1 Cor. 5.11 12. Therefore there are such as are not Brethren such as are without and cannot be judged by the Church these are no Subjects There are Brethren such as are within and may be judged these are Subjects By this distinction Mahumetans Pagans unbelieving Jews are excluded For none can be a Member of a Church Christian but a Christian who by Baptism is solemnly admitted to be a Subject of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and a Member of the Universal Church And whosoever shall be such may be a Member and so a Subject of a particular visible Church Yet one may be a Member of one particular Church and not of another for as in civil politicks none can be a subject of two several States civil at one time so in Ecclesiastical Government no person can be a subject of two particular Independent Churches at the same time Therefore when the Apostle saith Do not ye judge them within is to be understood of the Members of that particular Church of Corinth For they could not judge them of the Church of Rome of Ephesus of Jerusalem or any other but their own yet here is to be observed that manifest Apostates though they have been Christians cannot be received into a Christian Church nor such as have been Members of an Heretical Superstitious Idolatrous Church till they have renounced their Heresie Superstition Idolatry Neither must any subject himself to any such Church nor continue in it if formerly he hath been a Member for all sinful Communion is unlawful Yet wherein there is no such thing and God in his Providence casts him upon another Church he may subject and also continue As in a civil State there are sojourners and strangers and also plenary subjects so there may be in a particular Church For all such as are Members and Subjects of one Church and yet either sojourn or inhabit in another for less or longer time they are not Subjects till they be incorporate yet they are Subjects of the Catholick Church in any part of the World. And upon Letters Testimonial or any other sufficient Information they may be admitted to Communion in Word Prayer and Sacraments for these are priviledges of the Universal Church and common to all Christians of Age as Christians But these doth not render them Members of that particular Church for Discipline without Submission and Admission Only if they do offend against the just Canons of that Church where they are Strangers The Rule of delictum in alieno territorio c. holds good and they may be censured where the Offence is committed and where the Scandal is committed Of plenary subjects some are such by Birth some by Election Those by Birth are like the native Jew those by Election are like the Proselite Yet this is to be observed that as one who was an Heathen might be made both a Proselite and a Member of that Church of Israel at the same time and the same Act so one that was of no Church as being no Christian may be made a Christian and a Member of a particular Church visible at once Therefore we must distinguish of such as are incorporated into a Church for as Ephes. 2.11 12. There were such who were Gentiles and so none of God's people and aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel and strangers to the Covenants of Promise who afterwards ver 19. were no more Strangers and Forraigners but fellow Citizens with the Saints and of the Houshould of God and so of no people made a people and more of no Christians made Christians There be others who formerly were Christians and that which is more Subjects of some one particular Church which are made Subjects of another This is so to be understood as that to be a Christian or a Member of a particular Church is not meerly from Birth but from birth of Christian Parents who are Members of the Church Universal and sometimes nay often of a particular Church under a form of Government Neither doth this Birth without Divine Ordination incorporate us into the one or other For to be a Christian is not from Nature but from God's gracious Ordination which requires that even those who are born in the Bosom of the Church and baptized too should when they come to Age be instructed in the Covenant and also own their Baptism by profession of their Faith and promise for to keep the Covenant The neglect of this is the cause why many Congregations have such unworthy Members Yet it 's not necessary by any Divine Precept that all should be excluded whom we do not certainly know to be real Saints And here I will take occasion to debate of two things much controverted in these times 1. Of the qualification of a Member of the Church 2. Of separation from a Church section 3 For the qualification of the Church-member it 's agreed that visible Saints though not real may be Members of a Church But the Question is what a visible Saint is By visible the Congregational party in particular Mr. Hooker of New England understands one that shall appear to such as should admit him to be a Saint This Saintship is as he informs us in knowledge and practise and he grants a latitude in both This visibility is that whereby they appear to us to be Saints in respect of their knowledge and practise And thus they appear and may be
from an inferiour to a provincial Synod and from the Provincial to the Patriarchal which was the highest Court except the Christian Emperours call a General Council And that was said to be a General Council which extended beyond the bounds of one Patriarchate especially if it included all 9. After these Patriarchates began to be such eminent places many ambitiously sought them and there was great contention amongst themselves who should be greatest and have the precedency Neither could General Councils by their determinations prevent them for time to come 10. The Patriarch of Rome though but at the first one of the three and afterwards of the five and according to some of the seven if you take in Justiniana Prima with Carthage did challenge the precedency and preeminency of them all And though the Council of Chalcedon gave the Constantinopolitan See equal priviledges with his yet he would not stand to their determination but afterward challenged greater power then was due began to receive Appeals from Transmarine parts beyond the bounds of his Diocess and to colour his Usurpation alledged a Canon of the Nicene Council which was not found in the Greek Original He will be President in all General Councils no Canons must be valid without his Approbation His Ambition aspires higher when the title of Universal Bishop had been denied the Patriarch of Constantinople by Gregory the Great Boniface his Successour assumes it And by degrees they who follow him usurpe the Power and at length the civil Supremacy is arrogated and the Roman Pontiffe must dispose of Kingdoms and Empires and will depose and advance whom he pleaseth And is not he the Man of Sin and the Son of Perdition who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God shewing himself that he is God 2 Thes. 2.3 4. From all which words he that goes under the name of M. Camillas defines Antichrist in this manner Antichristus est Pontifex maximus Elatione vicariatu assimulatione Christo oppositus lib. 1. c. 3. de Antichristo As the Roman State subdued and subjected unto themselves the former Empires and Monarchies of the World and this in themselves after that became Vassals and Servants unto one Absolute Imperial Monarch and by him rome-Rome-Heathen raigned over the Kings of the Earth Revel 17.18 So in tract of time Rome-Christian usurped Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical over all Churches and her Patriarch swallowing up all the power of the former Patriarchs became Universal Monarch and Visible Head of the Universal Church The occasions true causes of this Usurpation and the means whereby he by degrees aspired to this transcendent power are well enough known Some will tell us that Episcopacy or rather Prelacy was the occasion at least of the Hierarchy and the Hierarchy of the Papacy For if there had not been a Bishop invested with power in himself and a provincial Jurisdiction given to one Metropolitan and many Metropolitans subjected to one Patriarch the Bishop of Rome could have had no advantage nor colour for his Usurpation This makes many prudent men jealous of Episcopacy especially as many understand a Bishop to be one invested with the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and that by divine Law without the Presbytery Division and Subordination which are essential to Government could be no proper cause of the Papal Supremacy But the trusting of power Ecclesiastical in one man extending and enlarging the bounds of one particular Church and independent Judicatory too far and subordinating the People and Presbyters to the Monarchical Jurisdiction of one Bishop the several Bishops to one Metropolitan the several Metropolitans to one Patriarch and several Patriarchs to one Roman Pontiffe did much promote and effectually conduce to the advancement of one man to the Universal Vicarage At the first institution of the Hierarchy neither the people nor Presbytery were excluded the Patriarchates were of a reasonable extent the Patriarchs independent one upon another and the end intended was Unity and the prevention of Schism and the subordination seemed to be made out of mature deliberation Yet humane Wisdom though never so profound if it swerve from the Rules of divine Institution proves Folly in the end Let not all this discourage any Ecclesiastical Community or disswade them from division co-ordination subordination if so be they keep the power in themselves as in the primary Subject and reserve it to the whole and not communicate it to a part and keep themselves within a reasonable compass From all this we may conclude that a Secession from Rome and the rejection of his Ecclesiastical Supremacy if so be we retain the true Doctrine and pure Worship of God is no Schism especially in England For 1. there were many Provinces out of the great Patriarchate and no ways subject to any of them but they had their own proper Primates and Superindendents Amonst these England was one and by the Canon of Nice had her own Jurisdiction and was under no Patriarch but a Primate of her own 2. The Bishop of Rome was at first confined to that City and after he was made Patriarch he had but the ten Suburbicarian Provinces and the rest of the Provinces of Italy had Milan for their Metropolis 3. That after the Conversion of the Saxons that that Bishop should exercise any power in England was a meer Usurpation And to cast off an usurped power and the same Tyrannical could be no Schism at all There is a Book printed at Oxford in the year 1641 wherein we find several parcels of several Authors bound up in one The first Author is Dr. Andrews the second Bucer the third Dr. Reynolds the fourth Bishop Usher the fifth Mr. Brerewood the sixth Mr. Dury the seventh Mr. Francis Mason The design of the whole is to maintain Episcopacy and in part to prove the Hierarchy 1. Some of the formentioned Authors do grant with Hierome that the Church was first governed by the common advice of Presbyters though this position in strict sence is not true as hath been formerly proved 2. Some grant that at the first Institution of Bishops a Bishop was nothing else but a President or Moderator in Presbyterial Meetings 3. That afterwards these were constant and standing with a power of Suderintendency not only over the people but the Presbyters within a City and the Territory thereof 4. That when a Church was extended to a Province in the Metropolis thereof they placed a chief Bishop called a Metropolitan who had the precedency of all the other City Bishops 5. That these Bishops could do no common act binding the whole circuit without the Presbytery 6. That there were such Bishops and Metropolitans in the Apostles times thus Dr. Usher doth affirm and he quotes Ignatius to this purpose 7. That there was an imparity both in the State and Church of Israel under the Old Testament and so likewise