to every Church-act it s an easie thing for them to bring in Anarchy being alwaies the greater number and so to swallow up the votes of the Elders as Brownists doe That Ministeriall Doctrinall Authority should be severed from the power of excommunication in some parties we never doubted because excommunication is an act of jurisdiction which is common to many but Doctrinall Authority is an affluxe of Order But to sever Rule and Authority from the power of concurrence to excommunication and censures as they doe in the people is a meer nullity of Rule and Authority too That the power of excommunication should be inseparably linked to a Congregation they would faine illustrate by a knowne comparison As the custome is in our Land The sentencing of a man to death is not by Lawyers nor by Iudges alone but by his Peeres a Iury of men like himselfe Their similitude still halts on the maine legge For who are the Iudges with them but the Presbytery and who are the Iury but all the Brethren But this is not so in a Corporation All the City are not the Delinquents Peeres but a select dozen of men Now suppose a man be accused as an offender in a Corporation shall the whole City be his Peeres or Iury to try him have they any such interest or priviledge is their consent or dissent regarded So the parallell required If a brother deserve censure he shall not be judged by the Pastors alone or with the Elders chosen by the people as his Iury for the Government of the Congregation but all the people are to be his Peeres or Iury This were strange to see in a City and would breed nothing but Anarchy and confusion So in the Church That Christ hath not betrusted a generall Assembly of Elders with that power he hath done the Congregation is begged not proved The reason is invalid Because say they they are abstracted from the people But that 's not true for the people are there representatively in their Elders who are able to represent the case of the offender with all the circumstances as fully as if all the people were there present But Christ say they would have this Tribe of men the brethren personally concurring not by delegation alone not to the execution only but even to the legall sentence also of cutting men off This is all begged and is the question And it is as if they should say in the parallell instance God would have all the Corporation personally concurring to the legall sentence or cutting off a malefactor not by delegation only as the Iury doe nor to the execution only which were a strange confusion So that as at the Assizes the multitude of the people present have no concurrence to the legall sentence c. but the Iudge and Iury only so the Brethren are to have no concurrence to the legall sentence of excommunication except to yeeld obedience in the execution but the Elders only and so the parallell is full And to conclude if the distance of the Presbyteries Clasficall c. may necessitate the censure to pertaine to the particular Congregation because of the circumstances better knowne to them By the same reason every Towne where a malefactor lives should have the Sessions kept amongst them because there the person and fact is better knowne and not one man to be absent from the censure Nay a man being to be excommunicated out of a particular Church is excommunicated out of all Churches therefore all the Churches must be present at the censure VINDICIAE Clavium OR A Vindication of the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven CHAP. I. What the Keyes be and what their power 1. THat by the Kingdome of Heaven is meant both the Kingdome of Glory which is above and the Kingdome of Grace which is the Church on Earth I easily grant But I only desire in the beginning of this discourse to be informed what you meane by the Church Whether 1. The invisible and mysticall Church of true Beleevers opposed to Reprobates or 2. The Catholicke visible Church opposed to Heathens or 3. The particular Congregation of Beleevers associated in Church-communion as you use to speake If we may guesse at your meaning by the whole proceeding of this Tract or by your discovery of your selfe in the other Discourse called The way of the Churches in New-England which though it was published after this of the Keyes yet was written and went up and downe in the darke before it I thinke you meane it in the latter sense for a particular Congregation For your first Proposition there gives us this Resolution That the Church which Christ in the Gospell hath instituted The way p. 1. and to which he hath committed the Keyes c. it coetus fidelium a combination of godly men commonly called a particular visible Church But of all the rest this is the most improbable sense of our Saviours words Mat. 16.19 For 1. By the Kingdome of Heaven on Earth he meanes that Church of which he had spoken before in v. 18. But that was either the Catholicke visible Church or rather the invisible mysticall Church for that only is built upon the rocke and against that the gates of hell shall never prevaile whereas particular Churches may faile 2. The kingdome of Glory the one part of the meaning of the Kingdome of Heaven is not contradistinguished to a particular Congregation but to the generall visible Church on Earth opposed to the World by your selfe The Keyes p. 2. On Earth that is say you in the Church on Earth for he gave him no power to bind in the World 3. That Church was there meant say you the way p. 1. whereof Peter was one But Peter was not a member of such a particular congregation for there was none such extant when Christ spake these words to Peter 4. You say againe it was that Church unto which Peter or any offended brother might tell the offence and have it censured But that was never done in a Church of Saints Beleevers without officers neither was the church of Corinth such a church as you described before for that had Officers who authoritatively might censure the incestuous person yet you joyne them both together 5. It was say you a Church who all met in one place for the administration of the Ordinances of Christ But the Ordinances of Christ are not to be found much lesse administred in a Church of Beleevers without Officers 6. When you say Christ committed the Keyes to the Church that is a particular Congregation you must meane it either Subjectivè or Objectivè If you meane it in the latter sense That the Keyes are committed to the Church as the object of the exercise of the Keyes that is for the use and good of the Church you say true but nothing to the purpose In this sense the Keyes are given first and more immediately to the invisible mysticall Church All are yours whether Paul c. then
to the generall visible Church for their sakes and then to the particular Congregation as a part or member of that generall visible Church But if you meane it in the former sense as you doe and must or else you aequivocate with us from the beginning and throughout your whole Booke you fall into that extreme of the Brownists which you so labour to avoid For to take the Church in Mat. 16. for a particular Congregation of Beleevers without Officers is a new and strange and false glosse maintained by none but Brownists and such like Separatists To conclude The Church of which our Saviour speaks is called here the Kingdome of Heaven on Earth But a particular Congregation of Beleevers is never called the Kingdome of Heaven being but a member or corporation of that Kingdome It were as improper to call a congregation Christs Kingdome as to call London the Kingdome of England yet so your party speake sometimes This I thought good to note to cleare the way for the better understanding of that which followes And now goe on 2. The next thing to be explicated is what the Keyes of the Kingdome be wherein you resolve us thus The Keyes are the Ordinances of Christ which he hath instituted to be administred in his Church as the preaching of the Word as also the administring of Seales and censures I take what you grant only I shall animadvert some things In this Paragraph as you doe clearely lay downe the state of the question so you doe strongly confute the scope of your whole Booke which is to give the people a share in the power of the Keyes that is in the government of the Church which appeares upon these considerations 1. You say the Keyes are the Ordinances which Christ hath instituted But the Ordinances of Christ are given indeed for the Church of Beleevers that is for their good and benefit objectivè But are never in all the Scripture nor in all Antiquity said to be given to that Church subjectivè It sounds ill at first hearing to say that the people have any power to exercise Ordinances of preaching or administring of Seales or Censures The power of preaching or administring Sacraments by the people as none but Separatists doe usurpe so your selfe complaine of it page 6. And why you should allow them power in censures there is very little reason 2. You say the Keyes are Ordinances which Christ hath instituted to be administred in his Church What Church the Church of Beleevers a particular Congregation for so you meane as was shewed afore Marke it to be administred in that Church scil by Officers instituted for that purpose not by that Church without Officers 3. You adde that which to me clearly excludes the people of your Church These Keyes are neither sword nor scepter c. for they conveigh not soveraign power but stewardly ministeriall Whence thus I argue The people or Congregation of Beleevers have no stewardly or ministeriall power over themselves ergo they have nothing to doe with the power of the Keyes They are not as Hilkiah was whose Office was over the house Isa 22.15 22. nor Stewards in the house as he was Gen 43.19 nor as those are who are spoken of 1 Cor. 4.1 2. Stewards of the mysteries of God But you adde a clause to draw in the people saying This power to open and shut the gates of Heaven lyeth partly in their spirituall calling whether it be their Office or their place and order in the Church c. I suppose the word calling should be taken here of a speciall calling or office as we use to call it which againe would exclude the people from any power in the Keyes as having no office in the Church But you adde by way of explication of your owne sense Whether it be their Office or their place and order in the Church on purpose to steale in the interest of the people in some share of the Keyes But if place order in the Church give the people out of office any power in the Keyes that is the Ordinances so you say again then may women children claim an inâ—erest in those Keyes for they have a place and Order in the Church as well as men which yet you would seeme to deny But let me professe at first what I shall make good from your selfe hereafter I see not but women and children may challenge a great part of that power of the Keyes which you give to the Brethren 3. Concerning the third What are the Acts of the Keyes and the fourth what is the subject to be bound and loosed I shall not contend with you The fifth To whom the power of the Keyes is given requires a more serious consideration as being the very foundation of all your new Fabricke which stands or fals with it The Text is expresse To thee Simon Peter will I give the Keyes c. in a cleare contradistinction to the Church before mentioned upon this rock of thy confession will I build my Church which you take for a particular congregation though by a great mistake as was shewed above But let it be granted for the present to be so then the words in all cleare construction run thus I will build my Church the particular congregation upon that rocke and I will give the Keyes of that Church called the Kingdome of Heaven and so by you interpreted to thee Peter and to such Officers as thou art Otherwise he would have said On this rocke will I build my Church and I will give unto it the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven that is of the Church it selfe which is scarse a reasonable interpretation of the words To make way therefore for your great designe you undertake to resolve that busie question as you call it How Peter is to be considered in receiving this power of the Keyes whether as an Apostle or as an Elder or as a Beleever c. Before I come to consider your answer I would make bold to put one ingredient more into the question whether Peter was not considered as a Deacon as well as an Elder or Beleever For seeing a Deacon is one of the Officers of the New Testament The Keyes p. 32. The way p. 83. some say Iudas was Christs Deacon and your selfe say all the Officers of the Church were virtually in the Apostles They were Pastors Teachers Ruling-Elders Deacons c. It may not unfitly be questioned whether Peter did not then represent a Deacon as well as an Elder or Beleever And then againe whether the Keyes were not given to Peter as a Deacon and why a Deacon only is denyed any power in the Keyes when beleevers are admitted to have a share therin seeing a Deacon hath power to collect and distribute the goods and treasury of the Church I leave these to your consideration or theirs who shall reply and come to your answer To shew your desire of peace and your impartiality in inclining
an Ecclesiasticall sense for the keyes delivered unto Peter But we goe on The key of Faith say you is the sâ—me with the key of knowledge Luke 11.52 which the Lawyers had taken aw y. But 1. by your favour the key of Faith and knowledge are not both one if you understand it of justifying Faith A man may have much knowledge and no Faith Knowledge may in a sense be said to be the key of Faith as being the inlet or Antecedent of Faith but so Faith and knowledge are not the same 2. The key of knowledge is one thing and knowledge is another The key of knowledge is the great Ordinance of preaching you said the keyes of the kingdome of Heaven were the Ordinances of Christ as the preaching of the Word the opening and applying of it p. 2 c. But this key of knowledge here you speake of is you say common to all Beleevers but a little before this you complaine that private Christians had usurped this key to preach the Gospell c. page 6 Whereas this key of knowledge is peculiar to the Ministers of the Gospell The Priests lips keep the key of knowledge c. and Faith comes by the Word preached This was the key of knowledge which the Lawyers had taken away either by not interpreting or misinterpreting the Scripture They could not take away the peoples knowledge much lesse their Faith They might take away the key both of knowledge and Faith that is preaching as the Papists doe by locking up the Word in a strange language and ours lately did by crying and putting downe preaching 2. Whereas you say They that had the key of knowledge had power to enter into the kingdome of Heaven and it may be to open the doore to others to enter also I answer The key s given to Peter Matth. 16. were not to open the Kingdome of Heaven to himselfe for that key if a key it was he had before but to open it to others by opening and applying the Word as you said above our Saviour speaks of binding and loosing others Whose sins ye bind on earth c. and of opening for and shutting out others not himselfe Keyes are given to Stewards not properly to let in or shut out themselves but by way of Office to let in or locke out others Besides A priviledge to find an open doore to enter into the fellowship of the Church p. 11. which is passive and in plaine sense one fit to be admitted into the Church So the Epistolers p. 2. The key of knowledge hath opened their hearts that is I think preaching the key of knowledge and Faith which you describe here is common to all Beleevers even women but I beleeve you will not give them a key to open and shut heaven to others that is the key of preaching Then againe why doe you dislike the former distribution when you also make one key to be the key of knowledge and so leave one of the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven without power contra-distinguishing the key of Faith or knowledge for with you they are both one from the key of power which fals under your key of Order Lastly whereas you say a faithfull soule by this key entreth into a state of grace and into the fellowship of the Church c. You may remember that by the Kingdome of Heaven which is the Church on Earth you understand a particular Congregation But a man may have this key of Faith or knowledge and never enter into your particular Church and so this key is given to a man out of the Church and yet you say the keyes are given to the Church I leave you to consider it These things hang not well together In the next place you come to the key of Order of which you thus write The key of Order is the power whereby every member of the Church walketh orderly himselfe according to his place in the Church and helpeth his brethren to walke orderly also But this is a strange expression of the key of Order never heard of before too generally and aequivocally spoken For Order may be taken either morally or Ecclesiastically Passively or Actively Morally so it is taken passively for a conformity in carriage to the rules of the word in Doctrine as well as discipline But Ecclesiastically it is an Active power acting upon others The very name of a key imports a power intrusted for others good and not their owne properly Every one is to keep Order but every one hath not the key of Order Order and Office in this Ecclesiasticall sense are both one None hath the key of Order but one in Office But your key of Order is common to every member of the Church The Keyes p ge 21. And that it is no more than morall or passive Order your selfe doe seeme to grant when you say The brethren stand in an Order even in an orderly subjection according to the order of the Gospell Every servant in a Family and every man woman and childe in a corporation stand in such an order and must walke orderly themselves and help others to walke orderly also but will any man say therefore these have interest in the keyes of the Family or Corporation If every member of a Congregation have this key of Order how and why are women and children excepted or are they no members of the Church or may they walke disorderly The instance of Saint Pauls walking orderly according to the orders of the Iewish Church manifests the morall sense of the word For certainly the Fraternity of the Iewes had no power of the Keyes The meaning was that Saint Paul by his conformity to some Iewish Ceremonies should manifest that he did not absolutely oppose the Rites of the Iewish Church not that he had any power of the Keyes of the government of that Church Surely the Iewes were bound all of them to withdraw from every brother that walked disorderly yet did not beleeve that that was any part of the exercise of the key of Order No more was it in those of Thessalonica when they did warne the unruly or withdraw from him that walked disorderly And this Key of Order if a Key it were was common not only to Elders and Brethren as you say but even to women and children as I said afore Of Order you say there be 2. Keyes one of power or interest another of Authority or Rule The first of these is called in Scripture Liberty c. Before I examine the particulars I shall note some few things 1. How modest errour is at first Here it is first called power mollified by interest and then by liberty after by priviledge all which are rather passive than active but afterwards it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power which though it sometimes signifies a priviledge honour or dignity Iohn 1.12 in a passive construction as given and received yet when it relates to Government or a power of the Keyes
the Keyes from the Scripture nor yet from antiquity though you would faine have us beleeve you would not sticke upon the former distribution if the words be rightly explained As how 1. Let them say you allow some spirituall power to the Key of knowledge though not a church power But have you not all this while been speaking of the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven that is the Church and now is the power of the Key of knowledge no Church power Againe have not you your selfe taken away from the Key of knowledge not only Church power but all power whatever by contradistinguishing it to the Key of power 3. Is that Key whereby he that hath it not onâ—y enters himselfe into the Kingdome of Heaven but also opens the doore for others to enter no Church power You adde secondly Let them put in a Key of liberty as well as of authority into Church power But both these are but one Key or nothing as we have said Nothing indeed to purpose if both these must consent or nothing is done as you and the Brethren assert 3. Let them not say you divide from the Key of Order or Office the Key of jurisdiction for Christ hath given no jurisdiction but to whom he hath given Office But 1. Christ it seemes hath divided the Key of Office from the Key of jurisdiction for hee hath given no jurisdiction to Deacons 2. You should have said and your scope required it Christ hath given to none the Key of Order or Office but to whom he hath given the Key of jurisdiction but that had contradicted your selfe in the instance of Deacons Concerning whom say you our Lord spake nothing of jurisdiction page 6. Now is it not as strange that there should be an Office in the Church without some jurisdiction As that there should among the Prelates bee jurisdiction without an Office at least instituted by Christ as it was in Chancellors Commissaries c. Nay is it not as strange that there should be Authority that is jurisdiction to binde and loose in those that have no Office at all as there is in the people in your way as that there should be an Office without jurisdiction And now I leave you to consider whether of these Distributions is most consentaneous to the truth CHAP. III. Of the Subject of the Key of Knowledge and Order YOu first tell us in generall That as the Keyes be divers so are the Subjects to whom they are committed divers But this is very doubtfull and disputable because at first all the Keyes were given to Peter at once and therefore one subject may possesse them all And sure they all meet in Pastors every one of them hath all the Keyes of knowledge and of power of Order and jurisdiction according to the old distribution and perhaps in yours also As the Apostles had all the Keyes by your confession They might exhort as Pastors The Keyes p. 32. teach as Teachers rule as Rulers receive and distribute the oblations of the Church as Deacons So I see no reason but every Minister of the Gospell hath virtually in him all the same power and Offices And if they be since divided into more hands for case and Order yet the subject is primarily but one and for the diversity of subjects of the Keyes it concernes them who plead it to make it good by Scripture Vpon this reason there are some who as they question the Office of a ruling Elder having 1. no direct or expresse instituted for it in the Scripture 2. No instance of any such that ruled and were not also Pastors 3. Nor doe you say That Peter received the Keyes as a ruling-Elder but as a Pastor so they would not yeeld the Office of the Deacon but that they finde expresse instituted of it afterwards by the Apostles But I will not multiply controversies but come to your particulars 1 The Key of knowledge or which is all one the Key of faith belongeth to all the faithfull whether joyned to any particular Church or no. But 1. Then one of the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven belongs to women yea to Infidels When God gives them Faith he gives them a Key to receive Christ and to find an open doore to enter into the fellowship of the Church But sure the Apostle Peter did not represent Infidels when the Keyes were committed to him 2. The Keyes you said were given to the Church but now you say they are given to some before they enter into the Church But I pray Sir is not he entred into the Church who hath received Christ and makes profession of his faith Yes you may say into the mysticall Church but not into a particular church-fellowship I answer he is entred also into the generall visible Church by profession of his faith to which Church we thinke the Keyes were first given and after to the particular Church But you have so long dreamed of a particular Church to be the first and only instituted Church that you seeme to forget the visible generall Church The way p. 10 and indeed to call it a Chimara This we thinke you learned from your Cousins if not your Brethren the Brownists Heretofore in Scripture language so soone as men beleeved and professed their faith they were said to be added to the Church not to a particular Congregation for so some were never added for ought we know as the Eunuch and some others but to the generall visible Church And I pray what Key was it that opened the doore to enter them into the Church Was it the key of their owne particular knowledge or Faith or the key of preaching viz. the key of knowledge in the Ministers of the Gospell and not in themselves You say here which is the truth that they find an open doore to enter into the fellowship of the Church which is passively to be capable to be admitted into the Church and not actively to open the doore to themselves 2. The Key of Order belongeth to all such as are in Church order whether Elders or Brethren But this is doubtfully spoken in a double respect 1. What you meane by Order as afore If Order and Office be all one as you seemed to yeeld then the key of Order belongs not to the Brethren at all but to the Elders who are in office If Order be taken for orderly carriage or as you your selfe speak in this very Paragraph For orderly subjection according to the order of the Gospell it is just nothing to the power of the Keyes For keyes imply an active power orderly subjection is morally passive 2. It is also doubtfull what is meant by Church in this place If it be taken for the generall visible Church that hath nothing to doe with the power of the keyes which are committed say you to the particular Church If for the particular Congregation it is then doubtfull still For it may be asked what power have the Brethren in
than either propagation or multiplication For these very Churches were before all one Church now only divided into two The Apostles and the first Planters did not thus propagate Churches but went into places where no Churches were no Christians and there gathered and multiplyed Churches We have enough of this division of Churches since your way set up but little of the propagation or multiplication Primitive and Apostolicall For I pray Sir tell us next time you write over how many Churches have you multiplyed amongst the Indians in New-England Not one that I ever heard of You have d vided Churches indeed from old England but propagated none And our Brethren at home how many Churches have they divided and dâ—stracted since their returne but have multiplyed none If some new Teachers should arise in New England and gather or rather steale some members out of every of your Congregations would you call this multiplication of Churches or rather division Had you gone into New England and sent out your Pastors who are by calling spirituall Fathers to convert Indians as was pretended or our Brethren here gone and sent into Wales and other parts little better than heathens and converted them and had gathered them into Churches this had been a propagation of Churches indeed But this they doe not nor will doe nor well can doe For their opinion is and yours too in New England that no Pastor is a Pastor to any but his particular Congregation so their Pastors are only Nurses to give sucke not spirituall Fathers to propagate and beget children to God and his Church That they leave to every gifted brother to raise up seed to their Brethren and not to themselves For if once the children be borne and a little growne up then these Fathers in Law take them up or rather steale them from them who have spent their strength in begetting and breeding them travelling in paine till Christ was formed in them But if a Pastor and flocke be relates is a Teacher so too They may doe well then to send Teachers to beget children for their Pastors lest it be said No man in Office hath any skill or will or power to propagate but only to divide Churches Againe why doe you call this a power of the Keyes for a Church to send out a Congregation as an Hive doth a swarm when they are too full This is their liberty not yours They have power without you to gather themselves together and to enter into a Church-way and to chuse their Officers and doe all as well as you had Lastly if Pastors quâ Pastors or Teachers quâ Teachers are tyed to a particular Congregation then cannot they propigate Churches only gifted Brethren can doe that And so gifted Brethren not Pastors and Teachers are the Successors of the Apostles We thinke Pastors and Teachers are Officers to the whole Church as the Apostles were You will say then they are Apostles First will you say your gifted Brethren are Apostles because they goe abroad to convert and propagate Churches Secondly it followes not That which made the Apostles differ from the Pastors is delivered by your selfe to stand in two things 1. The Keyes p. 32. That an Apostle had in him in all ministeriall power of all the Officers of the Church 2. That Apostolicall power extended to all Churches as much as to any one But withall you say That this power conjoyned in them is now divided by them amongst all the Churches and all the Officers of the Churches respectively I aske then what Officer of the Church hath power to plant and propagate Churches Your gifted Brethren are no Officers of the Church I hope Ruling Elders and Deacons are tyed as well to their particular Churches as the Pastors and Teachers ergo it must fall upon the Pastors and Teachers or there is no such thing now as propagation of Churches But take once more your owne grant in this Paragraph where now we are Though the Apostles be dead whose Office it was to plant and gather Churches yet the worke is not dead but the same power of the Keyes is left with the Churches in common c. Marke first you call it a power of the keyes to plant and gather Churches and an Office of the Apostles But this power of the Keyes this Office is not bequeathed to gifted Brethren nor to Ruling-Elders or Deacons ergo it is left to the Pastors or Teachers Next you say the same power of the Keyes is left with the Churches in common You should say with the Pastors or Teachers of the Church or with the Churches indeed but in the hands of her Officers Otherwise you make not only the brethren but sisters too according to their measure as you speake Fathers and Mothers To propagate and inlarge the Kingdome of Christ throughout all generations as God shall give opportunity But were it so yet then much more would it concerne the Pastors and Teachers the Successors of the Apostles if they have any at all to propagate and inlarge the Kingdome of Christ as God shall give opportunity CHAP. V. Of the Subject of the Key of Authority THe Key of Authority or Rule is committed to the Elders of the Church and so the Act of Rule is proper to their Office But me thinks you should have done well to distinguish both of Authority and Rule and also of Elders preaching from those they call Ruling-Elders For Authority and Rule may be distinguished because there is Rule in those that are called Ruling-Elders but not Authority to preach and administer Sacraments I would not have noted it but that you confusedly reckon up the particulars of Authority and Rule without distinction what belongs to one sort of Elders what to another As if they did equally belong to both 1. The first is That which the Eldâ—rs who labour in the Word and Doctrine are to attend unto chiefly that is the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacramentâ— For the first the preaching of the Word some of your Brethren say that private gifted Brethren may prophecye that is preach and others say they may baptize too who yet are denyed power in ruling as being not Elders not Officers to whom the Act of Ruling is proper Indeed you seeme to deny gifted Brethren power to prophesie publickly but your Prefacers write Magister hic non tenetur Yet their owne resolution of the case and their practise doth not well agree They say a gifted Brother may occasionally preach not in an ordinary course But we see they doe it ordinarily and constantly witnesse all their Lecturers their double and treble beneficed Lecturers and one who takes a Benefice but perhaps not the charge of soules nor administration of Sacraments where he constantly preaches If you say They are Elders or Pastors I answer they are so to their owne select Congregations but they are but as gifted Brethren to other Congregations for their principle is Pastor and flocke are
I Have diligently perused this Treatise called Vindiciae Clavium and perceiving that the judicious Authour hath exactly performed what he undertakes I cannot but conceive it will conduce very much to the ending of our Vnchristian Contentions concerning Church-Government the setling of some that waver and reclaiming of some that are mis-lead and appose Imprimatur IA. CRANFORD July 4 1645. VINDICIAE CLAVIVM OR A Vindication of the KEYES of the Kingdome of Heaven into the hands of the right Owners Being some Animadversions upon a Tract of Mr. I. C. called The Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven As also upon another Tract of his called The way of the Churches of NEVV-ENGLAND Manifesting 1. The weaknesse of his proofes 2. The Contradictions to himselfe and others 3. The Middle-way so called of Independents to be the Extreme or By-way of the Brownists By an earnest well-wisher to the Truth IER 6.16 Stand ye in the wayes see and aske for the old pathes where is the good way and walke therein LONDON Printed by T.H. for Peter Whaley and are to be sold in Ivy-Lane at the Signe of the Gun 1645. To the READER IT is true which the Prefacers to the Tract called The way of the Churches of Christ in New-England do say That we have long called for a fuller Declaration of themselves For all that hath as yet bin published hath not satisfied our expectation Nor do we think them able to satisfie any unprejudiced man The 32. Questions The Apologeticall Narration The Reasons of the dissenting Brethren The way of the Churches c. Now by them published have all been answered which yet these Brethren take no notice of The Keyes are now in question in the following discourse how well they doe fit the words in The way described or how sutable they are to the parties allowed to weare them There is one thing very suspicious That the Brethren doe not agree among themselves in the use and application of them For those two Brethren tell us in their Epistle That they hold with the Churches of New-England yet it is evident they agree not with their Author in The way For they professe That they doe not yet fully close with some expressions passim frequent in the Booke before some of which belike there are more they minded it to note a Star in the Margin This they could not but say and doe pace tanti Authoris or they could not assert the Booke And will this satisfie any indifferent Reader In the Title page they promise us a full declaration of the Church-way in all particulars But in the second page of their Epistle they tell us They doe not close with some expressions in the Book And there are no lesse than ten Stars affixed in the margine of the Booke wherein they intimate they cannot assert the Booke Of the same minde are the other two Brethren Ep. p. 6. the Prefacers to the Keyes and that not in bare expressions but in Doctrinall assertions How should such Tracts satisfie us when themselves are not satisfied And no marvâ—ll for those Brethren in their Apologeticall Narration doe wisely professe they keep a reserve open to alter their judgements upon occasion of New-light Besides this its evident that the Author of the Keyes does directly contradict the Authour of The way that is himself which when I have pleaded to some friends of his I have been told that he hath altered his judgement since he writ The way in many particulars I have heard indeed he hath often altered his judgement since he went to New-England But I cannot well beleeve it in this because the Prefacers to The way Ep. p. 3. bring us his owne words in a Letter newly written comming to their hands when their Epistle was in the Presse wherein he affirmes That there is not a jot of difference in any Doctrine of Divinity or Church practise So Mr. Cotton in his Letter to Mr. R.M. If it be true that he hath altered his opinion since he writ the Way they have done him wrong to publish it after the Keyes wherein the alteration is If he have not they would be requested to reconcile him to himselfe For I find he doth as flatly contradict himselfe as ever any man did I will instance but in one place and leave the rest to the following Discourse In the Keyes page 4. he sayes The Keyes were delivered to Peter as an Apostle as an Elder and as a Beleever The sense of the words sayes he will be most full if all the severall considerations be taken joyntly together But in The way page 27 he sayes The power of the Keyes is given to the Church to Peter not as an Apostle not as an Elder but as a profest Beleever in the name of Beleevers c. Is not this a flat contradiction and yet the Prefacers seeme to approve it for they set no Starre in the margine I shall leave it to them to reconcile How justly then may we call for a fuller Declaration and how unjustly doe the Brethren quarrell us for calling for it Ep. p. 5. Doe not they themselves promise us yet a fuller Treatise of the same Subject with amplier demonstrations by joynt consent of the Churches of Old and New-England That 's it that we expect the joynt-consent of the Churches and Brethren for their inconstancy and difference in judgement hath caused as our non-satisfaction so our just lamentation That they should rend a poore-rent-already-Church into peeces by setting up the practise of a New way and not be agreed of the platforme whereby they practise There are as I touched before no lesse then ten severall Stars affixed by these Brethren wherein I should conceive they differ from their Authour if not their Master not in bare expressions but in the Doctrine there delivered as page 45. VVhether the Church hath power to proceed against all her Officers if they be culpable in hereticall Doctrine or scandalous crime The Authour holds the affirmative they seeme to hold the Negative Againe page 53. VVhether a Church may consist of lesse than seven p. 55 VVhether confession of sinnes and profession of faith be necessary for a member admitted page 68. VVhether sitting at the Sacrament have a Symbolicall use made by Christ himselfe to teach the Church their Majority over their Ministers in some cases c In these and the rest we are unsatisfied and these Brethren may doe well to declare their judgement in their fuller Treatise promised This disagreement amongst themselves is prejudicious to their cause and way to those that are judicious that are not sworn to the words of any Master but Christ much more when the same person is not at agreement with himself which if it be not the case of the Authour of the Keyes I referre to the judgement of the indifferent Reader when he hath read the following Discourse Animadversions upon the Brethrens Epistle to the Reader IT is indeed the great controversie of
to any party you consider you say Peter in a threefold notion when he received the Keyes As an Apostle Elder Beleever so the sense of the words you say will be most full if all the considerations be taken joyntly together The sense indeed is most full to your purpose but I thinke least of all true * The power of the Keyes is given to the Churâ—h to Peter not as an Apostle not as an Elder but as a profest Beleever in the name of Beleevers c. The way p. 27. a flat contradiction And you doe beg the question to say Peter received the power of the Keyes as all these and in particular as a Beleever For of all the senses the last was least thought on in any age of the Church till this last when the Brownists and such like stumbled upon it When Saint Austin said Peter received the Keyes in the name of the Church Whether he did mistake the sense of the place or no you doe utterly mistake him to draw him to your meaning For 1. he did not meane your Church a particular congregation but either the generall vâ—sible Church or the invisible mysticall Church 2. Nor that neither subjectivè but objectivè that the Keyes were given to Peter as an Officer for the use and benefit of the Church But you proceed to say It appeares Christ gave the power of the Keyes to the Body of the Church even to the fraternity with the Presbytery Mat. 18.17 18. When they are met in his Name and agree together in the censure of an offendor But by this place and your former notion of Peter as a Beleever you may as well inferre that the Keyes are given to the Sororietie q.d. as to the Fraternity as Beleevers and as a part of the Body of the Church which I thinke is flat Anabaptisme worse than Brownisme You know there are some who deny that Mat. 18.17 18. holds forth any censure of excommunication at all Others that grant it yet by Church there understand the Officers of the Church such as the Apostles were to whom Christ spake What ye binde what ye loose c. You must not therefore beg a foundation to your building lest if it be fetched home your building fall on your owne head But you say All agree in this That no offender is to be excommunicated but with some concourse of the congregation at least by way 1. of consent to the sentence 2. of actuall execution of it by withdrawing themselves from him and this we conceive is some part of the exercise of the power of the Keyes But truly this is but the gingling of the Keyes at most no part of the power of the Keyes For 1. it belongs to Stewards in a Family only to exercise the power of the Keyes to take in and cast out what servants they please The rest of the servants heare the Keyes gingle when they turne the Keyes but have no part in the exercise of them no not so much as by consent active consent I meane so that if they consent not nothing is done but by a passive consent only as approving what the Steward hath done If you grant the Fraternity any more you make them joynt Stewards of the Family the Church as you shall heare hereafter Nay sometimes you seeme to give them no more The people discerning and approving the justnesse of the censures before administred by the Elders The Keyes p. 15. they give consent in obedience to the will and rule of Christ which is no part of the exercise of the power of the Keyes For suppose the censure be justly administred and the people deny their consent shall not a Delinquent be censured unlesse they will consent If not they have full power in the Keyes arising to authority which is the errour of the one extreme If so only as passively to consent its evident this is no part of the power of the Keyes 2. For their withdrawing that 's much lesse any power in the Keyes The Steward of a Family having discharged a naughty servant and turned and locked him out of doores all the rest of the servants are to withdraw from him but this is not by way of active power but passive obedience Is the withdrawing of people from a man outlawed in civill affaires any interest in the Keyes of Iudicature If it be said except the people consent and withdraw communion from a censured person the censure is in vaine I answer If the people should be so rebellious to civill Authority as not to withdraw from an outlawed man nothing were done the sentence was so farre in vaine If no man could be gotten to execute a malefactor condemned the sentence were frustrated in respect of the execution But doth this inferre that the people have an interest in the Keyes of secular power The question is not de facto what the people stubbornly may doe but whether they ought not to consent and withdraw and whether if they doe not they can challenge any interest in the power of the Keyes Againe if the Keyes were given to Peter as a Beleever I see no reason but women and children may come in and challenge a power in the Keyes It suffices not to say as the Epistolers say pag. 3. Women and children are excepted by a Statute Law of Christ against their enjoyment of any part of this publick power For though they be forbidden to speake in the Congregation or might by impotence as some say be excepted in some particulars yet there seemes no reason why they should be exempted from that power here given to the Fraternity which concernes them as well as men and they are as well able to exercise it as men viz. to give a passive consent or to withdraw from the party excommunicated which they may and must doe as well as men For as women may be offended so they should in reason have satisfaction by consenting to the sentence And as women may offend in keeping company with a brother or sister excommunicated so they ought to withdraw from them then if this be any exercise of the power of the Keyes you may heare them gingle at the womens girdles which is an extreme beyond the Brownists even downright Anabaptisticall But you give the Fraternity more power than this hereafter there we shall consider it Hitherto you have given them nothing but what is common to them with women CHAP. II. Of the distribution of the Keyes YOu first lay downe the ordinary Distribution of the Keyes and then except against it as defective in foure things 1. That any key of the kingdome of heaven should be left without power for the key of knowledge is contradistinguished from a key of power To this I answer It may be this distribution is not every way exact and perfect yet I thinke yours is rather worse And your exception fals upon your owne distribution a little more remotely For your key of Faith or
are still but where they were What if the Presbytery or Church will not submit to their determination or Declaration for it is no more what remedy hath the Church against their erring hereticall scandalous Presbytery If the Synod have a power of censure then againe you destroy your Independency No The Church may withdraw from them So they might before they consulted the Synod nay they were bound to doe it in your way without consulting the Synod But you may call to mind your former thoughts In your other Tract you give them full power to censure their Officers without any Officers as hath more then once been said above And thus your second answer is also answered already You say Excommunication is one of the highest acts of Rule The way p. 101. and ergo cannot be performed but by some Rulers Yet you contradict this fâ—â—â—ly in your other Tract when you say In case of offence given by an Elder or by the whole Eldership together the Church hath Authority marke that Authority which in this Booke you oft deny to require satisfaction of them and if they doe not give due satisfaction to proceed to censure according to the quality of the offence And yet which is strange me thinks here you resolve the cleane contrary The Church cannot excommunicate the whole Presbytery because they have not received from Christ an office of Rule without their Officers But now if this reason be good then on the other side it might seeme reasonable That the Presbytery might excommunicate the whole Church Apostate because they have received from Christ an office of Rule without the Church No say you They must tell the Church and joyne with the Church in that censure But this is to say and unsay For if the Church must joyne with them then the Church hath received some peece of an Office of Rule which was before denyed If you say they have not received any Office of Rule without their Officers This may imply that with their Officers they have received an Office of Rule which all this while you have seemed to deny allowing them a Liberty but no Rule or Authority And whereas you say They must tell the Church but that cannot be when the Church is Apostate I rejoyne this makes it reasonable to me That there is another Church to which they must tell the offence by way of appeale or else both an erring Presbytery or an Apostate Church have no remedy to recover them instituted by Christ and so the Church a multitude or a Presbytery is not so well provided for as one particular member But you have found a remedy The Church wants not liberty to withdraw from them Is not this even tantamount with excommunication Is it not the execution of that sentence to withdraw especially in your way Excommunication is the contrary to communion Now how doth the Church communicate their Elders Take your owne words As they set up the Presbytery The Keyes p 17. by professing their subjection to them in the Lord so they avoid them that is in sense excommunicate them by professed withdrawing their subjection from them according to God And this is as much as any people doe or need to doe to persons excommunicate unlesse you grant them a power to the very Act and decree of excommunication which as you have clearly done in your other Tract so you doe here giving them a power more than Ministeriall even a Kingly and more than a Kingly power when you say They rule the Church by appointing their owne Officers and likewise in censuring offenders not only by their Officers which is as much as Kings are wont to doe but also by their owne Royall assent which Kings are not wont to doe but only in the execution of Nobles Satis pro imperio 5. The last Liberty of the Church is Liberty of communion with other Churches which is seven wayes exercised c. To this I say in generall This is rather communion of Saints than communion of Churches because in your way every Church is independent and hath no Church-state in relation to any but it s owne members We suppose this communion is the liberty or priviledge of every Christian by vertue of his interest in the generall visible Church and not by any peculiar interest in a particular Congregation He that is a professed Christian and baptized hath a right to all the Ordinances of God where ever he find them As of old he that was a Citizen of Rome or so borne was a freeman through all the Romane Empire and enjoyed the priviledges of a Roman A Christian is a free Deacon in any part of the Christian world A Citizen with the Saints and of the houshold of God Eph. 2.19 And this to me seemes reasonable upon these grounds 1. Because every Christian not yet in a particular Church or Congregation is at liberty to joyne himselfe to any Church tyed by no obligation to one more than another 2. Because it is lawfull for any member of a particular Church upon just reasons to leave that Church and to joyne himselfe to another and nothing can hinder his removall or communion with another Church except he be scandalous c. 3. It was the custome of the first times before Congregations were fixed to adde them to the visible Church were their number lesser or greater and give them communion in all the Ordinances of Christ 4. Because the whole visible Church is but one City one Kingdome though for orders sake divided into severall Corporations It is not so in civill respects A Citizen of one Corporation cannot goe and set up trade in another because they have their severall Charters But in the City of God the Kingdome of Christ there is but one Charter for all and no more is required to admit a man a member of any Congregation but that he professe himselfe a Christian and live accordingly Your New Covenant to tye men to your particular Church that he may not remove without a generall leave will I feare prove a snare and a tyranny worse than yet we can imagine 1. But come we to your particulars First by way of participation of the Lords Supper the members of one Church comming to another Church c. But 1. Why doe you instance in this Ordinance only Have not their children occasionally borne there a liberty also of Baptisme Where neither of the parents can claim right to the Lords Supper there their Infants cannot claime right to Baptisme The way p. 81. Nor the childe of an excommunicate person p. 85. The rather because Baptisme is not administred with respect to this or that Church but to the generall visible Church Unlesse you hold that a man or childe is baptized to no Church but that particular and an Infidell to all the rest Yet some of your brethren will hardly baptize a childe of any but a member of their owne Church which is next doore to