and by consequence the onenesse also to consist in onenesse of Faith and doctrine But he hath a little before pag. 206. a considerable passage at this time about the call of our first reformers and saith that any enlightened by the spirit of God and members of the Catholick Church should teach informe and help their fellow members being seduced and led by blinde guides is agreeable to the law of nature Also that In extraordinary times men may go beyond the ordinary path so the thing done be materially good But this by the way Lastly the Professors of Leyden cited for this opinion by Apollon. which is much to be wondered at doe distinguish betwixt the Church Catholick and particular and say that The former is one in doctrine and faith but the latter one in discipline and government also Evidently implying the universall Church not to be one in Gouernment or not to be one Corporation And thus of the third and fourth inconveniences of this opinion and so much also for the first generall head of exceptions against it viz. the just prejudices and suspicious appearances of it as being Novell dangerous Papall and Anti-Protestant CHAP. IIII. Demonstrations against an Vniversall Visible Governing Church HItherto have been handled the lesse Artillery and as 't is hoped not without successe The main Batterie now follows by Arguments demonstrative and such as necessarily conclude against this opinion and that this may be done I premise as granted these principles 1. That the Author of all Ecclesiastick power in the Churches is Iesus Christ for unto him all of it was committed and from him derived 2. That he expressed plainly enough whatsoever was of great consequence for the well ordering of his house as for all other things concerning the salvation of his people 3. That the Apostles were appointed by him to perfect by themselves or Deputies whilest themselves were living either by precept or practise whatsoever concerned the Churches in such particulars 4. That they accordingly did faithfully discharge this trust 5. That Christ and his Apostles in those their precepts and practise are a rule to all Churches to the end of the World I am with you viz. in observing these things which I have commanded you unto the end of the World 6. That they are our rule both negatively and positively i. e. what they did not in such and such cases when they had opportunity we may not in the like and what they did we must do so also as occasion requires and opportunity serves The former particulars are plain enough the last not difficult if these places following and the like be considered Act. 15. 24. The Apostles charge the urgers of Circumcision upon the Gentiles not onely because they taught such Doctrine but also because they taught it having received no such Commandment unlesse we understand those words as having reference to what those Teachers it may be boasted viz. That they had Commission from the Apostles for that Doctrine Again The Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews insinuates it to be sufficient proof that the Priesthood did not at all belong to the Tribe of Iuda but of Levi because the Scripture speakes nothing saith he concerning the former in that respect The speech of Balaam implies as much and that other of the Prophet if the Lord have not spoken who can prophesie We know how the Lord thundereth against those who prophesyed and the Lord had not spoken to them which yet we would have understood as was said before with this caution viz. not spoken neither expresly nor by neer consequence in things of special concernment to the Church 7. That the Government of the Church of Christ it being his house and the knowledge of the first subject or chief trustee to whom the keys of that house is committed is of very great concernment and therefore to be laid down in Scripture at least by such evidence as with moderate opening to godly knowing and impartial men may comfortably be perceived These things premised we come to the Arguments The first whereof is taken negatively from the Author and Founders of the Church viz. The silence of Christ and his Apostles touching one Catholick Visible Governing Church This I conceive is not to be found in Scripture unlesse by such strayning of reason as we saw before Austin saith is dangerous in the things of God What is brought on the contrary out of Scripture shall be examined in another place to wit in the fifth chapter when the Arguments for this opinion if God permit shall severally be discussed onely for methods sake this being the joint for this Argument naturally to fall into 't is here mentioned The second Argument is from the same persons positively to wit the contrary Institution of Christ and his Apostles gathered plainly from their Teaching and Practise 1. If the keyes of Government were given first and fully with entire power immediately to a particular Church then there is no universal visible Governing Church because that is therefore contended for as the first subject of Government but the first is true therefore the latter The former is thus proved All Church power was given first and fully to the Church of the Jews But the Church of the Jews was a particular Church not the universal unlesse by accident because so it was that there was no other Church state in the world at that time unlesse we shall hold as * some do that there were other societies of Beleevers that were not united to the Jewish Church as Iob and his family c. but this is doubtful I therefore omit it The Church of the Jews was a particular one 1. It is every where called One congregation 2. All the Church in the chiefest Sex of it met together to solemn worship at one place in the Temple three times a year constantly and oftner as occasion served in Fasts War Thanksgiving Consultations c. neither had they any thing to do with those that joyned not themselves to their body as Cornelius Act. 10. A beleever and yet one that Peter might not go to And though it be granted to have been a Type of the Church of the New Testament yet not as Catholick but as Congregational as it self was or else as mystical for even our Brethren denie that order of Governours to bind under the Gospel though the Papists contend for it 2. The first Institution of the Church under the new Testament by Christ does give entire power of Government immediately to a particular Church Matth. 18. If thy Brother offend thee c. Tell the Church if he hear not the Church let him be as a Heathen c. Now this was a particular Church for it was such an one as one might complain to and it was endued with entire power even to excommunication 2. If the power and presence of Christ be so with a particular Society
all Churches must act from the Authority and by vertue of Commission from the Catholick Church for they act in the name of the Catholick Church So the Assertors of this opinion Expressely but then it follows unavoydably that all particular Churches whether National or Congregational that shall innovate change and alter any material thing in Doctrine Worship or Government without the consent of the Catholick Church are Schismaticks and if they be resolute in it against what might be said to the contrary they are HERETICKS as those have done that have changed in part Doctrine Worship and that Government which those general Councells did owne and establish much more those who have sworne to such alterations expresly against such things as the universal Church in those Councels did decree 5. Then all Magistrates are deprived of power of Reformation within their Jurisdictions before authority derived from the Church either in General Councel or from their Committee And hence is that cited out of our owne Lawyers Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbari debet That which concernes all must be allowed of all viz. That are of the same visible corporation 6. Lastly That I may add no more There must be a solemne meeting for the election of such general Officers as are to governe the universal Church in the absence of the universal Ministerial Representative Church For if one Corporation should choose Burgesses that should vote in the businesse of the whole Kingdome it would not be valid if there had not been first an agreement of the whole Kingdome in Parliament gathered that these so and so chosen should be Officers General and have votes in the publick Object If it bee said that Christ himselfe hath appointed such Generall officers by appointing Ministers in every Congregation and then Synods for publicke occasions It is answered This follows not 1. Because an Officer chosen in one particular Corporation as a Major or Alderman is not an Officer in the whole Kingdome No though all the Majors in the Kingdom were gathered together are they Officers of the whole Kingdome unlesse by way of distribution and as in relation to their severall places and but remotely and by accident only to the whole Kingdome so though all the Corporations of the Kingdome were gathered yet are they not a Parliament and supreme Court simply because they are meerly gathered together but it must be on former consent according to such Lawes whereby they become a New and a Superiour body to all the Kingdome both joyntly so long as they continue a Parliament and severally much lesse should they have any more power because they are many but dis-joyned farre asunder So it is in the Church 2. They may be officers of Synods and Councels though never so generall and yet not be officers generall of the whole world in point of jurisdiction as one entire body Because their meeting doth not make them a New body nor give them as such a body any superiour juridical power but onely Consultative and Decretory whether we look on any Scripture Precept or Practise of the Churches in the New Testament 3. It is denyed that Christ hath instituted any such Catholicke Visible body or the Representative thereof An Oecumenicall or Generall Councell much lesse the abstract of it a Catholick committee or Presbyterie and there is reason for it for the multitude of persons difference of spirits Languages c. danger and want of ground to Delegate from hand to hand Ecclesiasticke Power would occasion great confusion and such as God is not the Authour of The fourth and last sort of arguments are taken from the end the Authours of this opinion aime at from the Issue of the opinion it selfe and from the true scope of Church Government The former seems to be either to found the Right of such Presbyteriall Government as is now endeavoured and to deprive particular Churches of intire power in themselves or at least of Independency in their Government from other Churches or else it is to lay Groundwork of a more effectuall cure and remedy then hitherto for all distempers of particular Churches whether nationall or other Touching the first What will it profit if they gaine by this notion the jurisdiction of the whole world for a while and afterward loose their own and others liberty and perhaps souls also for the former being lost truth will be soone oppressed as is to be seen in the Papacy of which straightway Again Absolute Independency so as no other Church shall have any thing to do with an erring or delinquent Church is disavowed both in Doctrine and Practise by the greatest Patrons of that way in this Kingdome and beyond the seas * Concerning the second All distempers of Churches as farre as the Apostolicall Churches were cured of them have beene healed sufficiently without this opinion yea and better then by those who have owned and practised this principle for they have cured some but made others greater and stronger then they were before as we see in the Church of Rome 2. But whatsoever their aime be they should remember that the true end of Church Government is not only to avoid Confusion and Disorder c. but also to preserve the Rights and Priviledges of particular Persons and Churches to prevent Tyranny and invasion that way evils that are as dangerous to the Church and as introductive to Heresie as the former unto which this opinion in the Issue of it opens a wide gappe My Baynes whom the London Ministers quote with Honour saith Dioces Triall Q. 1. pag. 21. That those who subject themselves to a Presbytery as being under it by Subordination may in effect as well be subject to an Episcopall and by consequence I say to a Papall Consistory For if the Church universall be one visible Governing body a man will readily conclude it must have universall Officers and among many there must be some one chief and Christ that hath ordered this hath surely designed by some intimation or other who this should be and where the seat of the Vniversall Church should reside and then how readily will that place of Matthew 16. Thou art Peter c. be understood to place it upon him and his successors and then the question is where hee was Bishop and because the scripture saith nothing therefore * Ecclesiasticall Writers must be credited and then the place is Rome and the rather because 1. Their Faith was spoken of throughout the whole World 2. There was the seat of the Empire c. So that this opinion if not in the end of the Authours yet in the Issue of the things leads a man by the hand back to Egypt and Babylon again as it hath done many If it bee replyed No For that in this Vniversall body politique all Churches and their Elders shall be Equall and so in the Generall Councell conveened whereas in the Papacy all
TO EACH BELEEVER THEN TO THE WHOLE CHVRCH which I desire may be observed Again He makes the authoritie of a general Councel to depend on that promise When two or three are gathered in my name c. And then saith That this as well agreeth to any particular company of Christians as to a generall Councel 2. It doth not appear to me in those chapters that hee ownes general Councells on any such grounds nor do I see how he can by what he saith on Eph. 4. 11. above cited 3. If these Councells he there approves did excommunicate c. yet he doth not mention his approbation of them in those things and wee may apprehend he might count such actions among those particulars of their failings which he there enumerates 2. After his Argument he makes the objection M. Hudson had done viz. The whole Church hath no visible head Ergo It is no one Visible Corporation or body He replies to this 1. Particular Churches are visible Churches though destitute of Officers But I Reply should they be so if they had not one common bond of particular laws administred by one person or one visible Society of Officers 2. They may all meet as one visible body the universal Church then must either meet so or else have some visible officers universal over the whole Secondly he saith Christ is supposed the Visible Head in some respect Answ. But that is not the question but what visible existent head there is on earth by whom it may appear one Visible bodie As we saw before out of Calvin on Ephes. 4. 11. 2. How can we contain Christ visible properly 3. He saith The Church is one so as to act ordinarily as one divisim dividedly and yet by reason of the mutual consent in all Churches one act of power done in one Church is by authority of the universal Church and reaches to all Churches as excommunication out of one is excommunication out of all But 1. There was never any Society or Corporation that acted as one dividedly and in parts unlesse it did first act as one joyntly together and in a body wherein power was given to such divided bodies to act so unlesse it were upon some sudden and extraordinary accident that required immediate action before the body could convene 2. Every Society though it may act in parts as a Kingdome in severall Corporations and a Corporation in severall Wards or Halls and Companies yet hath it withall one common ordinary and standing officer or officers visible to governe in chiefe to whom all maine causes are referred c. But 3. That the particular Church that acteth in the right of the universall Church by reason of mutuall consent in all Churches is not proved by that medium for mutuall consent may be voluntary and accidentall and so a figure onely whereas hee is to prove that all Churches are necessarily essentially by way of institution and for ever to be one body whether they consent or consent not But a particular Church acteth first In the right of Christ who is the first subject of Church power Matth. 28. 28. Secondly it acteth in the right of a Church that is of a Societie that hath embraced the faith of Christ which as a Church indefinitely and essentially is the next subject of Church power because we see such power committed to every Church so we heard even now Calvin to expound that promise Matth. 18. when tvvo or three are gathered c. which I finde also the forepraised Author to have said before me whom at the writing of this above I had not seene in the particular 4. That he that is excommunicated out of one Church if duely is excluded out of all is not because the whole Church is one visible body but because all the particular Churches agree in nature and essence of Doctrine Worship and Government so that he that is unfit to be a member of one is so of all because they all require the same essentiall conditions as he that is cut off by the hand of Justice for violation of the Lawes of nature in one Common wealth is cut out of all yet it doth not follow that all men are one Common wealth Or as hee that is out-lawed in one Corporation justly is outlawed in all Congregations virtually and upon the matter though not directly and formally till hee be so declared by them if those Corporations go all by the same lawes for substance and government though it doth not follow that these severall corporations are therefore one or under one generall body which as I take it is the case betwixt England and Scotland where by reason of union under one King though the governments remaine distinct yet one that is borne in either Kingdome is not an Alien but a Free-borne Denizon of both and so by consequence as I apprehend for I may be mistaken in a Law notion and I bring it but for illustration hee that is out-lawed in one Kingdome cannot remaine under the protection of the Lawes of the other and yet the bodies are distinct in power and government though not divided wholy but in some respect So in the Church In the third and last place he comes to authorities But here either he cites those who are nothing for him or when they dispute the point professedly are expressly against him as his first Author Chamier who though he say that if not every Pastor yet all of them are set over the whole Church yet when he argueth the point he explaineth himselfe to mean all distributively every one in his charge as all the Maâ—ors and Sheriffes governe the whole Kingdome but not joyntly but severally for hee denyeth such an one visible universall Church as Mr Hudson acknowledged and as we saw before The 2. Are other moderne Divines whom Mr Noyes would have not to consist with themselves whilest they deny an universall visible Church and yet grants Judiciall Power to Synods But it hath beene shewed before that this may be granted though the other be denyed c. The 3. Are the Fathers who he saith so predicated an universall visible Church they laid the foundation for an universall Bishop If so then let this Author take heed he lay not a foundation to raise him out of the grave againe in his Image as I have heard a Reverend Elder of New England called an universal visible Church in respect of the Papacy and to bury the liberties of all the Christian Churches in his grave The 4. Author is Polanus who saith the things of God are administered Synodali {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} by the determination of the Synod but are confirmed Regia {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} by the Kings authoritie Wee allow the Power of determining with Calvin above cited according to the word of God to Synods and are well content and thankfull that Kings will become Nursing Fathers to the Church
of one visible Catholick Church and might both consist together in a particular one So that as neither Episcopacie nor Presbyterie absolutely considered are engaged to owne the opposed Tenet so neither doth that Truth I plead for constrain me to oppose either if within the forementioned limits My aim is the plucking up of that root from whence sprang the exorbitancy of both and what was worse then either And as I am not obliged to oppose so I would not be interpreted to plead for the one or other My businesse is to deal with the subject of Church government and that onely in its exrent and limits Now for a call to this service though it challenge the most exercised abilities and that other more able hands have undertaken it which I heard not of till these papers were almost in the Presse yet one of the * Authors I reply unto having done me the favour to invite me to a disputation about the Argument and afterward farther obliging me by sending one of the printed books to me for which I am his debtor with desire that if I excepted against any thing in it I â—ould send my thoughts in wâ—iting to him privately I conceived my self particulaâ—ly engaged to deal in this argument and that not privately but publickly because what I was to speak to was published first CHAP. II. The State of the question THat we may know what we speake and vvhereof vve affirme as the Apostle phraseth it the true state of the controversie is to be expounded the mistake whereof is the rise of much of the dispute about this question For the clearer proceeding wherein four or five Termes are to bee explained First the word CHVRCH Secondly the Onenesse or unitie of it Thirdly The Vniversalitie Fourthly The Visibility Fifthly that which is included in the other the povver of it Concerning the first The word CHVRCH is taken as in other acceptations so 1. Mystically and Essentially for a company of thoâ—e that have owned the doctrine * of Christ 2. Politically as such a company are cast into one Society Corporation Republique or Body politique And this againe is considered either Totally as comprehending those in heaven also Ephes. 3. 15. the vvhole family in heaven and earth or partially for those on earth onely and this either generally for all as some would understand the word though we cannot give an instance of this signification in Scripture or particularly for those who live together in One place and are associated into one body called a Particular Church as the Church of Rome Jerusalem c. The next Terme is Onenesse or Vnitie which is 1. Essentiall and in Nature such as is that of all particular things in their generall heads all men as they partake of the common nature and essence of man rationalitie which is one are in that respect called one Nation or Manâ—inde in the singular 2. There in an accidentall unitie when the agreement is in that which is not of the essence and nature but adventitious to the things as time place appurtunances c. as some Spanjards some French some English may be one company as by occasion they are met in one place or as kingdomes and States at generall diets or by mutuall leagues become one accidentally by such unions 3. An Integrall or Bodily onenesse as I may so speake when many particulars are joyned together as one whole and this is 1. of a similer or Homogeneall body whereof all the parts are of the same nature with the whole and one with another such as is the onenesse of drops of water in the Sea and sands on the Shore or â— of a dissimilar and hetrogeneall one when the parts differ from the whole and among themselves and this is double 1. Physicall and Naturall as â—hen all the parts and members make but one individuall substance as the head feet trunke c. are all one naturall body 2. Politicall or by way of morall corporation and Republique when many single ones are bound up in one sociall relation as divers persons into one family severall families into one corporation many corporations into one Common wealth and this union againe is twofold 1. Misticall when things are one in some hidden relation that is not visible to the sence as all families descending from some First house such are all the sonnes of Adam and of Abraham all professours of the same faculty be they never so farre asunder 2. Visible and outward when the union of all parts is obvious and evident to the eye and sence as the union of the members in the bodie of man or members of a society when they are met and act visibly together as the City of London in Common Councell the Kingdome of England in Parliament 4. There is a Collective or aggregative onenesse which differs from the former in that this is only by collection or gathering as an heap of stones is one by being gathered together into one place but in a body whether naturall or politique there is required moreover a mutuall incorporation and inward dependance on one another c. Thus of the second terme The third is Vniversall or Catholick It is taken 1. Properly for that common nature in which particular things agree as common to them all Rationall creature in the general is the universall nature in respect of all particular men And in this sence universality is only a notion framed in the minde of man and collected from observation of severall particulars but hath no reall actuall being in time and place 2. Improperly for that which though it be a single thing either naturall or by way of relation is yet in regard of the wide spreading of its parts called universall catholicke and Generall as we say the Kingdome of England in generall or universall doth this or that though it be but one single Kingdome c. and in this sence that which is called universall may have an actual being and existence The Fourth Terme is visibilitie It is an accident or addition to the nature of things as they are perceiveable to the eye or in a large acceptation by any other sence the subject whereof is alwaies a corporal or bodily thing representing it selfe as one unto the sence The last Terme included though not expressed is Church power It is first Doctrinall vix Teaching Discussive Determinative and concluding in points of controversie by the Word 2. Active and this is either General and common and answers to that power that all men by vertue of the onenesse of Nature and onenesse of the Law of nature have in order each to other As 1. to take care of and do good to one another to protect each other from violence c. 2. Properly Rective and Iuridical and this is either 1. Extraordinary in some unusuall cases as every man hath power of life and death in
many houses of the Hebrews have but onely one * Power Nature and Condition as the Churches throughout the World and in several Provinces being many in Numbers are but One Church Where he makes them One in that they have One Nature and Condition but saith they are Many in number Whereas this opinion makes all the Churches in the world to be but one in number in respect of Corporation and Government as all the houses in a City make but one single Corporation and all the Corporations in England make but one single Kingdom So that this Testimony taking the distinction above mentioned of onenesse in Nature of those that are many in number looks as much if not more on us then on our opposites 2. CLEMENS ALEXAND. * There is absolutely but one Ancient and Catholick Church in the Vnity of one Faith whereunto agreeth that of CALVINE The unitie of the Church consists in the unitie of the Faith and expresly against this universal visible Government he addes it is not necessary that we see it the Church Catholick and that it be visible for preservation of that unity 3. CYPRIANUS when he professedly disputeth the question about the unity of the Church passing by the corruptions added in this place and some of his * Epistles by the Papists defineth the unity of the Church by Doctrine and Discipline and saith This onely is the cause of Schismes Quod magistri Coelestis Doctrina suis quod idem est Ecclesiae vivitas non servatur That the Doctrine of our heavenly Master or which is ALL ONE the unity of the Church is not preserved and as there is one God one Christ one Faith so there is one Church one Discipline in it one Bishoprick whereof in the whole every one hath his share and as the Sun hath many beams but one light and the boughes of a Tree many but one Trunk so many particular Churches whereof unum lumen unum Caput una Origo one light one head one original in all which he makes the unity of the Church to consist in onenesse of nature faith spirit head not in number and Government As the leaves and boughes are not one in number and in themselves but in their Original and Root so are the Churches one in Christ and the spirit and nature though different in suppositum and Government 4. HIERON. It is called one Altar as it is said one Faith and one Baptisme and one Church but faith and Baptisme are said to be one in respect of Kind and nature not Integrally and numerally 5. AUGUSTINE He speaking of the first Subject of the keyes or Church power saith For all the SAINTES theâ—efore that doe cleave inseparably to the body of Christ did Peter receive the KEYES of the Kingdom of heaven because not he alone but universa Ecclesia ligat solvitque peccata the universal Church doth binde and loose sins But that he doth not mean joyntly as one body or Corporation but severally every Church by it selfe and so the onenesse of the Church here implyed is in nature and kind not in number appeares by what he saith in other places as where repeating that about Excommunication Mat. 18. If he hears not the Church let him be unto thee as a heathen he saith He who joyneth him to himself which is after this order cast out he not permitting being orthodox by vvhom he is cast out juris sacredotij sancti limites Excedit doth violate the rights of holy Priesthood He doth imply that particular Churches did excommunicate within themselves or the universal Church distributively taken 6. EUCHERIUS The Church dispersed throughout the whole world consists in one and the same faith and fellowship of Catholique truth and vvheras there is an innumerable multitude of the faithfull yet they rightly are said to have one heart and one soul in respect of their society in the Common faith and love Where all the universal onenesse hee implyeth it of faith and love This opinion then doth not appeare in prime and best Antiquitie nor with any evidence in those that followed so that till better testimonies appeare we must say that it is therefore absolute new 2. It is more new Relatively 1. In reference to the protestant party who Generally save very few excepted have never owned it but on the contrary constantly opposed it as shall be shewed anon But it is most nevv in regard of the Presbytirians these Brethren being the first we have met with or as it seemes themselves either for those they quote make rather against them as will appeare afterward certaine it is that Calvine whom they vouch as the first restorer of that Government though his was but a voluntary association as we saw before gave evidence expresly against it Also Chamier speaking the sence of the French Churches as afterward must be related but we need not be sollicitous to prove this seeing the Brethren of this opinion confesse this conceit to be opposed by the greatest part of the protestant writers as wil appear in the fourth Argument If therefore Novelty and new light be a prejudice against other opinions it cannot but reflect suspition upon this 2. Another just prejudice against this opinion may be that it is of Dangerous Consequence For if the whole Church that is Visible and to be seen on earth be one single Corporation or Kingdom and the first subject to whom all Government in Church affairs belongeth and in whose right and by power from which all particular Churches do act then of necessitie 1. There must be Viniversal and General officers and some one above the rest to whom the particular Churches may have continual recourse For all Corporations have officers that are officers of the whole Corporation and over all and not particular onely as not onely the Constables of the severall Parishes or Aldermen of cath Ward but the Major also of the whole who hath though not a divided yet a distinct and superior power in order to the Corporation above the rest though conjoyned 2. Seeing Christ hath provided a seasonable and standing means for the continual exercise of the Government of his Church that may be made use of as occasion requires therefore these officers must have alwaies residence in some one place though they may also remove to another they must have an actual being and residence as being the officers for the exercise of the power of the universal Church For it is impertinent to say that it is sufficient the universal Church meet by parties in severall Countreys and Ages for the meeting of officers of Corporations must be in one place and time as the Parliament Convocation Consistory c. And it were notably vaine to imagine that Christ hath committed the government of his Church first chiefly to that body that should not meet six times in sixteen hundred yeares * nay
taken properly in that he applies his speech particularly though not exclusively to the Corinthians ye are the body of Christ to wit yee are a particular body and members in particular and so chap. 3. 21. 22. All are yours whether Paul or Apollos let Apolonius note or Paul or Cephas or life or death all are YOVRS and ye Corinthians Christs c. where all are the whole Churches and each Churches in particular as their occasions require each in their order some Vniversal Officers which shall have power in Corinth or any other Church some particular to each Church So that the sence iâ— He hath given or set in the Church i. e. in this Church of Corinth and so in that of Ephesus c. Some Apostles c. as their need shall require yet not therefore making them one externall societie among themselves As some generall Officers make not England and Scotland one Kingdome 2. If we take the word Apostle as it is taken in some other places * and so may be taken here for such Officers as were sent out with commission from any Church upon speciall occasion which is the literall signification of the word and is so taken 2 Cor. 8. 23. Barnabas and the rest are called The Apostles of the Churches and Phil. 2. 25. Epaphroditus the Apostle of the Philippians according to which the sence would bee God hath set some of Corinth in the office of Apostles some Prophets as chap. 14. c. and so the argument hence were voided But 4. Were it granted that the Apostle in these places meanes by the Church the Church visible Catholicke yet this opinion gaines nothing thereby for it doth not follow that because it was so then and in respect of the Apostles that therefore it was to be so to the end of the world and in it selfe Christ who is the King of his Church hath the same liberty in his Kingdome speciall that God hath over the world which is his Kingdome general Now at one time the Lord would have the whole world almost one Kingdome or Monarchy under Nebuchadnezar Jer. 27. 8. and threatneth with heavy plagues that nation that should refuse to serve him giving this reason that himselfe is King of all Nations vers. 5. which is also repeated again Dan. 4. 22. so that the whole world was one Kingdome upon the matter yet it was not the will of God it should alwaies bee so In the like manner in Moses the Church and Common wealth affaires were chiefly under the Magistrate but afterward they were distinct unlesse under those Kings that were Prophets also So the twelve Tribes were under Saul David and Salomon one Kingdome yet it was of the Lord that afterwards they were two and afterward one againe after the captivity So likewise Christ taketh the same power over his Church when hee saw it for the advantage of it hee set over it one Company of Officers who ruled it in common viz. the Apostles in relation to whom the Churches were one though not in themselves but that doth not argue that hee meant it should alwaies so continue after their decease It is a Generall rule in all proceedings that things at their first plantation and beginning need some things that afterward would be inconvenient as a Stick by a Twigge a Bladder to him that swimmeth a Standing-stole to a childe So at the first constitution of the Jewish Church God made Moses an extraordinary Officer so that hee had no Successor so absolute till Christs time So at the first erection of the Christian Church Apostles and Evangelists which now are generally apprehended to be ceased Yea also in Scotland as we heard above at the beginning of their Reformation they had certaine Officers in the nature of Bishops whom they called Visitors which the Authour informes us were then necessary but the Church being setled not now any longer needfull 2. Nor were the Churches one in themselves as we said before but one in the Apostles and that by accident also as England and Scotland are one in the King because he governs both but they are not therefore one Kingdome in themselves considered But 3. Though wee grant this that whiles the Apostles were living there was one body of Officers over the whole Church and so in respect of them the Church might bee said to bee one GOVERNED body yet I say it was never one GOVERNING body for whiles the Apostles lived the Vniversall Governing power was committed to the Apostles onely and not with them to any other Officers or Churches no and not to all the Churches together but they with their officers were all in subjection to them and when the Apostles deceased the scripture speaks nothing of instating any other collected and vnited body to succeed them in that Vniversall Government no nor can it be gathered by consequence but the contrary namely that because the use of that Vniversall power ceased therefore the Office Officers and subject of it Object But Church government did not cease Answ. That Kinde or Way of Church government did that is an Vniversall one but there continued the Government still though administered in another way viz. by way of Distribution Each Church as a Church i. e. as having the Essentiall notes of a Church in it viz. The true Doctrine or faith of Christ received that power for it self though not in so eminent a degree yet as immediately from Christ that all the Apostles had for all Churches 6. But I may deny the former supposition and rightly affirme that the Apostles were not one joynt Ministery for besides that each had entire power some had one part committed to them and some another as Paul expressly affirmeth Gal. 2. 8. The uncircumcision was committed to me the circumcision to Peter Hence chap. 1. he saith He went not up to Hierusalem to those that were Apostles before him which he ought to have done if the government had beene committed to the Apostles joyntly and not severally whence also his going up thither Act. 15. about the question of Circumcision was not on this ground but to satisfie the Christians of Antioch about his Doctrine as consonant to that of the other Apostles On the former principle he professeth 2 Cor. 10. 13. c. he had not intruded into another mans line alluding as it seems to the shareing out of inheritances by line as Psal. 16. 6. for this reason the Epistles of Peter Iames and Iohn are called Catholicke because written to the dispersed Iewes throughout the severall nations as is the expression in the entrance of those Epistles Hence also Paul is sent from Ierusalem as not his place Act. 22. 18. And though sometimes he disputed with the Jews yet it was but as making way to the Gentiles neither did hee greatly prevaile with them as appears Act. 13. 40. 41. chap. 28. 16. 7. To conclude therefore our reply to
faithful or they agree to the Church militant in respect of its ESSENTIAL Nature which is proper to the truly faithful So then not to a Church as Vniversal or particular as Visible or invisible but as essentially a Church which a particular Church may be And the former replies also will serve unto what the other Authors urge from such like Scriptures and places as 1. M. Hudson from Act. 8. 3. Saul made havock of the Church Gal. 1. 13. I persecuted the Church 1 Cor. 10. 32. Give none offence to the Church of God 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath set some in the Church 1 Tim. 3. 15. That thou mayest know how to behave thy self in the Church of God Also when it is called the Kingdom of God a Barne a Draw-net a Marriage and because 1. Cor. 12. the Church is said to be one Body and one Woman Apoc. 12. one sheepfold John 10. one Dove Cant. 2. 2. All which and other places wherein the word Church is used are to be understood as hath been evidenced either of the Church in respect of the nature and essence of it as all beleevers and Churches have the same kind of Faith Doctrine c. or else as one mystical and invisible body of Christ but doth not at all insinuate much lesse prove that they are all one external and visible Corporation 3. M. Noyes who useth the same places of Scripture as the other as also Apoc. 11. 1 2 3. the Church is described as one City one new Jerusalem c. Answ. That place is taken by great Expositors to signifie such a state as is not yet in being what it will be when that shall exist is uncertain Secondly We grant it to be one City and Kingdome as a mysticall body 1. In respect of Christ the head 2. In regard that all Churches in their severall places walke by the same Laws c. i. e. as essentially agreeing together but not visibly governing as one body 4. The London Ministers part 1. pag. 3. who urge the forenamed place 1 Cor. 12. and that the Apostle maketh the whole Church but one Organical body a contradiction to their assertion Praefat. p. 11. That the Church is a similar body which overthrows their present Tenent for in a similar body all the parts together have no more internal power then single as in drops of water single Corporations as single though united in place So part 2. p. 66. where also they say that Eph. 4. 4. Christ is considered mystically not personally and if mystically not visibly Answ. First The Apostles scope and then the supposition he goes on are to be eyed The scope is to exhort to humility in great gifts to contentednesse in mean gifts and to love and edification by all gifts The supposition he grounds his Argument on is the relation wherein believers stand viz. of members of one and the same body sâ—il of Christ mystically considered as the Ministers speak but he neither expresseth nor implyeth the visibility of this body or the outward onenesse of it if he mean the Catholick and not the particular Church of Corinth 5. Lastly The Reverend Assembly who in the places above mentioned quote Eph. 4. 3. c. To which Answer hath been given above and may again when we come particulary to reply unto them And thus much in answer to the first Argument of Apollonius and others drawn from expressions that speake of the Church as one one body house Kingdome family sheepfold which is indeed the Achileum or Fort Royall in this Garison and which if I be not greatly overseene hath been by the former weapons out of Christs Armory absolutely taken and demolished The second Argument followes which is There is certaine Societie and Ecclesiasticall communion by divine institution and therefore a certain universall body for there is a certain internall fellowship and obligation to mutuall offices Eph. 4. 3 4 5 6. which doth require an externall and outward Society and Commuion Ecclesiasticall in exhorting reproving comforting edifying one another and that fellowship which the members of a particular Church retain among themselves in a due proportion Churches Provinciall and Nationall ought to keep by which communion Ecclesiasticall all Nationall Churches do grow up to one Vniversall Ecclesiasticall body Ans. This reason no way concludes the intended proposition I willingly grant there is a mutuall fellowship and spirituall communion which also requires an outward communion in many respects and particularly in those named by this Author viz. exhortation reproof c. And indeed this was all the combination that was in the most Primitive Churches and such inward and outward communion there is to bee betwixt all good men friends brethren nations c. But this argues not that therefore they must be one body in point of Government Neighbour Nations are to retain this inward communion and outward so farre as may make for mutuall good and there may bee a society or league betwixt them as betwixt Solomon and the King of Aegypt betwixt Solomon and Hiram King of Tyre So men of the same trade and profession in regard of the same art have an internall communion together and this requires some outward communion also as occasion serves but it no way concludes that therefore they must needs be one body or Corporation Suppose some dwell at London some at Yorke some in England and some in France 2. It is also granted that the same Vnion that the members of a Church have one with another the same have the severall Churches among themselves IN A DVE PROPORTION which are the words of the Author but this proportion is not IDENTITIE or samenesse of Relation that is it is not so neer a relation nor gives that power that the former relation doth As the same relation that the members of a Family have one unto another the same in a due proportion have particular families one to another but no man will say that what the members of a family especially some of them may doe one to another the same may a Corpoporation of Families do among themselves there is some neernesse but not altogether the same And this also is sufficient for the second Argument I shall meet with it again anon in the first Argument of the Reverend Assembly The Third There were certaine meetings in the New Testament which did represent the whole Church and wherein the businesse of the whole Church was transacted to wit the calling of an Apostle which was a part of Ecclesiasticall Discipline and there were the Pastors of the universal Church for they were sent unto all the world Matth. 21. 19. and therewere the brethren out of Galilee and Jerusalem Answ. 1. I deny with the Protestant Divines against the Papists that there is any Representative Church properly so called or that this was one it was onely at present a Particular Congregation whereof the Apostles were members though principall ones but not
nor were sent to so farre as is related and then it will fall out either that they did conclude and injoyne onely Doctrinally though with authority or else that a particular and ordinary Church or two or three Churches by ordinary power may prescribe and by authoritie injoyne Lawes to all Churches in the world by way of Jurisdiction It will not be easie to get safe from betwixt the hornes of this argument 5. But it will not prejudice me to yeeld it an ordinary Assembly for it is granted to any Assembly of one Church or more to do as much as is here expressed this councell to have done viz. 1. To meet for the discussion of any Doctrine that afflicts the Churches especially if they bee sent unto as these were 2. To conferre scriptures together which concerns those points 3. Light appearing by the spirit of God and Scripture they may represent their results as the will of God and minde of the Holy Ghost and so may 4. MINISTERIALLY IMPOSE and enjoyn to all other Churches what appears to be the clear mind of Christ as Paul did 1 Cor. 7. having no expresse command and as any of our Brethren do when they preach the Word Do they not injoyne obedience in the name of Christ but withall they disclaim having sole Jurisdiction so as to Excommunicate any alone by themselves if they obey not and yet they do the former by Authority because the Ministery of the Word is an Ordinance of God Object But it was an Assembly representing the Catholick Church because of the Apostles who were the Catholick Officers and the whole acted by the ordinary power of the Catholick Church Answ. 1. The Reason overthrowes the Argument For if it was therefore an Assembly of the Catholick Church because of the presence of the Apostles Then if the Apostles had been absent it had been but the Assembly of a particular Church And the Apostles when assembled alone had made an Assembly of the Catholick Church So the universality or Catholicisme of the Assembly depended wholely and solely on the Apostles Or else secondly The Apostles if alone out of this Assembly neither severally nor joyntly should have been able to determine and do what was here done Or else thirdly The Apostles in this Assembly did denude and strip themselves of their Apostolical power or at least suspend it it for that time and acted onely as ordinary Elders of the Catholick Church but then it would follow either that that particular Church of Jerusalem was the Catholick Church as Rome is said to be for there were messengers from few if from more then one other Churches Or that the Apostles though laying aside their being Elders of the universal Church for that was their Apostleship did yet act as Elders of the universal Church all which are {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} crasse interferings I thinke this Church acted 1. As the mother Church 2. As having an accesse of Authority by the presence of the Apostles 3. As being the Church from which the scandal enquired about was conceived to arise Neither doth the joyning of the Elders and Brethren wholy take off the eminency and authority of the Apostles above the rest for their speeches onely are recorded no more then Paul's joyning others with him in his Epistles though it do argue that the Church of Antioch had not that esteem of them as infallible alone And thus much also for that other place brought for confirmation of the third Argument A Representative Catholick Church in Scripture The fourth and last Argument is from the Testimony of some Reformed Divines viz. Walaeus and the Professors of Leydon But the first speaks nothing for him but what all acknowledge and was granted above scil. The Church saith he may be considered two waies 1. Vniversally for the Church which by the preaching of the Gospel is called out of the world throughout the world which in a certain sense or in some respect may even be called Catholick or for a particular Flock tyed unto one place In which sense I know none denie a Catholick Church it being one of the Articles of the ordinary Creed that there is a Catholick Church that is that the Church is now no longer bound to any one place as under the Jewish Government But that the Church in respect of the several members and societies of it is dispersed over the face of the earth But this doth no more conclude that therefore they are one Visible Corporation then when we say Mankinde is spread over all the World that therefore all men are one company or body politick 2. The Professors of Leyden are against him for they distinguish betweene a Visible and particular Church and betweene the Invisible and universal and say That a Visible Church is considered two waies 1. As a company or Society of one Towne City or Province which are united not onely in the unity of Faith and Sacraments but also in the Forme of outward Government or else it is considered as a certain Oecumenical and Vniversal body dispersed in several places throughout the whole World Although THEY DIFFER IN THE EXTERNALL FORME IT SELFE OF CHVRCH-GOVERNEMENT and circumstantial Rites very much yet agreeing in the ESSENTIAL VNITY OF FAITH and of the Sacraments Whence that is common in Cyprian Episcopatus unus est cujus à singulis in solidum pars tenetur Wâ—ich words evidently destroy this opinion For first they make the Essentialunion or forme of the Society and onenesse of the Church to consist in the onenesse of Faith and Sacraments Secondly They imply That Government is one as it is in Christ but divers as it is in severall Churches and in the hands of severall Officers for so Calvine in Ephes. 4. 11. expounds that of Cyprian The Episcopacie he gives to Christ alone in the administring whereof every one hath his part Thirdly And which chiefly assaulteth the heart of the cause for which it is brought by this Author They make the very difference betwixt the universal Church and a particular Church to be this That they disagree in the outward or visible forme of Church-Government therefore in the sense of the Professors of Leyden the Vniversal Church is not one Governing Body for then the Government must be one not only in Essence Nature and Kinde but one in Number Existence single and Indivual being And thus much for answer in particular to Apollonius who indeed hath the substance of what hath been said for this opinion others that follow having taken his grounds and dilated them a little but not much strengthened them thereby as will appear in the sequele 2. The next Defendant of this opinion is M. Hudson cited in the first chapter his sense is the same his words and expressions not so distinct as the former Before I come to his Arguments such as seem to differ from those before 1. note that the
never for there never was yet any universal meeting of the Catholick Church nor its officers though some Councells have been called Generall because of the number of Bishops unitie of places from whence they have come and the Emperours latitude of Dominion that called them 3. From hence would follow that very many particular Churches would be in peril to be greatly damaged seeing in appeals they must be adjudged by those that are many thousand miles distant from them and could not have perfect * cognizance of the cause nor in case they wanted information for their guidance in judgement could by reason of distance have it in time 4. Great would be the vexation charges travel c. that would arise from such a Court as whereunto Appeals were to come and yet such there must be if the whole Church be but one Corporation 3. A third and fourth prejudice and probable exception against this opinion is T is Papal and Anti-Protestant 1. Papal not indeed in regard of the height of it as it refers the root and head of this universallity unto Rome onely but in regard of the opinion it self An universal visible Church a mayne ground of the former M. Hudson and so M. Noyes indeed would avoid this prejudice also but with Labour in Vain He saith he stateth not the question as the Papists do because they take Visible for Glorious Catholick for Romane and subject it to the Pope For 1. whatsoever the Papists add to the question yet the substance and substratum of it is the same In vain should they fix the seat of it at Rome and subject it to the Pope if it might not be in it self one Corporation and Republique 2. Again they do not take visible for glorious but for that which is obvious to the sense though they make Glorious an adjunct thereunto 3. They so fix the seat of the Church at Rome and subject it to the Pope severall of the most eminent of them as that it is onely in the absence of a general Councel which they make above the Pope as being the Church Catholick Representative as is shewed else-where But to return Bellarmine de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 11. haveing related the opinion of the Protestants and propounded the Romish in opposition thereunto viz. There is a visible Catholick Church He proves it by the same places that the Authors of this opinion do to wit Mat. 16. Vpon this Rock I will build my Church and Chap. 18. Tell the Church which though in that place he bring to prove it Visible yet it implies to make it universal also for both these joyntly Catholick Visible he was to prove in opposition to the Protestants for as they say this could not be meant of a particular Church So hee that it cannot be meant of an invisible And he defines it to be one visible Church or Congregation of men bound together by the profession of the same faith and participation of the same sacraments under the government of lawfull Pastors and especially of that onely Vicar of Christ on earth the Pontiffe or Bishop of Rome In the definition it is to be noted that hee makes all beleevers but one single Corporation or Congregation though divided in places under one single Governent under one visible head the Pope of Rome In all but the last clause which is not Essential to the thing though it be to those persons the definition agrees to the minde of the authours of the opinion here impugned And 2. It is Anti-Protestant being opposed generally by them Calvine disputing against the Papists about the unitie and visibilitie of the Church saith as was noted before The onenesse of the Church consisteth in the onenesse of faith And for the visibilitie he saith It is not necessary for the preserving of this unitie that we should see the Church with our eyes Chamier in his Answer to Hardings Argument against Jewell Art 4. Sect. 17. urging that Every multitude in it selfe one did stand in need of one Governour by whom it might be managed but the Church visible is in it self one saith The Church as it is Catholicke or Vniversall is not one in it selfe because it is one generall or universall gathered and aggregated of many particular Churches as if one should say the kingdome or a Kingdome not this or that Kingdome but Kingdome in generall the parts whereof are all particular Kingdomes the French Spanish English For SO the word CHVRCH being taken it is compounded mark not constituted of infinite particular Churches the Romane Constantinopolitane c. Now that which is one in that sence it is manifest that it needs no one governour for not as to every Kingdom there is a King so to all Kingdomes there is one King that that which is called Kingdome in Generall may have a being and therefore not in the Church neither as it is understood to be one collected of many particular Churches Is it necessary that one should be president He evidently both denyeth and excellently refuteth this Catholick union by this very thing because the Church is Catholicke therefore not really one but notionally only as all the Kingdomes in the world are one in the nature and notion of Kingdomes but not one corporation or one Government And so before him Bishop Jewell in answer to the same Papist proving the minor or second part of the former argument viz. That the Church is one visible Congregation or societie because as our brethren do there is one faith and Baptisme one calling so one Church as Saint Paul saith ye all are one body and members one of another and in our Creede wee all professe to beleeve one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church saith that whereas Mr Harding had proved the major also out of Aristotles 12. booke of his Metaphysicks out of Homer Never did Aristotle or Homer dreame of this NEW FANCY that one King should rule over the whole world And by consequence or that the whole world was but one Kingdome and so he implyeth it to be as ridiculous that all Churches should bee but one governing Church and hee addeth what is considerable in this Argument wherein reason is followed rather then scripture His reason were better if either Peter or Paul or any Catholick Father had used it and then citeth Austin de Doct. Christ l. 3. c. 28. who saith To attribute much to discourse of reason in understanding scripture haec consuetudo periculosa est this custome is dangerous per scripturas enim divinas multo tutius ambulatur It is far safer following of the Scripture So that Bishop Jewell conceiveth this against both scripture and Antiquitie Mr Rutherford also due right of Presbytery pag. 231. titleing the page thus How our Church hath been visible makes it out only by this That in all Ages there have been some who have held the same points with us in the main Implying the visibility