English Presbyterians being firm Adherers unto the first Reformers did in their Opposition to the Papal Tyranny hold first That there was no proper Visible Church but what was Particular secondly That Particular Churches were of the same Extent with Single Congregations and the Power of those in Office was confined to the Limits of a single Congregation §. 16 The Learned Mr. Cartwright a Person of that esteem amongst the Nonconformists in the Reign of the Queen as to be chosen by them to defend their Principles against Dr. Whtgift expressing their sense with much Freedom and Clearness I need insist on no other to prove what I affirm of them and who-ever is conversant with the Books then written will see that their Authors so generally and frequently refer'd themselves to his Writings and so constantly undertook his Defence as to be satisfied that the mentioning what was pressed by others is altogether unnecessary §. 17 This Learned Cartwright writing in Defence of the Admonition tot he Parliament Published in the Year 1572. Answered by Dr. Whitgift doth not only make a Reply to that Answer which was in the Year 1574. defended by Whitgift But in his Reply to this Defence of the Answer Anno 1575. expresseth himself fully to this effect I both mention Cartwright's Reply to Whitgift's Defence of the Answer and do inculcate it because Fuller Heylin and Walton have told the World that the Defence of the Answer kept the Field with all the Marks of an absolute Victory whereas it 's most manifest that Cartwright made a Reply thereunto in two Parts the First Anno 1575. and Anno 1577. he Published the rest And what is Remarkable Fuller in the same or very next Page where he so confidently avers that Cartwright never Replyed to the Second Answer doth himself refer to the first part of the Reply that was made unto it See his Church Hist Cent. 16. l. 9. p. 102. Now in the first Part of this second Reply Cartwright fully Confirms the Truth of my Assertion That every Particular Church should have her Bishop is manifest by Paul to Timothy For seeing the Discription of a Bishop which he gives doth Agree unto the Minister of every Congregation and nothing there requir'd in the one which is not in the other it follows that the Minister of every Congregation is the Bishop thereof For the Description agreeing with every of them the things described must likewise Secondly unless he do by this description of the Bishop set forth the nature of every Minister of the Word in his Congregation in describing the Offices of the Church he has left out the Principalest Members and was more careful in describing the Deacons Ministry not occupied in the Word than the teaching Ministries But that is absurd it must follow that he understood them by the name of Bishop Furthermore St. Paul's Bishop was appointed to the same Place whereunto his Deacons But his Deacons were assigned to a Particular Congregation St. Paul also there assigning the Charge and Care of the Bishop over the Church of God must either give him Charge over the Whole Body of the Catholick Church or over One Particular Congregation or of the Faithfull Company of one House But he extendeth not the Charge over all the Catholick Church for that were to make a Pope not a Bishop nor restraineth him to the Faithful of one Household considering that he opposeth the Government of his House to the Government of the Church It followeth therefore that he appointeth him to one Particular Church That by this Word Church must be understood one of these three Significations it standeth upon this Ground that in none of St. Paul's other Epistles or St. Luke's Writings that word Church is ever used otherwise and never signifieth the Church either of a Province or Diocese Rep. 2. Part. 1. p. 360. and in page 687. saith he I have shewed that Scripture useth not to call a Province or Diocese a Church but either the whole Vniversal or else a Particular Congregation Thus you see how Mr. Cartwright doth not only hold a Presbyter and a Bishop to be the same office but that the office of a Presbyter is Appropriated to a single Congregatio and that the Holy Scripture never speakes of a Diocesane or Provincial Church but only of the Vniversal which is Invisible and a Particular Church and therefore not of a Classical Church But §. 18 What I shall offer from the multitude of Nonconformists whose Sorrows encreased on James the First 's coming to the English Throne will evidence what I affirm to Persons of the meanest Capacities For Dr. Ames who gathered up the sence of these Old Nonconformists whom he styles in his Preface to his English Puritanism Rigid Presbyterians declared positively that they Hold and Maintain That every Company Congregation and Assembly of true Believers joining together according to the Order of the Gospel in the true Worship of God is a true Visible Church of Christ and that the same Title viz. of True Visible Church is Improperly given to other Societies Combinations or Assemblies whatsoever That Christ Jesus hath not Subjected any Church or Congregation of his to any other Superiour Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction than unto that which is within it self So that if a whole Church or Congregation shall err in any Matter of Faith and Religion no other Churches or Spiritual Church-Officers have by any Warrant from the Word of God Power to Censure Punish or Controul the same But are only to Counsel or Advise the same and leave their Souls to the immediate Judgment of Christ and their Bodies to the Sword and Power of the CIVIL MAGISTRATE who alone upon Earth hath Power to Punish a whole Church or Congregation They hold that every Established Church ought as a special Prerogative wherewith she is endowed by Jesus ChrisT to have Power and Liberty to choose their own Spiritual and Ecclesaistical Officers They hold and believe the EQuality in Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Authority of Churches and Church-Ministers is no more Derogatory and Repugnant to the State and Glory of a Monarch than the Parity and Equality of School-Masters or Masters of Families Chap. 2. § 1. 5. 11. There was also about this time a Protestation of the Kings Supremacy made in the Name of the Afflicted Ministers in which they declare That they confine and bound all Ecclesiastical Power within the Limits only of one Particular Congregation holding that the greatest Ecclesiastical Power ought not to stretch beyond the same And that it is an ARROGATING PRINCELY Supremacy for any Ecclesaistical Person or Persons whosoever to take upon themselves Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over many Churches That it is utterly unlawful for any one Minister to take upon himself or accept of a sole Eclesiastical Jurisdiction over so much as one Congregation And therefore some of the most Honest and Godly in the Congregation ought to be adjoined to the Minister in the Spiritual Regiment of
we would speak exactly neither a Classis of Officers Assembled nor a Company of Visible Saints combined can properly be called a Church They viz. the Independents deny a Classis of Officers to be a Church and We who are for Classes deny a Company of Saints combined without Officers to be a Church being both of them but PARTS of a Church part of the Matter of a Church and therefore PROPERLY no Church The Truth is tho' both a Classis and a Company of Saints combined without Officers have by Custom obtained to be called Churches yet PROPERLY they are but Parts or Members of the whole Church diversly combined But we add If we will speak exactly a Particular Congregation consisting of Officers and Members is not PROPERLY a Church but a Member of the Catholick Visible POLITICAL Church And if they much more some Members of that Member Visible Saints without Officers are Improperly called a Church Again here lies one of the great Mistakes in the Independent way That they imagine a Church without and before any Officers and then give them Power to make Officers So far the Learned Mr. Cawdrey §. 5 2. The Judicious Mr. Hudson states the Controversie after the same manner but more elaborately and with greater Logical Exactness and expresly affirms the Catholick Church Visible to be a Totum Integrale or POLITICAL Society to be a Corporation or Body Politick in which there is a Governing and Governed Part. And on the Supposition that the Catholick Church Visible is a Totum Integrale 't will unavoidably follow as Learned Mr. Calamy hath happily expressed it in his Preface to Mr. Hudson that the Congregational Government is not right The Truth is saith he the Position there held forth would utterly overthrow the Grounds and Pillars of the Congregational Government for if there be a Catholick Church Visible and this Church be not only a Church Entitive but a Church Organical and a Totum Integrale having all Church Powers habitually seated in the Officers of it which they have Commissions from Christ to Exert and put into Act upon a Lawful Call and if particular Congregations are Integral Parts and Members of the Church Catholick as the Jewish Synagogues were of the Jewish Church and if the Ministry Orders and Censures were given by Christ first to the Church General Visible and secondarily to the Church Particular then 't will follow that the particular Congregation is not the First Receptacle of Church Power and that all Church Power is not Entirely and Independently in a particular Congregation So far Mr. Calamy to whom I add That according to this Notion Visible Saints combined for Church Communion without Officers are not a Church Essential and have not a Power to choose Officers c. For upon this Principle it 's manifest yea 't is owned That to the Catholick Church Visible which is a Totum Integrale or an Organized Body a POLITICAL Church the Administration and Immediate Participation of Government and all other Ordinances are firstly and immediately given yea further it must be granted that particular Churches whether Congregational or Classical Provincial or National are not Properly Churches but Integral Parts of the Catholick Visible POLITICAL Church that whoever is a Visible Christian has an Immediate Right to all Ordinances and that the Relation of every Minister is firstly and habitually unto the Catholick Church Visible and secondarily to this or that Particular Church which is not Properly a Church that where-ever any single Christian comes he is a Member of the Particular Church in that Place and has a Right to all Ordinances tho he never joyn'd himself to any and whoever is ordained he is a Pastor of the Catholick Church may Administer all Ordinances whither soever he comes and Excommunicate Delinquents Tho' for Order sake his Power is not exercised yet the Power remains Entire in every Ordained Minister even in them who are called to take the Charge of any particular Church §. 6 1. On the other hand the First Reformers of all Perswasions subverted this Notion in their Opposition unto the Papists by denying such a thing as a Visible Catholick Church Sublato Fundamento tollitur opus And they who now own that the many Visible Christians scattered through the World may be called the Catholick Church Visible yet do strenuously oppugn its being a Political Church And these Congregationalists affirm the Church Catholick Visible to be Totum Vniversale Genericum or as they sometimes express it a Totum Essentiale that this Totum Genericum gives Essence unto its Species or Parts and is its Cause and in order of Nature before its Species as a Cause is before its Effects But then it must to prevent mistake be carefully observ'd that by Church Universal Visible they mean a Congregational or a Particular Church Essential which including the General Nature of a Church they call General or Vniversal but such as hath where the Combination is its Essentials existent antecedently to the Consideration of its being an Integrum or a Body Politick and as such is dressed with a Power of choosing its Officers and of becoming thereby a Totum Integrale or an Organick Body §. 7 2. Fit Matter Combined before formed into an Organick Body is with them the Church Essential the only immediate Seat of Church Power or to express it in the Words of Mr. Allen and Mr. Sheppard Def. of the Nine Proposit p. 88. The true Form of all Church Societies Instituted by Christ to which he hath given the actual Administration and Immediate Participation of Church Government and all other Instituted Ordinances as the Subject thereof is Congregational §. 8 These two Reverend Brethren do not I confess think themselves obliged to encumber this Controversie with those Logical Niceties of a Totum Genericum a Totum Integrale yet do they hold That the true State of this Controversie lies here concerning the NATURE ORDER and FORM of such Visible Societies as Christ Jesus by Divine Institution in the Gospel hath reduced his Visible Members unto for the Actual and Immediate Injoyment of all his Instituted Ordinances And the Chain of their Principles lies thus First There is a Particular Church Essential which is Congregational this Congregation is made up of Visible Saints who upon their Mutual Consent and Agreement to walk together according to Gospel Rule have an Immediate Right to Stated Communion in all the Special Ordinances of the Gospel that as they have Power to Combine together as aforesaid so being combined they have a Power of choosing their own Officers as being furnished with such have received Authority from Jesus Christ to Exercise Government and of enjoying all Ordinances of Worship within themselves §. 9 These then are the Points wherein Mr. Cawdrey Hudson and others who were for the Classical Churches and Government differed from the old Nonconformists and the English Presbyterian and Congregationalist For the Ecclesiastical Presbyterians held the Catholick Church
AN APOLOGY FOR THE English Presbyterians WITH A DEFENCE OF THE Heads of Agreement Assented to by the Vnited Ministers in the Year 91. LONDON Printed and are to be Sold by the Booksellers of London and Westminster 1699. TO THE READER IN the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and James the First the English Presbyterians were represented to be for such a Church-Government as was Inconsistent with and Destructive of the King's Supremacy in Matters Ecclesiastical as well as of the Diocesan Form And that the Civil Magistrate might be induc'd to Believe it Three Articles were proposed to be Subscribed unto the First about the Supremacy the other Two about the Government Liturgy and Ceremonies of the Church whereupon they who refused Subscription only to the Second and Third were said to do so because they would not Allow of the First This Accusation was the more generally Receiv'd because the English Presbyterians Corresponded with their Brethren in Scotland who deny the Supremacy about Episcopacy the Liturgy and the Ceremonies and among the Conforming Clergy there were some who would have introduced the Classical Government under the Name of Diocesan which moved Archbishop Bancroft to Publish his Scotizing Dangerous Positions and Survey Besides the Classical National Government being founded on a Divine Right was the more frightful to the Queen her Nobility and Gentry who would never suffer the Divine Right of the Diocesan Government knowing that the Divine Right of a National Church Government of any sort and the Regal Supremacy can never simul semel dwell in the same Kingdom the Setting up of the One being a Subversion of the other The English Presbyterians Observing the Nature of the Accusation and the Arts used to insinuate the Belief of it into the Minds of their Governours judg'd it necessary to do their Part to clear themselves from those Imputations which they did in their Protestations Petitions and other Writings by a Free Open and Vndisguised Representation of their Principles about the Nature and Constitution and Power of Particular Churches and also about the King 's Supremacy making it Evident that in all these Points they agreed entirely with the first Reformers even with them who sate up a Church at Franckfort in Queen Mary's day and had a Chief hand in Reforming the Church of England under Queen Elizabeth who settled Parochian Churches which for their Form are the same with Congregational as the only Churches of Divine Institution recognizing all the Superiorities and Preheminences which the Diocesan Bishop hath above the Presbyter to be only Jure Regio or Parliamentario so that as the Parochian Presbyters are of God's Institution the Diocesan Bishop is of the Prince's making and accordingly as every Creator takes care of his own Creature as God has Provided a Maintainance for the Presbyter the King hath also Endowed the Bishop which is as I take it the true reason why Sr. Thomas Ridley a Person Zealous for the Church in his View of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Laws Par. 3. Cap. 5. Affirms That God hath by his Word made Tythes due to Parochian Churches but not to Diocesan Bishops whose Indowments stood in good Temporal and Finable Lands which Gratious Princes and other good Benefactors of former Ages bestowed upon them The English Presbyterians keeping tightly to those Principles on which the Reformation began were Esteemed by the Nobility and Gentry to be Men of such Peaceable Principles as might be safely Indulg'd who therefore oft in Parliaments made Application to the Prince on their behalf On these Principles the late Union between the Congregational and Presbyterian was entered into giving so much Security to the Church of England that no Sincere Approver of it can have any hand in setting up that Government which endangers it Their being for any such Model is a being for what destroys those Churches which they themselves Believe to be of God's Appointment Nor Indeed can they be for the Divine Institution of any other Particular Churches than what are Congregational unless upon this Principle That the Catholick-Church-Visible is a Govern'd Society that hath a Supreme Power under Christ Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical Authorized to Govern the Whole by Legislation and Judgment Which is a Notion so contrary to what not only all true Protestants in general but the English Presbyterians as well as the Congregationalists in particular are for that they detest and abhor it A Clear Conviction of these things upon mature Deliberation and a serious Observation of the Sentiments of our Wisest and most kind Friends with a sincere Desire that my Brethren may be cleared from those Aspersions which either through the Inadvertency of some of themselves or the Crafty Insinuations of their Adversaries hath been cast upon them and that they may continue in the Peaceable Injoyment of that Liberty which through the Auspicious influence of the Government they are Possessed of hath moved me to make this Apologetical Representation of their Genuine Principles Being strongly Perswaded that as our Governours will consider the Real difference there is between the Principles of the English and CLASSICAL Presbyterians and notwithstanding their Indignation against the Latter will always extend their Generous and Christian Compassions towards the Former So my Brethren of the Presbyterian Denomination will give some Evident Demonstrations of their sincere and Constant adherence to those Principles of the English Presbyterians as Delivered long ago in their Protestations c. and lately in the Heads of Agreement and Particularly to those Articles of it by which they are set at the greatest Distance from Intermedling with the National Church Form Farewel ERRATA PAge 49. line 20. for Especially read Specifically p. 61. l. 6. for as read and l. 16. for Ecclesiastical read Classical AN APOLOGY FOR THE English Presbyterians THE Prejudices which are in the minds of many against the Presbyterians in this Kingdom arising from some mistaken Notions entertain'd about the Principles which Men of that Denomination are said to embrace there can't be I think a more Effectual Apology made for them than what is done by an Impartial Representation of those Principles they do really own and what tho' laid to their Charge they do with the most Indignation and Abhorrence disavow I will therefore faithfully propose what the English Presbyterians for whom alone I make this Plea do and do not hold And for the greater satisfaction of my Reader I will set in the clearest Light I can the Notions espoused by the Classical or Scotch Presbyterians with which the English could never comply though upon the Supposal that they are zealous Defenders of that Classical Government they have fall'n under the Displeasure and Contempt of our Civil and Ecclesiastical Gonours SECT I. What are the Principles about Church-Government held by the English Presbyterians wherein they do differ from the Classical-Scotch-Presbyterians §. 1 THE Principles held by the English Presbyterians about the Constitution and Power of Particular Churches
People could be entirely for it nor could the Shadow of it find acceptance amongst us the Sober Party who Dissented from the Diocesans being for the most part English Presbyterians and Congregationalists SECT IV. The ENGLISH PRESBYTERY after the Restauration of Charles II. prevail'd again and so continued till the late Vnion commenced These things shewn out of the Writings of Dr. Collings and Mr. Baxter §. 1 WHen Charles II. was Restored soon after the Presbyterians were cast out and the Episcopal put into their Places whereupon the Nonconformists who were not of the Independent way did soon by their Practice and the several Books written in Defence of their Nonconformity convince their closest Observers that they were for those Principles which the English Presbyterians had from time to time Asserted And that thus much may with the greatest Clearness and to the most satisfaction be evinced I will refer to what Dr. Collings and Mr. Baxter have offered on this Occasion §. 2 1. Dr. Collings who laboured much and wrote well in the Controversie about Church-Government gives an Account of the main Opinions of those Ministers and People in England who go under the Name of Presbyterians and calls his Book ENGLISH PRESBYTERY §. 3 2. In the Account he gives of their Opinions he tells us That they were for a Catholick Church Visible which the Old English Presbyterians would never own but the it must be observ'd that he doth not represent them as Asserters of a Catholick Church Visible form'd into one Govern'd Society or an Organick Body For he carefully appropriates the Governing Power to fixed single Congregations in which the Ruling Officers may have the Knowledge of every Member under his Care His Words are They Believe that Christ hath Appropriated Ministers of the Gospel to this Visible Church who may Preach the Gospel and Baptize in any Parts of it but CAN ONLY Exercise an ordinary Jurisdiction in those particular Parts of it over which God hath given them a particular Oversight as Pastors and Teachers The Exercise of Acts of Jurisdiction REQUIRING A PARTICULAR KNOWLEDGE of PERSONS OPINIONS KNOWLEDGE and CONVERSATION which no single Person can have as to all the Members of the Visible Church P. 6. § 4. and in the same Page § 6. 't is added They Believe Persons thus set apart as in a foregogoing Paragraph to the Ministry are fully Authorized to Preach the Gospel and to Baptize in any Place where they are called to it AND TO ADMINISTER THE LORD'S SUPPER when they shall be FIXED IN ANY CONGREGATION that they may Administer it knowingly to Persons that are able to discern the Lord's Body and to EXERCISE ACTS OF JURISDICTION in THEIR FIXED CONGREGATION And P. 10. § 2. An Admonition which is a Church Censure is the Act of the whole Congregation or the officers of it as well in the Name of Christ as IN THEIR NAMES shewing a Person Offending his Errour from the Word of God and Exhorting and Warning him to Reform This they say may be often Repeated 4. Excommuniation being the Highest Censure they Believe ought not to be Denounced by any Persons but those whom God's Word hath appointed thereunto The Persons Decreating it must be the Church by its Officr or Officers they agreeing thereunto §. 4 3. The Doctor in these Paragraphs as he truly Represents the English Presbyterians to be of Opinion that Christ's Ministers may Preach and Baptize whenever in the Visible Church they are called so He adds That they say the Exercise of Jurisdiction belongs to the Minister as he is fixed to a Congregation that he is to Admonish Ecclesiastically in Christ's and the Churches Names that the Persons decreeing to Excommunicate must be the Church by the Officer or Officers allowwing unto the Christian Magistrate more Power in these Matters than Classical Presbyterians as in P. 8 9 and so far from making the Catholick Church Visible a Governed Society or Organnick Body that you see they Appropriate the Power of Jurisdiction unto a fixed a Congregation without mentioning a Subordination of Classical or Provincial Assemblies of the Ruling Officers unto a National or other Greater Synods But §. 5 1. The Learned Mr. Baxter who about the Nature and Constitution of Particular Churches hath been more Elaborate and Convincing than most in Desending their Non-conformity unto the Church of England doth most exactly describe the English Presbyterians fetching his Arguments from the Inconsistency there is between the Diocesan Government and the Specific Nature of Christ's Instituted Churches Ministry and Discipline And §. 6 2. That he may the more clearly shew where the Strength of his Arguments doth lie he distinguisheth between particular Instituted Churches and the Catholick Church Visible affirming that they are Specifically Distinct from each other upon the account of the different sorts of Communion that are had in a Particular and in the Catholick Church For saith he §. 7 3. Communion which is the Essentiating End of these Societies is twofold The One sort is in the same Species or kind of Worship only and the other in the same Individual Acts of Worship Adding that the Communion which is in the same kind of Worship only may be between them who are at the greatest distance from each other and consequently with every Member of the Catholick Church Visible which therefore he calleth Catholick Communion and seeing it can be only in kind it cannot be more visible as such than the Species of things are But Communion in the same Individual Acts of Worship is by joyning in the same Ordinances of the Word Prayer and Lord's Supper and they who have Communion with each other in this way must meet in the same Place at one and the same time and 't is therefore called Personal-Presential or Local Communion which is therefore Proper and Adaequate to a particular Congregational-Church This is a thing that must be Inculcated viz. Communion in the same Individual Acts can be had only in a single Congregation because there alone they can actually joyn in the same Worship whence it necessarily follows §. 8 4. That that Communion which is stretched beyond the Bounds of one single Congregation being only in the same kind of Worship is of the same sort with Catholick Communion And seeing the Members of a Diocesan or Classical Church can have no other Communion with each other than what is Catholick they want that Communion which is Essential unto those particular Churches which are of Divine Institution and specifically distinguished from the Catholick Church And on the other Hand the Asserting Diocesan or Classical to be particular Churches of the Lowest Rank and Order is quantum in se a destroying Parish or Congregational Churches and as stretching particular Churches to a larger Extent is to make the Ends of their Constitution impossible to be attained As Mr. Alsop in his Misch of Impos It is very Lawful to build a Ship or a Man of War as big as two or