Ministery and the Minestery before the Church p. 175 176 177. The Keys and power of ordaining Officers not committed to the Church of believers destitute of Elders p. 180. 181. 182. Robinsons reasons on the contrary siding with Arminians and Socinians who evert the necessity of a Ministery are dissolved p. 182. 183. No Ordination of Elders by a Church of onely Believers but by Elders in a constituted Church p. 184. 185. seq Ordination and Election differ ibidm Corrupt rites of the Romish Church added to ordination destroy not the nature of Ordination though such an Ordination be unlawfull yet is not invalid and null p 186. 187 188. The various opinions of Romanists anent Ordination ibid. Election may stand for Ordination in case of necessity p. 187. Of the succession of Pastors to Pastors p. 185. 186. Calling of Pastors seems by our Brethrens way not necessary p. 200 Arguments for Ordination of Elders by a Church of onely Believers dissolved p. 189. 190 191 seq Believers because not the successors of the Apostles have not power of Ordination p. 192. 193 194. seq The Keys by no warrant of Gods word are given to Pastors as Pastors according to the Doctrine of our Brethren p. 197. seq They side with Sociaians who ascribe Ordination to sole Believers p. 200. Election belongeth to the people p. 201. 202. seq In the ancient Church this was constantly taught till Papists did violate Gods Ordinance p. 203. Election of a Pastor not essentiall to his calliâg p. 205. The calling of Luther how ordinary and how extraordinary p. 205 206 207. seq The essence of a valid calling p. 208. 209. How it may be proved by humane testimonies that the now visible Church hath been a visible Church since the dayes of the Apostles p. 229. 230. seq Since the long continuance of the Waldenses p. 235 236. seq A calling frow the Papists Church as valid as Baptisme from the same Church p. 237 238. seq Robinsons arguments are removed p. 239. 240. Of addition of members to the Church p. 241. What sort of Professors whether true or seeming believers doe essentially constitute a visible Church divers considerable distinctions anent a visible Church p. ib. 242. 243 seq The invisible not the visible Church the prime subject of the Covenant of grace and of all the priviledges due to the Church and of all title claime and interest in Jesus Christ and how by the contrary doctrine our brethren imprudently fall into a grosse poynt of Arminianisme p. 244. 245 246 247 248. seq The invisible Church hath properly right to the seales of the Covenant our brethren in this poynt joyne with Papists whom otherwise they sincerely hate p. 242 205 251. seq What sort of profession doth constitute a visible Church p. 356. That Christ hath provided no Pastors as Pastors for converting of soules and planting visible Churches is holden by our Brethren p. 256. The arguments of our brethren for a pretended Church of visible Saints not only in profession but also in some measure of truth and sincerity as the author saith are disolved p. 256. 257 258. Robinsons arguments at length are discussed p. 268. 269 seq The Lords adding to the Church invisible no rule for our adding p. 256. The places Mat 22. Mat. 13 of the man without his wedding garment comming to the feast and of the târes in the Lords Field discussed p. 261 262. 263. The typical Temple no ground for this pretended visible Church p. 263 264. Nor the place 2 Tim. 3. 5. p. 261. Nor Rev. 22. 15. without are Dogs p. 267. 268. And of diverse other places and persons at length in seq Ordinary and prosessed hearing is Church-Communion p. 268 269 270 seq Excommunicated persons not wholy cut off from the visible Church p. 272 273 274 seq Sundry distinctions thereanent collected out of the Fathers and Schoolemen p. 277 278 279 282. Some Separatists deny that the regenerated can be excommunicated as Robinson some say onely the Regenerated are capable of excommunication as Peter Coachman p 279 280 281. Of the diverse sorts of excommunication and the power thereof p. 282 283 295. The reason why Papists debar not the excommunicated from hearing the word p. 275 276. How the Seals are due to the visible Church only in foro Ecclesiastico properly p. 281. In what diverse considerations the word preached is a note of the visible Church p. 283 284. seq The difference betwixt nota and signum p. 301. And nota actu primo notificativa and nota actu secundo and notificans p. 285. Arguments of Robinson and others answered p. 286. 287. Whether discipline be a note of the true church diverse distinctions thereanent p. 287 288. The order of Gods publick worship p. 228. Of the Communion of the visible Catholik Church p. 289 290. The Ministery and Ordinances are given principally to the guides of the Catholick Church and to and for the Catholick Church p. 289 290 291. And not to a Congregation only ibid 292. Congregations are parts of a Presbyteriall Church p. 293 294. Christ principally the head of the Catholick Church and secondarily a Spouse Head Lord King of a praticular Congregation p. 295. The excommunicated is east out of the Catholick visible Church p. 295 296. A sister Congregation doth not excommunicate consequenter only but antecedenter also p. 297. How Presbyteriall Churches excommunicate not by power derived from the Catholick visible Church p. 299 300. Of the power of the Catholick visible Church p. 300 301. A Congregation in a remote I le hath power of Jurisdiction p. 302. A Presbyteriall Church is the first and principall subject of the Ordinary power of Jurisdiction p. 302 303. What power generall councells have and how necessary p. 304. Power of excommunication not in a single Congregation consociated with other Churches p. 205 206. Synods or councels occasionall rather then ordinary p. 307. A Congregational Church how it is by divine right p. 307. 308 Tell the Church Mat. 18. not restrained to a single Congregation only p. 310 311. The place Mat. 18. 17. Tell the Church considered p. 310 311 312 313 seq An appeale from a Church that hath lawful power p. 315. A representative Church p. 316. The power of a single Congregation p 320 321 322. Matthew 18. Tell the Church establisheth a Church Court p. 322 323 324. What relation of Eldership do the members of the classicall Presbytery beare to the whole Presbyteriall Church and to all the congregations thereof p. 325 326 327 328 329 seq They have power of governing all Congregations in those bounds and not power of Pastorall teaching in every one of them ibidem Oncrousnesse of ruling many Churches whereof the Elders of the classicall Presbytery are not Pastors no more then the onerousnesse of advising that is incumbent to sister Churches p. 331 332 333. The power of Presbyteries Auxiliary not destructive to the power of Congregations p 334. 335.
a number of sole believers united in a Church-covenant which in very deed iâ but stones and timber not an house builded of God for in the ministeriall Church of the New Testament there is eâeâ a relation betwixt the Elders and the flock wee desire to to see a Copy of our brethrens instituted visible Church to the which Elders are neither essentiall nor integrall parts for their instituted visible Church hath its compleat being and all its Church-operations as binding loosing ordeining of Officers before there bee an Edldership in it and also when the Eldership is ordained they are not Eyes and Eares to the instituted Church nor watchmen because it is a body in essence and operation compleat without officers 2. the officers are not Governors for as I trust to prove they have no act of ministeriall authority of governing over the people by our brethrens Doctrine 2. all their governing is to Rule and moderate the actions of the whole governing Church which maketh them no wayes to be governours nor over the believers in the Lord nor overseers nor watchmen as a Preses who moderateth a Judicatorie a moderator in a Church-meeting a Prolocutor in a convocation is not over the Judicatorie Synod or meeting or Convocation 3. The Eldership are called by them the adjuncts the Church the subject the subject hath its perfect essence without its accidents and common adjuncts 2 Quest. Whether or not Christ hath committed the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to the Church of Believers which as yet wanteth all Officers Pastors Doctors c. The Author sayth this company of believers and Church which wanteth Officers and as we have heard is compleat without them is the corporation to which Christ hath given the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven which deserveth our brotherly censure for wee then aske a Scripture for the Lords giving of the keys to Pastors and Elders if the keys be given to Peter Mat. 16. as a professing believer by what Word of God are they given to Peter as to an Apostle and Pastor it would seem the Pastors have not the keys jure Divino for by this argument our Divines prove the Bishop not to bee an Office of power and jurisdiction above a Pastor and Presbyter because the keys were not given to Peter as to the Archbishop but as to a Pastor of the Church and indeed this would conclude that Pastors are not Officers of authority and power of jurisdiction jure Divino Hence the question is if it can be concluded that the keyes of of the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 16. Mat. 18. were given to Peter as he represented all professing believers or if they were given for the good of professing believers but to Peter as carrying the person of Apostles Pastors and Church-guides 1. Distinction There is one question of the power of the keyes and to whom they are committed and another of the exercise of them and toucheth the government of the Church if it be popular and democraticall or not 2. Dist. It is not inconvenient but necessary that Christ should give to his Church gifts Pastors and Teachers of the which gifts the Church is not capable as a subject as if the Church might exercise the Pastor and Doctors place and yet the Church is capable of these gifts as the object and end because the fruit and effect of these gifts redoundeth to the good of the Church see Parker see the Parisian schoole and Bayner 3. Distinct. There is a formall ordinary power and there is a vertuall or extraordinary power 1. Concl. Christ Iesus hath immediatly himselfe without the intervening power of the Church or men appointed offices and Officers in his house and the office of a pastor and Elder is no lesse immediately From Christ for men as Christs Vicars and Instruments can appoint no new Office in the Church then the office of the Apostles Eph. 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Mat. 28. 19. The Offices are all given to the Church immediatly and so absolutely and so the power of the keys is given to the Church the same way But the Officers and key bearers now are given mediatly and conditionally by the intervening mediation of the ruling and ministeriall Church that she shall call such and such as have the conditions required to the office by Gods Word 1. Tim. 3. 12 3. Hence we see no reason why the keys can be said to be given to believers any other wayes then that they are given for their good 2. Concl. I deny not but there is a power virtuall not formall in the Church of believers to supply the want of ordination of pastors or some other acts of the keyes simply necessary hic nunc this power is virtuall not formall and extraordinary not ordinary not officiall not properly authoritative as in a Church in an Iland where the pastors are dead or taken away by pest or otherwayes the people may ordaine Pastors or rather doe that which may supply the defect of ordination as David without immediate Revelation from Heaven to direct him by only the Law of nature did eate shewbread so is the case here so answer the casuistes and the schoolemen that a positive Law may yield in case of necessity to the good of the Church so Thomas Molina Suarez Vasquez Vigverius Sotus Scotus Altisiodorensis Durand Gabriel and consider what the learned Voetius sayth in this What if in an extreame case of necessity a private man endued with gifts and zeale should teach publickly after the example of the faithfull at Samosaten Yea and Flavianus and Diodorus preached in Antioch as Theodoret sayth yea saith Voetius an ordinary ministery might be imposed on a Laick or private person by the Church though the presbytery consent not in case of necessity God sayth Gerson may make an immediate intermission of a calling by Bishops yea sayth Anton. speaking of necessities Law The Pope may commit power of Excommunication quia est de jure positive pure Laico mulieri to one meere Laicke or a woman though we justifie not this yet it is hence concluded that God hath not tied himselfe to one set rule of ordinary positive Lawes a captive woman as Socrates saith preached the Gospell to the King and Queen of Iberranes and they to the people of the Land 3. Concl. The Author in the foresaid first proposition will have no instituted visible Church in the New Testament but a Congregationall or Parishionall Church that meeteth together ordinarily in one place for the hearing of the Word But we thinke as a reasonable man is the first immediate and principall subject of aptitude to laugh and the mediate and secondary Subjects are Peter Iohn and particular men so that it is the intention of nature to give these and the like properties principally and immediately to the speciâe and common nature and not immediately to this or that man
from Galilee Acts 1. 14. and some from Jerusalem v. 15. 3. No particular Church had power Ecclesiasticall as this Church had power to choose an Apostle who was to be a Pastor over the Churches of the whole World as our brethren teach so Mr. Paget sayth well These Disciples who waited upon Christ such as Barsabas and Matthias were no members of the Church of Jerusalem and so what powâr had a particular Church to dispose of them who were no members of their Church 3. That which concerneth all must be done by all and that which concerneth the feeding and governing of the Church of the whole World must be done by these who represent the Church of the whole World but that Matthias should be chosen and ordained an Apostle to teach to the whole World concerned all the Churches and not one particular Church ãâã Therefore there was here either no Church which no man dare say for âhere is here a company of believers where there is preaching and Church government v. 15. 16. 26. or then there was here a Congregation which is against sense and Scripture or there is a Church Provinciall Naturall or Oecumenick call it as you please it is a visible Church instituted in the New Testament after the ascension of Christ and not a Parishionall Church Some answer this was extraordinary and meerely Apostolick that an Apostle should be ordained and is no warrant for a nationall Church now when the Churches of Christ are constituted But I answer this distinction of ordinary and extraordinary is wearied and worne to death with two much employment 2. Beza Calvin Piscator Tilenus Whittaker Chamier Pareus Bucanus professors of Leyden Walaeus VVillet P. Martyr Ursinus c. and all our Divines yea Lorinus the Jâsuite Cajetan alledge this place with good reason to prove that the ordination and election of Pastors belongeth to the whole Church and not to one man Peter or any Pope Yea Robinson and all our Brethren use this place to prove that the Church to the second comming of Christ hath power to ordaine and exanthorate and censure her officers 2. We desire a ground for this that the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church which is ordinary and perpetuall to Christs second comming should joyne as a collâterall cause in ordination and election of an Apostle which ordination is extraordinary temporary apostolick see for this Pet. Martyr VVhittaker Bilson Chamier Pareus Beza Calvin Harmonie of the confessions Iunius Cartwright Fulk Ursinus Zwinglius Munsterus and Theodoret would have us to rest upon Apostolick demonstrations like this And Irenaeus speaketh against rectifiers of the Apostles in this Cyprian sayth the like 2 Acts 6. A Church of Hebrewes and Graecians together with the twelve Apostles is not a particular Ordinary Congregation and a governing Church choosing Deacons therefore they are a nationall Church though the first ordination of Deacons be meerely Apostolick and immediately from Iesus Christ yet the ordination of these seven persons was a worke of the Churches power of the keys Now let our Brethren speake if this was a Congregationall Church that meeteth ordinarily to the word and Sacraments such as they say the Church of Corinth was 1 Cor. â1 18. So say I of the Church Acts 15. 22. called Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church this could not be a particular Church for no particular Congregation hath Ecclesiasticall power to prescribe Decrees and Canons to all the Churches of the Gentiles and that this was done by an ordinary Ecclesiastick power that remaineth perpetually in a Church such as this was is cleare because our Brethren prove that the whole multitude spake in this Church from vers 12. Then all the multitude kept silence and therefore the multitude say our Brethren spake from v. 21. all the Church voyced in these Decrees and Canons say they 3. Sister Churchers keepe a visible Church-communion together 1. They heare the word and partake of the Seales of the Covenant occasionally one with another 2. They eschew the same excommunicated heretick as a common Church-enemy to all 3. They exhort rebuke comfort and edifie one another as members of one body visible 4. If one sister Church fall away they are to labour to gaine her and if she will not be gained as your Author sayth they tell it to many sister Churches if shee refilse to heare them they forsake Communion with her 1. Here is a visible body of Christ and his Spouse having right to the keyes word and seales of grace 2. Here is a visible body exercising visible acts of Church-fellowship one toward another Hence here a visible Provinciall and Nationall Church exercising the specifick acts of a Church Ergo Here is a Provinciall and Nationall Church For to whom that agreeth which essentially constituteth a Church visible that must be a visible Church You will say they are not a visible Church because they cannot and doe not ordinarily all meete in one materiall house to heare one and the same word of God and to partake of the same Seales of the Covenant joyntly but I answer 1. This is a begging of the question 2. They performe other specifick acts of a visible Church then to meete ordinarily to partake joyntly and at once of the same ordinances 3. If this be a good reason that they cannot be a Nationall Church because they meete not all ordinarily to heare the some word and to partake of the same Ordinances then a locall and visible and ordinary union joyntly in the same worship is the specifick essence of a visible Church but then there was no visible Nationall Churches in Iudea for it was impossible that they could all meete in one materiall house to partake of the same worship 4. These who for sicknes and necessary avocations of their calling as Navigation Traffiquing and the like cannot ordinarly meet with the congregation to partake joyntly with them of these same Ordinances loose all membership of the visible Church which is absurd for they are cast out for no fault 5. This is not essentiall to a nationall Church that they should ordinarily all joyntly meet for the same worship but that they be united in one ministeriall government and meet in their chiefe members and therefore our Brethren use an argument à specie ad genâs negativè a provinciall or nationall company of believers cannot performe the acts of a particular visible Church Ergo such a company is not a visible Church just as if I would reason thus A Horse cannot laugh Ergo he is not a living Creature or it is an argument à negatione unius speciei ad negationem alterius such a company is not such a congregationall Church Ergo it is no visible Church at all an Ape is not a reasonable Creature Ergo it is not an Ape 3. Conclu There ought to be a fellowship of
the ancients have taught as Tertullian Irenaeus Origen Cyrill Theophylact. Oecumânius Clemens Alexandrin Iustin Martyr Chrysost. August Hilarius Ambrose Basil. Epiphanius Ierome Eusebius Cyprian Damascen Beda Anselme Bernard So our Divines Calvin Luther Beza Martyr Iunius Bullinger Gualtâr Daneus Tiâenus Bucanus Trelcatius Piscator Pareus Tossanus Polanus Decolampadius Bucer Hipperius Viret Zuinglius Fennerus Whittakerus Feildus Reynoldus Anto. Wallaeus Profess Leydens Magdeburgersis Melanthon Chemnitius Hemingius Aretius Then the Keyes be given to Church-officers because they are Officers and Stewards of the Kingdome And you will have the Keyes to be given to believers as believers and as the Spouse of Christ. Now Elders and believers may be opposed as believers and no believers as the Church of the redeemed and not the Church of the redeemed but the accidents onely of that Church as you teach and as the Spouse of Christ and his body and not the Spouse nor his body I see not by our brethrens doctrine that Officers as Officers have any right title or warrant to the Keyes or to any use of them seeing they are given to believers as believers and as Christs body and Spouse 2. The place Matth. 28. 19. is against you for you say that Pastorall preaching and administration of the Seales are given onely to such as are Preachers by office Now the converting of infidels and other unbelievers to make them fit materials of a visible Church is not as you say the charge proper to Pastors as Pastors and by vertue of their Pastorall charge as baptizing by this place is their proper charge because Pastors as Pastors convert none at all nor can they as Pastors exercise any pastorall acts toward the un-converted the un-converted by your way are under no Pastorall charge but converted by Prophets not in Office Pastors as Pastors exercise all pastorall acts toward these onely who are members of a visible Church as toward these onely who have professed by oath subjection to their ministery ad are partakers of the precious faith and are the sonnes and daughters of the Lord God Almighty So you teach So by this Text Pastors as Pastors cannot convert infidels and we desire a warrant from Gods Word for the pastorall acts in converting souleâ yea seeing by this place persons out of office onely doe convert soules by your doctrine with all reason persons out of place should baptize for teaching and baptizing here and by your owne doctrine are of a like extent See to this and satisfie us in this point of such consequence as everteth the ministery of the New Testament which we believe our brethren intend not being so direct Anabaptatisme and Socinianisme points that we know our deare brethren doe not love or affect The Author addeth He who said to the Apostles Whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained and whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted Joh. 20. 23. He also said to the Church Whatsoever ye biââ on earth shall be bound in Heaven Math. 18. 18. Which is a Commission of the same power and to the same âffect and so the Apostles and the Churches both received the same power immediately from Christ and therefore though the Church presented their Officers chosen by themselves to receive ordination from the Apostles ãâã now when the Apostles are ceased and no other successors left in tâââ roome from whom their officers might receive ordination but frââ the Presbyterie of their owne Churches where such a Presbytery is yet wanting and is now to be erected the Church hath full power to give ordination to them themselves by the imposition of their hands Answ. If the Reverend Authour had framed an Argument here it should have been thus Those who have received immediately from God a Commission of the same power and to the same effect by the Text Math. 18. 18. Which the Apostles of our Lord received by the Text Joh. 20. 23. These may doe what the Apostles did in ordaining of Elders seeing they are the successors of the Apostles where there be no Elders But the Church of believers received the same Commission Matth. 18. 18. which the Apostle did Joh. 20. 23. and where Edders are wanting in the Church the Church of believers is their successors Erge c. First the assumption is false for if the Church receive the same Commission Math. 28. The Apostles received Joh. 20. and you must adde Math. 28. 19. for the same Commission is given to the Apostles Math. 28. 19. which is given Joh. 20. 23. But the Disciples received Commission Ioh. 20. and Math. 28. of Pastorall binding and loosing and preaching by vertue of their Office and to administer the Sacraments in their owne persons as you grant therefore the Church of believers received commission from Christ where Presbyters are not to preach by vertue of an Office and administer the Sacraments in their owne persons Ergo the Church of believers may where there is no Presbytery preach by verue of an Office and administer the Sacraments You will happily say there is no such necessity of baptizing as of ordination of Ministers and baptizing is incommunicable because we read not that any in the Apostolique Church baptized but Pastors I answer there is in an extraordinary necessity where there are no Presbyters at all as little necessity of ordination if there be Presbyters in other Congregations to ordaine And since you never read that any in the Apostolique Church ordained Pastors but Pastors onely why but we may have recourse to a Presbytery of other Congregations for ordination as well as for baptizing for it is petitio principii a begging of the question to say that baptizing is proper to Pastors but ordination is not so yea but ordination by precept practice is never given but to Pastors and Elders in consociation 1 Tin 4 14 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 1. 6. 2 Tim. 2. 2 3. Tit. 1. 5. Act. 6. 6. Act. 13. 3 Act. 14 23. 2. There is good reason why Pastors should be successours of the Apostles in the act of ordaining Pastors you grant where Pastors and Elders are they succeed to the Apostles in the acts of ordination but that all believers men and women should be the Apostles successours to ordaine Pastors is a rare and unknowne case of Divinity for 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Apostles are all Prophets Yea not long agoe you said that Act. 1. an hundred and twenty amongst whom there were women had all hand in the ordination of Matthias to be an Apostle so that beleevers by you are made the Apostles successours and more yea even co-ordainers and joynt-layers on of hands with the Apostles Yea if believers received immediately this same Commission from Christ Math. 18. which the Apostles received Ioh. 20. Believers are to ordaine Pastors no lesse when the Presbytery and Elders are present then when they are absent yea and rather then the Apostles because the Church of beleevers their patent passed the Seales first even before
the Lords resurrection 3. It is good you grant that ordination and election are different we will make use of it hereafter The Authour addeth We willingly also acknowledge where God hath furnished a Church with a Presbytery to them it appertaineth by imposition of hands to ordaine Elders and Deacons chosen by the Church but if the Church want a Presbytery they want a Warrant to repaire to other Churches to receive imposition of hands to their Elders 1. Because ordination is a worke of Church power now as Church hath power over another so no Presbytery hath power over another Church then their owne All the Apostles received alike power Ioh. 20. 23. 2 The power of the keyes is a liberty purchased by Christs blood Math. 28. 8. Phil. 2. 8 9 10. Therefore it is unlawfull for any Church to put over that power into the hands of another Answ. We desire a warrant from Gods Word where Elders where they are present are to ordaine Elders by imposition of hands and not believers for ordination is a worke of the Church Officers are not the Church nor are they parts or members of the Church but onely accidents the Church hath its full being the power and use of the Keyes given to them by Math. 18. though there be not a Pastor or Officer among them and if Christ before his resurrection gave the Keyes to beleevers as to his Spouse living body and such as have Peters faith Math. 16. Resolve us we beseech you brethren in this how Christ can give the Keyes after his resurrection Ioh. 20. 23. to the Apostles as Pastors and as no believers not his Spouse not his body for Officers as Officers are not the redeemed of God nor Christs Spouse If you say that Christ Ioh. 20. gave the Keyes to his Disciples as beleevers then he gave the power of baptizing after his resurrection also by the parallel place Math. 28. 19. to the Apostles as to beleevers Hence 1. Christ hath never given the Keyes to Officers as Officers 2. The place Ioh. 20. is but a renewing of the Keyes given to the Church Math. 16. and Math. 18. and all believers are sent and called to be Pastors as the Father sent Christ and as Christ sent his Apostles as our Lord speaketh John 20. 21. This I thinke all good men will abhorre though M. Smith saith these words and that power Iohn 20. 21. was given to Cleoâhas and Mary Magdalen And by your way Paul as I thinke without warrant interdicted women of the use of that power that Christ purchased by his blood 3. There is no warrant of the Word to make good that Christ gave the Keyes to Officers as Officers by your way but onely to Officers as to beleevers and therefore believers ought rather to ordaine Pastors then the Officers though there be Officers to ordaine 3. That Pastors of other Congregations may not ordaine Pastors to Congregations who have no Pastors of their owne as they may baptize infants to them also we see no reason Yea and Church power is not a thing that cannot be communicated to another Church by your Doctrine for ye grant members of one Congregation may receive the Lords Supper in another Congregation except you deny all communion of sister Churches for it is a worke of Church power to give the Lords Supper to any then if you give that Sacrament to members of another Congregation consider if the liberty purchased by Christs Blood be not communicable to other Churches Thirdly saith he if one Church repaire to another Church for ordination they may submit to another Church for censuring of offenders now how can Churches censure these that are not members Is not this a transgression of the Royall Law of governement Mat. 18. 15 16 17 18. Answ. The offence being great and the offender deserving to be cast out of all the visible congregations round about yea and to be bound in Earth and Heaven the congregation is to have recourse to all the congregations consociated when they are convened in one presbytery that they being convened in their principall members may all cast him out because it concerneth them all as if onely one congregation doe it they transgesse that royall Law Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet 2. The Author granteth that the Church presented their officers chosen by them to receive ordination from the Apostles Ergo The Church did give a way their liberty of ordination bought by Christs bloud to the Apostles not as to Apostles but as to pastors which is against our Brethrens Doctrine for except the Apostles bee said to ordaine Officers as Pastors and not as Apostles our Brethren shall find none to be the successors of Apostles in the power of ordination but onely Believers so Pastors have no power at all to ordaine Pastors the contrary whereof our Brethren teach Now I come to the Brethrens minde in their Questions It was objected How can it be lawfull for meere lay and private men to ordaine Elders they answer the persons ordaining are the publick assembly and so cannot in any congruity of speech be called meere Lay-men I answ Seeing they have no Church office they can be nothing but meere private men For the unwarrantable action of ordination maketh them not publick Officers As if a Midwife baptize in the name of the Church shee is not a meere private person 2. They say The Church hath power from Christ for the greater to wit for Election Ergo she hath power to doe the lesse which is ordination or ordination dependeth upon Election and it is nothing but the putting of a person in actuall possession of that office wherunto he had right by Election Answ. Ordination by your owne grant is more then Election for the Apostles ordained Acts 6. and must have done the most and the multitude elected the seaven DeacÌons Acts 6 2. Ordination is more then the installing of a person chosen it is a supernaturall act of the Presbytery separating a man to an holy calling election is posterior to it and is but an appropriation of a called person his Ministery to such a particular flock 3. Say they Ordination may be performed by the Elders where there be Elders 1 Tim. 4. 14. yet it is an act of the whole Church as the whole man seeth but by the Eye Answ. Though you say Pastors in the Churches name baptize yet doth it not follow Ergo where Pastors are not the Church of believers may baptize 4. They object when the Church hath no Officers the prime grave mân performe ordination as Nuâ 8 The Israelites layd on Hands on the Levites that is some prime Man layd on hands Answ. Israel wanted not Officers 2. These prime Men are called the Congregation Ergo there is a representative Church 5. They object If B lievers may not ordaine it shall follow either that Officers may minister without ordination against the Sripture 1 Tim. 4. 14. Heb.
his Brotherly relation to the people as if hee were called to bee their Pastor I desire to know what the naked relation of Authority or Jurisdiction addeth to his care and onerousnesse in poynt of labouring by preaching the Gospell Indeed now being called his care is Pastorall and more authoritative But if according to the measure of the Talent every one is to proportion his paines to gaine more Talents to his Lord and if the relation of a Pastor adde no degrees of gifts to His Talent as wee may suppose I thinke his onerousnesse in labouring was as great before hee was a Pastor as after but I speake not this to say that in a constituted Church there is no calling required other then giftes Nor doe I speake this to say that a calling is not a new motive why a man should imploy his gifts for the honour of the Giver But only to shew that CHRIST hath united powers of Jurisdiction in Congregations in Presbyteries in Churches of Provinces and Nations that so not onely gifts might conduce to helpe and promove edification but also united powers of Jurisdiction which are also gifts of God and though some may say that a calling to an Office layeth on Mân a more speciall Obligation to make accompt for Soules then gifts onely which in some sense I could also yeeld yet seeing wee thinke the relation of the Eldership to a whole Classicall Church is not founded upon an Office different from the Offices of Pastors and Elders which they have and are clothed with in relation to their particular Congregations but onely authoritative acts of the same Office and that for the common promoving of edification in the whole Classicall Church grounded in the depth of his Wisdome who hath seven Eyes upon a Brotherly Consociation in which they must either edifie one another and occasionally partake of these same holy things or then scandalizâ and leaven one another with their publique transgressions wee cannot see how presbyteriall Elders are more to give accompt for the Soules of the whole Classicall Church in Scriptures sense Hebrewes 13. 17. then consociated pastors and Elders of consociated Churches are to give an accompt to GOD for sister Churches over which they are to watch and whose Soules they are to keepe and so farre as they are Brethren must make a reckoning to GOD for them And how can the presbytery be more said to intangle themselves in governing the Classicall Church in some things with things not proper to their calling seeing consociated Churches in a Brotherly way doe medle with those same things though not in a way of Jurisdiction For helping the Classicall Church by way of Fraternity is not unproper to a Christian calling of Brethren and the joyning of power of Jurisdiction I meane of power lesser to another power greater to helpe the Classicall Church upon the same ground of Fraternity cannot bee unproper to the calling of a Colledge of presbyters Objecti 5. The power of Presbyteries taketh away the power of a Congregation therefore it cannot bee lawfull The antecedent is thus confirmed 1. Because if the Presbytery ordainâ one to bee Excommunicated whom the Elders of a Congregation in conscience thinke ought not to bee Excommunicated the man Jure Divino must be Excommunicated and the power of the Congregation which Christ hath given to them is nul And the exercise thereof impeded by a greater power 2. the voyces of two Elders of a Congregation which are now sitting in the greater and classicall Presbytery are swallowed up by the greater number of Elders of thirty or forty Congregations met in one great presbytery Ergo the power of the Congregation is not helped by the presbytery but close taken away Answ. The Argument doth presuppose that which is against GODS Law to wit 1. That there is a contradiction of Voyces betwixt the Elders of a Cong egation and of the greater presbytery which should not bee for Brethren even of Galathia which contained many Congregations as our Brethren confesse should all minde and speake and agree in one thing that belongeth to Church Discipline as is cleare Gala. 1. 8. Gala. 5. 10 v. 15. Gala. 6. 1. 2. 2. The Argument supposeth that the greater presbytery is wrong in their voycing that such a man should be excommunicated and the two Elders of the Congregationall Church is right and hath the best part in judging that the same man ought not to be Excommunicated But Christ hath given no power to any Church to erre and that power which in this case the presbytery exerciseth is not of Christ and de jure the power of the greater presbytery in this case ought to bee swallowed up of the two Voyces of the Elders of the Congregation But suppose that the Elders of one Congregation and the whole meeting all agree in the truth of GOD as they all doe Acts 15. will you say that Peter Paul and Iames their power is null and taken from them and their three voyces are swallowed up in that great convention because to their power and voyces are added in this dogmaticall determination which you grant even now to many consociated Churches the power and voyces of the rest of the Apostles and Elders yea and as some say of the whole Church Acts 15. 2 v. 6. 25. Acts 16. 4. Acts 21. 18. 25 I believe addition of lawfull power doth not annull lawfull power but corroborate and strengthen it So this shall fall upon your owne Eldership of your independent Congregation Suppose âen Pastors Elders and Doctors in one of your Congregations whereas sometime there were but three and these three had the sole power of Jurisdiction and exercise of the Keyes you cannot say that the accession of six Elders to three hath made null the power of three and swallowed up their voyces for if their power and voyces were against the truth it is fit they should be swallowed up if they were for CHRIST they are strengthened by the accession of lawfull power and moe voyces and neither annulled nor swallowed up Object 6. The Church at the first for example when it was but a hundreth and twenty had the full entire power within it selfe Ergo it should bee in a worse case by the multiplication of Churches if now that power bee given to Presbyteries Ans. It is a conjecture that the whole Christian Church Acts 1. was onely an hundreth and twenty I thinke there were more though these onely convened at the ordination of Matthias for there were above five hundred Brethren at once which saw CHRIST after his Resurrection 1 Cor. 15. 6. and these I Judge belonged to the Christian Church also 2. It is constantly denied that addition of lawfull power to lawfull power doth arnull or put in a worse condition the prexistent power it doth helpe it but not make it worse and twenty Churches adding their good and Christian counsells and comforts to two Churches doe not annull or hurt or swallow up
either the power of good counseling in these two Churches or their good counsels but do much confirme and strengthen them Object 7. It is absurd that there should be a Church in a Church and two distinct kind of Churches or a power above a power a Jurisdiction above a Jurisdiction a State above a State as Master and Servant and Father and Sonne so there is here a governing and a commanding Classicall Presbytery and a governed and commanded Classicall Church and in a politicall consideration formally different now where there bee two different States there be two different names Titles and Adiuncts as 1 Cor. 12. 28. GOD hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets So it is said Genesis 1. GOD made two distinct Lights a greater Light to serve the Day and a lesser Light to rule the Night But the Scripture maketh no mention of greater or lesser Presbyteries wee have the name of Presbytery but twice in the New Testament and in matter they differ not for these same Elders are the matter of both in form they differ not for the same combination and union is in all they differ not in operations for the superior hath no operations but such as the inferior can exercise for because a Pastor exhortâth a Pastor comsorteth we doe not make two kindes of Pastors if wee cannot finde a distinction betwixt presbyter and Presbyter how can wâe ãâã a distinction betwixt Presbytery and Presbytery Hath the Wisdome of Christ left these Thrones in such a confusion as by Scripture they cannot be knowen by Name Title Nature Operations And if there be a power above a power wee have to aâend to a Nation and so to subdite a whole Nation and their consciences to this Government and we are to put a Kingdome within a Kingdom Answ. A Church-Congregationall within a Church-Classicall is no more inconventent then a part in the whole an Hand in the Body and that is a lesser body in a greater and our Brethren call the people a Church and the Elders the Elders of the Church and what is this but a Church in a Church 2. A power above a power is not absurd exâept it be a Church-power so above a Church-power as the Superior power be privative and destructive to the inferior as the Popes power distroyeth the power of the Chuâch Universall and the prelates power destroyeth the power of the ãâã where of he is pretended Pastor But the power of the presbytery is Aâxiliarte and cumulative to helpe the Congregation not privative and destructive to destroy the power of congregations Secondly a power above a power in the Church cannot be denied by our Brethren for 1. In the Eldership of a âââgle Congregation the Eldership in the Court hath a power of Jurisdiction above a power of order which one single Minister hath to preach the Word and administrate the Sacraments for they may regulate the Pastor and censure him if he preach hereticall Doctrine is not this a power above a power yea two Elders in the Court have a power of Jurisdiction to governe with the whole prebsytery but the power of the whole presbytery is above the power of a part But to comâ neerer The Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem met in a Synod have a power in dogmaticall poynts over the Church at Antioch and others and our Brethren say that the Church at Antioch might have in their inferiour Synod determined these same poynts which the Synod determined at Ierusalem her 's power above power Thirdly we doe not see how they be two or divers indicatures formally and specisically different in nature and operations for they differ onely in more or lesse extension of power as the reasons doe prove as the power of government in one City or Borough doth not differ formally from the power of the whole Cities and Boroughs incorporated and combined in one common Judicature and the power of two or three or foure Colledges doth not differ from the power of the whole combination of Colledges combined in the comm on Judicature of the Universities so here the powers of the inferior Judicatures do differ from the Superior onely in degree and in number of members of the Judicatures the policy divine is one and the same though the Superior can exercise acts of Jurisdiction different from the Acts of the inferior in an ordinary way such as are ordination of Pastors and excommunication where many Churches are consociated though where this consociation is not Ordination and Excommunication may be done by one single Congregation also to argue from the not distinction of Names Titles and Adjuncts of the Iudicatures is but a weake Argument because Congregationall and presbyterian provinciall and a nationall Church-Body make all one body and the inferior is but a part and member of the Superior and thefore it was not needfull that as Apostles and Prophets and the Sun the greater light by name and Office is distinguished from the Moone Gen. 1. the lesser light that Congregation and Presbyter should be distinguished by Names and Office and Titles in the Scripture for a Prophet is not formally a part of an Apostle but an Officer formally different from him and the Moone is not a part of the Sun as a Congregation is a part of the Classicall Church so Mat. 18. the Scripture distinguisheth not the people and Elders in the word Ecclesia Church as our Brethren will have then both meant in that place Mat. 18. Teil the Church Now we say as they doe to us in the like we are not to distinguish where the Law doth not distinguish But the Scripture sayth Mat. 18. The Church that the offended hath recourse unto is that Church which must be obeyed as a Judicature and spirituall Court but the people is neither a Judicature nor any part thereof And 2. Of that Church Christ doth speake that doth actually bind on Earth and loose on Earth and that by the power of the Keyes but the people neither as a part of the Court doth actually bind and loose on Earth by power of the Keyes 3. Christ speaketh of that Court and of that Church which doth exercise Church-power on Earth under the title of binding and loosing but we find not a Church in the face and presence of the people binding and loosing under the name of the Church in the Word of God Shall we use such an insolent signification of the word Church as the Word of God doth not use and Lastly I say of these of Corinth gathered together convened together in the Name of the Lord Jesus with the Ministeriall spirit of Paul and with the power of the Lord Iesus these cannot be the Church excommunicating before the people The Text destinguisheth not the Court of Elders who hath the power of Jurisdiction from the people and all these to whom he writeth and who were puffed up and mourned not for the scandall have no such power of Jurisdiction nor can the
answerable for soules Heb. 13. 18. 4. It is tyrannicall because it putteth power into the Magistrates hand to take from the Church that inbred and inârinsecall power of externall and visible government over her selfe and members which all civill incorporations by instinct of nature have and the Magistrate as such not being a member of the Church hath a headship even being a heathen Magistrate over the redeemed body of Christ. 2. By this reason the Lord Jesus as King hath no Pastors in his name to use the ââves of his kingdom by binding and loosing for discipline being an externall thing say they is not a part of Christs kingly power but the King as Christs civill vicar hath this power but I say all acts of Christ as hee is efficacious by the Gospel to gaine soules are acts of Christ as powerfull by the Scepter of his Word and those who are his instruments to exercise these acts are subordined to him as King of the Church but Church-men by an externall ecclesiasticall power delivering to Satan and externally and visibly casting out of the Church that the spirit may bee saved in the day of the Lord are instruments subordined to Christ who is efficacious to save spirits by excommunication and to gaine soules by rebukes Gregorius Magnus saith those to whom Christ hath given the Keyes of his kingdome by these hee judgeth and why is this word the word of his kingdome the Scepter of his kingdome the sword that commeth out of his mouth by which hee governeth his subjects and subdueth nations so called but because Christs kingly power is with those whom hee hath made dispensators of his Word 9. Conclusion Nor hath the King power of ordaining Pastors or depriving them or of excommunication 1. All these are acts of spirituall and ecclesiasticall power 1 Tim. 3. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. Act. 6. 6. Act. 13. 3. Act. 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 6. and flow from the power of the keyes given by Christ to his Apostles and their successors Matth. 28. 18 19 20. Mark 16. 14 15 16. Joh. 20. 21 22 23. Hence I argue to whom Christ hath given out his power as King of the Church Matth. 28. 18 19. power of the keyes Matth. 18. 18. Matth. 16. 19. and a commandement to lay hands and ordaine qualified men for the ministry and those who by the holy Ghosts direction practised that power by ordaining of Elders these onely have right to ordaine Elders and their successors after them but Apostles and their successors onely are those to whom Christ gave that power and who exercised that power as the places prove 2. Ordination and election both in the primitive Church of the Apostles was done by the Church and consent of the multitude Act. 1. Act. 6. 2 3 4. 5 6 c. but the civill Magistrate is neither the Church nor the multitude 3. Ordination is an act formally of an ecclesiasticall power but the Magistrate as the Magistrate hath no ecclesiasticall power Ergo hee cannot exercise an act of ecclesiasticall power 4. If ordination were an act of Kingly power due to the King as King then 1. The Apostles and Elders usurped in the Apostolick Church the office and throne of the King and that behoved to bee in them an extraordinary and temporary power but wee never find rules tying to the end of the world given to Timothies and Elders of the Church anent the regulating of extraordinary and temporary power that were against the wisedome of God to command Timothy to commit the Word to faithfull men who are able to teach others as 2 Tim. 2. 2. and to set downe the qualification of Pastors Elders Doctors and Deacons to Timothy as a Church man with a charge to keepe such commandements unviolable to Christs second appearing if Timothy and his successors in the holy ministry were to bee denuded of that power by the incoming of Christian Magistrates 2. The King by the laying on of his hands should appoint Elders in every citie and the spirits of the Prophets should bee subject to the King not to the Prophets as the word saith 1 Cor. 14. 32. 5. Those who have a Church power to ordaine and deprive Pastors must by office try the doctrine and be able to ãâ¦ã sayers and to finde out the Foxes in their hereticall wayes and to rebuke them sharpely that they may bee sound in the faith but this by office is required of Pastors and not of the King as is evident 1 Tim. 3. 2. 2 Tim. 2. 2â Tit. 1. 9 10 11. It is not enough to say it is sufficient that the King try the abilities of such as are to bee ordained and the bontgates of hereticall spirits to bee deprived by Pastors and Church men their counsell and ministery and upon their testimony the King is to ordaine and make or exauthorate and unmake Pastors because 1. so were the King a servant by office to that which Church men shall by office determine which they condemne in our doctrine which wee hold in a right and sound meaning 2. He who by office is to admit to an office and deprive from an office must also by office bee obliged to bee such as can try what the office requireth of due to bee performed by the officer nor is it enough which some say that the ignorance of the King in civill things taketh not away his legall power to judge in civill things and by that same reason his ignorance in Church matters taketh not away his power to judge in ecclesiasticall matters for I doe not reason from gifts and knowledge that is in the King simply but from gifts which âxâfficio by vertue of his Kingly office is required in him It is ââue as King hee is oblieged to read continually in the book of the Law of God Deut. 17. and to know what is truth what hereâie in so faâre as hee commandeth that Pastors preach sound doctrine and that as a Judge hee is to punish heresie Some say hee is to have the knowledge of private discretion as a Christian that hee punish not blindly I thinke hee is to know judicially as a King 1. Because hee hath a regall and judiciall knowledge of civill things even of the major proposition and not of the assumption and fact onely Ergo seeing hee is by that same kingly power to judge of treason against the Crown the civill State by which he is to judge of heresie to punish heresie it would seeme as King hee is to cognosce in both by a kingly power both what is Law and what is fact 2. Because the judgement of private discretion common to all Christians is due to the King as a Christian not as a King but the cognition that the King is to take of heresie and blasphemy whether it bee heresie or blasphemy that the Church ââââeth heresie and blasphemy is due to the King as King because hee is a civill Judge therein and if the Church
A Church-congregationall within a Church Presbyteriall p. 336 337 338. Entire power of government in one Congregationall Church against nature and the order of grace p. 340 341. A Nationall Church no Iudaisme but Christian p. 342 343. How Pastors are Pastors in relation to these Congregations p. 344 345. And Churches whereof they are not proper Pastors p. 344 345 346. The place 1 Cor. 5. considered if it can prove that all the multitude have an interest of presence in all acts of Iurisdiction p. 348 349 350. The place Acts 15. for a lawfull Synod considered at length Acts 15. p. 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362. seq All the requisites of a juridicall Synod here p. 355 366 357. The Apostles did not act in this Synod as Apostles p. 358 359 360. 361 362 seq 368. 369 370. The power of this Synod not doctrinall onely but also juridicall p. 365 366 367. The Church Acts 15. 22. seemeth to be a Synodicall Church p. 346 347. If the Apostles as infallible did reason in this Synod p. 371 372. How the Holy Ghost is in all lawfull Synods p. 373 374. And what Holy Ghost is meant ibidem This Synod not a company of counsellors p. 382 383 384. Church power intrinsecally in every part of the Church and not derived either by ascending or descending p. 383 384. Which is the first Church and five necessary distinctions thereanent p. 384 385 386. Presbyteriall government warranted by the light of nature p. 386 387. Power of censures in this Synod p. 388 389 seq Acts of this Synod could not have been performed by any one man p. 387 390 391. 393. Reasons proving that the Apostles acted in this Synod as Apostles are removed p. 391 392 323. A power to act Church-acts cannot want a power of censuring the contraveners p. 396. How the decrees Acts 15. bind all the Churches p. 398 399. What was in question Acts 15. p 403 404. The Apostles proceeding by way of disputing not by apostolick infallibility in this Synod p. 406 407. seq The question Acts 15. a Church question p. 410 411. The synagogue of the Iewes a compleat Church though all the Ordinances of God were not there p. 414 415. The power of an Oecumenick Synod above a nationall Church what it is p. 416 417 418. There is a visible Catholick Church 1 Cor. 12. p. 418 419 420. The Church of Herusalem was a Presbyteriall Church p. 425 427 428. The Church of Jerusalem an ordinary Christian Church p. 429 430 431 432. A presbyteriall Church after the dispersion p 438 439. The Apostles exercised acts of a classicall presbytery as ordinary Elders Acts 6. p. 440. 444. seq The seales not to be denied to approved professors though they be not members of a parishionall Church p. 185 186 seq Whether the invisible or visible Church hath right to the Seales p. 188. The visible Church of the Jewes and the visible Church of the Gentiles of one and the same nature and essentiall constitution p. 190 191 162. Whether for every sinne of ignorance there was need of a sacrifice p. 191. Arguments to prove that only members of a parishionall Church are capable of the seales dissolved p. 192. No strong hand of providence such as necessary absence from the congregation as traffiquing but only morallimpediments maketh men uncapable of the Seales p. 197 198. The place 1 Cor. 5 12. concerning these who ore without again discussed p. 200 201. Pastors doe warrantably performe pastorall acts in other congregations then their own p. 204 205. seq The place Acts 20. 28. discussed p. 206 207. The congregation make and unmake Pastors by our Brethrens Doctrine ex opere operato 207 seq Arguments of our Brethren hereanent dissolved p. 208. That persons are received into the visible Church by Baptisme diverse distinctions hereanent p. 210 211 212 213. The efficacy of the Sacraments handled p. 202. A fourefold consideration of Sacraments p. 212 213. The error of Papists making Sacraments physicall instruments the error of Arminians Socinians and of our Brethren making them naked signes p. 212. 213. Of Sacramentall grace p. 214. Arguments of our Brethren removed p. 605. 606 607. The mind of Socinians the difference of a Sacrament and a civill seale most considerable p. 215 216 217 218 219 220. In what case separation is lawfull p. 221. Fundamentalls p. 221. Of fundamentals superstructures circa fundamentalia things about the foundation p. 221 222. Matters of Faith and poynts fundamentall different p. 222. Ignorance of Gods matters have a threefold consideration p. 222 223. Ignorance of fundamentals ibidem Knowledge of fundamentals how necessary p. 223. What are fundamentall poynts p. 223. How Iewes nnd Papists have all fundamentals and how not p. 230 231. The error of Papists hereanent that the Churches determination maketh fundamentals p. 224. Nine considerable distinctions anent fundamental poynts containing diverse things anent fundamentals p. 224 225. seq Our Brethren ignorant of the nature of a visible Church p. 231 232. Neither believing nor unbelieving essentiall to the visible Church ibidem Robinsons arguments for separation found light and empty p. 232. 233. seq The place 2 Cor. 6. 14. fully vindicated p. 233 234. seq By evidence of the place fathers and protestant divines ibid. The place Iohn 17 6 7 8. fully vindicated Robinson his interpretation borrowed from Arminius and other places and reasons discussed at length p. 246 247 248. seq Eight distinctions anent separation p. 253 254 seq Infants of visible professors are to be baptized p. 255 256 seq Arguments on the contrary dissolved ibid. What right to baptisme the child hath from parents p. 257 seq Conversion of soules an Ordinary fruit of a sent Ministery p. 266 267 268. seq Rom. 10. 14. how shall they preach except they be sent diseussed diverse sending acknowledged by our brethren p. 269. seq No warrant for the preaching of gifted personsnot called by the Church in a constituted Church Six distinctions thereanent p. 272 273. seq Socinians deny the necessity of a sent Minister p. 271. Robinson expoundeth the place Rom. 10 14. as Socinians do ibid. 275 276 277 278. Robinsons arguments for preaching of unofficed Prophets answered as from Eldad and Medad p. 281 282. And 2 Chro. 17. 7. from the Hebrew Text and R. Jarchi Salomon his exposition cleared p. 282 283. And Jehoshaphat his Sermon how Kings may exhort p. 284 285. That Christs disciples before his Resurrection and the seventy disciples were not unofficed preachers p. 286 287. And other places p. 290. As Joh. 4. 28. Luk. 8. 39. Act. 8. 1 2. 3. p. 291. 292 293. seq And 1 Pet. 4 10. 11. Rev. 11. 3. Rev. 14. 6. fully vindicated p. 294 295 296 297. That there be no ground for unofficed Prophets 1 Cor. 14 p. 297 298 299. seq The place Heb. 5. 11. vindicated all objections from 1 Cor. 14. of Robinson particularly discussed and found empty and most
weake p. 297 298 299 seq Mr. Coachmans arguments dissolved p. 305 306 307. seq The way of Church judging in independent congregations examined p. 308 309. That there be no peculiar authority in the Eldership for which they can be said to be over the people in the Lord according to the doctrin of independency of Churches and their six ways of the Elders authority confuted p. 311 312 313 314 315. seq That independency doth evert communion of sister-Churches and their seven wayes of Churches-communion refuted from their own grounds p. 324 325 326. seq The divine right of Synods Ten distructions thereanent p. 331 332. seq The desinition of a generall or Oecumenick Synod p. 332. 333 The place Acts 15 farther considered p. 334 335. Synods necessary by natures Law p. 336. Papists no friends to councells p. 336 337 338. seq 340 341. Three ways of communion of sister-Churches according to the doctrin of independent Churches confuted p. 346 347. seq How the magistrate hath power to compell persons to the profession of the truth p. 352 373. seq Six distinctions thereanent 2 part p. 352 353. The Magistrates power over a people Baptized and over Pagans who never heard of Christ in this poynt of Coaction to profession not alike p. 353 354 355. The magistrates compelling power terminated upon the externall act not upon the manner of doing sincerely or hypocritically p. 355 356. The magistrates power over hereticks with sundry distinctions thereanent p. 356 357 358. seq Socinians judgement and Arminians hereanent p. 359 360 A farther consideration of compelling or tolerating diverse Religions p. 361 362. Some indirect forcing lawfull p 362. Erroneous opinions concerning God and his worship though not in Fundamentalls censurable p 363 364. Diverse non Fundamentalls are to be believed with certainty of Faith and the non-believing of them are siânes punishable p. 365. 366 367 seq Arguments on the contrary dissolved and the place Philip. 3. 15. cleared p 316. seq How an erring conscience obligeth p. 378 379 380 381 seq Arguments on the contrary answered p. 383 384. seq The Princes power in Church affairs Ten distinctions thereanent p. 391 392. 393. How the Magistrate is a member of the Church p. 392 393. The Prince by his Royall Office hath a speciall hand in Church-affaires p 393 394. The intrinsecall end of the Prince is a supernaturall good to be procured by the Sword and a coactive power and not only the externall peace of the State Spalato resuted p 396 397 398. seq How the Magistrate is subordinate to Christs mediatory Kingdome p 402 403 404 seq The ordinary power of the Prince is not Synodicall teaching or making Church-Lawes p. 403 404 405 406. seq The influence of the Princes civill power in Church-Canons p. 409. 410 411 seq The government of the visible Church spirituall and not a formall part of the Magistrates Office p. 417 418. seq The power of Ordination and Deprivation not a part of the Magistrates Office p. 427 428. seq Instances from David Salomon Ezechiah c. answered and our Doctrine and Iesuites differenced p. 438 439. seq Difference betwixt the Princes commanding Church-duties and the Churches commanding these same p. 417 418 seq The Kings ordinary power to make Church-Lawes examined p. 438 439 440. seq The intrinsecall end of the Magistrate a supernaturall good p. 442 443 446 447 448. The Popes pretended power over Kings protestants contrary to to Papists herein what ever the author or Popish libeller of the survey and the night-Author of Treason Lysimachus Nicanor say on the contrary p. 449 450 451 452. seq The way of Reformation of Congregations in England according to the independent way examined p. 457 458. The originall of Church-Patronages p. 459. And how unwarrantable by Gods Word p. 462 463. Other wayes of Reformation of England according to the way of independent Churches modestly considered as about maintenance of Ministers and replanting of visible Churches there p. 464 465 466. seq Errata THe Author could not attend the Presse therefore pardon errors of the Printing Observe that the Author was necessitated to make some occasionall addition to the mids of this Treatise which occasioned-variation of the Figures of the Pages and therefore stumble not that when the Booke commeth to page 484 the next page not observing due order is page 185. 186 and so forth to the end of the Treatise page 60. title of the page 60 c. page 61 62. 64. dele not and for not of the same essentiall frame c. read of the same essentiall frame c. page 484 line 22 Churches their persecution read Churches through their persecution for page 229 read 209. for page 259. read 269. for p. 484. r. p. 498. ×××× THE Way of the Church of Christ In NEW ENGLAND Measured by the Golden Reed of the SANCTUARY Or The way of Churches walking in brotherly equality and independence or coordination without subjection of one Church to another examined and measured by the Golden Reed of the Sanctuary Propositions concerning the supposed visibility and Constitution of independent Churches examined CHAP. 1. SECT 1. PROP. 1. THe Church which Christ in his Gospell hath instituted and to which he hath committed the keys of his Kingdome the power of binding and loosing the Tables and Scales of the Covenant the Officers and Consures of his Church the Administration of all his publick worship and Ordinances is coetus fidelium a company of Believers meeting in one place every Lords day for the administration of the holy ordinances of God to publick edification 1 Cor. 14. 23. 1 Because it was a company whereof Peter confessing and believing was one and built on a rock Mat. 16. 18. a Such as unto whom any offended brother might complaine Mat. 18. 17. 3 Such as is to cast out the incestuous Corinthian 1 Cor. 5. Which cannot agree to any diocesian provinciall or Nationall assemblie Ans. From these we question Quest. 1. If a company of believers and saints builded by faith upon the rock Christ and united in a Church-Covenant be the only instituted visible Church of the New Testament to the which Christ hath given the keys Let these considerations be weighed 1. Dist. The matter of an instituted visible Church is one thing and the instituted visible Church is another as there be ods betwixt stones and timber and an house made of stones and timber 2 Dist. It is one thing to govern the actions of the Church and another thing to governe the Church the Moderator of any Synod doth govern the actions of the Synod but he is not for that a Governour Ruler and Pastor of the Synod Or ordering actions and governing men are diverse things 3. Dist. A thing hath first its constituted and accomplished being in matter forme efficient and finall causes before it can performe these operations and actions that flow from that being so constituted a Church must be a Church before any
Ministeriall Church actions can be performed by it 4. Dist. It is one thing for a company to performe the actions of a Church mysticall and redeemed of Christ and another thing to performe actions ministeriall of a Church instituted and ministeriall 1. Concl. A company of believers professing the truth is the matter of the Church though they be saints by calling and builded on the rock yet are they but to the Church instituted as stones to the house 2. Because they cannot performe the actions of a constituted Church till they be a constituted Church 3. Our Divines call men externally called the matter of the visible Church so Trelcatius Tilenuâ professors of Leyden Piscator Bucanus so say our brethern 2. Concil Ordination of Pastors and election of Officers administration of the seales of grace and acts of Church censures are holden by Gods Word and by all our Divines actions of a ministeriall and an instituted visible Church and if so according to our third distinction It is a wonder how a company of Believers united in Church-Covenant cannot performe all these for they are united and so a perfect Church and yet cannot administrate the Sacraments for though they be so united they may want Pastors who onely can performe these actions as this Treatise sayth and Robinson and the Confession And it is no lesse wonder that Officers and Rulers who are to feed and governe the Flock are but only accidents and not parts not integrall members of a constituted Church no perfect Corporation maketh its owne integrall parts or members a perfect living man doth not make his owne Hands Feete or Eyes the man is not a perfect one in all his members if all the members be not made with him but Officers by preaching make Church-members 3. Concl. The visible Church which Christ instituted in the Gospel is not formally a company of believers meeting for publick edification by common and joynt consent as this Author sayth 1. The instituted Church of the New Testament is an organicall body of diverse members of eyes eares feete hands of Elders governing and a people governed 1 Cor. 12. 14 15. Rom. 12. 4 5 6. Act. 20. 28. But a company of believers meeting for publick edification by common consent are not formally such a body for they are a body not Organicall but all of one and the same nature all believers and saints by calling and are not a body of Officers governing and people governed for they are as they are a visible Church a single uncompounded body wanting Officers and are as yet to choose their Officers and all thus combined are not Officers Rom. 10. 14. How shall they preach except they be sent 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Apostles are all Prophets we justly censure the Papists and amongst them Bellarmine who will scarce admit an essentiall Church of believers but acknowledgeth other three Churches beside to wit a representative Church of their Clergy onely excluding the Laickes as they call them 2 A consistoriall Church of Cardinalls 3. A virtuall Church the Pope who hath plenitude of all power in himselfe against which our writers Calvin Beza Tilenus Iunius Bucanus professors of Leyden Whittaker willet doe dispute so the other extremity can hardly be maintained that there is an instituted visible ministeriall Church to which Christ hath given the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven exercising Church actions as to ordaine and make and un-make Officers and Rulers without any officer at all The major of our proposition is grantted by our brethren who cite 1 Cor. 12. Rom. 12. Acts 20. 28. To prove a single Congregation to be the onely visible Church instituted in the New Testament Nothing can be said against this but a Church of Governours and People governed is an instituted visible Church but there is an instituted visible Church before there be Governours but such an instituted Church we cannot read of in Gods Word which doth and may exercise Church acts of government without any Officers at all 2. That company cannot be the Church ministeriall instituted by Christ in the New Testament which cannot meete all of them every Lords day as the Church of Corinth did for administration of the holy Ordinances of God and all his Ordinances to publick edification for so this Author describeth a visible instituted Church 1 Cor. 14. 23. But a company of believers meeting for publick edification by joynt and common consent cannot meete for the publick administration of all the Ordinances of God 1. They cannot administer the seales of the Covenant being destitute of the Officers as the Scripture and their confession saith 2. They cannot have the power of publick edification being destitute of Pastors because the end cannot be attained without the meanes appointed of Christ. But Christ for publick edification and Church edification hath given Pastors Teacherâ and other Officers to his Church Eph. 4. 11. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Iâ is not enough to say that such a company meeting hath power of Pastorall preaching and administration of the Seales of grace because they may ordaine and elect Officers for such publick edification but 1. we prove that that which our brethren call the onely instituted visible Church of the New Testament hath not power to administrate all the Ordinances of Christ and how then are they a Church can we call him a perfect living man who cannot exercise all the vitall actions which flow from the nature and essence of a living man 2. If this be a good reason that such a company should be the only instituted Church in the New Testament having power of all the Ordinances because they may appoint Officers who have such a power then any ten believers who have never sworne the Church-Covenant meeting in private to exhort one another is also the only instituted Church ministeriall in the New Testament for they have power to make such Officers and may invest themselves in right to all the Ordinances of Christ by our brothers Doctrine 3. All the places cited by the Author speake of a Church visible made up of Officers governing and people governed as Mat. 16. Mat 18. cannot exclude Pastors who binde on Earth and in heaven or Pastors who are stewards and beare the keyes as hereafter I shall prove Also the Church of Corinth did meete for the administration of the Lords Supper 1 Cor. 11. 20. and so were a Church of Officers and governed people they met with Pauls spirit and the authority of Pastors 1 Cor. 5. 4. another Church that exercised Discipline as Collosse Col. 2. 8. was a Church of Officers and people Col. 4. 17. Philippi consisted of Saints Bishops and Deacons Phil. 1. 1. 2. Ephesus of a flocke and an eldership Acts 20. 28. so the visible ministeriall Church that the word of God speaketh of as all the seven Churches of Asia and their Angels had in them Officers to governe and people governed and therefore they were not
so are the blessings of the promises as to bee builded on a Rock victory over hell and such given principally and immediately to the Catholick and invisible Church as to the first and principall subject and no wayes to a visible Congregation consisting of 30 or 40. professing the Faith of Christ but onely to them not as Professors but to them as they are parts and living members of the true Catholick Church For sound professors though united in a Church-covenant are indeed the mysticall Church but not as professors but as sound believers and therefore these of whom Christ speaketh Mat. 16. Are builded on a Rock as true believers but the keys are given not to them but for them and for their good as professors making Peters confession and in Gods purpose to gather them into Christ. But the Text evinceth that these keys are given to Peter as representing the Church-guides especially though not excluding believers giving to them popular consent and not to Believers as united in a company of persons in Church-covenant excluding the Elders 1. To that Church are the keys given which is builded on the rock as a house the house of wisdome Prov. 9. 1. The house of God 1 Tim. 3. 15. Heb. 3. 4. By the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles by Doctors and Teachers whom Christ hath given for the building of his house Eph. 4. 11. But this house is not a company of professing believers united by a Church-covenant and destitute of Pastors and Teachers but a Church edified by the Word Seales and Discipline Ergo such a Church is not heere understood The propofition is granted by the Author I prove the assumption The Church of believers combined in Church-covenant but wanting their Pastors and Teachers is not wisdomes house nor builded by pastors and Doctors given to edifie and gather the body but they are only the materialls of the house yea wanting the pastors they want Ministeriall power for pastorall preaching and administrating the Seales and for that they want the power of edifying the body of Christ which is required in a visible Church Eph. 4. 11. Though the building of this Church on the Rock Christ may well be thought to be the inward building of the Catholick and invisible Church in the Faith of Christ yet as it is promised to the Church to the which Christ promiseth the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven it can be no other beside external and Ministeriall building by a publick Ministery 2. Arg. To these are the keys here promised who are stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4. 1. And servants of the house by office 2 Cor. 4. 5. And are by office to open the doores and behave themselves aright in Gods house 1 Tim. 3. 16. and to divide to these of the house their portion in due season Mat. 24. 45. and to cut the word 2 Tim. 2. 15. But a company of professing believers joyned together in a Church-covenant and destitute of officers are not stewards by office nor servants over the house c. Ergo to such a company the keyes are not here given The proposition especially is to be proved for the assumption is granted by our brethren and evidently true but it is sure by the phrase of Scripture Esai 22. 22. And I will lay upon his shouldier the key of the house of David ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Clavis a ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã apperuit proveth this Shindlerus in Lexico metonymicè significatur Authoritas Facultas potestas omnis gubernationis iubendo ac vetando expediendo ac coercendo power of government Musculus so Calvin these who are made masters of housholds receive keys whereby they open and shut it is a token of power given to Kings Iunius it noteth a full government by this borrowed speech sayth Beza is signified the power of Ministers Isai. 22. Mat. 16. Pareus I shall make the steward of my house Hierom the key is a power of excellency and Chrysostom Augustine Beda sayth the same Fulgentius calleth this the power of binding and loosing given to the Apostles so other Scriptures expound the keyes to be a power of office as Esa. 9. 6. And the government shall be upon his shoulder Interpreters say Davids keys are given here Rev. 3. 7. These things saith he that hath the key of David who openâh and no man shutteth and shutteth and no man openeth Rev. 1. 18. I have the keys of hell and death Rev. 9. 1. And to him was given the key of the bottomlesse pit so Stephanus on the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Clavis Whittaker it signifieth a power of office given to some and not to all as Calvin here saith he Christ speaketh of Peters publick office that is of his Apostleship so Bullinger Erasm. Zwinglius Marlorat Pareus on the same place I think while of late never interpreter dreamed that in the Text Mat. 16. the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven are given to all believers but only to the stewards of the house builded upon the Rock 3. Arg. To these in this Text doth Christ give the keys to whom he giveth warrant for the actuall exercise of the keys to wit to bind and loose on Earth and so open and shut the doores of the Kingdome But this warrant and officiall authority of binding and loosing Christ giveth to Peter onely as representing Apostles Teachers and Elders and not to the Church of believers convened Covenant-wayes and destitute of Officers Ergo the proportion is cleare in the Text to the same person to whom the promiseth the power or keys to the same he promiseth Officiall warrant to exercise the speciall acts of the keys but to Peter is the promise of both made 19. and if Christ allude to the place Is. 22. 22. Then I say these to whom Christ gave the keys doe by Office represent him who hath the keys of Davids house and the Government on his shoulder And I will give to thee the Keys of the Kingdome of Heaven there is the power and authority granted And whatsoever thou shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven there is a warrant for the exercise of the acts of the power given also to Peter Now if the keys be not given to Peter as to a Pastor Peter and pastors by this place as pastors neither have the keys nor officiall warrant to preach and to remit or retaine sinnes and if by this place they have it not we desire to see a warrant from Christ before he went to heaven for pastorall preaching Beza in his marginall notes in this Text sayth here is the Heavenly authority of the Church Ministery also binding and loosing is all one with opening and shutting Heaven Gates and with remitting and retaining sinnes Ioh. 20. Papists I know deny that the Apostles were made priests judicially to remit
the other and we find the keys given to Officers and Stewards only And here is no Church Mat. 18. or yet Mat. 16. without Pastors except they say that Christ Mat. 18. 18. speaketh not to the Disciples but to the multitude of the Jewes which is a great crossing of the Text. And to say that Christ speaketh to the Apostles not as to Apostles but as to the Church of believers is only a bare affertion and cannot be proved and all they can say hangeth upon this one place and this is the most The power of binding and loosing is given to the Church which is to be obeyed and heard in the place of God But this Church is never in the VVord of God say they taken for a company of Officers Pastors and Elders only it signifieth alwayes the Body of Christ his Spouse his Saints by calling partakers of the most holy Faith To which I answer The body Spouse of Christ and Saints by calling as they are such is the invisible Church and the keys and Seales sayth this Author are not to be dispensed to all the faithfull as such but as they arè confederate or joyned together in some particular visible Church that is sayth he as they are members of a visible Church Ergo c. the body and Spouse of Christ as such is not the Church here meant of but the visible Congregation Now the essence of a visible Church of which Christ speaketh here is saved in ten who are only visible professors and not a Church of sound Believers not the true body mysticall and Spouse of Christ and yet by this place the Keys are given to such a Church now wee desire againe a place in all Gods Word for a Church in this sense and a Body of Christ and his Spouse in this meaning for certainly professors this way confederate as professiors are no more a Church of Christ redeemed ones and his Spouse then an Assembly of Elders onely can be called such a Church of Believers for both Churches are and may be where no believers are at all at least for a time and even while they exercise this power of Binding and Loosing and so thâ place Matthew 18. is as much against our brethren as against us And Lastly our Doctrine is acknowledged by all our Divines against the Papists proving that Mat. 16. the Keyes were given to Peter as representing the Apostles and his successors in the pastorall charge not as representing all believers Also the Fathers Irenaeus Nazianzânus Cyprianus Basilius Ambrosius Theophilactus Cyrillus Euthymius Hyeronimus Augustine Beda Chrysostomus And ordinaria glossa Hugo de sanct Victor Haymo Cardinalis Cusanus Anastasius Leo Durandus Thomas Adrianus Scotus making a comparison between Peter and the rest of the Apostles say the keys were given to all the Apostles when they were given to Peter and Peter received them in the name and person of the rest of the Apostles wherby they declare it was never their mind that Peter received the keys in name of all believers Also the learned as Augustine Beda Gregorius expound the Church builded upon the rock to be the Catholick Church and not a particular visible Church And Gerardus giveth a good reason why this Church Mat. 16. cannot be a particular visible Church because the gates of hell prevaileth against many joyned to the visible Church in externall society and VVicklif writing against the Monkes resureth that error of the Papists that any members of the true Church can be damned and Whittaker sayth Augustin against Petilian sayth the Church builded on the rock is the Church of the Elect not the visible Church CHAP. 2. SECT 2. PROP. THis Church saith the Author doth meete together every Lords Day all of them even the whole Church for administration of the Ordinances of God to publick edification Ans. Two things are here said 1. That all even the whole Church must meete for administration of the Ordinances of God that so all and every one of the Church may be actors and Judges in dispensing of censures this we take to be popular governement 2. That there is a necessity of personall presence of all and every one of the Church Hence Quest. 3. Whether or no the multitude of Believers and the whole people are to be judges so as private Christians out of Office are to exercise judiciall acts of the keys For the more easie clearing of the Question let it be observed 1. Dist. There is a dominion of Government Lordly and Kingly and this is in Christ only in relation to his Church and in civill judges and is no wayes in Church guides who are not Lords over the Lords inheritance there is a government Ministeriall of service under Christ and this is due to Church-guides 2. Dist. Regall power being a civill power founded in the Law of nature for the Ants have a King may well be in the people originally and subjectively as in the fountaine nature teaching every communitie to govern themselves and to hold off injuries if not by themselves yet by a King or some selected Rulers but power of Church-government being supernaturall and the acts of Church-government and of the casting such as offend out of Christs Kingdome being supernaturall neither of them can be originally in the multitude of professing beleevers but must be communicated by Christ to some certaine professing beleevers and these are Officers Therefore to put power and acts of government in all professors is a naturall way drawne from civill incorporations Christ is not ruled by our Lawes 3. Dist. The government of Christs Kingdome is the most free and willing government on earth yet it is a government properly so called for there be in it authoritative commandements and Ecclefiasticke coaction upon the danger of soule penalties in regard of the former all the people by consent and voluntary agreement have hand in election of Officers inflicting of censures because it concerneth them all but in regard of the latter the whole people are not over the whole people they are not all Kings reigning in Christs government over Kings but are divided into governours and governed and therefore the rulers Ecclesiasticke onely by power of office are in Christs roome over the Church to command sentence judge and judicially to censure 4. Distinct. The Officiall power of governing superaddeth to the simple acts of popular consenting the officiall authoritative and coactive power of Christs Sceptor in discipline That distinction in the sense holden by our brethren that the state of the Church is popular and the government Aristocraticall in the hands of the Eldership is no wayes to he holden nor doe the Parisian Doctors the authors of this distinction mind any Church-government to be in the people Our brethren in the answer to the questions sent to them from England explaine their minde thus 1. We acknowledge a Presbytery whose worke it is to teach and rule and whom the
member Christs wisdome who careth for the whole no lesse then for the part cannot have denied a power conjunct with that congregation to save themselves from contagâons to all the consociated Churches for if they be under the same danger of contagion with the one single congregation they must be armed and furnished by Christ Iesus with the same power against the same ill so the power of excommunication is given to the congregation but not to the congregation alone but to all the congregations adjacent so when I say the God of Nature hath given to the hands a power to defend the body I say true and if evill doe invade the body nature doth tell it and warne the hands to defend the body but it followeth not from this c. if the power of defending the body be given by the God of Nature to the hands therefore that same power of defence is not given to the feete also to the eye to foresee the ill to reason to the will to command that locomotive power that is in all the members to defend the body and if nature give to the Feete a power to defend the body by fleeing it is not consequence to infer O then hath nature denied that power to the hands by fighting so when Christ giveth to the congregation which in consociated Churches to us is but a part a member a fellowsister of many consociated congregations he giveth also that same power of excommunicating one common enemy to all the consociated Churches without any prejudice to the power given to that congregation whereof he is a member who is to be excommunicated because a power is commmon to many members it is not taken away from any one member When a Nationall Church doth excommunicate a man who hath killed his Father and is in an eminent manner a publick stumbling âlock to all the congregations of a whole Nation it is presumâd that the single congregation whereof this parricide is a member doth also joyne with the nationall Church and put in exercise its owne power of excommunication with the nationall Church and therefore that congregation is not spoyled of its power by the nationall Church which joyneth with the nationall Church in the use of that power And this I thinke may be thus demonstrated The power of excomunication is given by Christ to a congregation not upon a positive ground because it is a visible instituted Church or as it is a congregation but this power is given to it upon this formall ground and reason because a congregation is a number of sinfull men who may be scandalized and infected with the company of a scandalous person this is so cleare that if a congregation were a company of Angels which cannot be infected no such power should be given to them even as there was no neede that Christ as a member of the Church either of Iewes or Christians should have a morall power of avoyding the company of Publicans and sinners because he might possibly convert them but they could no wayes pervert or infect him with their scandalous and wicked conversation therefore is this power given to a congregation as they are men who though frailty of nature may be leavened with the bad conversation of the scandalous who are to be excommunicated as is cleare 1 Cor. 5. 6. Your glorying is not good know yee not that a little leaven leavneth the whole lumpe therefore are we to withdraw our selves from Drunkards Fornicators Extortioners Idolaters and are not to eate and drinke with them v. 10. And from these who walke inordinately and are disobedient 1 Thess. 3. 12 13 14. And from Hereticks after they be admonished lest we be infected with their company just as nature hath given hands to a man to desend himselfe from injuries and violence and hornes to oxen to hold off violence so hath Christ given the power of excommunication to his Church as spirituall armour to ward off and defend the contagion of wicked fellowship Now this reduplication of fraile men which may be leavened agreeth to all men of many consociated congregations who are in danger to be infected with the scandalous behavior of one member of a single congregation and agreeth not to a congregation as such therefore this power of excommunication must be given to many confociated congregations for the Lord Iesus his salve must be as large as the wound and his mean must be proportioned to his end 2. The power of Church âjection and Church separation of scandalous persons must be given to those to whom the power of Church communion and Church confirming of Christian love to a penitent excommunicate is given for contraries are in the same subject as hot and cold seeing and blindnesse but the power of Church-communio at the same Lords table and of mutuall rebuking and exhorting and receiving to grace after repentance agreeth to members of many consociated Churches as is cleare Col. 3. 16. Heb. 10. 23. 2 Cor. 2 6 7 and not to one congregation only Ergo c. the assumption is cleare for except we deny communion of Churches in all Gods Ordinances we must grant the truth of it 2. We say that of our Saviours tell the Church is not to be drawen to such a narrow circle as to a Parishionall Church only the Apostle practice is against this for when Paul and Bannabas had no small dissention with the Iewes of a particular Church they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine others of them should goe and tell the Apostles Elders and whole Church Nationall or Oecumemek Acts 15. 2. v. 22. and complaine of those who taught that they behoved to be circumcised Acts 15. 1. and that greater Church v. 22. 23. commanded by their ecclesiastick authority the contrary and those who may lay on burdens of commandements as this greather Church doth expresly v. 28. Acts 16. v. 4. ch 2. v. 25. they may censure and excommunicate the disobeyers And Acts 6. 1. the Greek Church complained Acts 6. of the Hebrewes to a greater and superior Church of Apostles and a multitude made up of both these v. 2. and 5. and they redresed the wrongs done to the Grecian Widdowes by appointing Deacons also though there was no complaint Acts 1. Yet was there a defect in the Church by the death of Judas and a catholike visible Church did meete and helpe the defect by chosing Mathias it is true the ordination of Matthias the Apostle was extraordinary as is cleare by Gods immediate directing of the lots yet this was ordinary and perpetuall that the election of Mathias was by the common suffâages of the whole Church Acts 1. 26. and if we suppose that the Church had been ignorant of that defect any one member knowing the defect was to tell that catholick Church whom it concerned to choose a catholick Officer we thinke Antioch had power great enough intensively to determine the controversie Acts 15. but it followeth not that the catholick
a marriage covenant So C. D. sometime excommunicated now repenteth and is received as a gained brother in the bosome of the Church all the members of the Church come by that under a new relation to C. D. as to a repenting brother and they are to love reverence exhort rebuke comfort him by vertue of the covenant of grace but I conceive not by a new Church covenant entering them as in a Church membership and Church order towards him So a new particular Church is erected and now counted in amongst the number of the visible Churches all the sister Churches are to discharge themselves in the duties of imbracing loving exhorting edifying rebuking comforting this sister Church new elected But I thinke our brethren will not say That all the sister Churches are to make a new expresse vocall Church covenant with this sister Church and such a Church covenant as maketh them all visible Churches which have right to all the holy things of God in and with this new sister Church it is the covenant of grace once laid hold on by all these sister Churches which tieth them to all Christian duties both one toward another and also toward all Churches to come in I thinke there is no necessity of an expresse covenant of marriage betwixt this new Church and all the former sister Churches as there is a solemne marriage oath betwixt the Husband and the Wife and a solemne covenant betwixt the supreame Magistrate and the King and his Subjects when the King is crowned all we say is this if for new relations God laid a bond and compelling tie of conscience and that of perpetuall equity whereby we are entered in every new relative state beside the bond that Law and Gospell lay on us to doe duties to all men both in Church and Common-wealth then when a person is converted unto Christ and another made a Lawyer and another a Pastour another a Physitian another a Magistrat another a learned Philosopher and President of an Academy another a skilled Schoolemaster and so come under new relations many and diverse in the Church and State I should not be obliged to love honour and reverence them all by vertue of the fifth Commandement but I behoved by vertue of a particular Covenant I know not how to name it to come under some new relative marriage toward all these else I could not performe duties of love and reverence to them and though there be a convenant tacite betwixt a new member of a congregation and A. B. the Pastor and they come under a new relation covenant waies which I grant is not the point in question but this new covenant is that which by necessity of a divine Commandement of perpetuall equity maketh the now adjoyner a member of the visible Church and giveth him right and claime to the seales of the covenant so as without this covenant he is without and not to be judged by the Church but left to the judgement of God as 1 Cor. 5. 12 13. one who is without Thirdly the Apologie saith and Author of the Church covenant The covenant of grace is done in private in a mans closet betwixt the Lord and himselfe the other in some publique assembly 2. The covenant of grace is of one christian in particular the other of a company joyntly some call the one personall the other generall Answ. Though the covenant of grace may be layd hold on in a closet or private chamber yet the principall party contracter is God on the one part and on the other not a single man but Christ and all his seed yea the Catholique church all the House of Israel But our brethrens mind is that conversion of soules to Christ is not a Church act nor a Pastorall act but a worke of charity performed by private christians yet by the Pastorall paines of Peter three thousand Act. 2. were converted and this is a depressing of publique ministery and an exalting of popular prophecying which is the onely publique and ordinary meane blessed of God for conversion 2. By this all the covenants sworne in Israel and Iudah were not a swearing of the covenant of grace but of a Church covenant which we must refute hereafter 3. We desire an instance or practice of receiving any into the publique assembly by this Church covenant publique receiving by baptisme we grant in Cornelius Act. 10. the Eunuch Act. 8. Lydia and her house Act. 16. the Iayler Act. 16. but we never read of Sauls Churchâcovenant and Church confession wherby he was publiquely received into Church membership nor of such private tryall of Church members and therefore wee thinke it to bee a devise of men 6. Arg. If this Church-covenant be the essence and forme of a visible Church which differenceth betwixt the visible and invisible Church then there have beene no visible Churches since the Apostles dayes nor are there any in the Christian World this day save only in New England and some few other places for remove the forme and essence of a thing and you remove the thing it selfe now if this be true and if Ministers have Ministeriall or pastorall power over people and the people no relation unto them as to Pastors except they mutually enter into this Church-covenant then are they no Pastors to the people at all and so all Baptised in the reformed Churches where this covenant was not are as Pagans and Infidels and all their Baptisme no Baptisme and all their Church Acts no Church Acts and they all are to be Rebaptized The Author of the Church-covenant saith there is a reall implicite and substantiall comming together and a substantiall professing of faith and agreement which may preserve the essence of the Church in England and other places though âhers be not so expresse and formall a covenanting as neede were The eternity of the covenant of God is such that it is not the interposition of many corruptions that may arise in after time that can disanull the same except they willfully breake the covenant and reject the offer of the Gospel which we perswade our selves England is not come unto and so the covenant remaineth which preserveth the essence of the Churches to this day and he giveth this answer from learned Parker and he alleadgeth Fox who out of Gilda saith England received the Gospell in Tiberiââ his time and Joseph of Arimathea was sent from France to England by Philip the Apostle an â2 Answ. I deny not but Tertullian and Nicephorus both say the Gospell then came to the wildest in Brittaine and no doubt be ââved to come to Scotland when Simon Zelotes camâ to Brittaine but so did the Gospell come to Rome Philippi Corinth will iâ follow that the covenant is there yet And 1. If the not wilfull rejecting of the Gospell save the essencâ of a visible Church in England which charity we command in our Brethren Rome may have share of the charity also and there
may be a true visible Church there as yet and we then wronged them in separation from them Because Gods people in Babel did never wilfully reject the covenant 2. Our brethren professe they cannot receive into their Church the godly persecuted and banished out of Old England by Prelates for the truth unlesse saith he they be pleased to take hold of our Church-covenant Now not to admit into your Churches such as cannot sweare your Church covenant in all one as to acknowledge such not a true Church and to separate from them and so the want of an explicite and formall Church-covenanting to you maketh professors no Church-visible and unworthy of the seales of grace but reverend Parker saith that there is such a profession of the covenant in England sic ut secessionem facere salvâ conscientiâ nullus possit that no man with a safe conscience can separat therefrom 3. The ignorants and simple ones amongst the Papists have not rejected the Gospell obstinately in respect it was never revealed to them yet the simple ignorance of points principally fundamentall maketh them a non-Church and therefore the want of your Church-covenant must un-Church all the reformed Churches on Earth It is not much that this Author saith the primitive Church never did receive children to the communion nor any till they made a confession of their Faith What then a confession of their Faith and an evidence of their knowledge is not your Chuoch-covenant for by your Church-covenant the parties to be received in the Church must give testimony of their conversion to the satisfaction of the consciences of all your Church The old confirmation of children was not such a thing 2. The tryall of the knowledge of such as were of old not yet admitted to the Lords Supper is not an inchurching of them because if âny not that way tryed in the ancient Church did fall into scanâalcus sins they were being come to yeeres lyable to the censures of the Church which said certainly the ancients acknowledged them to be members of that visible Church but you say expresly they are without and you have not to doe to judge them 1 Cor. 5. 12. And let the author see for this the counâell of Laodicea Gregorius Leo Augustine Tertullian Cyprian Ambrose the councell of Elibert Perkins Martine Bucer Chemnitius Peter Martyr who all teach that confirmation was nothing lesse then your Church-covenant 2. That it had never that meaning to make persons formll members of the visible Church 3. That that was sufficiently done in Baptisme 4. That comfimation was never the essentiall forme of a visible Church but rather the repetition of Baptisme so Whitgift a man much for confirmation confirmatio apud nos usurpatur ut pueri proprio ore proprioque consensu pactum quod in Baptismo inibant coram Ecclesiâ confirment Pareus sayth they were in the Church before Sed impositione manuum in Ecclesiam adultorum recipie bantur Beza saith the same Calvin liberi infidelium ab utero adoptati jure promissionis pertinebant ad corpus Ecclesiae Bullinger acknowledging that in Baptisme infantes were received into the Church saith Pastorum manus illis impone bantur quorum fidei committebatur Ecclesiarum cura 7. Argum. A multitude of unwarrantable wayes partly goeth before partly conveyeth this Church-covenant As. 1. It is a dreame that all are converted by the meanes of private Christians without the Ministery of sent Pastors by hearing of whom Faith commeth all are made materialls and convertes in private without Pastors judge if this be Christs order and way 2. How it is possible a Church shall be gathered amongst Infidells this way Infidells cannot convert Infidells and Pastors as Pastors cannot now be sent by our Brethrens Doctrine for Pastors are not Pastors but in relation to a particular congregation therefore Pastors as Pastors cannot be sent to Indians 3. They must be assured in conscience at least satisfied in every one anothers salvation and sound conversion were the Apostles satisfied anent the conversion of Anainas Saphira Simon Magus Alexander Hymeneus Philetus Demas and others 4. By what warrant of the word are private Christians not in office made the ordinary and onely converters of Soules to Christ conversion commeth then ordinarily and solely by unsent Preachers and private persons Ministery 5. What warrant have the sister Churches of the word to give the right hand of fellowship to a new erected Church for to give the hand of fellowship is an authoritative and pastoriall act as Gal. 2 9. When Iames Cephas and Iohn perceived the grace that was given unto me they gave unto me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship that is saith Pareus they received us to the colledge of the Apostles so Bullinger and Beza now this is to receive them in amongst the number of Churches as Pareus and members of the catholick Church but Churches being all independent and of a like authority the Sister Churches having no power over this new erected Church what authority hath Sister Churches to acknowledge them as Sister Churches For 1. They cannot be upon two or three houres ââght of them hearing none of them speak satisfied in their consciences of their Regeneration 2. By no authority can they receive them as members of the catholick Church for this receiving it a Church-act and they have no Church-power over them 3. What a meeting is this of diverse Churches for the receiving of a new Sister Church It is a Church I believe meeting together and yet it is not a congregation and it is an ordinary visible Church for at the admitting of all converts to the Church-order this meeting must be surely here our brethren acknowledge that there is a Church in the New Testament made up of many congregations which hath power to receive in whole Churches and members of Churches unto a Church-fellowship this is a visible provinciall or nationall Church which they other wayes deny 6. We see no warrant why one not yet a Pastor or Elder should take on him to speake to a congregation though they all conseât that he speak exhort and pray we desire a warrant from Gods Word that such a thing should be here is preaching and Church-preaching Church-praying and praysing and yet there is no Pastor nor man called to office we see not how this will abide the measure of the Golden-neede especially in a constituted Church 7. We desire to see such a Church-action Acts 2. Where three thousand were added in one day to the Church 8. If it be enough that all be silent and testify their consent to the Church covenant by silence how is the Church-Magistrate and these of other Churches satisfied in conscience of the conversion of all for all consent to this the Magistrate may be a King and he cannot acknowledge these as a Church whose faces he never
the scandalous 3. Reas. Author If the Apostle speake of severall exercises of severall gifts but both coincident to the same person or Church office why then doth he command the Teacher to waite on teaching and the Exhorter upon exhorting One who hath a gift of giveing Almes and shewing mercy is not commanded to wait upon Almes giving unlesse it be his office as well as his gift Ans. It is not fit that the Doctor should attend the pastorall duties except he be a pastor also and have both gift and office but having gifts for both he may attend both as the Church calleth him to both Author Teaching and exhorting flow from severall gifts and they are seldome found in one in eminency Ans. Then where they are found in one in eminency as sometimes they are either hath God given a Talent for no use which is against the Wisdome of Gods dispensation or then hee who hath gifts for both may discharge both as hee may and can through time and strength of body But wee contend not with our brethren in this seeing they confesse he that is gifted for both may attend both CHAP. 7. SECT 7. Of Ruling Elders WE subscribe willingly to what our Author saith for the office of ruling Elders in the Church For Paul Rom. 12. 8. from foure principall acts requisite in Christs house and body v. 6 7 8. Teaching Exhorting Giveing of Almes Râling maketh foure ordinary officers Teachers Pastors Deacons and Elders Opposite to the office of ruling Elders object that by Rulers may be understood Governours of Families Ans. Families as they are such are not Churches but parts of the Church and cleare it is that the Apostle Speaketh of Christs Body the Church in that place 5. As we have many members in one body c. They Object that Paul speaketh of severall gifts not of publick Offices in the Church for he speaketh of all the power and actions of all the members of the Body of Christ now the offices alone are not the body but all the multitude of believers Ans. This cannot well be answered by these who make all the believers governours and a generation of Kings and Teachers because it is expresly said v. 4. all members have not the same office Ergo they are not all to attend ruling and to rule with diligence 2. ãâã is false that he speaketh not of Officers and publick Officer Hee who speaketh of reigning doth indeed speak of a King as he who speaketh of exhorting which is the specifick act of a pastor speaketh of a pastor The place â1 Cor. 12. 28. 29. Is cleare for Ruling Elders but some say that governours are but arhiters which Paul biddeth the Corinthians set up in the Church for decyding of civill controversies 2. Cor. 6. that they goe not to Law one against another before heathen Judges Ans. Paul commandeth to obey Judges but never to set up a new order of Judges in their roome 2. These arbitees weââ not governours to command but rather faithfull Christians to counsell and remove controversies or Christian reconcilers to hinder them to goe to the Law one with another before infiâââ judges 3. The Apostle is speaking here of such Officers as Christ hath set in the Church as the Church and Kingdom of Christ but these civill arbitrators are no Church-Officers ââ Tim. 5. 17. The Elders who rule well are worthy of double honour c. This place speaketh cleare for ruling Elders The adversaries say here are meant Deacons to whom are allowed stipends for either here or elsewhere wages are allowed for Deacons Answ. 1. Paul would not speake so honorably of Deacons as to allow them the worth of a double honorable reward Yea Gods Word purteth the Deacons out of the roll of Rulers and governours in Gods house as having nothing to doe by their office to labour in the Word and Prayer but are in Gods wisdome set lower to attend Tables nor doth the word call them Elders or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in relation to the Church but onely in relation to their owne family and house 2 Tim. 3. 12. their office is an office of meere service of Tables 2. He is a labouring Elder worthy of wages that the Apostle speaketh of here as v. 18. The Deaconship being to receive the mercy and charity which is almes and not debt cannot be such an office as taketh up the whole man so as hee must live upon the Churches charges 3. Bilson a man partiall in this cause against the minde of all the ancients saith Didoclavius giveth this interpetation But it is seconded with no warrant of Gods Word for Governours and Deacons are made two species of officers Rom. 12. 8. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã he who ruleth with diligence and he who hath mercy with chearefulnesse And two opposite species are not predicated the one of the other And if well governing Rom. 12. be âell teaching and diligent exhorting all are confounded in that Text where the Apostle marshalleth the officers and their severall exercises so accurately Nor can hee meane here Bishops so old that they are not now abâe to labour in the word and doctrine for then pastoâs for their age and inhability to preach should because of their age and infirmity deserve lesse honour and reward then the yonger who are able to labour in the word and doctrine This is crosse to the sift Commandement which addeth honour and double honour to age and gray haires being found in the way of righteousnesse 2. Against Justice that because yeares and paines in Gods Service hath made them aged for that they are to have lesse honour and reward whereas they deserve the double rather then that the younger should be preferred to them Nor. 3. Can the Apostles meaning be that these who rule well that lead an exemplarily holy life are worthy of honour especially painefull preachers Because 1. A person is never called a labourer and worthy of hire as the Oxe that treadeth out the Corne because of holinesse of life especially the Church âs not to give stipend to a pastor for his holy life 2. Their life should be exemplarily holy who did not labour in the word and doctrine that is we have a pastor passing holy in his life but he cannot preach or keepeth an ill conscience in his calling because he is lazy and a loyterer in preaching 3. What Word of God or dialect in the word expresseth a holy life by well goverâing for a holy life is the sanctity of mans conversation be he a private or a publick man But to govern well is the paraphase of a good Governour and officer in the Greeke tongue or any other Language Nor. 4. Can the Apostle understand by labourers in the Word and Doctrine as Bilson saith such as wânt thorough the Earth and made jâurnies as Apostles and Evangelists did to plant visit and confirme Churches and by these who govern well such as labour indeed in the
Ministery is before a Church of believers Eph. 4. 11. Pastors Teachers and a Ministery are given to the inbringing and gathering of the Church ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã That is edifying and not onely for confirming but for the converting of the Body of Christ. Nor is Robinson and his fellowes here to be heard that the word of restoring is the same which is used Gal. 6. 1. and so nothing is meant but repairing of Christians already converted not the converting of these who are yet unconverted But I Answer 1. The Word of restoring doth no more import that they were converted before then the word of renewing Eph. 4. 23. Rom. 12. 2. and the word of awaking from sleepe of sinners Epâ 5. 14. doth import that these were new Creatures before and that they had the life of God before they be said to be renewed againe and made new and awaked out of their sleepe And this Pelagian and popish exposition is a faire way to elude all the places for the power of grace and to helpe Papists and Arminianâ 2. By this there is 1. no necessity of a publick Ministery for the conversion of Soules to Christ nor is a Ministery and Pastors and Teachers given by Jesus Christ with intention to open the eyes of the blind and to convert soules to God All the ordinary wayes of conversion of Soules is by the preaching of men out of office and destitute of all calling of the Church to preach which is a wonder 3. The Fathers begetting by order of nature are before the children the pastors are Fathers the seede before the plant or birth the word preached Rom. 10. 14. is the immortall seed of the new birth 1 Pet. 1. 23. The Ministery and ordinary use thereof is given to the pastors as to Christs Ambassadours 2 Cor. 5. 18. 20. Therefore the Ministery is before the Church of believers though wee will not tie the Lord to these only yet is this his ordinary established way but more of this hereafter Robinson objecteth The Apostles and brethren were a Church of God Acts 2. 25. when as yet no Pastors or Teachers were appoynted in it How then are the Ministers spoken of Eph. 4. 11. before the Church out of which they were taken yea the office of pastors was not heard of in the Church then Ans. 1. It is cleare there were in that meeting eleven Apostles called to be pastors Mat. 10. 1 2 3. sent of God Mat 29. 19 inspired or the Holy Ghost to open and shut Heaven Ioh. 20. 21 22. Before Christs ascension and this meeting was after his ascension Acts. 1. 15. and here was a governing Church and without the Apostles an Apostle could not be chosen and called by men And an instance of such a calling is not in Gods Word 2. He objecteth The Apostles themselves were first Christians and members of the Church before they were Ministers Answ. Men may be a Church of Christians and a mysticall Church before they have a Ministery but they are not a governing Church having the power of the keyes so long as they want officers and stewards who only have warrant ordinary of Christ to use the keys 3. He objecteth God 1 Cor. 12. 28. hath set officers in the Church Ergo the Church is before the Officers as the setting of a Candle in a Candlestick presupposeth a Candlestick The Church is the candlestick Rev. 1. The officers candles lights stars Answ. God hath put and breathed in man a living soule Ergo he is a living man before the soule be breathed in him friend your logick is naught The Church is the Candlestick not simply without Candles and Lampes the Church ministeriall is the Candlestick and the Ministers the Candles set in the Church ministeriall as Eyes and Eares are seated and all the seales are seated in a living man Ergo he is a living man before the senses be seated in him it followeth in no sort Because by the candles seating in the Church the Church becommeth a ministeriall and governing Church It is as you would say the Lord giveth the wife to the husband Ergo. He is an husband before God give him the wife 4. He objecteth That it is senseles that a Minister may be sent as a Minister to the hidden number not yet called out which are also his stâck potentially not actually as Mr. Bernard saith because it is the property of a good shepheard to call his own sheep by name Ioh. 20. also it is a logicall error that a man may have aâ actuall relation to a stock potentially it is as if a man were a husband because he may have a wife But I answer he not onely may be but is a pastor to these that are but potentially members to the invisible Church though unconverted except you say a man hath no relation as a pastor to the flock to all and every one of a thousand soules which are his flock except they bee all truly converted and members of the invisible Church which if you say I can refute it easily as an Anabaptisticall falsehood for if they all professe the truth and chuse him for their pastor hee is their pastor but they are a saved flock potentially though actually a visible flock having actuall relation to him as to their pastor But. 2. That a good minister know all his flock by name be requisite and is spoken of Christ Ioh. 10. in relation to the whole Catholick Church as is expounded v. 14. yet will it not follow he is not a pastor nor not a good pastor who knoweth not all his flock at all times 3. A man is indeed not properly a pastor and a Church officer to Indians who neither are called nor professe the truth if he preach to them though he have not relation to such as to a Christian flock yet he hath a relation of a pastor to them in that case Yea I desire our brethren to satisfie me in this even according to their grounds A number of Christians is a Church mysticall but they are not a Church ministeriall while they be conjoyned covenant-wayes and use the keyes in such acts of Church union Ergo They are not a Church ministeriall before they bee a Church governing which is all wee say for then they should be a body seeing and hearing before they be a body seeing and hearing Quest. 2. VVhether there be any Church in the Scripture having power of the keys yet wanting all Church-Officers The Question is neere to the former yet needfull in this matter to be discussed The Question is not if the name Church be given to a company of Christians without relation to their Officers for the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is given to a civill meeting The Hebrews call sometimes any meeting of people a Church as ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã doth sometime signifie Gen. 49. 6. my soule come not thou ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to their assembly So the Rabbines use ãâã ãâã
if you meane in Church-communion take heed that the keys of every christian family and the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven be not by this made all one Also it is saith he unequall dealing to make a prophane multitude under a diocesian prelate a Church and to deny that a company of faithfull believers is a Church 2. God hath not tied his power or presence to any order or office of the world but accepteth of them that feare him and worke Righteousnes 3. A power to enjoy the officers is seated in the body as an essentiall property 4. Thâ Lord calleth the body of the Saints the Church excluding the Elders Acts 20. 17. 28. 1 Tim. 3. 15. because the Church is essentially in the saints as the matter and subject formed by the covenant unto the which the Officers are but adjuncts not making for the being but for the welbeing of the Church and so the furtherance of their faith and their service Answ. A profane multitude under a diocesian prelate is not a Church mysticall of redemed ones as a company of Believers are but professing the truth and consisting of a flock of called Officers they may wel be a Ministeriall Church which foure Believers cannot be It is true God hath not tied his power and presence to any order or office as Anabaptists say and so speaketh the Catech. of Raccovia and Smalcius and Nicolaides say there is no necessity of a Ministery after that the Evangel iâ preached by the Apostles and confirmed by miracles and that a Ministery is onely profitable ad benè esse and not necessary The Arminians teach so the Remonstrantes praedicationem verbi ad id simplicitèr necessariam negant quid clarius So Eipscopius pastoris actio non tam necessaria est quam utilis ad edificationem postquam Scriptura omnibus singulis legenda data est ut ex ca suopte Marte discat quisque quantum satis est But Paul maketh it in the ordinary way necessary for salvation to believe to call on the Name of the Lord and to heare a Prophet sent and the presence and power of God in the Seales of Righteousnes is tyed to lawfull Pastors who onely can administrate those Seales Mat. 28. 19. as to meanes ordained of God not as if God could not save without them and accept the righteous doers without them but see how this man would beare us in hand that the comfort of pastorall preaching and the Sacraments cannot be tyed to called Ministers exccept we call God an accepter of persons which is denied Acts 10 I believed Teachers and Doctors and Elders had beene the Eyes Eares and Hands and so integrall parts of the visible Church as Christ is the head of the catholick church And this man maketh integrall parts adjunctes of the church thereby declaring Ministers may be well wanted and that they are passements ad bene esse and things of order Never did Anabaptists speake louder against the Ordinances of Christ and Socinians and Arminians are obliged to him Thirdly the beleevers have right to the Officers and this right is an essentiall property of the Church then also because beleevers have right to the Keys the Keyes are onely an adjunct of the visible Church which our brethren must deny 4. Acts 20. 17. 1 Tim. 3. 15. The Church excluding the Officers is saith Robinson called the Church as the Elders of the Church and Timothy was to behave himselfe well in the Church of God This is answered they are first a mysticall Church not a governing Church Secondly a man is called a man excluding his soule if your soule were in my soules stead Therefore a man is a thing living and a reasonable man without his soule what vanity is here Fifthly if the Church-Covenant be the essentiall forme of the Church it is as accider tall to the well being of beleevers as Officers are for they are the light of the world the salt of the earth which is more necessary then a Church-Covenant And Robinson saith further Two or three have received Christ and his power and right to all the meanes of grace and Christ and his power are not divided also the wife hath immediate right to her husbands person and goods for her use Answ. Two or three yea one beleever and these not entred in Church-state but beleeving in Christ have received Christ and his power in all Christian priviledges due to that state True They have received Christ and his power in all ministeriall and Church-priviledges it is false nor can our brethren admit of this by their grounds for then should they have right in their owne person to preach pastorally and administrate the Sacraments if Christ and the pastorall power to such acts cannot be divided and if they have as immediate right to use the keys in pastorall acts as the wife hath to the husband and goods Also saith he Of the Churches of the Gentiles some were converted to God by Apostles others by private Christians Acts 8. 12. and 10. 36 44 47 48. and 11. 19 20 21. and 13. 1 12 48. and 14. 1 7. Can we in reason thinks during the Apostles absence that the Churches never assembled together for edification in praying prophesying and other ordinances were not all they converts who desired to be admitted to their fellowship Had they not use of excommunication The Apostles came but occasionally to the Churches where they appointed Elders Acts 14. 25. Why did Paul leave Titus at Crete save onely that men of gifts might be trained up in prophesying Answ. All here said is conjecturall he cannot give us an instance of a Church exercising church-Church-power and destitute of Officers onely he saith Can we conceive that in the Apostles absence there was no Church meetings for edification But were there no Elders and Officers in the Apostolike Church but onely Apostles I thinke there have beene Pastors and when the Apostles first left the planted Churches can we conceive that they left new converted flockes without Pastors and if without Officers they met for prophecying can wee conceive that they wanted the Seales of the Covenant certainly Sacraments without Officers are no rules for us to follow Secondly of conversion by private persons I purpose to speake hereafter if they preached it is not ordinary nor a rule to us Thirdly at Crete there have beene Preachers but of government without them I see nothing since Elders Timothy and Titus are limitted in receiving accusation against Elders and are forbidden to lay hands suddenly on any man I see not how the people without Officers did this It is good that this Church that they give us is all builded upon conjectures and an unwritten Church is an unwritten tradition If the Apostles appointed Elders in the Church for this end to governe wee gather the contrary of your collections Ergo there was no government in the Churches before there were governours for the
ordainers of Matthias to the Apostleship and this is the question 4. The place Act. 14. 23. proveth that Elders appoint or ordaine Elder with consent or lifting up of the hands of the people which is our very doctrine 5. Act. 6 The multitude are directed to choose out seven men as being best acquainted with them Yet if Nicholas the sect master of the fleshly Nicolaitans was one of them it is likely they were not satisfied in conscience of the regeneration of Nicholas by hearing his spirituall conference and his gift of praying which is your way of trying Church-members But 2. they looke out seven men 2. They choose theâ But v. 6. The Apostles prayed and laid their hands on them which we call ordination and not the multitude 6. Cyprian giveââ election of Priests to the multitude but neither Cyprian nor any of the Fathers give ordination to them Author Sect. 7. If the people have power to elect a King they have power to appoint one is their name to put the crown on his head Ergo if beleevers elect their Officers they may by themselves or some others lay hands on them and ordaine them Ans. The case is not alike the power of electing a King is naturall for Ants and Locusts have it Prov 30 25 16 27. Therefore a civill Society may choose and ordaine a King The power of choosing Officers is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a supernaturall gift And because God giveth to people one supernaturall gift it is not consequent that he should give them another also beside ordination is another thing then coronation of a King Presbyters in the Word have alwaies performed ordination Neither will it hence follow saith the Authour as some object that because the Church of believers neither make the Office nor authority of Pastors that both are immediately from Christ and that therefore the beleevers may not lay hands upon the Officers nor doth it follow because they receive ordination from the Church that therefore they should execute their Office in the Churches name or that they should be more or lesse diligent at the Churches appointment or that the Church of beleevers have a Lordly power over them or that the Elders must receive their commission from the Church as an Ambassadour doth from the Prince who sent him or that the Church in the defect of Officers may performe all duties proper to Officers as to administer the Sacraments For 1. most of the objections doe strike as much against imposition of hands by Bishops and Presbyters 2. Though Officers receive the application of their office and powerly the Church yet not from the Church and if from the Church yet not from her by any Lordly power and dominion but onely ministerially as from instruments under Christ so that they cannot choose or ordaine whom they please but onely him whom they see the Lord hath fitted and prepared for them nor can they prescribe limits to his Office nor give him his Embassage but onely a charge to looke to the Ministery that he hath received of the Lord. Ans. 1. I know none of ours who use such an Argument that because a Pasters or Elders Office is from Christ that therefore the Church cannot ordaine him For it should prove that the Presbyterie cannot ordaine him a Pastor because his Office is from Christ and not from the Presbyterie It would prove also that because the Office of a Judge is from God that the free States of a Kingdome could not ordaine one to be their King or that the King could not depute Judges under him because the Office of a King and Judge is from God and not from men 2. If Elders have their Ordination to that heavenly Charge from the people as from the first principall and onely subject of all ministeriall power I see not how it doth not follow that Elders are the servants of the Church in that respect and that though it doth not follow that they come out in the name of the Church but in the name of Christ whose Ambassadours they are yet it proveth well that they are inferiour to the Church of beleevers For 1. though the power of the Keys given to beleevers in relation to Christ be ministeriall yet in relation to the Officers whom the Church sendeth it is more then ministeriail at lest it is very Lordlike For as much of this ministeriall power is committed to the Church of possibly twenty or forty beleevers as to the Mistresse Lady Spouse and independent Queen and highest dispencer of all ministeriall power and the Elders though Ambassadours of Christ are but meere accidents or ornaments of the Church necessary ad benè esse onely and lyable to exauthoration at the Churches pleasure yea every way the Officers in jurisdiction are inferiour to the Church of beleevers by your grounds and not over the people of the Lord. For if the Church of believers as they are such be the most supreame governing Church then the Officers as Officers have no power of government at all but onely so farre as they are beleevers now if they be not believers as it falleth out very often then have they no power of the Keyes at all and what they doe they doe it meerely as the Churches servants to whom the Keyes are not given marriage-waies or by right of redemption in Christs blood yea Officers as they are such are neither the Spouse not redeemed Church yea nor any part or members of the redeemed Church 2. The Church of believers are the âod the Officers meanes leading to the end and ordained to gather the Saints if therefore as the end they shall authoritatively send Officers they should call and ordaine Officers as the States of a Kingdome with more then a power ministeriall Yea with a Kingly power for all authority should be both formally and eminently in them as all Regall or Aristocraticall power is in the States of a Kingdom as in the fountaine But neither doe we bring this argument to prove a simple Dominion of the Church of believers over the Officers or a power of regulating limiting and ordering the Ambassage of Officers as King and State lay bands upon their Ambassadours but we bring it to prove that this doctrine degradeth the Officers from all power of government above the believers and putteth them in a state of ministeriall authority under these above whom Jesus Christ hath placed them contrary to Scripture 3. The Authour saith believers may not administer the Sacraments in the defect of Pastors because that by appointment of Christ belongeth onely to such as by Office are called to preach the Gospell Math. 28. 29. which is indeed well said but I desire to be satisfied in these 1. These places Math. 28. 29. Mar. 16. 14 15. Luke 24. 28. being all one with Math. 16. 17. and Joh. 20. 21 22 23. The Keyes of the Kingdome are given to Church-officers because of their Office So the Text is cleare and so
for they were called by the Pope and his Clergy for saith Robinson when there be no ãâã Church-officers on Earth to give ordination we must hold with Arrians and expect new Apostles to give ordination neither can a true pastor go and seek a calling from a false pastor Hence observe carefully the following distinctions to obviate both papists cavillations and our Brethrens doubts 1. Distinct. That is 1. Properly extraordinary which is immediately from God without any other intervening cause so Moses his calling when God spake to him out of the Bush to goe to Pharaoh and command the letting goe of his people was extraordinary for both the matter of the calling and the persons designation to the charge was immediately from God Luthers calling this way was not extraordinary because hee preached no new Gospell nor by any immediate calling from God 2. That is extraordinary which is contrary to the Law of of nature Neither the calling of Luther nor of Hus and Wiccliff was extraordinary for that any inlightened of God and members of the Catholick Church should teach informe oâ helpe their fellow-members being seduced and led by blind guides is agreeable to the Law of nature but according to our Brethrens grounds Luthers calling here was not onely extraordinary but unlawfull and contrary to a Divine Law For now when Apostles are ceased Luher had no warrant if our Brethren say right no calling of God to exercise pastorall acts of preaching converting soules to Christ and baptizing through many visible Churches congregations because that is say they Apostolick and no man now can bee a pastor but in one fixed congregation whereof he is the elected pastor 3. That is extraordinary which is beside a Divine positiââ Law So that one should be chosen a pastor in an Iland where there be no Elders nor pastors at all and that the people onely give a calling is extraordinary and so it is not inconvenient thaâ something extroardinary was in our reformers 4. That is extraordinary which is against the ordinary corruptions wicked and superstitious formes of an ordinary caling so in this sense Luher and our reformers calling was extraordinary 2. Dist. A calling immediately from God and a calling from God some way extraordinary are farre different An immediate calling often requireth miracles to confirme it especially the matter being new yet not alwayes John Baptists calling was immediate his Sacrament of Baptisme beside the positive order of Gods worship yet hee wrought no miracles but an extraordinary calling may be where there is an immediate and ordinary revelation of Gods Will and requireth not miracles at all 3. Dist. Though ordinarily in any horologe the higher wheele should move the lower yet it is not against ordinary art that the hotologe be so made as inferiour wheeles may move without the motion of the superiour Though by ordinary dispensation of Gods standing Law the Church convened in a Synod should have turned about Hus Wicliff Luther to regular motions in orthodox Divinity yet it was not altogether extraordinary that these men moved the higher wheeles and laboured to reforme them Cyprian urged Reformation Aurelius Bishop of Carthage Augustin and the African Bishops did the like the Bishop of Rome âepining thereat It is somewhat extraordinary that Reformation should begin at Schollers and not at principall Masters 4. Dist. A calling may be expresly and formally corrupt in respect of the particular intention of the ordainers and of the particular Church ex intentione ordinanris operantis Thus Luthers calling to bee a Monke was a corrupt calling and eatenus and in that respect hee could not give a calling to others But that some calling may be implicitely and virtually good and lawfull in respect of the intention of the Catholick Church and ex inteâtione opâris ipsius ordinationis he was called âo preach the Word of God 5. Dist. Luthers Oath to preach the Gospell did oblige him as a pastor this is his calling according to the substance of his Office and is valid but his Oath to preach the Roman Faith intended by the exacters of the Oath was eatenus in so far unlawfull and did not oblige him Even a Wife married to a Turke and swearing to bee a helper to her Husband in promoving the worship of the Mahomet or being a papist is ingaged in an Oath to promote Romish Religion if shee bee converted to the true Faith of Christ needeth not to be married de novo but remaineth a married Wife but is not obliged by that unjust Oath to promove these false Religions though the marriage Oath according to the substance of marriage duties tieth her 6. Dist. A pastor may and ought to have a pastorall care of the Catholick Church as the hand careth for the whole body and yet neither Luther nor Zuinglius are universall pastors as were the Apostles For they had usurped no power of Governing and Teaching all Churches though I professe I see no inconvenience to say that Luther was extraordinarily called by God to goe to many Churches to others then to Wittenberg where hee had one particular charge yea even through Germany and the Churches of Saxony and Zuinglius through the Helvetian and Westerne Churches which yet doth not make them essentially Apostles because 1. They were not witnesses of Christs Death and Resurrection which as a new Doctrine to the World as Apostles they behoved to preach Acts 1. v. 22. They only revealed the old truth borne downe by an universall Apostacy 2. Because they were not immediately called nor gifted with diverse Tongues And the like I may say of Athanasius for men in an extraordinary apostacy to goe somewhat farther then to that which a particular Church calleth them to is not formally apostolick yet lawfull 7. A calling to the Ministery is either such as wanteth the essentialls as gifts in any messenger and the Churches consenâ or these who occupy the roome of the Church the Church consenâing such a Minister is to bee reputed for no Minister Or. 2. An entry to a calling or a calling where diverse of the Apostles requisites are wanting may bee a valid calling as if one enter as Caiphas who entered by favour and money and contrary to the Law was High-Priest but for a yeer âyet was a true High-Priest and prophecied as the High-priest 8. If the Church approve by silence or countenance the Ministery of a man who opened the Church doore to himselfe by a silver key having given the prelate a bud The ordinance of God is conferred upon him and his calling ceaseth not to be Gods calling because of the sins of the instruments both taking and giving 9. Though Luther was immediately called by Men An. 1508. by the Church of VVittenberg as may be seene in his writings as Gerard sheweth and the Jesuit Becanus saith hee was called and ordained a Presbyter and so had power to preach and administer the Sacraments yet that hindereth
reckoneth out divers offices in this body Now this is not one Congregation onely but that one Body of Christ whereof Christ is head this is the Catholick Church 2. What power ministeriall our Brethren affirme to bee given to a Congregation they say it is given to them under the notion of a flock of redeemed ones of the Spouse and body of Christ as they cite for this act 20. 28. Col. 1. 18. Eph. 1. 22 and under the notion of the City of God the Kingdome house and building of Christ but so they come to our hand for this reduplication or notion of a flock of redeemed ones of the body and spouse of Christ of the City Kingdome House Building agree first to the Catholick Church as is clear Col. 1. 8. Eph. 5. 25 26. 1 Tim. 3. 15. Eph. 2. 19 20 21 22. and secondarily only to a Congregation as it is a part of this universall flock 3. The whole Catholick Church visible is made one ministeriall body Cant. 6. 4. beautifull as Tirzah comely as the City of Jerusalem terrible as an army with banners By reason of their order of discipline and is there called an organicall body having v. 6 7 8. Eyes Haire Teeth Temples Locks and haveing particular Churchs under her three score Queens fourescore concubines and virgins without number Yet is it sayd v. 9. My Dove my undesiled is but one she is the only one of her Mother Ainsworth who here may be more then a witnesse sayth this one Church is the daughter of Jerusalem who is above and the mother of us âll Câton a witnesse not inferior saith on this place The true catholick Church of Christ is the Mother of all reformed Daughters and that argument that our Brethren useth to prove a particular Church to be visible because of externall communion not in one House for that is accidentall to visibility one congregation may meet in three caves of the Earth in time of persecution and yet remaine one congregation holdeth good in this catholick church made up of so many organs as a congregation is formed 1. Begetting by the Ministery of the word daughter-Churches to God as they say a congregation doth nor is it enough to say Ierusalem is not one by externall government and order of Discipline because they cannot meet together to exercise Discipline but shee is one invisibly because shee hath one Faith one Lord one Baptisme one Spirit one Hope of glory For the Text sayth they have one and the same Organs Teeth Eyes Haire Temples Locks they are one Ierusalem and compact City one Army terrible by the Sword of of discipline 2. We do not say to make them one visible church that they must have one visible actuall government in externall order for when of a congregation of 60. their be 30 absent through sicknesse and the busines of a lawfull calling they are one Church visible though in one metting you cannot see them all with one cast of your Eye and when the church of Ierusalem exceeding in number ten thousand did meet in part from House to House that is in sundry Houses yet continuing in the same doctrine of the Apostles and in fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayer Acts 2. 46. 32. our brethren will say they are one church And therefore the power of Discipline and the exercise of the Word Seales and Discipline in parts is sufficient to make one visible catholick Church 4. To that Church hath Christ given as to the first church the ordinances and ministery which he principally intendeth to perfit to gather and to bring to the unity of faith in a perfit body by these ordinances and that Ministery because the wisdome of Christ hath not given his Ministery and Ordinances to the catholick Church intending principally to save them except he give them a power in that Ministery to the first subject which being put forth in acts may compasse that end But Jesus Christ principally intends to perfit to gather to bring to the unity of faith in a perfit body by these ordinances and Ministery the whole catholick visible church and secondarily only this or this particular congregation Ergo Christ hath given to the whole catholick Church as to the first Church the ordinances and Ministery and so in this Mioistery catholick hee ha h given the Keys to this catholick Church visible as to the first Church 5. I prove it thus when ever Chrst giveth gifts to a whole he giveth it to the whole by order of nature before he give it to the parts of that whole as is cleare by induction He gives Christ a gift to the whole Church by order of nature first to the World Joh. 3. 16. Then to this or this believer of the World So he giveth redemption and grace by order of nature first to his Church in generall Eph. 5. 25. Christ dieth first for his Church not this or that single company or particular person first for His sheep that is the whole flock Joh. 10. v. 11. then for this or this company or this of this straying sheep He came to seeke and save first the lost Luk. 19. 10. then this or this lost man He died first to gather together in one not one man onely yee not the nation of the Iewes onely but to gather together in one all the Children of God which were scattered abroad Ioh. 11. 25. and he is a propitiatiou by order of nature First for the sinnes of the whole World 1 Ioh. 2. 1. and then secondarily for our sinnes so hath hee given the gifts of Apostles Prophets and Teachers first to and for Saints in common and in generall and not for this and that Saint or for this company of Saints at Ephesus Now that particular Congregations are parts of the great visible Church I prove and first that they are parts visible of a Presbytery or a circuit of Congregations within the locall bounds of a Presbytery I make good thus Those who have one common necessary object of externall government in Church-affairs those are a whole visible community gifted with power from Christ to rule in that common and necessary object of government and this and this portion of this whole community must be parts of that whole But those Congregations within the locall bounds of the circuit of a Presbytery have one common necessary object of externall government in Church affaires Ergo those Congregations in such a circuit must be parts of this whole The major I take from our Brethren who therefore make a particular Congreation to be one in respect of ordinary meeting to partake of word seales and to transect matters of jurisdiction amongst themselves but this agreeth to many congregations within one circuit for they meet occasionally one with another in hearing the word and receiving the seales and for the assumption I prove it thus all those congregations have these particulars of externall government in Church affaires which they cannot
originally in caetu sidelium in a Church of Believers but they cannot say that therefore the acts of Preaching administrating of the Sacraments and all acts of jurisdiction can be exercised by the Believers because they are the first subject Secondly the farther that the members or Churches either Congregationall Presbyteriall or Nationall are removed in locall distance one from another the lesse is the visible and externall communion of rebuking comforting and admonishing one another yet the power and obligation of these duties are not removed So though the Nationall Churches be locally distant one from another yet their power of exercising duties and so their power of Jurisdiction in an Oâcumenicke Councell is not from thence concluded to be null Yea Nationall duties upon occasion are still obligatoryâ and communion of men of sundry Nations is cleare to mee Esai 2. 3. many Nations shall flow unto the Mountaine of the Lords House Zach. 8. 23. Ten men shall take hold out of all Languages of the Nations they even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew saying we will goe with you for wee have heard that God is with you I do not say these Nations doe meete all in one Synod but the places doe well prove the power lawfull of performing duties whereas the exercise of them in one place is not hic nunc in ordinary providence possible And so this consequence must be weake the whole catholick visible Churches in their principall guides cannot ordinarily and constantly meet hic nunc for the exercise of their power Ergo they have no such power For if the power be exercised in parts which through occurrences of Providence and the corruption of mens nature cannot be exercised in whole at once yet it s not hence evinced to be a power not given of Christ for eâification for by our Brethrens grant three thousand are added to the Congregationall Church of Jerusalem Acts 2. and to this Church of three thousand and a hundred and twenty Christ hath given the ordinary power of the Keyes as to the first subject though through occurences of providence and the corruption of mans nature some of these suppose a thousand through sicknesse pest danger of persecution and sinfull separating from the assembly of Saints could not hic nunc meet in one house to exercise joyntly all the acts of that power which our Brethren say is given to them by Christ they cannot say therefore Christ never gave to this whole Church consisting of three thousand and a hundred and twenty any such power Thirdly there is a great difference betwixt the power given ad esse simplictèr to the being of a Church and the power given ad benè esse tantùm onely to the well-being 2. Great difference also there is betwixt ordinary power to be exercised constantly and ordinarily because of neerer consociation of the Churches in those things that concerne that Church in particular suppose a presbyteriall or Congregationall Church and a power to be exercised but more rarely not ordinarily because of the lesse communion visible and great locall distance of Churches as it falleth out in the whole visible Church Now from this First The ordinary power of Jurisdiction because of neerest vicinity and contiguity of members is given by Jesus Christ to one Congregation in an Isle 1. Because that Church is a Church properly so called though it be not a perfit and complete Church I say it is a Church properly so called Because 1. It is a little City and a little Kingdome of Jesus Christ having within it selfe power of the Word and Sacraments and that is a Church and hath the essence of a Church to which agree the essentiall notes of a visible Church Now preaching of the Word and Administration of the Sacraments are essentiall notes of a visible Church But I say it is not a compleate and perfit Church in the latitude of visibility for Churches are lesse or more visible according as they have lesse or more visible communion for visible communion constituteth a visible Church Now a Congregation in a remote Island hath a lesse communion visible with other visible Churches then conscciated visible Churches have 2. It is not compleate and perfit in its operations because in case of doubts of conscience touching government and practice and dogmaticall poynts it wants the joynt authority and power of Jurisdiction needfull for the well-being of a Church which it should have if it were consociated with many other Congregations so as wee say an hand with five fingers is a compleate hand but it is not a compleat organicall body but a part of the organicall body of a man so is a Congregation a Church wanting nothing of the being and essence of a Church yet is it incompleate because it is a part or member of a Presbyteriall Church and not being consociated wanteth that which belongeth to the well being of a compleat visible Church For visibility of a Church must have a latitude because it is an accident or adjunct of an organicall politick body which is totum integrale Secondly the ordinary power of ordinary Jurisdiction in a more perfit way because of ordinary and perfiter consociation is given to the Presbyteriall Church as to the proper subject in the constant and ordinary exercise of Discipline because contignity being the foundation of visible externall government the Presbyteriell Church of Ierusalem Ephesus Corinth Antioch and Rome is a perfit compleat consociaâd body To which the power of ordination exauthoration or deprivation of Pastors of excommunication in a constant and ordinary way doth belong For this is a principle of Church-policy Every politick body of Christ hath power of Church government within it selfe But a Presbyteriall church is such 2. This is a received maxime also Quod tangit omnes ab omnibus suo more tractari debet VVhat concerneth all should be agitated by all according to their degrees of concernment but excom nunication of a person in a consociated Church concerneth all the consociated Churches in a Presbytery all are scandalized all may be and are in danger to be leavened with the infectious lumpe And here it is to be observed that as preaching of the Word is an essentiall note of the visible Church and agreeing to the visible Church as necessary ad esse simpliciter to the very being of a visible Church For if the word as Preached and some way promulgated be not in such a society we cannot call it a visible Church so Discipline is a note of the visible Church and necessary ad bene esse and it cannot be a Ministeriall Church in a good condition exercising acts of edification if the wall of Discipline be broken downe and meeting in one place for Word and Sacraments is but accidentall for a Ministeriall Church If the Word be preached and the Sacraments administrated in sundry Congregations though not in a Presbyteriall Church all convened in all its members
Catholick body but the case for ordinary and constant power of ordinary and constant Jurisdiction is not so in a Presbyteriall in a provinciall in a Nationall in the Catholick visible Body And therefore it followeth not that they are not compleat Bodies and entire Churches for all ordinarie and constant Jurisdiction and the reason is cleare because Synods or Synodicall Churches above a Presbytery to me are not ordinary not constant Courts but extraordinary and prore nata occasionall having their rise from some occurrence of providence as is most cleare by Scripture The Church of Ephesus being a Presbyteriall Church did constantly exercise Discipline and try false Prophets and those which called themselves Iewes but were lievs Revel 2. 2. Whereas that famous Councell at Ierusalem was not an ordinary and constant Court but extraordinary that is occasionall for so I take the Word for expressions cause and had its rise Acts 15. 1. from a meere occasion because some came from Iudea and taught the Brethren except yee be circumcised after the manner of Moses you cannot be saved And the subject of this Court was not the constant and ordinary affaires of Discipline that belonged to the presbytery of Ierusalem and Antioch No v. 6. the subject was only an incident controversy raised by false teachers subverters of soules v. 24. and therefore it is said v. 6. The Apostles and Elders ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to consider of this matter therefore the presbyteriall Church hath both Word and Sacraments dispensed in it distributively through all the Churches and for the power of Jurisdiction ordinary intensivè and quoad essentiam Ecclesiae ministerialis according to the entire essence of a ministeriall Church it is as perfit and compleat in one single Congregation as in a provinciall as in a Nationall yea as in the Catholick visible Body whereof Christ is the Head onely a provinciall nationall and the Catholick Church visible extensivè according to the power of extension is a larger and a superior Church and though the presbyteriall Church be a part of the Catholick it is so a part as it is a perfit whole Church as a man is a part of this great all the World yet so as he is a perfit reasonable Creature and so a whole man and a part of the World but a Congregation is so a part of the Presbytery that it hath not a whole entire compleat intensive power over its owne members to excommunicate them because its members are for contiguity and necessity of neere visible communion parts that cannot avoyd dayly edifying or scandalizing of consociated Churches and therefore the consociated churches trust have a power over the members of a Congregation But our Brethren will say Contiguity of locall cohabitation doth not in be a visible Church but only the voluntary agreement of Professors who doe ex pacto and by covenant tacit or expresse make up a conseciation for a Papist and a Protestant may cohabit in one house Answ. That is true but contiguity is such a necessary foundation of externall visible Church fellowship in one presbytery as without that contiguity I see not how jure Divino there can be either a Congregationall Church or any other Church for sure I am Christ hath not ordained me to be a member of a Congregation in America or of a presbyteriall Church in Geneva And that such persons and no more be members of a Congregation is not juris Divini yet without a contiguity lesse or more they cannot be members of a Congregation nor is this single Congregation a limbe of this presbyteriall Church jure Divinâ onely this in abstracto is jus Divinum that there be a Congregation of a convenient number and a presbytery of such as may meete conveniently in their guides But to returne the Brethren do deny that God gave a power of Jurisdiction to the Catholick visible Court of the Oâcumenick Church And why because a generall councell cannot excommunicate nor relax from Excommunication a nationall Church But I answer 1. It is by accident and not through want of innate and intrinsecall power that the Court of a Catholick councell cannot in an ordinary and constant way exercise the power that Christ hath given to her as the presbyteriall church doth and the exigence of providence maketh it so because it falleth out by the blessing of God that Zion must say as it is Esai 49. 20. The place is too streight for me give place to me that I may dwell And because she inlargeth the place of her Tent and stretcheth forth the curtains of her habitation and lengthneth her cords and breaketh forth on the right hand and on the left and her seed inheriteth the Gentiles Esai 54. 2 3. and because from the rising of the Sun to the going dââne thereof his Name is great amongst the Gentiles and in every place incense is offered to him Mal. 1. 11. yet have generall councells condemned Hereticks as Nestorians Macedonians Eutyches and others and I see nothing to prove that a generall councell hath no power to excommunicate a Nationall Church If the Lord should be pleased to give the Christian Churches a generall councell this day they might lawfully in a juridicall way declare the faction of Romish pretended catholicks to be mysticall Babylon a cage of uncleane Birds which is excommunication in the essence and substance of the Act nor is there need of a legall and juridicall citation of nationall Churches or a citation of witnesses to prove Romish Heresies and perfidious and detestable obstinacy for their writings and deeds are so notorious that the senses of men may as infallibly prove the fact as we know there is such a City in the world as Rome and Cânâtantinople as for the instance that a catholick councell cannot ordinarily be had to relax a repenting nationall Church I answer the same inconvenience will follow if we suppose an ordinary case the Church congregationall as our Brethren suppose of Ierusalem Acts. 2. consisting of three thousand and a hundred and twenty having excommunicated Ananias Saphira and others who yet by the grace of God should truely repent in the meane time the Sword of the Roman Emperor intervening scattereth this Church that they cannot convene in a spirituall Court to relax them and out of Court they have no authority of Jurisdiction here were an invincible necessity of their remaining in Satansbonds in foro externo ecclesiae But what then This is to limit God as Papists do in binding and tying salvation of Infants to the outward signe of externall baptisme as if God in soro caeli in his own Court could not absolve penitent sinners because the Church will not which is more ordinary through mens corruption or cannot absolve through the necessity of exigence of divine providence and the more catholick that crosses be as warâ the universall and catholick cruelty and treachery of the church of Mâlignants against the true catholick Church of Christ the more easily are
is a Member of that common Court which doth concerne them all therefore all these consequences are null Object 9. But when the Presbytery doth excommunicate in a particular Congregation by a delegate they may with as good reason preach by a delegate as exercise Jurisdiction by a delegate the one is as personall and incommunicable as the âââr Answ. It is certaine there bee great oddes for the acts of jurisdiction performed by speaking in the Name of Iesus Christ doe come from a Colledge and Court and because it were great confusion that a whole Court should speake therefore of necessity such acts must be done by a delegate Indeed the Juridicall acts of the whole juridicall proceeding of decerning the man to be excommunicated cannot bee done by one man onely it would bee most conveniently done by the whole Senate or at least by a select number against which the accused party hath no exception and is willing to bee judged by but the acts of order as Preaching flowing from the power of order can be performed only by the Pastor in his owne person and not by a deputy Except that a Synodicall teaching which commeth from the power of Jurisdiction may bee sent in writ by Messengers and Deputies to the Churches Acts 15. 25. Acts 16. 4. Object 10. A Pastor is not a Pastor but in relation to his owne Church or Congregation Therefore hee cannot doe Pastorall Acts of either Order or Jurisdiction in a Presbyterie Answ. How a Pastor is a Pastor in relation to all the World deserveth discussing First Some have neither power of Order nor Jurisdiction in any place as private persons Secondly some have both power of Order and Jurisdiction through all the World as the Apostles who might teach and administrate the Sacraments and Excommunicate as Apostles in every Church Thirdly some have power of Order and Jurisdiction in a certaine determinate place as Pastors in their owne particular Congregations Fourthly some have power of Order in relation to all the VVorld as Pastors of a Congregation who are Pastors validly Preaching and Administrating the Sacraments but orderly and lawfully Preaching where they have a calling of those who can call to the occasionall exercise of their calling hic nunc In this meaning a Pastor of one flock is a Pastor in regard of power of Order to all the World Because though his pastorall teaching be restrained by the Church in ordinary onely to this Congregation yet hath hee a pastorall power to preach to all the World in in an occasionall way both by Word and Writ yet doth not this power being but the halfe of his Ministeriall power denominate him a Pastor to all the World as the Apostles were and the same way hath hee power to administrate the Sacraments and this way may our Brethren see that power of order to be a Minister or Pastor is given by the Presbytery so as if the man were deprived clave non errante hee now hath lost his pastorall relation to both the Catholick Church and that Congregation whereof hee is a Pastor So as hee is now a private man in relation not onely to that Congregation whereof hee was a Pastor but also in relation to the whole visible Church now no particular Congregation hath power to denude him of this relation that he had to the whole catholick Church But a Pastor of a flock is a Pastor in respect of power of Jurisdiction not over all the World to excommunicate in every Presbytery with the Presbytery hee is onely capable by vertue of his power of order to exercise power of Jurisdiction where hee shall come upon suposall of a call if hee be chosen a Pastor there or be called to be a Commissioner in the higher or highest Courts of the Church catholick but other wayes he hath no power of Jurisdiction but in that Court whereof he is a member that is in the Eldership of a Congregation and in the Classicall Presbytery for hee is so a member of a Congregation as he is also a member of the Classical Presbytery and therefore though he be not a Pastor one way in this Classicall Court I meane in respect of power of order yet is hee a Pastor ãâã in watching over that Church in respect of power of Jurisdiction Our Brethrens ground then is weake when they say A Pastor cannot give the Seales to those of another Congregation because he hath no Ministeriall power over those of another Congregation if they meane power of Jurisdiction it is true he hath no Jurisdiction over those of another Congregation but if they meane hee hath no power of order over them that is for what ever be the Churches part in this it is certaine the Pastor doth administrate the Seales by power of order and not by power of Iurisdiction and the Church as the Church hath not any power of order for shee is not called to any pastorall dignity though wee should grant that which yet can never bee proved that shee is invested with a Ministeriall power Object 11. If the Church which you suppse to be presbyteriall to wit the Church of Corinth did excommunicate or was commanded to excommunicate the incestuâus person before the Congregation convened and met in one then must your classicall Church exercise all other acts of Iurisdiction before all the Congregationall Churches of the Classicall Presbytery meete in one But this latter is as unpossible as absurd For how shall thirty or forty Congregations meet all in one place for all the severall acts of Jurisdiction Also you confesse that many Congregations cannot meete in one place that the proposition may be made good We suppose these grounds of the Presbyteriall frame of Churches 1. That the presbyteriall Church of Corinth not the Congregation had the onely power of excommunication 2. That this man was to be excommunicated in presence and so with the consent of the whole multitude for so the Text sayth 1 Cor. 5. 4. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã When you are gathered together 3. Excommunication is the highest act of Iurisdiction in the Church being the binding of the sinner in Heaven and Earth if therefore this highest act of Iurisdiction must bee performed before all the Church congregated in one then must all acts of Iurisdiction be performed also in presence of the congregated Church for it concerneth their edification and is a matter of conscience to then all 4. The reason why wee thinke sit hee should be excommunicated before or in presence of that Congregation whereof hee is a member is because it concerneth them and hee is a member of this Congregation But by your grounds the whole Presbyteriall or classicall Church should be present which were unpossible for hee is to you a Member of the whole Classicall Church and the power of excommunication is in the whole classicall Church and they ought to bee present by the same reason that the Congregation whereof hee is a neerest member is present Answ. 1.
Elders as well as the Apostles convened to consider about this matter and Act. 21. 18. 25. All the Elders of Jerusalem with James take on them these acts as well as the Apostles and they are the decrees of the Elders no lesse then of the Apostles Act. 16. â 4. a derivation of the immediate impiâing Spirit to âââ Elders and by them as fellow-members of the Synod to the Apostles and a derivation of this immediat Apostolick spirit by the Apostles to the Elders to make them also infallible is unknowne to Scripture for one Prophet did not immediatly inspire another and one Apostle did not immediatly inspire another wee read not in the Word of any such thing and therefore it is said Act. 15. 7. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã And when there had beene much disputing Peter sââd up All who interpret this place say even Papists not exâpted as Salmero com in ãâã Salmeron Lââmus â Lorinus Cornelius a lapt Cornelius a lapide and others on the place that when there is not consultation and disputing on both sides to find out the truth but an absolute authoritie used by commanding the proceeding of the counceil is rash saith Salmeron now the Prophets were immediatly inspired without any consultation with men in delivering Gods will and they saw the visions of God as it is said And the Word of the Lord came to Jeremiah to Ezechiel to Hosea c. and bee said c. yea when a propheticall spirit came upon Baââm Num. 24. bee seeing the visions of God hee prophecied directly contrary to his owne carnall mind and to his consultation with Balââk now it is cleare that the Apostles what they spake by the breathings and inspirations of that immediatly inspiring Spirit is no lesse cannonick Scripture then the prophecies of the immediatly inspired Prophets who saw the visions of God and therefore 2 Pet. 1. 16 17 18 the voyce that the Apostles heard from heaven This is my beloved Sonnâ in whom I am well pleased is made equall with the word of prophâcie and propheticall Scripture which the holy men of God spale â they were moved by the holy Ghost v. 19 20 21. and 2 Pet. 3. 16. Pauls Epistles are put in the classe with other Scriptures v. 15 16. now all Scripture 2 Tim. 3. 16. is given by divine inspiration and 2 Peter 3. 2. puteth the words of the Prophets and Apostles in the same place of divine authority 2 Pet. 3. 2. That yee bee mindfull of the words which were spoken before by the holy Prophets and of the commandements of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour whence to mee this synodicall consultation is not Apostolicall but such as is obligatory of the Churches to the end of the world and a patterne of a generall Synod 6. This assembly is led by the holy Spirit as is cleare v. 25. 28. but this is not the holy Spirit immediatly inspiring the Apostles as Apostles but that ordinary Synodicall spirit to borrow that expression that is promised to all the faithfull pastors and rulers of the Church to the end of the world because the immediatly inspiring spirit comming on Prophets and Apostles in an immediate inspiration did necessitate the Prophets and Apostles to acquiesce and prophesie and to doe and speake whatsoever this spirit inspired them to doe and to speake but this spirit spoken of v. 28. doth not so but leaveth the assembly to a greater libertie because the assembly doth not acquiesce to that which Peter saith from Gods Word v. 7 8 9 10 11. nor doth the Assembly acquiesce to what Barnabas and Paul saith v. 12. but onely to that which James saith v. 13 14 15 16 17 18. but especially to his conclusion which hee draweth from the Law of nature not to give scandall and from the Scriptures cited by himselfe and by Peter v. 19 20. Wherefore my sentence is saith James c. and this clearely is the sentence of James as a member of the Synod v. 19. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which is an expression clearly insinuating that the judgement of James though it was not contrary to that which Peter Paul and Barnabas had spoken yet that is was somewhat diverse from them and more particular and the very mind of the holy Ghost which the whole Synod followed and therefore though Peter and Paul spake truth yet did they not speake that truth which did compose the controversie and this is to mee an argument that they all spake as members of the Synod and not as Apostles 7. The immediatly inspired Apostolick Spirit though it may discourse and inferre a conclusion from such and such premisses as Paul doth Rom. 3. 28. and hee proveth from the Scripture Rom. 4. 4. 5. 6. that wee are justified by saith without workes and 1 Tim. 5. 17. 18. and Act. 9. 22. Act. 24. 14. 17. and so doth Christ reason and argument from Scripture Matth. 22. 31. Luk. 24. 25 26 27. and so have both the Prophets and Apostles argued yet the immediatly inspired Spirit of God in arguing doth not take helpe by disputing one with another and yet doth not obtaine the conclusion in hand but here Peâââ and Paul argue from Scripture and they prove indeed a true conclusion that the Gentiles should not keepe Moses his Law as they would bee saved yet they did not remove the question nor satisfic the consciences of the Churches in their present practise for if James had not said more then the Churches had not beene sufficiently directed in their practise by the Synod and for all that Peter and Paul said the Churches might have eaâân meates offered to Idols and blood and things strangled which at that time had been a sin against the Law of nature and a great stumbling block and a scandalizing of the Jewes Except therefore wee say that the Apostles intending as Apostles to determine a controversie in the Church they did not determine it which is an injury to that immediatly inspiring spirit that led the Apostles in penning Scripture wee must say that Peter Paul and James here spake as members of an eccleâiasticall Synod for the Churches after-imitation 8. If the Apostles here as Apostles give out this decree then it would seeme that as Apostles by virtue of the immediatly inspiring spirit they sent messengers to the Churches for one spirit directeth all and by this Text wee should have no warrant from the Apostles practise to send messengers to satisfie the consciences of the Churches when they should bee troubled with such questions now all our Divines and reason doth evince that a Synod may by this Text send messengers to resolve doubting Churches in points dogmaticall for what the Apostles doe as Apostles by that power by which they writ canonick Scripture in that wee have no warrant to imitate them 9. I propounded another argument before which prevaileth much with mee The Elders of an ordinary Presbytery and Churches such as conveened at this Synod cannot be
clearely insinuate that their commandement as Apostles de jure should have ended the controversie but now for the edification and after-example of the Churches they tooke a Synodicall way 13. The way of the Apostles speaking seemeth to mee Synodicall and not given out with that divine and Apostolicall authoritie that the Apostles may use in commanding it is true they use lovely and swasory exhortations in their writing but this is a ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a decree not an exhortation now James saith 1â ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is set downe as his private opinion with reverence to what Peter and Paul saith and v. 7. Peter when many had disputed and spoken before him standeth up and speaketh and v. 12. Barnabas and Paul after the multitude is âânt doth speake which to mee is a Synodicall order and the whole Synod v. 28. say It seemed good to us They answer 1. Consociated Churches have some power in determining of dogmaticall points but this is no power of jurisdictim The seventh Proposition to which almost all the Elders of New England agreed saith The Synod bath no Church-power but the cause enimeth with the Church Corpus cum causa the Church-body and the cause which concerneth the Church-body doe remaine together ând therefore quaestio defertur ad Synodum causa manet penes eccleiam the question is brought to the Synod the cause remaineth with the Church Another Manuscript of Godly and learned Divines I saw which saith That the ministeriall power of applying of the rules of the word and Canons to persons and things from time to time as the occasions of the Church shall require pertaineth to and may be exercised by each particular Church without any necessary dependance on other Churches yet in difficill cases wee ought say they to consult with and seeke advise from presbyteries and ministers of ãâã Churches and give so much authoritie to a concurrence of judgements as shall and ought to be an obligation to us not to depart from any such resolutions as they shall make upon any consideration but where in conscience and hence our peace with God is apparently concerned Answ. I perceive 1. That our brethren cannot indure that a Synod should bee called a Church but 1. I verily thinke that when Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1 2. had much dissention with those who taught you must bee circumcised after the manner of Moses that the Church of Antioch resolved to tell the Church that is the Synod while as they fall upon this remedy v. 2. They determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine other of them ãâã goe up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question that is that the Church of Antioch when the subverâers of soules would not heare their brethren of Antioch did tell the Synod convened at Jerusalem that is according to our âviours order Maâââ 18. 17. they did tell the Church and my reason is if the Church at Antioch could not satisfie the conâcâenâes of some who said you must bee circumcised else you cannâx in saved they could not nor had they power in that cast not to goe on but were obliged to tell the Synod that is the Church whom it concerned as well as Antioch for if they had sent the matter to the Synod as a question not as a cause proper to the Synod or Church then when the Synod had resolved the question the cause should have returned to the Church of Antioch and been determined at Antioch as in the proper court if that hold true the question is deserred to the Synod the cauâe remaineth with the body the Church but the cause returned never to the Church of Antioch but both question and cause was determined by the Synodicall-Church Act. 15 v. 22. 23 24. and the determination of both question and cause ended in the Synod as in a proper court and is imposed as a commandement and a Synodicall Canon to bee observed both by Antioch v. 25 26 27 28 29. and other Churches Act. 16. 4 5. Ergo either the Church of Antioch lost their right and yet kept Christs order Matth. 18. 15 16 17. or the question and cause in this case belongeth to a Synod 2. It is said expresly â 22. It pleased tâ Apostles Elders and the whole Church to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch c. What Church was this the whole Church of ââleevers or the fiaternitie at Jerusalem say our brethren but with leave of their godlinesse and learning no say â 1. What reason that the Church of all beleevers men and women of Jerusalem should de jure have beene present to give either consent or surfrage there because it concerned then practise and conscience but I say it concerned as much if not more the conscience and practise of the Church of Antioch if not more for the cause was theirs say our brethen and cause ad corpus say they quaestio ad synodum and it concerned as much the practise and conscience of all the Churches who were to observe these decrees Act 16. 4. 5 Act. 21. 25. yet they were not present If the multitude of ââleevers of Jerusalem was present because they were ãâ¦ã to the Synod whereas Antioch other ãâ¦ã were nor off were not present but in their commissioners then I say the Church ââ the multitude of Jerusalem whose commidicâââs were here ãâã I say the multitude was present âuely de ãâã not ãâã nor was there more law for their presence then âor all other Churches who also in conscience were obliged to obey the councells determinations but I deare a warrant that the fact of the Synod such as was sending of the decrees and Commissioners with the decrees to Antioch should bee ââââibed to the multitude of beleevers at Jerusalem who by no Law of God were present at the Synod and by no Law of God ãâã more consent then the Church of Antioch and were present ãâã ãâã and by accident because they dwelt in the ãâã where the Synod did sit therefore say I the ãâã Church in the whole Synod 2. By what Law can Jerusalem a sister Church have influence or consent de jure in sending binding Acts as these were as is cleare v. 28. Ch. 16. 4 5. Ch. 21. 25. to the Church of Antioch for this is an authoritative sending of messengers and the Canons to the Church of Antioch as is evident v. 2 2. 3. It is utterly denied that the Church of Jerusalem I meane the multitude of beleevers could meet all at one Synod 4. The word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã v. 12. which is said to hold their peace is referred to the Apostles and Elders met Synodically v. 6. and is not the multitude of beleevers 5. Where are these who are called Elders not Apostles they are ever distinguished from the Apostles as Act. 15. 2. v. 6. v. 22. Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. âare is no reason that they were all
Elders of Jerusalem for ãâã can Elders of one sister Church impose Lawes burdens â28 and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã decrees Ch. 16. 4. upon sister Churches or hâw can they pen canonicall Scripture joyntly with the Apostles Some of our brethren say so much of those degrees that they obliged formally the Churches as Scriptures doe oblige the learned Junius saith well that the Apostles did nothing as Apostles where there was an ordinarie and established Elderyââ in the Church therefore those Elders behoved to bee the ãâã of Antioch for Act. 17. v. 2. ãâ¦ã Commissioners were ãâã from Antioch then Paul and ãâ¦ã I thinke also the Churches of Cyria and ãâã ãâ¦ã there as well as Antioch and de jure ãâ¦ã should have beene there The case was theirs every way the same with the Church of Antioch and their soules subverted v. 24. 6. Those who are named v. 22. Apostles Elders and the whole Church are called v. 25. Apostles and Elders and Brethren and elsewhere alwayes Apostles and Elders Elders including brethren or the whole Church v. 22. of some chosen men and brethren as Act. 13. 2. v. 6. Ch. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18. 25. 2. I desire to try what truth is here that this Synod but power and authoritie in points dogmaticall but no church-Church-power saith the seventh proposition of the reverend and godly Brethren of New England and no power of jurisdiction but the Church of Antioch had Church-power and power of jurisdiction to determine this cause and censure the contraveeners as our Brethren say But I assume this Synod tooke this Church-power off their hand and with the joynt power of their owne Commissioners sent from Antioch v. 2. v. 22. 23. determined both cause and controversie and it never returned to any Church-Court at Antioch as is cleare v. 25 26 27 28. Ergo this Synod had a Church-power 2. A power and authoritie dogmaticall to determine in matters of doctrine is a Church-power proper to a Church as is granted by our brethren and as wee prove from Act. 20. 29. This is a part of the over-sight committed to the Eldership of Ephesus to take heed to men rising amongst themselves speaking perverse things that is teaching false doctrine and if they watch over them as members of their Church for they were v. 30. men of their owne they were to censure them 2. If Pergamus bee rebuked Reâel 2. 14. 15. and threatned with the removing of their Candlesticke because they had amongst them those who held the doctrine of Balaam and the doctrine of the Nicolaitans hated by Christ himselfe and did not use the power of jurisdiction against them then that Church which hath power dogmaticall to judge of doctrine hath power also of jurisdiction to censure those who hold the false doctrine of Balaam and v. 20. Christ saith to Thyatira Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã because thou suffâââ that woman Jesabel which calleth herselfe a Prophetesse to teach and to seduâe my servants to commit fornication and to eate things sacrifââd to Idols Hence I argue what Church hath power to try the false doctrin of Jesabel and is blamed for not censuring her but permitteth her to teach and to seduce the servants of God hath also power of jurisdiction against her false doctrine this poposition I take to bee evident in those two Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira I assume but this Synod Act. 15. hath authoritie and power to condemne the false doctrine taught by subverters of soules teaching a necessitie of circumcision in the Churches of Syria Cilicia Antioch c. Act. 15. vers 23 24. Therefore this Synod hath power of jurisdiction 3. Every societie which hath power to lay on burdens as here this Synod hath v. 28. and to send decrees to be observed by the Churches as Act. 16. 4. and to send and conclude that they observe no such thing and that they observe such and such things Act. 21. 25. by the power of the holy Ghost conveened in an Assembly 25. and judging according to Gods Word as â 7 8 9 10 11 12 c. these have power of juridiction to censure the contraveners but this Synod is such a societie Ergo it hath this power The Proposition is Matth. 18. 18. If hee refuse to heare the Church let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican nothing can bee answered here but because this Synod commandeth onely in a brotherly way but by no Church-power therefore they have no power of jurisdiction But with reverence of these learned men this is petitio principii to begge what is in question for the words are cleare a brotherly counsell and advise is no command no ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã no decree which wee must observe and by the observing whereof the Churches are established in the faith as is said of these decrees Act. 16. 4 5. To give a brotherly counsell such as Abigail gave to David and a little maide gave to Namaan is not a burden laid on by the commander but it is said of this decree v. 28. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã It seemed good to the holy Ghost to lay no other burden on you Also we do not say that power of jurisdiction is in provinciall or nationall Synods as in the Churches who have power to excommunicate for 1. this power of jurisdiction in Synods is cumulative not privative 2. It is in the Synod quoad actus imperatos potius quam act us elicitos according to commanded rather then to elicit acts for the Synod by an ecclesiasticall power added to that intrinsecall power of jurisdiction in Churches doth command the Churches to use their power of jurisdiction rather then use it actually her selfe Let me also make use of two propositions agreed upon in a Synod at New England Their 3. proposition The fraternitie have an authoritative concurrence with the Preshyteny in judiciall Acts. 4. Proposition The fraternitie in an Organicall body actu subordinate id est per modum obedientiae in subordination by way of obedience to the Presbytery in such judiciall Acts 2 Cor. 10. 6. Now if here the whole Church of Jerusalem as they say from v. 22. was present and joyned their authoritative concurrence to these decrees there was here in this Synod an Organicall body of eyes eares and other members that is of Apostles Teachers Elders and people and so a formed Church by our brethrens doctrine ââgs Paul and Barnabas v. 2. being sent to this Synod by the Church of Antioch to complaine were sent to tell the formed and organicall Churches as it is Matth. 18 19 which is a good argument if not ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as Aristotle saith yet ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 2. If the Brethren here concurre as giving obedience to the Elders and the Apostles doe here determine as Apostles and Elders then the brothren in this Organicall body doe concurre to the forming of these decrees by way of obedience to the
his brother and therefore we doubt not but the Church hath jus law to excommunicate the Apostles in case of obstinacie and would have used this power iâ Judas had lived now when the power of excommunication was in vigor but wee say withall de facto the suâposition was unpossible in respect that continued and habituall obstinacie and flagitious and atâocious scandals deserving excommunication were inconsistent with that measure of the holy Spirit bestowed upon those Catholick Organs and vessels of mercy but this exempteth the Apostles from act all excommunication de facto but is our brethren exââpt them a jure from the Law they transforme the Apostles into Popes above all Law which wee cannot doe Apostolick eminencie doth ãâ¦ã neither Peter nor Paul to bee above either the ãâ¦ã the ãâã Law or the positive Lawes gi ãâ¦ã One doth wittily say on these ãâ¦ã Matth. 8. 15. The Pope is either a ãâ¦ã if hee bee a brother offending ãâ¦ã complaine of him to the Church ãâ¦ã bee no brother there 's an end ãâ¦ã his father and never after this ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã in a Synod as Apostles doth not ãâ¦ã in Apostolick acts could not use Sy ãâ¦ã others 1. Because Daniel 9. 2. ãâ¦ã understood by books the num ãâ¦ã Lord came to Jeremiah the ãâ¦ã Paul 1 Cor. 1. 1. and Timothi ãâ¦ã and ãâã 1 Thess. 1. 1. and 3. The ãâ¦ã and yet â ophâts and Apostles were immedi ãâ¦ã which they ââote and spake Answ. 1. Daniel ââd the Prophecie of Jeremiah and the Pro ãâã the books of Moses and the Apostles read the old Testament ãâã and Paul read âeathen Poets and citeth them Act. 17. ãâã Tiâ 1. 12. and maketh them Scripture 2. But the question is now if as Prophets and immediatly inâââ Prophets and Apostles they did so consult with Scripture which they reade as they made any thing canoniâk Scripture upon ãâã medium and formall reason because they did read it ãâã it out of bookes and not because the immediate iââpiration of the holy Ghost taught them what they should ãâã canonick Scripture Suppone a sentence of a âeathen ãâã suppone this that Paul left his cloake at Troâs not the âââwledge of sense not naturall reason not experience none ââ these can bee a formall medium a formall meane to make scripture but as thus saith Jehovah in his word is the formall reason why the Church beleeveth the Scripture to be the Word ââ God so the formall reason that maketh Prophets and Apostles to put downe any truth as that which is formally canonicall scripture whether it bee a supernaturall truth as the ãâã was made flesh or a morall truth as Children obey your ãâã or a naturall truth as The Oxe knoweth his owner or an experienced truth as make not friendship with an angry ãâã a truth of heathen moralitie as mee are the off-spring of God or a truth of sense Paul lest his cloâke at Tâoas I say the ãâã formall reason that maketh it divine and Scripturall truth is the immediate inspiration of God therefore though ãâã learned by bookes that the captivitie should indure seventi yeares yet his light by reading made it not formally Scripture but Daniels putting it in the Canon by the immediat actiâr impulsion and inspiration of the holy Spirit and though Matthew did read in Esaiah A Virgin shall conceive and beared Sonne yet Matthew maketh it not a part of the New Testament because Esaiah said it but because the holy Ghost did imdiatly suggest it to him as a divine truth for a holy man might draw out of the Old and New Testament a Chapter of orthodox truths all in Scripture words and beleeve them to bee Gods truth yet that Chapter should not formally bee the Scriptur of God because though the Author did write it by the light of faith yet the Propheticall and Apostolicall spirit did not suggest it and inspire it to the author I know some Schoolâ Papists have a distinction here They say there bee some sepernaturall truths in Scriptures as predictions of things that tall out by the mediation of contingent causes and the supernaturall mysteries of the Gospell as that Achab shall bee killed in the wars the Messiah shall bee borne c. Christ came to ãâã sinners and those were written by the immediatly inspiring Spirit others were but historicall and naturall truths of fact as that Paul wrought miracles that hee left his cleake at Troas and these latter are written by an inferior spirit the assisting not the immediatly inspiring Spirit and by this latter spirit say they much of Scripture was written and from this assisting Spirit commeth the traditions of the Church say they and the decrees of Popes and councells and this holy Spirit though infallible may and doth use disputation consultations councells of Doctors reading but wee answer that what counsells determin by an assisting spirit is not Scripture nor yet âm-ply infallible nor doth Daniel advise with Jeremialis writing what hee shall put downe as Scripture nor Paul with Sosâhââââ with Timothy and Silvamus what hee shall write as Canonick Scripture in his Epistles for then as the decrees of the coun ãâã at Jerusalem are called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders and this decree which commeth from the Apostles and Elders assemâled with one accord and speaking with joynt suffrages from the holy Ghost v. 7 8 9 10 c. v. 28. as collaterall authors of the decree is the conclusion of Apostles and Elders so also should the prophâcie of Daniel at least the first two verses of the ninth chapter bee a part of Daniel and a part of Jeremiâhs prophecie and Pauls Epistles to the Corinthians should bee the Epistle of Paul and Sâstheâes and his Epistles to the Colossians and Thessahâianâ the Epistles of Paul of Timothy of Silvanus whereas Sosthenes Timothy Silvanus were not immediatly inspired collaterall writers of these Epistles with Paul but onely joyners with him in the salutation The erring and scandalous Churches are in a hard condition if they cannot bee edified by the power of jurisdiction in presbyteries Object But it never or seldome in a century falleth out that a Church is to bee excommunicated and Christ hath provided Lawes for things onely that fall out ordinarily Answ. It is true wee see not how an whole Church can bee formally convented accused excommunicated as one or two brethren may bee in respect all are seldome or never deserted of God to fall into an atrocious scandall and wilful obstinacie yet this freeth them not from the Law as suppose in a Congregation of a thousand if five hundreth bee involved in libertinisme are they freed because they are a multitude from Christs Law or from some positive punishment by analogie answering to excommunication 2. The Eldership of a Congregation being three onely doth not seldome scandalously offend and are they under no power under heaven The people may withdraw from them saith the Synod of New England what then so may I withdraw
from any who walketh inordinately 2. Thes. 3. 14. 15. 3 It is not well said that Christ giveth no Lawes for sinnes that seldome fall out What say you of Anathema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. to bee used against an Apostate from the faith and against such as fall into the sinne against the holy Ghost I thinke visible professors capable both of the ânne and the censure yet I thinke it falleth seldome out it fell seldome but that an Apostle was to bee rebuked haâ Paul then no law to rebuke Peter Gal. 2. Object 2. A Synod or presbytery may prânounce the dââdfull sentence of non-communion against persons and Churches ãâ¦ã Answ. But I aske where is the power and institution from Christ that one private man as hee may counsell his brother so hee may by our brethrens grounds pronounce this sentence Object 3. One private man may not doe it to a whole Church ââ a classicall Presbytery and a Synod hath more authoritie over him then hee hath over them Answ. One private man may rebuke another yea bee may plead with his mother the whole Church that hee liveth in for her whoredomes Hos. 2. 2. But if hee justly plead and his mother will not heare may hee not separate Our brethren of New England I thinke shall bee his warrant to separate for their sixth Synodicall proposition saith the fraternitie and people are to separate from the Eldership after they refuse wholesome counsell Now what Scripture warranteth twenty to withdraw and separate shall also warrant ten and five and one for no reason that if twentie bee carelesse of their salvation in the dutie of separation and shall not separate that one man shall not separate because a multitude doth evill I am not to doe evill with them Object 4. But a Synod or a classicall presbytery hath more ãâã and authoritie then one private man or one single Congregation 1. Because they are a company of Elders to whom as to the Priests of the Lord whose lips should preserve knowledge the ââyes of knowledge and consequently a power and Synodicall authoritie is given though they have no power of jurisdiction 2. Because as a private mans power is inferiour to a Pastors so is the power of classicall and Synodioall meeting of Elders above a man or a single congregation and a Synod in dogmaticall power ariseth so higher then these ââ divine institution doth fall upon it Answ. The power of order and the key of knowledge doth elevate a Pastor whose lippes doth preserve knowledge above a private Christian yea as I conceive above a multitude of beleevers but I would know if a Synods dogmaticall power bee above the power of single congregations I thinke it is not by our brethrens âenents for they say expresly that every particular ãâ¦ã jus to decide dogmaticall points and this âight the Church of Antioch had Act. 15. and laboured to end that ãâ¦ã in her selfe which sheweth that they had right and â we but they had not habilitie and therefore in that case they ãâ¦ã light and advise from other Churches and they say The câniociation of Churches into classes and Synods wee ãâã to bee lawfull and in some cases necessary as namely in things ãâ¦ã not peculiar to one Church but common to all And likewise when a Church is not able to end any matter that concernes onely themselves theâ they are to seek advise counsell from neighbour Churches hence the power of Synods is only by way of counsel and advise a Pastors advise is but an advise he giveth not his advise virtute ãâã as he is a Pastor for then his advise should bee pastorall and authââitative and proceeding from the power of order though not from the power of jurisdiction hee onely giveth his advise as a gifted and inlightned man and so to my poore knowledge two hundreth five hundreth holy and learned Pastors determining in a Synod any dogmaticall point they sit all there not as in a court not as Pastors for then their Decrees should have pastorall authoritie and some power formally ministeriall to determine yea and to sway in a ministeriall way by power of the keyes of knowledge all the inferiour Churches whom the decree concerneth even as the Eldership of Pergâmus which to our brethren is a congregationall Church doth decree by the dogmaticall power of the keyes of knowledge that the doctrine of Balaam is a false doctrine therefore they sit there as gifted Christians and so have no Church-power more then a private brother or sister of the Congregation hath toward or over another for though a multitude of counselling and advising friends be safer and more effectuall to give light then a counselling friend yet are they but a multitude of counselling friends and the result of all counselling and advising men doth never rise higher then a counsell and advise and can never amount to the nature of a command as twenty schâââ-fellowes suppose as âudent and wise as the twentie masters of an Universitie if these twentie schoole-fellowes give their advise and counsell ãâã a weightie businesse that concerneth the practise and obedience of all the students the result of their counsell and advise can never bee more then an advise and cannot amount to the same determination of the twentie masters of the Universitie the result of whose determination is a soveraigne commandement and an authoritative and judiciall decree and statute to all the whole Universitie 2. Whereas these Godly brethren say the power of Synods in things which belong to particular Churches is but a counsell and advise they should have told their mind whether or no the Synod hath more then advise and counsell in things that are not peculiar to one Church but common to all the Churches in that bounds for it would seeme that a Synod is a colledge of commanders in dogmaticall points that doe equally concerne all Churches this should have beenespoken to though in those things which are peculiar to each particular Church they bee but a colledge of friendly advisers and counsellers 2. If a Synod bee but a societie of counsellers they have no more any authoritative power to pronounce the sentence of non-communion against any single Congregation or private man then a private man or a single Congregation hath authoritative power to pronounce that sentence against them but 3. You make the Synodicall power so above the power of private Christians in counselling as that this Synodicall power is of divine institution as you say but let me aske what to doe to counsell and advise onely then that power of counselling in Abigail to David in one brother or sister to another brother and sister is of divine institution warranted by the Law of nature Levit. 19. 18. by the Law of charitie by the communion of Saints Col. 3. 15. 1 Thes. 5. 14. Heb. 3. 13. Heb. 10. 24. Mal. 3. 16. Zach. 8. 21 22 23. for there is a divine institution for one brother to counsell
colledge of Apostles and Elders conveened and yet materially it is the same prohibition Object 4. The Acts of this Synod are finaliter acts of government because they are rules conducing for the governing of the Church but formaliter they are acts of dogmaticall power and not formally acts of jurisdiction for there is no rebuking of subverters of soules inordine to excommunication no penall power is exercised here sub poona under the paine of excommunication and therefore there an here no formall acts of government Answ. 1. The acts of Church-government finaliter that is government because to prescribe rules and directive Lawes for they are not properly Lawes which the Church prescribeth Christ is the onely Law-giver are formall acts of governing and one power doth not make Lawes for governing the Church and another power different in nature punish the contraveners And what power disposeth and ordereth the meanes doe also dispose and order the end Canons of the Church tending to the edification of the Church are meanes tending to the government of the Church and I appeale to the judgement of our reverend brethren if wee suppose that one single Congregation should doe all that this Synod doth if they would not call it a formall governing of that particular Congregation for example in the Church of Pergamus one ariseth and teacheth the doctrine of the Nicolaitans suppose that fornication is indifferent is the eating of blood and is no sinne the Angels of the Church of Pergamus preach against this doctrine in private they deale by force of arguments from Scripture that it is a wicked doctrine and destructive to holinesse as Paul and Barnab as disputeth Act. 15. 1. 2. with the obtruders of a necessitie of Circumcision yet they prevaile not now suppose this independent Church following the Apostle Pauls way thinke good to convene a Synod or a parishionall assembly to determine Synodically that this is a wicked doctrine and shall in their decree call the holders of this doctrine subverters of soules and forbid fornication in their Synod now supposing Pergamus to be a single Church in a remote Iland consociated with no neighbouring Churches who could in reason deny that this Synodicall power so inacting were a power formally governing the Church of Pergamus it is true some of our brethren say that it is even to us a received tenent that the power that disposeth of the meanes of governing doth not for that governe in respect that we teach that the classicall presbytery doth decree and in act and the Congregation doth execute these Decreed but I pray you doth this prove that the power ordering the meanes of governing is no formall act of governing yea the contrary is true because the Congregation executing the acts of the classicall presbytery as subordinat in that act to the classicall presbytery by their authority therfore while they give out these acts or Canons doe formally governe that Congregation executing their acts in this particular Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson against Mr. Herle c. 1. p. 9. teach that there is a power of clearing truth dogmatically and that ãâã â ãâã ultimately where the controversie is ended but they will have this ultimate power not in a Synod onely but also in a Congregation But 1. they seeme to make this dogmaticall power a Church-power and the exercise thereof formally an act of Church-government and so it must bee Church-power and Church-government in the Synod as well as in the Congregation 2. The last period and conclusion of the controversie cannot bee both in the Congregation de jure by right onely and in the Synod by right onely for two last powers cannot bee properly in two subordinate judicatures for if Antioch appeale to a Synod as they doc Act. 15. 2. then Antioch is not the sole last and ultimate and finall judge and 3. If the controversie concerne many Churches as this doth Act. 15. 2. 23. 24. I see not how a Congregation except they transgresse their line can finally determine it And here while as our brethren doe all edge that a Synod hath a power to decree and make lawes but hath no power at all to execute these Lawes or to punish the contraveners but power of punishing is all in the single Congregation â They tie all governing power to a punishing power as if there were no other wayes to governe but upon supposall of scandalls whereas all Scripture and polliticians make a power of giving Lawes formally a governing power 2. When one societie and Synod maketh the Lawes and another must execute them and punish the contraveners the single Congregation that punisheth is more subjected by a truely prelaticall bondage then if the Law-makers had onely the power of punishing the contraveners at they onely have the power of making the Lawes I take not here Lawes for Lawes properly so called but for ministeriall directories having ecclesiasticall authoritie and here in effect our brethren lay truely a prelaticall bondage on the Churches of Christ for they teach that a Synod may make a Law by a pastorall power and that this Synod is an ordinance of Christ by Act. 15. and that as Prelates did they send those Synodicâll decrees to bee obeyed and put in execution by the Churches and ordaine the contraveners to bee punished by the Churches and here is a power above a power and mandates for government sent by the Synod to the Churches to bee obeyed and a Synod governing by Churches this they call prelaticall in us But 3. there is no penall power here say they and nothing decerved to bee obeyed sub paena under the paine of excommunication therefore no power of jurisdiction But this consequence is justly denyed for no politician no reason in the world can say that all power of jurisdiction is included in the power of excommunication What hath the Church a Church-power to threaten and no Church-power to pardon the penltent I think if the Church as the Church Matth. 18. receive a power from Christ to bind in heaven and earth doth not Christ in that same patent give to her also a power to loose in earth and heaven and when hee saith if bee refuse to beare the Church let him be to thee â aubeâhen and publican doth hee not give to the Church a power to command if hee command to heare and obey the Church hee must give a power of jurisdiction to the Church to command and a power to command not penall onely but promissorie also to loose and absolve upon condition of prosessed repentance Now suppose the Church make a Law that theresurrection of the dead is a truth of God to bee beleeved and professed upon occasion that in the Congregation Hymeneus Alexander den yeth that Article in that very Commandement doctrinall the Church doth governe the whole Congregation and exerciseth a power of formall governing though in their act they say nothing of the censure of excommunication to those who shall deny that Article
of the resurrection for I hope a simple sanction maketh a Law though no penaltie bee expressed in it and though there had beene in the Decree Act 15. 28. an expresse punishment this should to our brethren prove no power of jurisdiction exercised by many for this which is said Gal. 1. 8. Though wee or an Angel from heaven preach unto you another Gospel then that which wee have preached let him bee accursed and that 1 Cor. 9. 16. Woe unto mee if I preach not the Gospel and many other threatnings in Scripture though a punishment bee annexed expressely cease not to bee meerely doctrinall and are not threatnings importing formally any power of Church-jurisdiction and therefore though mention should have beene made of a censure if there bee not here a Synod 2. Having power and authoritie from Christ. 3. Commanding by the holy Ghost as these indeed are all here the name of censure should prove no power of jurisdiction Object 5. The laying on of the yoake spoken of v. 28. is a meerâ doctrinall yoake and it importeth no more a poner of jurisdiction then we can conclude that the obtruders of circumcision bad a power of jurisdiction because they are said to lay on a yoake also and to tempt God in so doing vers 10. Answ. I retort this reason for we can then no more conclude that the Apostles by an Apostolick authoritie layd on this yoake then wee can conclude that the obtruders of circumcision did lay on this yoake because they are said to lay on a yoake and to tempt God v. 10. It is a most unequall reasoning to argue against a iust Synodicall power from a sinfull and unjust power for these obtruders of circumcision had no lawfull power at all to lay a yoake on the Disciples but sinned and tempted God in laying on that yoake but it is not denyed by our brethren but the Apostles and Elders had a lawfull power to lay on a yoake in this Synod onely it is controverted whether it bee a meere dogmaticall or doctrinall power or if it bee a power of jurisdiction nay the obtruders of circumcision by neither of these two powers layd on a yoake upon the Dsciples Object 6. These decrees which did no other wayes bind the Church of Jerusalem then they did bind all the Churches of the world cannot bee decrees of power of jurisdiction over the Church of Jerusalem and over the Church of Antioch But these decrees did no otherwise bind the Church of Jerusalem then they did bind all the Churches of the world for the decrees of Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem Act. 6. 4 5. were sent to all the Churches of the world to bee observed and seeing they could not as Synodicall Canons obliege all the Churches of the world by an ecclesiasticall tie because all the Churches of the world sent not Commissioners and all the Churches of the world couldnot be represented in this Synod but onely the Churches of Jerusalem and Antioch yea wee see not that this Synod is any more then the Church of Antioch seeking counsell from the sister Church at Jerusalem as one Church may advise another Church that is weaker in knowledge in a matter of such difficultie because the Apostles were at Ierusalem and that ãâã 1. The whole Canons are ascribed to the Church of Jerusalem onely to the Apostles Elders and the whole Church Act. 15. 22. and Act. 15. 22. and Act. 16. 4 5. and Act. 21. 25. the Elders of Jerusalem take this act or canon to themselves 2. It cannot be proven that the Churches of Syria and Cilicia had any commissioners heââ farre lesse had all the Churches of the Gentiles who yet are commanded to keepe those decrees by commissioners there C. 15. 19. Act. 21. 25. Act. 16. 4 5. 3. It cannot bee proven that Antioch sent Elders to this meeting but onely Commissioners Act. 15. 2. Answ. This answer is much contradicent to what our brethren other waies hold for if it be a patterne of a sister Church giving advise and counsell to another this is imitable to the worlds end and if the Canon come from the Apostles as Apostles it is not imitable 2. That one sister Church can lay burdens on another and give out ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã decrees to bee kept is unwarrantable now ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as they are called by all that understandeth Greeke are not friendly advises of brethren the Seventie Interpreters use the word Daniel 6. 26. to expresse a Law made by Darius Luke useth the word c. 2. 1. saith a decree ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã came from Augustus Caesar to taxe all the World 2. It is a graver businesse then we can thinke of to beleeve that these who onely give advise and counsell and must conveene in a Synod as Apostles and Elders doe here v. 23. 2 that they can say as it is v. 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us to lay no other burden on you then tââse necessary things for a counsell or advise can never amount to the burden imposed by the holy Ghost speaking in a Synod 2. It is denied that this decree oblieged the Church of Jerusalem no other way then it oblieged all the Churches of all the world for here bee three sorts of Churches and three sorts of Churches are under a tie by this Synod first Jerusalem secondly Antioch Syria and Cilicia thirdly universally all the Churches of the Gentiles The Church of Jerusalem have formall commissioners here under an ecclesiasticall tie as concerning the faith of the things contained in the decree that it is lawfull for the Gentiles to abstaine from things offered to idolls from things strangled and from blood and they were simply under a tie both of the seventh Commandement and by the fifth Commandement to abstaine from fornication because the Synod had forbidden it 2. They were under a tie by due proportion not to keepe the Law of Moses and not to bee circumcised by any necessitie of a Divine Law but onely by permission to use these ceremonies for feare of scandall 3. They are tied by proportion also to give no offence in things indifferent 4. Not to reject the Gentiles whom the Lord had called to his heavenly kingdome as well as the Jewes 2. These Churches of the Gentiles who never heard of the Synod and so were not oblieged to bee there in their Commissioners or not tied at all by this Decree by vertue of any ecclesiasticall tie but are onely tied by the Law of Nature not to abuse their libertie in the use of things in their owne nature indifferent and so this is false that the Church of Jerusalem was tied no other way by these acts then all Churches of the world for some of the Churches of the world were not tied at all by any ecclesiasticall bond but onely for the necessitie of the Law of Nature 3. Jerusalem Antioch Syria and Cilicia were tied by an ecclesiasticall tie because Jerusalem
nor being a witnesse of the life death and resurrection of Christ then the authoritie of James and Peter who werâ eye-witnesses of Christs life doctrine and sufferings and saw him visibly ascend to heaven and the believers doubted if hee was an Apostle and the Synod was convened to have theresolution of the Apostles and so it was meerely Apostolicall Ans. Though I grant there beesome truth in this that Pauls Apostolick calling was now more question ãâã then the rest of the Apostles and I easily yeeld that these who disputed with him could not rest upon his authority yet I deny that hence wee can inferre no Synod for if the Apostles had convened in Synod to satisfie those who doubted of Pauls authoritie as an Apostle then they would have reterred the matter to James and Peter who to these beleevers were undoubtedly the Apostles of the Lord but if the Apostles had had no intent but to end the controversie in a mere Apostolick way and not intended a Synodicall and an âclesiasticall and perpetuall remedy in such cases of controversies in particular Churches I shall not beleeve that the Apostles when they were to determine by a superior an Apostolick and infallible light they would have joyned with them the Elders as Act. 15. 16. to consider of the question and that the Church of Auâioch doubting if Paul was an Apostle would have decreed to seeke a resolution from Elders and that in an Apostolick way for they sent to the Elders at Jerusalem for a resolution as well as to the Apostles Act. 15. 2. and judge yee if the Apostles being to determine infallibly as Apostles would joyne the falliblo and inferiour light of Elders v. 6. and Brethren v. 22. if tlloy had not had a mind to determine the question in a Synodicall way Object 9. But it is not cleare that in this act they either censure persons or doe any thing in order to Church-censure but onely exercise a naked doctrinall power Answ. A doctrinall power was in a higher measure in the Apostles then in all the Elders of the world who were all but fallible men and James and Peter to these beleevers who moved the question were undenyably Apostles and what doctrinall power could they seeke in the Elders to whose determination by intention both of Antioch ch 15. 2. and by the Apostles intention v. 6. the question is referred as well as to the Apostles if the matter was not to bee ended by a formall Synod 2. Nor can they deny a power of jurisdiction though there were no persons rebuked and censured in this Synod for the object of a juridicall power is not onely persons but things of order decencie circumstances questions of doctrine as is cleare Reâel 1. 14. 15. officers to be ordained Act. 6. 3 4 5 6. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2 3. 3. Our brethren cannot deny but the sentence of non-Communion is a censure and a great one yea and of kindred and blood most neare to excommunication and that if any Churches should have refââsed those Canons by this Canon the Churches might have pronounced the sentence of non-communion against them and to pronounce this sentence is an act of government as properly so called as to pronounce the sentence of excommunication for it is the formall halfe of the sentence of excommunication Object 10. It seemeth that Apostles here determine as Apostles for they condenme the obtruders of circumcision because they taught these things without any Apostolick Commandement v. 24. They teach that you must bee circumcised and keepe the Law to whom wee the Apostles gave no such commandement Answ. This is no more a good argument to prove that the obtruders of circumcision did teach false doctrine and were not condemned by the Apostles and Elders Synodically then if one should say this is not a Synodicall decree of the Church because it is proven and made good by the Word of God for Synodicall decrees exclude not Gods word though they bee not formally Scripture for in some part of the Epistle the Apostles may well speak of themselves as distinguished from Elders and as Apostles and yet the assembly is an ordinary Synod and not an Apostolick meeting for if wee should argue thus the whole Church men and women v. 22. sent messengers to Antioch as the Church and not as Apostles our brethren would thinke it a weake consequence to inferre Ergo this was nothing but a Congregational not an Apostolical meeting Yet our brethren contend that the whole Church and single Congregation of Ierusalem did concurre in this meeting as consenters and having power also though not of jurisdiction but I wonder why our brethren should so contend that there was no power of censuring put forth in this Assembly seeing one of their speciall answers whereby they would prove that this it not a patterne of an ordinary Synod and such a Synod as wee contend for having power of jurisdiction is that this was an ordinary meeting of the Elders and Church of Ierusalem giving counsell and advise with the Apostles to the Church of Antioch but I am sure the businesse of not scandalizing did as much concerne the Church of Ierusalem and therefore in the Synod they ought to put forth power of jurisdiction if any of their members hearing that the Apostles contended that the ceremoniall Law did not lay a tie on the conscience of either Jew or Gentile in foro dei before Gods court as the places cited by Iames prove v. 15 16 17. Peter saith expresly that God now putteth no difference betwixt Iewes and Gentiles v. 9. but ãâã are saved through the grace of our Lord Iesus v. 11. should ab âaine from blood to the offence of the weaker should not this Congregation all Church condemne such in ordine ad censuram in order to excommunication yea the Eldership and Congregation of Jerusalem here convened as our brethren say should have failed in this first Synod and also the Apostles with them if they neglected to exercise juridicall power over their owne Congregation in the case of scandall and a scandall as possible to them to fall in as the Gentiles and therefore either this assembly consisting of Apostles and of the particular Church of Ierusalem erred which wee cannot say or then they did exercise power in order to excommunication towards their owne Church and so there is some juridicall power put forth in this meeting Object 11. Though the Apostles in this Synod proceed by way of disputing and borrow light one from another it followeth not thââ they goe not on here as Apostles yea though Peter and Paul dâe not say all the truth nor fall upon that which is the conclusion of the Assembly as I ames doth it doth not hinder but they are led in all these Synodicull debaâeâ by the infallible and Apostolick spirit because some things are revealed to one Evangelist and to one Prophet which is not revealed to another Iohn the
they are registred in the bookes of Old Testament bee formally Scripture yet as cited by the Apostles they dâe not become Scripture except these saying bee cited tali modo that is by the influence of the immediatly inspiring holy Ghost which influence onely maketh formally any saying to bee Scripture Object 12. If the Apostles did not in a Synod with the Elders dispute and voyce as Apostles it should follow that as Apostles they did plant Churches but after the Churches were planted they ceased to bee Apostles and did all as ordinary Elders which is most incongrâoâs for then should they descend from an infallible to a fallible spirit Answ. The Apostles did onely use their Apostolick power when there was need of it as God worketh not miracles but in some necessitating exigence of second causes and what they could doe by an ordinary power when the Churches were once constituted they did not attempt to doe by their Apostolick power and though their Apostolick power was in them as a habit yet the exercise thereof was rather under the dominion of an extraordinary and immediate rapt and influence of God then under the mastery of their owne free-will I would aske why the Church of Antioch no doubt most lawfully Act. 15. 2. did send to seeke resolution at the fallible spirit of Elders and also as our brethren teach at the infallible spirit of the Apostles and why did they not from their infallible and Apostolick spirit seeke out and choose seven men to bee Deacons but remitted to the fallible spirit of the multitude who are not infallible or Apostolick in their choise both the nomination and election of these seven men but the Apostles did much honour the Churches of Christ in cooperating with them and in doing most things with their consent that by example they might interdict dominion and assert a ministeriall power and make Christ most Monarch-like in the government of his spirituall Kingdome nor did they put off or interdict themselves nor forfeit their Apostolick power after Churches were constituted but used their Apostolick power at the Commandement of that great King exalted Jesus Christ whose Catholick Ambassadours they were as God immediatly moved them Object 13. Paul exercised the power of the Keyes of knowledge upon Barbarians and might have preached to Indians and did presâh to the scefling Athenians Ergo hee might exercise power of jurisdiction over them and judge those who are without it is no consequence and against the word of God 1 Cor. 5. 12. Yea Paul by this power dogmaticall rebuked the Athenians Act. 17. 22. I perceive that in all things yee are too superstitious yet Paul had no power to excommunicate the Athenians Mr. Mather Answ. I deny not but there is great odds betwixt a concionall rebukinâ by way of preaching which may bee and is alwayes performed by one and a juridicall rebuking by a power juridicall of the Keyes which is performed onely by a Church-sâciâtie now it cannot bee denyed but the rebuking of men because they subverted soules v. 24. is not a meere concionall rebuking which may bee performed by one 1. it is a rebuking v. 24. 2 it is a rebuking performed by many by a whole Synod v. 6. v. 22. 3 It is performed by a politicall societie and body having a dogmaticall power to judge and determine in a doctâinall way as our brethren say and consequently as wee say having a juridicall power v. 25. It seemed good unto us being assembled with one accord to send chosen men unto you c. which is undenyably a politicall body an assembled company as v. 6. met about a question which concerneth the Churches of Christ as is cleare v. 2. v. 6. v. 23. c. 16. 4 5. c. 21. 25. compared with v. 22. hence a businesse of doctrine which troubleth the Churches of Antioch c 15. 2. and of Jerusalem v. 5 6 7 8. and Syria and Cilicia v. 23 24. must bee a Church-businesse in respect of the subject 2. The question is a Church-question in the matter of practise it conoârneth the consciences of the Churches in the point of taking and giving offence in a Church-societie as this doth v. 19. That yee trouble not them which amongst the Gentiles are turned unto God and v. 28 29. compared with 1 Cor. 10. 24 25 26 27 c. Rom. 14. 14 15. this was a Church-âcandall or publick offence as touching the matter materia quânt 2 The forme and manner of deciding the controversie was a publick Church-way by the Word of God Act. 15. so ãâã proveth v. 7 8. 9. and James v. 15 16 c. maketh good 4 The efficient causes and agents in the question are 1. Church ãâã v. 6. Apostles and Elders 2. Church-officers conveened Church-wayes in a Church-body or societie v. 6. c. 15. and The Apostles and Elders came together in a Synod ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a word which cur brethren acknowledgeth doth 1 Cor. 5. 4. note a formall Church-assembly to consider of this matter and â 25. It seemed good to us being assembled with one accord ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and the very word Church is not wanting though with reverence of others it seemeth not to bee the multitude seeing the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã beeing so generall must have its signification from the action and end for which the meeting is intended as before I said as is cleare v. 22. It pleased the Apostles Elders and whole Church 5. The action they performe when they are met in a politicall body is to decide a Church-controversie that troubled many Churches Act. 15. 2. v. 23 24. 6 The end is the peace and edifying of the Churches as that the Churches of the Gentiles bee not troubled with needlesse ceremonies as James saith v. 19. and the good of the Churches v. 29. from which if you keepe your selves yee shall doe well c. 16. 4. And âs they went through the cities they delivered them the Decrees to ãâã v. 5. so were the Churches established in the faith Consider ãâã is the happy end and fruit of this Synod The establishâââ of the Churches Therefore have our brethren without reason I speake with reverence of their learning and godlinese denied the word Church to bee given to a Synod or a meeting of Elders which to mee is cleare Act. 15. v. 6. The ãâã sending is the Eldership of Antioch the Church receiâââ v. 4. is the Eldership at Jerusalem and cannot conveniently bee exponed of the whole and numerous thousands that ââeâed at Jerusalem the rebuking cannot then bee meerely ââââinall by the power of the keyes of knowledge which is exercised by one nor are the Apostles and Elders here considered as meerely Preachers and Teachers in the Act of teacher for why then should they not bee formally a Church and a Church-assembly as our Brethren say if they bee an assembly meeting for preaching the Word for the exercise of the keyes of Knowledge in the hearing of a multitnde
is essentially an act of preaching the Word Object 14. This Synod declares only in a doctrinall way what is necessary what is scandalous the same way that Paul doth Rom. 14. 14 15. i Cor. 8. 1 Cor. 10. Answ. This Synod and Paul declare one and the same thing Ergo with one and the same authoritie it followeth not Paul writeth 1 Cor. 5. that the incestuous man should bee excommunicated and this hee wrote as canonicall Scripture by the immediat inspiration of the holy Spirit if then the Church of Corinth should have excommunicated him shall it follow that they gave out the sentence of excomunication by the immediate inspiration of the holy Spirit I thinke not their Churches sentence had been given out by a meere ecclesiasticall authoritie according to the wch Churches of Christ to the worlds end doth excommunicate following the Church of Corinth as a patterne Obj. 15. Though these obtruders of ceremonies did pervent soâks v. 24. yet the Synod doth not summond them before them nor excommuncite them but remit them to the particular Churches to whom it properly belonged to censure and not to any Synod or superiour Judicature Answ. There was no need to summon them for these subverters of soules were personally present at the Synod and rebuked in the face of the Synod as perverters of soules v. 24. for if they were not present 1. to whom doth Peter speake v. 10. Now therefore why tempt yee God to put a yoake on the necke of the disciples c. the Apostles and Elders did not impose the yoake of Moses Law upon the beleeving disciples nor any other save onely the obtruders of circumcision 2. Who were they in the Synod who made much disputing v. 7. note the Apostles not any save these obtruders Ergo they were personally present at the Synod nor needed they to excommunicate them for I judge that they acquiesced to the determination of James which was the sentence of the Synod and the great dispute spoken of v. 7. ceased v. 13. and the conclusion is agreed upon 22. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã then it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and whole Church and there was reason why these obtruders should acquiesce so that there was no need of further censure for there was satisfactiou in part given to both siddes The question was whether or no are beleevers now to keepe the Law and the ceremonies of Moses his Law It was answered by the Synod by a distinction which favoured in part both sides 1. There is no necessitie that the beleeving Gentiles who are saved by grace as well as the Jewes bee troubled to keepe all the ceremonies and this satisfied the Apostles who taught that the Gentiles were now made one people with the Jewes and both are freed in conscience from Moses his yoake the other part of the distinction it was this yet there bee some ceremoniall commandements as not to eate things offered to Idols blood and things strangled for fornication is of another nature and abstinence therefrom is of perpetuall necessitie 1 Cor. 6. 13 14 15 16. 1 Thess. 4. 3. Col. 3. 5. these must bee avoided for scandals sake by all the Jewes but especially by the Gentiles lest the weake Jewes who take these to be divine commandements yet in force take offence and this was satisfactorie to the obtruders and wee heare no more of their disputing and there is an end of the controversie by the blessed labours of a lawfull Synod 3. I could easily yeeld that there is no necessitie of the elicit acts of many parts of government such as excommunication ordination admitting of heathens professing the faith to Church-membership in Synods provinciall nationall or oecumenicall but that Synods in the case of neglect of presbyteriall-Churches command these particular Churches whom it concerneth to doe their dutie and in this sense the Synod Act. 15. is to remit the censure of excommunication to the presbytery of Antioch and Jerusalem in the case of the obstinacie of these obtruders of circumcision but so some power of government is due to the Synod as prescribing of Lawes and Canons for presbyteries and Congregations Object 16. Therefore was the Synagogue of the Jewes no compleat Church because all the ordinances of God cannot bee performed in the Synagogue and therefore were the Jewes commanded onely at Jerus salem and in no other place to keepe the passeover and to offer offerings and sacrifices which were òrdinary worship Deut. 12. but there is not any worship or sacred ordinance saith that worthy Divine Dr. Ames of preaching praying Sacraments c. prescribed which is not to bee observed in every Congregation of the New Testament Nor is there any ordinary minister appointed who is not given to some one Assembly of this kind So also Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson teachers in New England Others say because there was a representative worship of sacrificing of all the 12. Tribes at Jerusalem therefore all the Synagogues were dependent Churches and Jerusalem was the supreme and bighest Church but there is no representative worship in the New Testament and therefore no need of Synods as higher Churches Answ. Surely the aforesaid reverend Brethren of New England have these words But it seemeth to us that the power of a Synod is not proporly a power and exercise of government and jurisdiction but a power of doctrine and so a Synod is rather a âaching then a governing Church from which I inferre 1. That out Brethren cannot deny a power of governing to a Synod but it is not so proper governing as excommunication and ordination performed in their Congregations but say I it is more properly governing as to make Lawes and rules of governing is a more noble eminent and higher act of governing as is evident in the King and his Parliament then the execution of these Lawes and rules 2. Our brethren incline to make a Synod a teaching Church but I inferre that Synodicall teaching by giving out decrees tying many Churches as our Brethren of New England and the forenamed authors teach is an ordinance of Christ that can bee performed in no single Congregation on earth for a doctrinall Canon of one Congregation can lay no ecclesiasticall tie upon many Churches Ergo by this reason our Congregations shall bee dependent as were the Jewish Synagogues 3. With favour of these learned men it is a begging of the question to make Jerusalem the supreme Church and the Synagogues dependent Churches because it was lawfull onely at Jerusalem to sacrifice for I hold that Jerusalem was a dependent Church no lesse then the smallest Synagogue in all the tribes for in a Catholick meeting of all Judah for renewing a Covenant with God Ierusalem was but a sister Church with all of Iudah Benjamin Ephraim Manasseh who 2 Chron. 15. 9. 10. 11 12. made up one great Church which did sweare that Covenant Ordinances doe not formally make Churches visible nor divers ordinances divers
nor natures light doth warrant us to unjust appeales or to any thing against equitie and reason but that supremacy of power should bee in a Congregation without any power of appealing I thinke our brethren cannot teach for when the Church of Antioch cannot judge a matter concerning the necessitie of keeping Moses his Law or any difficill dogmaticall point they by natures direction Act. 15. 2. decree to send Pau ' Barnabas and others to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders as to a higher judicature that their truth may bee determined and this they did without any positive law that wee can imagine for Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson as also the Author of the Church government of New England teach that the Church of Antioch had jus power to judge and determine the controversie but because of the difficultie had not light âo judge thereof Ergo they must acknowledge appeales by natures light warrantable as well as wee for suppose wee that a Congregation inclineth to this that Arminianisme is the sound doctrine of grace opposite to Stoicisme one man is cited before the Congregation for holding the contrary hee knoweth all the Congregation in those points to be Pelagians would not our brethren say that this man so unjustly accused for holding the truth against the enemies of grace may appeale to a Synod I thinke they must teach this by their grounds though by the way I thinke the brethren erre in this to teach that Antioch had power to determine the controversie Act. 15. in this case 1. when the Churches of Syria and Cilicia to their knowledge were troubled with the like question as v. 24. may cleare 2. when as the partie against the truth was so prevalent within the Church of Antioch Act. 15. 2. as that they opposed the Apostle Pau ' and Barnabas also in this case I doubt much if they had power to determine a question that so much concerned all the Churches for that was proper to a Synod of many Churches 2. When the greatest part of a Church as Antioch is against the truth as is cleare Act. 15. 2. I beleeve in that they lose their jus their right to determine eaâenus in so farre for Christ hath given no ecclesiasticall right and power to determine against the truth but onely for the truth and therefore in this appeales must bee necessary Mr. Mather and Mr. Thomson against Herle c. 2. p. 17. 18. say we do much Judaizein that we multiply appeales upon appeales from the Congregation to a Classe then to a Synod then to a nationall assembly then to an âeckmenick councell and this way while the world indureth causes are never determined and Synods cannot alwayes bee had even as in Jerusalem the supreme judicature was farre remote from all proselytes as from the Eunuch of Aethiopia Act. 8. and from the remotest parts of the holy Land But God hath provided better for us in the New Testament where every Congregation which is at hand may decide the controversie Answ. 1. The speedinesse of ending controversies in a congregation is badly compensed with the suddainnesse and temerity of delivering men to Satan upon the decision of three Elders without so much as asking advise of any classes of Elders and with deciding questions deepe and grave that concerneth many Churches which is a putting a private sickle in a common and publick harvest 2. All appeales without just warrant from Christs will wee condemne as the abuse of appeales to a court which is knowne shall never bee 3. Antiochs appeale to a Synod two hundreth miles distant as our brethren say in so weighty a question was no Judaizing but that which Paul and the Apostles was guiltie of as well as wee 4. Matters concerning many Churches must bee handled by many The Doctrine of the Presbyteriall Churches of Jerusalem Corinth Ephesus Antioch vindicated VVEe are convinced from the numerous multitude of beleevers and the multitude of Pastors at this famous and mother Church of the Christians at Jerusalem to beleeve the frame and mould was presbyteriall and that it cannot bee so much as imagined or dreamed that it was moulded to the patterne of one single Congregation which could all meet ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã into one place The frame of an independent single Congregation is such as no more doe meet ordinarily in one house then may conveniently bee edified in partaking of one Word and one breaking of bread that is one Table at the Supper of the Lord nor can wee imagine that the first mould of a Christian visible Church was so inconvenient as that it crossed edification and conversion which is the formall effect of a Church-meeting Now the multitude was such as could not neither morally nor physically meet in one house For at one Table many thousands and multiplied thousands could not meer and therefore consider their number they were Act. 1. a hundreth and twentie met in one place but I shall not bee of the opinion that this was all seeing 1 Cor. 15. 6. Christ after his resurrection was seene of Cephas then of the twelve after that hee was seene of above five hundreth brethren then in one day at one Sermon about three thousand soules Act. 2. 42. and ch 4. 4. though they were apprehended who preached the Gospell yet many of them which heard the Word beleeved and the number of the men was about five thousand I deny not but worthy Calvin saith id potius de tota ecclesia quam de nova accessione intelligendum this was the whole number including the three thousand that were converted c. 2. but first hee saith Potius hee inclineth rather to this opinion but secondly the Text saith of those which heard the word it would seeme to mee at the second Sermon of Peter and Augustine Chrysostome Bedâ Basilius Oecumenius Hieronym Ireneus make this number divers from the former so doe Cornelius a Lap. Salmeron Stapletonus l Sanctius Lorinus Lyranus Cajetanus but we shall not contend about the matter nor yet whether the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã includeth women which it often doth in the Greek as ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in Demosthenes doth also yet the wisdome of God in the Apostles cannot admit us to imagine that five thousand could ordinarily meet to the Word Sacraments and government in one house and after this many thousands were added to this Church 1. Our brethren say it is one thing to say that they could not meet in one place by reason of extrinsecall impediments of persecution and through want of a capacious and large roome and another thing to say that it was unpossible that they could bee one Congregation and meet in one place for though wee prove they could not meet because of persecution wee doe not prove that they were so numerous that they could not conveniently meet in one place Answ. Though it bee
And this saying pleased the whole multitude and they choosed Steven c. so this multitude did not make one Congregationall Church but it was a company of the multiplied disciples both of Grecians and Hebrews as is clearely related to these spoken of v. 1. c. 6. Now Hebrewes and Grccians were directly one Church having one government and seven Deacons common to both now that could not bee a single independent Congregation as is already proved 4. If the conâtitution of this Church at Jerusalem bee sewish because of some Jewish observations and so no patterne of the frame of ordinary visible Churches Christian I say 1. this is no good argument seeing the Christian visible Church and the Jewish visible Church is of that same frame and constitution having that same faith sâall grant except Papists Socinians and Arminiâns and so that same profession of that same faith 2. If this were a good reason then all the Churches of the Gentiles which are commanded for a time in the case of scandall to observe some Jewish Lawes to abstaine from eating meates offered to Idâls and from blood and from things strangled Act. 15. 29. Act. 16. 4. shall bee also Churches in their constitution Jewish and so no patterne to us and the Church of Rome and of Corinth shall bee Jewish also and no patterne to us because in case of scandall they are to abstaine from meats forbidden in the Law of Moses Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. c. 10. but this our brethren cannot teach 5. Though Apostles did governe all these Congregations yet wee are not to thinkeâ that seeing there were such abundance of gifted men in this Church on which the Spirit according to Joels prophecie was powred in so large a measure that they did not appoint Elders who did personally watch over the converted flock especially seeing Apostles use never this Apostolicall and extraordinary power but in case of necessitie where ordinary helpes are wanting else this answer might clude all reasons drawn from the first moulded Churches which were planted by the Apostles and watered by their helpers But I have heard some say that multitude of Pastors at Jerusalem doth not prove that the Apostles were idle if they did all attend me Congregation because they had worke enough in the Synagogues ãâã convert the unconverted Jewes all the twelve did not labour in preaching to the one single new converted Congregation Answ. But if you lay downe our brethrens supposition that the Apostles had no publick meetings for the Word and Sacraments of the Christian Church but the Temple and that they ceased not daily in the Temple and from house to house to teach and preach Christ as is said Act. 5. 42. then consider that they preached not daily in the Synagogues but in the Temple and iâ houses and their first conquest of five thousand was above three Congregations beside those who daily came In and cârâainly it the first was but one Congregation yet one of the twelve preached to that Congregation the other eleven bâhoorâd to have a Congregation also 6. Our brethren acknowledge the Church of Jerusalem to be one Church for it is called even before the dispersion one Church in the singular number Act. 2. 47. And the Lord added to the Church daily ãâã as should bee saved Act. 5. 11. Great feare came upon all the Church and Act. 8 1. Aâ that time there was a great persecution ãâã Church 2. They grant before the disportion that it had a government but they deny this government to bee presbyterial thy sây it was Apostolick and extraordinary and that it had not in Eldership nor read wee of any Elders till after the dispersion Act. 8 1. When their number was diminished so as it is cleare they ãâã meet in one Congregation 3. You must prove this government bee one if you prove a Presbyteriall Church at Jerusalem 4. ãâã must prove divers formed and organicall and severall Conââânions at Jerusalem if you prove such presbyteriall Churches as ãâã have in Scotland but I pray you The Apostles you say ãâã the Church of Jerusalem as Apostles and so as extraordinary Elders not as an ordinary Eldership and Presbytery but give mee leave to say this is a meere shift 1. What reason to call the Apostles governing of the Church extraordinary more then their preaching the Word and their administration of the Sacraments is extraordinary and if Word and Sacraments doe prove that this was the first visible Church and a type and patterne to all visible Churches why should its government bee extraordinary 2. Why should the government bee extraordinary because the Apostles did governe it in respect they were extraordinary officers and should not the government bee by the Apostles and exercised by them as a common ordinary presbytery seeing this Church in its goods was governed by seven ordinary and constant Chuâch-officers the seven Deacons Act. 6. and seeing the people did exercise an act of ordination say our brethren but an act of popular election say wee which cannot bee denynyed to bee a politick act of divers Churches Hebrewes and Grecians choosing their owne ordinary officers in relation to which they made one governed Church under one common government which is not congregationall because not of one Congregation but of moe Congregations conveened in their principall members for they could not all meet in one as wee have proved Ergo it must bee presbyteriall And that this government is one to mee is evident because these seven Deacons were officers in ordinary to them all 3. Wee see not how wee need to prove that the severall Congregations were severall formed fixed and organicall bodies 1. Because it shall bee hard to our brethren to prove a Parishionall Church in its locall circuit in the Apostolick Church and when Churches were moulded and framed first in locall circuits of parishes I will not undertake to determine 2. Ten Congregations in a great Citie though not moulded locally and formally in ten little distinct Churches organicall yet if sixteene or twentie Elders in common feede them all with Word Seales and common government they differ not in nature from ten formed and fixed Congregations and the government is as truely Aristocraticall and presbyteriall as if every one of them had their owne fixed Eldership out of these sixteene Elders for fixing of this or this Elder to this or this Congregation is but accidentall to the nature of an organicall Church if ten little Cities have ten magistrates who ruleth them all in common they are ten perfect politicall incorporations and societies no lesse then if to every one of these ten were a fixed magistrate to this or this citie Because the King and State might accuse them all for any misgovernment or act of unjustice done by the whole ten conveened in one judicature to judge themall for what unjustice is done by the major part is to bee imputed to the whole colledge in so farre as the whole colledge hath
to preach and administer the Sacraments 4. The Apostles abode many yeares at Jerusalem after there was an erected Eldership Act. 15. 2. 22. Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 18 19 20. Gal. 1. 18 After three yeares I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter Gal. 2. 1. Then foureture yeeres after I went up againe to Jerusalem c. 9. And when James Cephas and John who seemed to bee pillars perceived the grace that was given unto mee they gave to mee and Barnabas the right hands fellowship 5. Though wee should give and not grant that this dispersion did bring the Church of Jerusalem to so low an ebbe as to make it but one single Congregation yet after the dispersion all the Churches Act. 9. 3. had peace and were edified and multiplyed and so the Church of Jerusalem also was multiplied if all France be multiplied Paris which is a part of France must bee multiplied and if there were many thousands of the Jewes that did beleeve Act. 21. 20. though these many were for a great part come up to the feast at Pentecost as some thinke yet may wee well thinke a huge number of these thousands were of the Church of Jerusalem it is said v. 21. They are informed of thee that thou teachest all the Jewes which are amongst the Gentiles to forsak Moses these belike were the Jewes at Jerusalem who heard that Paul was come to Jerusalem and Act. 12. 24. The Word of God grew and multiplied it is the same phrase that is used Act. 6. v. 7. to expresse the multiplying of the Church by the multiplying of the Word for there is no other multiplication of the Word but in the hearts of numbers who receive the Word in faith Our brethren object 1. Though there bee Elders at Jerusalem Act. 15. 2. v. 4. and Act. 21. 18. yet that doth not prove an Eldership oâ a formall presbytery even a presbytery of a classicall Church doth not prove that these Classicall Elders are Elders of a Classicall Church Answ. Our brethren should give to us the measure which they take to themselves for they prove from that which the Scripture Act. 20. 28. doe name the Elders of the Church of Ephesus that there was an Eldership at Ephesus which governed all the people of Ephesus and from Bishops and Deacons at Philippi Phil. 1. 1. that there was an Eldership in that Church and from the Angel of the Church of Smyrna Pergamus Thyrtira c. that there was a colledge of Elders or a Presbytery in those Churches for if those Churches had elders in them though they were in their meaning Elders of a particular Congregation and so an Eldership and a presbytery they must give us the favour of the like consequence in many of those Churches they had Elders Ergo they had a presbyteriall or classicall Eldership and the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is as seldome in Scripture to our brethren to prove their Congregationall Eldership as it is to us to prove our Presbyteriall or classicall Eldership and in this jam sumns ergo pares and one government and combination voluntary under one Congregationall presbytery shall bee as hardly proven as one government and one voluntary combination of many Congregations and where the multitude is so numerous as that they cannot meet in one it is unpossible to prove that so many thousands did all agree and that according to Christs institution to meet ordinarily in one for doctrine and discipline whereas the meeting in one of so many thousands is most inconvenient 2. An Eldership doth prove there is a relation of those that make up the Eldership to all the Church distributively to which they have the relation of Elders but doth not prove that the Eldership is an Eldership in a Church-relation to any one single person and that that single person hath a reciprocall Church relation to that Eldership so here the classicall Eldership carrieth a relation to a classicall Church and a classicall Church doth retort and reflect a reciprocall relation to the Eldership but it doth not follow that every Congregation of the Classicall Church doth reflect a reciprocall relation of a Church classicall to either the classicall Eldership or to any one Elder of the classicall presbytery 2. They affirme that there was no presbyteriall government exercised by the Apostles in the Church of Jerusalem for they say for the substance of the Act it is true The Apostles did governe as Elders that is their Acts of government were not different from the Acts of government of ordinary Elders but the Apostles did not governe under this formall reduplication as ordinary Elders but as Apostles because as Apostles they were Elders both in the Church of Jerusalem and in all Churches of the world but this proveth not an ordinary Eldership Titus at Crete did but the ordinary Acts of an ordinary Elder at Crete in appointing Elders in every citie yet this proveth not that there is in the successors of Titus an ordinary Episcopall government for because of the extent of the Apostles power to all Churches on earth you may from this prove as well an Episcopall power as a presbyteriall power in an Eldership over many Congregations and before you prove a presbyteriall power you must prove an extent and an ordinary extent of an Eldership over many Congregations which you shall never prove from the extent of the Apostles power which was universall and alike in all Churches I answer if our brethren had formed their arguments in a syllogisme I could more easily have answered but I will doe it for them Those who did rule with an universall extent of power of government in all Churches these did rule as Apostolick rulers and not as ordinary presbyters in the ruling and governing the Church of Jerusalem but the Apostles before the dispersion did rule thus Ergo the Apostles before the dispersion did rule as Apostles not as ordinary presbyters The proposition they make good because if those who rule with an universall extent of power doe it not as Apostles they have then prelates to succeed them as ordinary officers in their extent of power and extent of pastorall care over many Churches But I answer by granting the major and the probation of it in the connex proposition because those who rule with an universall extent of power doe it as Apostles but I deny the assumption that the twelve Apostles did rule the Church of Jerusalem with an universall extent of power over all Churches for it is true the Apostles who did governe the Church of Jerusalem had an universall power over all Churches but that they did rule the Church of Jerusalem as having this universall power and by virtue of this universall and Apostolicall power I utterly deny and I deny it with the reduplication and except our brethren prove that the Apostles did governe the Church of Jerusalem as having this Apostolick power and under this reduplication they doe not prove that they ruled
as Apostles which is the conclusion to bee proven Now that I may give a solid reason of this wee are to consider what Apostles doe as Apostles and what as ordinary Elders as take along this rule with you what Apostles doe as Apostles every one of the Apostles his alone may doe as quod convenit ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã convânit ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã What ever agreeth to an Apostle as ââ Apostle agreeth to all Apostles as because Apostles may worke miracles any one Apostle may worke a miracle so Peter his alone extra collegium when hee is not with the twelve hee may worke a miracle his alone hee may speake with tongues and his alone hee may preach and baptize through all the world and therefore Peter as an Apostle not as an ordinary Elder doth raise the dead speake with tongues preach and baptize in all nations without any calling of the people or without consent of the presbytery but what the Apostles doe as ordinary presbyters and as a classicall Colledge that by cannot doe in that relation but in collegie as the eye doth not see but as fixed in the head so when the Apostles do any thing in collegio not without the suffrages of a colledge that they must doe as ordinary Elders for example Paul if hee delivered Hymeneus and Alexander his alone to Satan 1 Tim. 1. 20. as many thinke hee did then hee did that as an Apostle but suppose hee had beene present at Corinth 1 Cor. 5. to obey his owne Epistle and direction that hee gave to excommunicate the incestuous man hee should with the Eldership of Corinth delivered him to Satan as an Elder not as an Apostle yea in a presbyteriall way Paul could not have delivered him to Sathan without the concurring joynt suffrages of the Eldership of Corinth So because Act. 6. 1. 2. 3. the whole twelve doe call together the multitude the whole twelve doe that as ordinary Elders which I prove for if they had conveened them as Apostles by that transcendent Apostolick power by which they preach and baptize in all the Churches and by which they raise the dead Peter his alone might have conveened them so they ordaine Elders by imposition of hands as an ordinary Eldership now doth all the twelve doe it in a Court whereas if they had put on these seven men to bee Deacons upon the people by vertue of their Apostolick calling they should not have convened the people nor sought the free consent of the people for any one Apostle his alone as Peter might by the transcendent power of an Apostle have ordained those seven men to bee Deacons but then hee should clearely have done it not in an ordinary Church way so now the Apostles must Act. 6. governe as ordinary Elders also what the Apostles do by the interveening help of ordinary perpetually established meanes that they doe not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders as they work not miracles by advise and consent of the multitude because they do it as Apostles but here the twelve do all by the interveening help of the ordinary and perpetually established free voices of the multitude 1. Because the twelve Apostles conveene The Apostles did nothing in vaine and without warrant any one of the twelve might have instituted the office then that all the twelve conveene it must bee to give a pattern of an ordinary Eldership for you never finde all the twelve meet to doe with joynt Forces an Apostolick worke they never met all twelve to pen a portion of Scripture twelve of them nor a colledge of them never met to raise the dead to worke a miracle to speake with tongues because these bee workes above nature and one is no lesse an instrument of omnipotencie to work a miracle then 12. or 20. therefore wee must say that these twelve conveened as ordinary Elders to bee a patterne of a presbytery 2. The complaint is made by the Grecians to the court not to one Apostle for the whole twelve doth râdresse the matter 3. Tht colledge hath a common hand in this government for the poore as their words cleare 2. It is no reason that wee should leave the Word of God and serve Tables 4. They put on the people what is their due to looke out and nominate to them seven men as Apostles they should have chosen the men 5. They doe put off themselves the charge of Deaconrie and the daily care as v. 1. Ergo they were before daily constant Deacons and why not Elders also 6. They will doe nothing with out the free voices of people and give to the people the ordinary election this day and to Christs second comming due to them Ergo the Apostles stoope beneath the spheare of Apostolick power and condescend to popular power and so must here bee as ordinary Elders not as Apostles 7. They doe ordaine seven men to be constant officers 2. From this it is easie to deny that we may as well inferre Prelates to be the lawfull successors of Tâus whose power was universall in every Church of Crete as to inâerre a presbyteriall power because Titus his alone ãâã an ãâã appointed Elders and wee cannot inferre a Monarchiâ in the Church from some extraordinary acts of the the first planters of Churches because wee inferre from the Aristocraticall and ordinary power of the Apostles an Aristocraticall power of presbyteries now in the Church shall wee hence inferre a Monarchie 3. If the Acts of government performed here Act. 6. by the Apostles bee extraordinary and Apostolick they are not imitable by us but all Divines teach that from Act. 6. the ordinary presbytery may according to this very patterne ordaine Deacons and Elders The reverend brethren object The Apostles did ordaine a new office here to wit an office of Deacons as all our Diviââs prove from the place but the Apostles as ordinary Elders in an ordinary Colledge presbyteriall cannot appoint a new Office in the Church for the presbyteries now also by that same presbyteriall power might also appoint a new office in Gods house which is absurd Answ. I grant that the Apostles as Apostles performe some Acts of government in this place and that they appoint a new office of Deacons here but that is neither the question nor against our cause but I desire the opponents to make good that the Apostles did appoint this new office in a Church-way as they ordaine these seven men to the office and that in collegio I aske did the Apostles 1. Crave the concurrence of the conveened multitude and their free voices shall wee appoint this new office men and brethren or shall wee for beare 2. Did they voice the matter in a colledge amongst themselves as they doe Act. 15. and do they say amongst themselves in the presbytery Apostolick have wee warrant from Christ to appoint a new office of Deacons What is your mind Peter what is your sentence James Matthias c now this is to proceed
to Jerusalem by revelation as Paul did Gal. 1. Ergo all their acts that they did there they did them by immediate revelation Answ. The consequence is null Paul went by revelation up to Jerusalem and there Gal. 2. hee rebuked Peter as an Apostle no as a Brother for then Paul should have exercised Apostolick Authority over Peter which is popish Object 3. If the Apostles did act as Presbyters here they did wrong the particular Churches and took their Liberty from them in exercising ordinary Ministeriall acts there which are proper to that Church Answ. It followeth upon the denyed principles of an independent Congregation onely for a Church without Elders hath no Presbyteriall power and therefore such a power can not bee taken from it you cannot take from a Church that which by Law it hath not If the Acts of the government in the Apostles are according to the substance of the Acts all one with the Acts of government in the ordinary presbytery Ergo say I those Acts come not from an Apostolicall and extraordinary power even as the Apostles preaching and baptizing are not different in nature and essence from the Acts of preaching and baptizing in ordinary Pastors though they had power to preach and baptize every where and wee onely where wee have an ordinary calling of the Church and from the Apostles preaching and baptizing every where wee may inferre it is lawfull for the ordinary Elders their successors to preach and baptize in some place why may we not inferre because the Apostles in collegio in one presbytery did ordaine ordinary officers that we have thence a patterne for an ordinary presbytery Object 4. If there were no institution for preaching and baptizing but onely the Apostles naked practise we were not warrantably to preach and baptize from the sole and naked example of the Apostles Answ. Shew us an institution for preaching and baptizing then for that which we alledge is an institution Matth. 28. 19 20. Mark 14. v. 15. to you is a commandement given to the Apostles as Apostles as you said in the 1. objection proponed by you and therefore we have no more warrant to preach and baptize from the Apostles example then we have to work miracles and because by the same reason of yours Christs command to his Apostles to preach before his death Matth. 10. is not ordinary presbyteriall preaching but conjoyned also with the power of casting out devills Matth. 10. 1 2 3. it must also upon the same ground bee a Commandement given to the Apostles not as ordinary Pastors but as Apostles if we compare Matth. 10. 1 2 3. with Mark 16. 15 16 17 18. If you flee to John Baptist his practise of baptisme 1. you are farther off then you were 2. What warrant more that John Baptist his practise should warrant preaching and baptizing if it want an institution then the Apostles preaching and baptizing when it is separated from an institution 2. This argument pincheth you as much as us for a thousand times in your bookes a warrant for our ordinary Elders to preach and baptize is fetched from the sole practise of the Apostles 3. By this the argument for the Christian Salbath from the Apostles observing that day shall also fall 4. This also shall make us loose in fundamentalls of Church government which are grounded upon the Apostles practise 5. The Apostles had no Apostolick and extraordinary ground which moved them to preach and baptize according to the substance of the Acts for they did preach and baptize upon these morall and perpetuall motives and grounds which doe obliege ordinary Elders to preach and baptize even to Christs second comming Ergo their very practise not considered with the institution is our patterne and rule It is as evident that there was a Presbyteriall Church at Ierusalem after the dispersion seeing the dispersion as we have proved did not reârench them to one Congregation because our Brethren doe conclude from a company of Elders of the Church of Ephesus Acts 20. of Ierusalem from the Angell of the Church of pergamus of Thyatira a formall ordinary Presbytery of Ephesus of Ierusalem of Thyatira Let us have the favour of the same argument upon the supposall of many Congregations which the word doth warrant and upon the supposall that it is called one Church alwayes as Acts 2. 47. The Lord added to the Church Acts 5. 11. feare came upon all the Church Acts 8. 1. there arose a great persecution against the Church Acts 12. 1. Herod stretched forth his hand to vex certaine of the Church v. 5. prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God Acts 15. 4. and when they were come to Jerusalem they were received of the Church and of the Apostles and Elders Acts. 21. 15. Paul went up to Jerusalem and v. 18. The day following Paul went in with us into James and all the Elders were present Here be Elders of the Church of Ierusalem and Ierusalem is named one Church frequently and alwayes before and after the dispersion it is called a Church in the singular number not onely in relation to persecuters but also in relation to government and because they were a politicall society to which there were many added Acts 2. 47. and which hath Elders Acts 15. 4. Acts 21. 15. 18. And a Church-union in a constituted body hearing the Word and receiving the Sacraments as this Church did Acts 2. 42. is not a Church but in regard of Church-policy and Church-government They reply That enemies doe persecute the Church Acts 8. 1. Acts 12. 1. Acts 8. 3. Saul made havock of the Church that is of the faithfull of the Church for Saul had no regard in his persecution to a Church in their government or Church combination therefore the enemies are said to persecute the Church materially I answer this objection I tooke off before But 2. Principally the enemies persecuted the Church under the notion of â Society politicall holding forth in a visible Church-profession their faith in Christ and that by hearing receiving the Seales and subjecting themselves in a visible way obvious to the Eye of all to the government of the Christian Church Yea the enemies had no better character to discerne them to be Saints and so worthy of their malice then Church-characters of a Church-profession But 2. Whereas the Holy Ghost giveth the name of one Church to the Church of Ierusalem all constantly speaking of it both as a Church and in relation to persecuters and that every way in that notion as our Brethren say that the Scripture speaketh of their own Corgregationall Church wee have the same reason to call it one Church because of one government for the question is not now if it bee many Congregations but it it bee one Church Object 2. They are called the Elders at Jerusalem not the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem Ergo from this it is not concluded that they were one Church Answ. Acts 16. 4.
Congregation as set over them by the Holy Ghost as they are set over their owne Parish to whom they be onely Pastors having Ministeriall power by a Church Covenant and the peoples Ordination as our Brethren teach 2. Manuser Those over whom saith our Authour we have no power of censure over those we have no power to dispense the communion Now if we should censure any such for drunkennesse or other scandals who are not of our Congregation it should be a non habente potestatem an act done by those who have no power Answ. The major proposition by your owne Doctrine is clearely false for you say your selfe Strangers sojourning with us members of other Churches knowne not to be scandalous are admitted to the Lords Supper yet can you not excommunicate strangers sojourning for a time falling in scandals For First to you they are without how then can you judge them as you say Secondly You have by the holy Ghost no ministeriall power over them as over your owne flocke as you expone Act. 20. 28. Thirdly You looke aside at excommunication for those of other Churches consociated in a classe we doe lawfully excommunicate and censure for excommunication is not a cutting off of a person from one single Parishionall Church onely as you imagine but a cutting off of a person from all the visible Churches consociated first because he is delivered to Satan and his sin is bound in heaven in relation to all the faster Churches and is so to be esteemed and not in reference to the one single Congregation whereof he is a member Secondly all are to be humbled and mourne for his fall and to consent he be cut off and not one single Congregation onely Thirdly all consociated Churches shall be leavened by keeping Church-fellowship with such a lumpe Fourthly all are to repute him as a Heathen and a Publican Fifthly all are to admonish him as a Brother 2 Thessalon 3. 15. Sixthly all are to forgive him and receive him in Church-communion if he shall repent and occasionally to edifie him as a brother The Seales of righteousnesse of faith saith the Author are not seales to the faithfull as such but as they are joyned together and consederate in some visible Church none but in a visible Church may dispense the seales in the Oâd Testament none were partakers either of the Passeover or of Circumcision unlesse they were either Israelites borne or proselytes in the Church of Israel We read not that Job and his friends though righteous through faith were circumcised nor would they have omitted to speake of Circumcision as of a pertinent evidence of the corruption of mans nature of which they speake much the Sacraments saith this same Author are not given to the invisible Church nor to the members thereof as such but to the visible particular Churches of Christ and to the members thereof therefore the seales are not to be givento those who are of no particular visible Church Answ. 1. The Seales of the Covenant are principally given to the invisible Church as the Covenant it selfe in Gods decree of election is especially made with the elect and such as shall never fall away as is cleare Jer. 31. 37. Jer. 32. 40. Esay 54 10. Heb. 8. 9. 10. and the invisible Church as such as a number of beleevers have onely right before God to both Covenant and seales yea and consequently are onely Christs body and Spouse and redeemed Saints and so onely have all the power of the keyes and the ministeriall power of dispensing the Seales and by our brethrens doctrine the visible Church not as visible but as the true body Spouse and Bride of Christ so as the invisible company of the redeemed ones have the Seales and Covenant and so all Ministeriall power of Christ is given unto them 2. It is true the orderly and Ecclesiasticke way of dispensing the Seales is that they bee dispensed onely to the visible Church but this visible Church is not one parish but all professing the faith of Christ though they be not joyned in one visible parish by one Church oath as the Author meaneth for the Saints in Scripture as Cornelius the Eunuch the Jaylor did professe and visibly evidence their faith and so that they were capable of the Seales by desiring to be saved and saying What shall we doe to be saved by trembling at the Word of God by asking the meaning of the Word of God which expressions are in many not in-churched to particular Congregations not did the Apostles aske if they were members of one parish before they baptized them but if they beleeved in Christ. 3. Whether Job his friends Melchisedeck Lot and others the like were circumcised we need not dispute but that they were not circumcised because they were not in a visible Church estate with Abraham is a question and uncertaine and therefore not sure to be a foundation of new opinions in Church Government but though it were granted it followeth not because none were circumeised but Abrahams seed and all and onely Abrahams seed were circumcised therefore none are to be baptized but those who are members of one particular Congregation Alas this is a weakâ consequence rather it followeth all borne of Jewes were circumcised Ergo all borne of Christian parents are to be baptized and we see not but sacrificing was restricted to the visible Church no lesse then Circumcision yet Job sacrificed to God Job 1. and Chap. 42. The Author addeth The difference here is The circumcised in Israel might rightly keepe the Passeover amongst themselves because the whole nation of Israel made but one Church and the officers and ministers of any one Synagogue and the Priests and Levites were ministers in ââmmune of the whole house of Israel in proportion whereunto they that are baptized in any particular Church may in like manner require the Lords Supper if there be no other impediment in regard of their unfitnesse to examine themselves which is a thing requisite to receive the Lords Supper more then was required to receive the Passeover But now because the Churches of the new Testament are of another constitution then the nationall Church of all Israel baptisme in one Church doth not give a man right to the Lords Supper in another unlesse the Officers of the one Church were Officers of all as in Israel they âerâ or unlesse that one Church and the Officers thereof did recommend their right and power to another Answ. 1. It is true in the one Church of Israel there was something typicall that is not in our Churches as one Temple ââe high Priest one place of sacrificing one Priesthood one Aâke c. but this was peculiar to Israel as such a specifice Church and typiâied also the externall visible unitie of the whole visible Church of the new Testament in professing one Lord one Faith one Baptisme one externall communion and government externall de jure but this agreed not to
may receive the Seales in another Congregation if he be recommended by Letters as a sound Professor to that other Congregation I Answer Recommendatory Letters can never give a Church-right to the Church-Priviledges of the Seales of the Covenant they doe but onely notifie manifest and declare the Church-right which the man had before Ergo either he cannot in any sort be capable of the Seales of the Covenant in another Congregation then his owne whereof he is an inchurched Member which destroyeth all communion of sister Churches or if he be capable of the Seales in another Congregation he was capable and hâd a Church-right in himselfe before he received reconimeââaâory Letters yea these whom we recommend by Letters as âit to partake of the Sacraments in another Congregation ââ presuppose they have Church-right to the Seales in another Congregation visible then in their owne whereof they are members except our testimony be false Ergo before our recommendatory Letters the person of approved piety was a member of all the visible Churches about hoc ipso and by that same reason that he is a member of one visible Congregation yea Peter clearely insinuateth that all who have received the Holy Ghost are to be baptized Act. 8. 47. as Philip Act. 8. 37. and That if the Eunuch beleeved be might be baptized So that Faith to speake properly doth give us right to the Seales and to speake accurately a visible profession of faith doth not give a man right to the seales of grace but onely it doth notifie and d clare to the Church that the man hath right to the seales because he beleeveth and that the Church may lawfully give to him the seales and that profession is a condition required in the right receivers of the seales in an Ecclesiasticall way but faith giveth the right to these seales and because the faith of the beleever goeth with the beleever when he goeth to another visible congregation then his owne that faith giveth him right to the seales in all places and in all Congregations for faith giveth right to receive Christ Sacramentally not in one Congregation onely but in all and a visible profession doth as a condition notifie this faith and Church-right in all Congregations Ergo the man hath right in all Congregations as he hath right in a parishionall Church But our Brethren reply Peter might baptize Cornelius though he was no member of a visible Congregation because the Apostles being âfficers in al Churches might dispense the Seales in all Churches but Ministers now are pastors onely of the determinaâe flocke over which the holy Ghost hath set them therefore they have not Citie Seales at their power to dispense to any other then to Citizens Answ. Peter his argument to Baptize is not from a temporall reason that endureth for a while but from a morall argument of perpetuall equitie and necessitie till Christs second comming He that beleeveth and hath received the holy Ghost is to be baptized But many out of Church-state and who are not members of a particular Congregation have received the Holy Ghost and doe beleeve being Christians of approved pietie we are to adde no restrictions or exceptions where God addeth none Non est distinguendum ubi lex non distinguit They that beleeve should receive the seales but not except they be in-Churched and members of a particular Congregation The proposition is Gods Word but the restriction or exception is not Gods Word 2. The Apostles though they were universall Pastors of the world yet teach us by word and practise who are to be admitted to the seales even to the supper those who do try and examine themselves and that to the end of the world 2. Our brethren say It is probable that Cornelius was in Church-state and the Eunuch comming to Jerusalem to worship argueth he was a proselyte and a member of the Jewish Church not yet dissolved Lydia and the jaylor were members of the Church of Philippi which Church communicated with Paul at the beginning of the Gospel Psal. 4. 15. at least it is probable that Lidia was a member of the Church of the Jewes Answ. It is hard to build a new Church government contrary to the doctrine of the reformed Churches upon probabilities 2. If Cornelius Lydia and others were members of the Jewish Church it was not a good consequence by our brethrens doctrine to make them members of a Christian Congregation without in-churching of them by your Church-oath for you make the constitution of the Jewish Church and ours different yea and as you teach all circumcised were members of the Jewish Church and had right to their Passeover but all circumcised are not meet to bee members of a Christian Church for many circumcised were Idolaters murtherers prophane moâkeâs of God Esay 1. 13 14 15 16. Jer. 10. 7 8 9 10 11. Ezek 10. 6. 17. 18 9. And though the Church of Philippi was one of the ãâã Church ãâã communicated with Paul yet was there no Christian Church of Elders and people there when Lydia was converted for Acts 16. 13. in the place where prayer was wont to be made on the Sabbath day none heard Paul preach but some women Ergo there could not be a Christian Church there and it is certaine the jaylor before was a persecutor and no member of a Christian Church They say Abraham and his seede were not circumcised till God called him into Church-Covenant and so into Church-state and there is the same reason and use of baptisme as of circumcision If the argument taken for baptizing of infants be good why may we not inserre a necessitie of Church-membership before baptisme as of Church membership before circumcision So the Apologie saith It cannot be proved that baptisme was imposed upon all beleevers as such no more then it can be proved that circumcision was imposed upon all beleevers as such and Baptisme is no more now necessary to a beleever whose calling or another strong hand of Gods providence will not suffer to live in Church fellowship with Gods people then circumcision was necessary to Melchisedeâk Job or others whom the hand of God detained from Church-fellowship with the posteritie of Abraham yea circumcision and the Passeover seeing they were administrated in private houses might more conveniently be administrated to persons not in Church-state nor Baptisme and the Lords Supper can be administrated so in respect they are seales given to a Church body in an assembly 1 Cor. 10. 17. and 12. 13. Answ. Abraham Sarah and the Soules they had gotten in Charran were in Church-state obeyed God built an Altar Gen. 12. 2 3 4. before the Church Covenant which you speake of Chap. 17. and it is denyed that that supposed oath of the Covenant made them a Church So we see no necessitie of Church-membership to one single Congregation before either circumcision or baptisme for baptisme is a seale of our entry into the visible Church as I shall prove 2.
Rom. 15. 16. 1 Cor. 1. 10. Act. 1. 14. I answer 1. that is because they are in Church-government all one and a conspiracy in error is but seeming unity But 2. I say good men as Paul and Barnabas will differ But 3. what if all be wrong of three parts as 1 Cor. 1. 12. Some said I am of Paul some I am of Apollo some I am of Christ all the three were wrong in that case doth not a Synod by the word of God determine the matter best certainly though Synods may erre yet are they of themselves Christs lawfull way to preserve veritie and charity and unity But our brethren answer us divisions ought not to be and they will not but all agree in the truth if the Church will lay aside corrupt judgement and depend on Christ considering the promises made to the Church Jer. 32. Ephes. 3. 9. Matth. 18 20. Let me answer there is much more charity in this answer then verity 1. They ought not to disassent from truth true but what then the remedy is not given except you returne to a Synod the division Act. 15. ought not to be the house should not be fired true but the question is how shall water be had to quench it for many things are which ought not to be 2. Neither will divisions be that is false 1 Cor. 1. 12. 3. As heresies must be so scandals must be our author saith they will not be they will not be say the brethren if the Church lay aside corrupt judgement and affection and attend upon the rule and depend on Christ. I answer There is but vanity and no solidity I crave pardon in this answer it is the vaine answer of Arminius in the case of the Saints perseverance The regenerate say they cannot fall away if they be not inlaking to Gods grace and if they in holy feare take heed to their wayes so saith Arminius in his Declaration and in his answer to Perkins so also say the Arminians in their confession and Episcopius But what is this but regenerate persons shall persevere upon condition that they shall persevere for not to be inlaking to the grace of God is to cooperate to the grace of God or with the grace of God and to cooperate with the grace of God is very perseverance it selfe for saith the the wicked Socinus and Smalcius and so say our brethren all shall agree in the truth if they lay aside corrupt judgement And what is that if they lay aside corrupt judgement that is if they agree with the truth and assent to the Word of God But so it is that the best regenerate even Barnabas a man full of the holy Ghost Act. 11. doth not lay aside corrupt judgement But our brethren proveth they will law aside corrupt judgement but how you alleadge the Papists abused Scriptures Ier. 32. God promiseth to put his Spirit and feare in his Church that they shall not depart from the Lord. True say I they shall not depart from God providing they lay aside corrupt judgement as you teach us But doe you not teach us by your answer to elude these pregnant places which unanswerably prove the necessity of the perseverance of the regenerated But 2. what though God promise to put his feare in the heart of the regenerate this promise is not made to the visible Church conveened in a Synod as it is such nor will it prove that a Synod shall all agree in the truth that the whole Church shall lay aside corrupt judgement except you serve your selves with these and the like places as Papists and by name as Bellarmine Gâetserus Snarez Bucanus Stapleton Gregorius de Valentia doe serve themselves with them and the like to prove that Councels are in fallible What is said in the fourth Section anent the power of the people in Church-governââââ is already examined onely in the closure thereof they seeme to give something peculiar to the Elders which the people have not which I discusse in the insuing question Quest. VIII What peculiar auhority is in the Eldership for the which they are over the people in the Lord according to the doctrine of our brethren We hold that Christ hath given a superiority to Pastors and Overseers in his House whereby they are by office government and power of the keyes above the people But 1. this authority is limited and conditionall not absolute as if they may doe what they please 2. It is a power ministeriall not a Dominion for as meere Servants and Ambassadours of Christ they doe but declare the will and commandement of the King of Kings 3. When this authority is not exercised by the precise rule and prescript of the Law of God it is not valid but null and of no force 4. They are so above the people as 1. they are their Servants for Christs sake 2 Cor. 4. 5. yea we are their servants servants not as if the people had a dominion over the Pastors or as if they had their authority from the people they have it immediately from Christ but because all their service is for the good and the salvation of the people 5. They have so superiority as they are subject to the Prophets to be judged and censured by the Church representative of Pastors Doctors and Elders It will be found that our brethren give no authority or superiority to the Eldership above the people In their answers to the 32. questions We acknowledge say they a Presbytery whose worke it is to teach and rule and whom the people ought to obey and condemne a meere popular government such as our writers condemne in Morellius Answ. So say our brethren in their Doctrine we acknowledge that the people and gifted men not in office should teach and all the faithfull is the governing Church to which Christ hath committed the keyes and power of ordination and highest Church censures even excmmunication and that the Elders should obey the Church of beleevers Ergo in teaching and âuling you acknowledge no Presbytery 2. Seeing you ordaine the Elders to be ordained by the imposition of the peoples hands to be elected called censured excommunicated exauthorited shew us why the people are not the Rulers ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and the Elders ruled 3. The key of knowledge is a chiefe part of the keyes and these keyes by which sinnes are remitted and retained and men bound or loosed on earth and heaven and seeing Morellius Anabaptists and your selves teach that these keyes were given to the whole Church of beleevers how doe you thinke that people are not in teaching Overseers as properly as the Elders and that your government is meerely popular as Morellius taught to say nothing that when you deny your government to be meerely popular you doe not deny but it is popular for a government meerely popular admitteth of publike men to rule for the people and we never read of a government in Athens Lacedemonia
or any where in the which all the people did actually judge rule and command and so was meerely popular But the Word of God giveth a reall superiority to the Pastors and Church guides over the people in the Lord as Jer. 1. 10. So I have set thee this day over the Nations and over the Kingdomes to roote out and to pull downe and to destroy and to throw down to build and to plant here is a reall authority given to Jeremiah onely by his office of his prophecying without any power of the seales or sacrificing or judging or governing which was the part of the Tribe of Levi of which Tribe Jeremiah was not Matth. 10. v. 40. He who receiveth you receiveth me Luke 10. 16. He that heareth you heareth me he that despiseth you despiseth me and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me John 13. 20. 2 Cor. 10. 8. For though I should boast something of the authority which the Lord hath given us for edisication and not for your destruction I should not be ashamed 1 Cor. 4. 1. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and of the Stewards of the mysteries of God John 20. 23. Whose soever sinnes yee remit they are remitted and whose sinnes yee retaine they are retained 2 Cor. 5. 18. And he hath given to us the word of reconciliation 20. Now then wee are Ambassadours for Christ 1 Cor. 12. 28. And God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondly Prophets c. Eph. 4. 11. And he gave some Apostles c. 1 Thes. 5. 12. And we beseech you brethren to know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you Heb. 13. 17. Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your soules as they that must give an account Acts 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the flocke over which the Lord hath made you Overseers to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud 1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the over-sight thereof not by constraint c. 1 Tim. 3. 2. A Bishop then must be blamelesse c. 4. One that ruleth well his owne house c. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour v. 21. 28. 2 Tim. 2. v. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. Tit. 1. 9 10 11. 2. The Lord in his house putteth a difference betwixt the Feeders and the flocke the Governours and the governed those who are over the people in the Lord and those who are under them in the Lord the Overseers and Watchmen and the City over which they watch the Stewards and the family therefore there must be a peculiar authority in those who are Elders 3. The flock is to obey heare follow in the Lord to have the Elders in high estimation to submit to their doctrine to receive them as Christ Ergo some authority they must have 4. The Lord hath given to them an over-sight Act. 20. 28. and hath committed to them a ministery 2 Cor. 5. 15. hath put them in his worke and ministery 1 Tim. 1. 12. 5. God will seeke an account of the bloud of the lost at their hand Ezech. 3. 20. Heb. 13. 17. and God giveth a reward for the discharge of their office 1 Pet. 5. 4. 2 Tim. 4 8 Matth. 24. v. 45. 46. Ergo they must have a place of authority over the people which the people have not 6. The proportion betwixt the priesthood in the Old Testament and the ministery of reconciliation which is more excellent and glorious 2 Cor. 3. 7 8. requireth the same Now the Lord in a peculiar manner choosed the Tribe of Levi Deut. 33. 8 9. Esay 52. 11. Num. 3. 12. v. 45. ch 8. v. 6. Separate the Levites to me ch 18. 23. Josh. 3. 3. 1 Chron. 15. 2. Josh. 14. 3. 8. But let our Author speake what peculiar authority or what singular acts of authority are due to the Elders above the people The Church saith he exerciseth severall acts of authoritie over the Elders 1. In calling and electing them to office and ordaining them in defect of the Presbytery I answer 1. Calling and electing are not to be confounded electing is no act of authority but that the people calleth and ordaineth the Elders wanteth example in the word of God and therefore the Author addeth that the people ordaineth the Elders in defect of their Presbytery that is where there is no Presbytery then in case of extraordinary necessitie and where the Church is not constituted they are to ordaine the Elders but in a Constitute Church the power of ordination is in the Presbytery Ergo ordinarily the people doe not exercise this authoritie over the Elders 2. The Church of beleevers saith the Author sendeth forth the Elders for the publick service of the Church as the whole Church of Jerusalem sent forth chosen Ministers with letters of instruction to Antioch and to other Churches Act. 15. 22. Now the Ambassadour is not greater then he that sent him but usually inferiour Joh. 13. 16. Answ. 1. I deny not but a Church of beleevers in the least Congregation is greater then any Pastor or number of Pastors as they are such for the Pastors are servants for the Church and meanes for the end and lesse and inferior in respect of Christian dignity but this is not the point wee doe not now dispute of Christian dignitie one redeemed soule in that respect is of more worth then a thousand Pastors as they are but meere Pastors but because the Church sendeth the Elders the Elders are a part and a great part of the visible Church which also send themselves but it proveth not the Peoples Church authority as they are contradistinguished from Elders to be superior and above the authority of Elders for here the comparison must not be betwixt one or two Elders and the Church including all the people and the rest of the Elders but the comparison is betwixt spece and spece the office and dignitie and authoritie of the Elders as Elders and the people as people and the Church of Jerusalem was not a Parishionall but a Presbyteriall Church consisting of many Elders and Congregations now we deny not two Elders to be inferior in authoritie to the whole Colledge of Elders and people and so there is no authoritie of the people above the Elders from this proved 2. Morton answereth Papists in the like argument that sending proveth onely that those who are sent are not superiors to those who sent them for the Father sent his Sonne into the world 3. Saith the Author if an Elder or a whole Eldership erre the Church may call him or them to account and in case of obstinacie excommunicate them for it is not reason that Elders should want the medicine of excommunication to save their soules
or Church assembly have any power to bind the Churches to obedience because these commandements and decrees of censure are but ministeriall and limited and in so farre onely of force as they have reason from the Word of God as you say 3. Conclusion There is an authoritative power in Synods whereby they may and doe command in the Lord the visible Churches in their bounds the whole Churches are subject to the ordinance and decree of the Church Act. 1. where with common consent of a Synodicall meeting Matthias is ordained an Apostle Ergo all the Churches are to take him for an Apostle This argument cannot bee repelled because the Apostles by their extraordinary power did choose Matthias Because 1. they themselves cite this place to prove the peoples power ordinary which is to indure to Christs second comming in calling and electing their owne officers and Elders 2. Almain a Papist alleadgeth the place with good reason to prove that a generall councell is above Peter or the Pope because Peter would not choose Matthias without consent of the Apostles and Church 3. If this was extraordinary that Matthias was chosen why then is the vow and consent of the Church sought for there is nothing extraordinary and Apostolick flowing from an Apostolick spirit which is concluded or done by the spirit ordinary of the Church of beleevers So also Act. 6. If the Apostles did not by the ordinary and Synodicall power of ordinary Pastors choose seven Deacons how doe they first require that the Churches of Grecians and Hebrewes should seek out seven men v. 3. and did ordaine them with the common consent of the whole multitude v. 5. Act. 15. A Synod of moe Churches give decrees which obliege the Churches v. 28. ch 16. v. 4. Ergo Synods have authoritie over the Churches Those who say this Synod is not a patterne for after Synods say farre aside for their reason is this was 1. An Apostolick Synod 2. the holy Ghost was here 3. the thing determined was canonick Scripture But this is a way to clude all the promises made to Pastors in the word when as they are first made to Apostles this promise Behold I am with you to the ând of the world and this I will send you the other Comforter who ãâã lead you in all truth cannot bee made to faithfull Pastors and the Christian Church that now is for it is certaine Christ is otherwise present with his Apostles then with his Pastors after them And that he gave them a tongue a spirit when they were before the councels and rulers as to Apostolick men as Act. 4. 8. 9 10. Act. 5. 29. as Christ promised Matth. 10. 19. 20. Luk. 21. 13 14 15. for they were full of the holy Ghost before rulers but by our brethrens doctrine it shall follow none of these promises belong to Pastors now adayes in the like because no pastors now are Apostles Surely this were to fetter and imprison many glorious promises within the pale of the onely Apostolick Church and because Christ ascending to heaven sent downe the Apostolick spirit to his Apostles to write and preach canonick Scripture it shall follow he fulfilleth that promise John 16. 13. to none now adayes because none have the Apostolike spirit in the manner and measure that the Apostles had Yea further it is canonick Scripture that the Apostles at the last supper did shew forth the Lords death till be come againe therefore it shall follow that we have no warrant to shew forth the Lords death till he come againe 2. But that the Apostles in an ecclesiastick way did determine in the Synod for our imitation and not in an Apostolike way is cleare by many evidences in the text as Act. 15. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent commissioners to the Apostles and Elders about this question Paul as an Apostle needed not be sent to know more of the matter then he knew as an Apostle for as an Apostle he knew the whole mystery of the Gospel Gal. 1. 16. 17. Ephes. 3. 4 5. Ergo he was sent to the Synod as a Pastor and that as an ordinary Pastor 2. They came together v. 6. to consider of this businesse but as Apostles they needed not the help of a Synod Ergo they came together as ordinary Pastors for the Churches after imitation 3. There was much debating and disputing v. 7. about the matter 4. They set down their minds and sentences in order one after another as Peter first v. 7. 8. then Barnabas and Paul v. 12. then James v. 13. and to James his sentence the whole Councell agreeth v. 22. Now what the Apostles as Apostles and from an infallible Spirit do they doe it not by seeking light and help one from another 5. The Decree of the Councell is a thing that Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church resolveth after much dispute v. 22. But all these especially brethren and the whole beleevers as our Brethren say doe not joyne themselves with the Apostles either to write canonick Scripture or to give their consent to the writing of it therefore they doe consent by a synodall authority for the after imitation of the Churches Also there bee reasons of moment for Synods and 1. if according to the Law of nature and nations no man can bee a Judge in his owne cause then are appeales from the Eldership of one congregation when they are a party to the accused person naturall and from a Session to the Presbyteries and Synods of many moe Elders But the former is reason nature Law of Nations Ergo so is the latter 1. It is best reason which hath most of Scripture Paul and Barnabas Act. 15. 1. 2. had no small disputation with those who said circumcision was necessary finding their parties could not be Judges They appeale to a generall councell at Jerusalem where were the Apostles and Elders The Church of the Grecians and the Church of the Hebrewes strive neither of them can judge other and both appeale to a higher judicatory to the twelve Apostles and their owne Churches meeting with them and there is the matter determined aâent helping the poore by Deacons if the Judge doe wrong and one particular congregation shall oppresse one sincere and sound beleever what remedy hath the care of Christ provided for this that the oppressours may be edisied by Church censures and the oppressed freed and delivered by remedy of discipline of Christ whose it is to judge the poore of the people and to save the children of the needy Ps. 72. 4. Now it is knowne that Diotrephes doth sometime excommunicate and the evill seâvant ruleth all Hieronymus saith Arrians ruled all in the dayes of Constantius and Valens Basil saith we may say in our time that there is neither Prince nor Prophet nor Ruâââ nor oblation nor incense Athanasius and Vincentius Lirinent complain'd that it was in the Arrians times as with the Church and Prophets in the
review of the councell of Trent saith gravely It is but a theating of Christândome above board to leave the judgement of the necessitie of generall councells to the Popes will and no marvell then Popes decline councells for the councell of Pisan as Bellarmine granteth was convocated against Julius the second that wicked man and therefore was rejected by Julian the second in the councell of Lateran yet this councell and all the decrees thereof was approven and confirmed by Alexander the first who was accounted lawfull Pope and b Platina faith this councell was approved and that in it Gregory 12. and Benet 13. were deprived of their papall dignitie all nations assenting except neither Spaine the King of Scotland and Earle of Arminac who followed Pope Benet and for approbation of the councells of Pise Constance and Basil which censured Popes and deprived them and subjected them to a generall councell let any man read the Review of the Councell of Trent and Bellarmine is therein fully consuted Also generall councells have condemned the doctrine of the Church of Rome for which they thinke them not necessary as the councell of Frankford saith Bellarmine and Basil and Constance are not approved in all because they favour not the Roman Churches doctrine and the Popes supremacy above Councells yea and generall councells cannot bee simply necessary saith hee because the Catholick Church remained safe the first three hundreth yeers after Christ without generall councells and might have remained safe other three hundreth yeers and so a thousand yeers and faults may bee amended by the Lawes of Popes and by provinciall councells saith hee and their Costerus saith the Pope him selfe without councells hath condemned many heresies and this is a shorter and more compendious way then by councells for it is hard and laborious to conveene councells therefore the Churches salvation doth not depend upon them saith Bellarmine yea it is in vaine saith the Jesuit Pererius to doe that by many which may as conveniently bee done by fewer he meaneth councels may be wanted Our brethren rejecting councells and their necessitie at all in this sideth with Papists Though Calvin saith Nullum esse nec melius nec certius remedium that there is no better nor surer remedy to find out the truth then a Synod of true Pastors And Arminians and Socinians thinke that Synods are neither necessary nor profitable for as our brethren here give no authoritie to Synods but to counsell and advise the very same is taught by a grand Arminian Episcopius who saith Synods are not profitable for the establishing the truth or rooting out of errors and heresies but onely to advise sist examine and by reasons and arguments to perswade and therefore are not profitable either for the being or for the well being of the Church Synodici conventus nec ad âesse nec ad bene esse ecclesiae absolute necessarii sunt ad veritatis divinae stabilimentum hereseon errorumque averruns itionem vel exstirpationem eo tantum casu utiles esse statuimus si ad deliberandum ventilandum examinandum rationibus argumentisque persuadendum congregentur litium finem facere circa religionis capita aliter quam persuadendo est tyrannidem in ecclesiam invehere libertatem conscientiarum si non omnino tollere saltem vehementer astringere ligare To ând controversies in the Church any otherwise then by perswading is to bring in a tyranny in the Church of Christ and to hurt if not altogether to evert the libertie of consciences of men And the Arminians in their Apologie teach us that a decision or a determination of a Synod obligeth not those who were not present at the making of that decision And so have I shown from Answorth and our brethrens doctrine that they teach people cannot assent without tyranny of consciences to the decrees of the Elders at the making whereof they were not present and present consenters 2. A Synods decision doth incline the mind to consider of the decision but doth not compell authoritatively to consent and obey 3. This is violence to the conscience 4. To setch expositions of the word from confessions of faith or decrees of councells is dangerous and this is the doctrine of Socinians for Theophil Nicolaides saith the Church in a Synod cannot decide controversies because shee may erre neither can shee take them away for that were to doe violence to mens consciences and Smalcius saith this were tacite quietly to leave the writings of the Apostles and commend humane traditions So our brethren give nothing but a power of counselling and morall perswading to Synods and no authoritie to command because say they in their answers to the 32. questions Synods may erre and their decrees have no more force then they fetch reason from Gods Word and truely our brethren with Socinians and Arminians here do fall in many foule errors For 1. all preaching of the Word and all power of authoritie of Pastors commanding in the name of the Lord faith and obedience is onely morall and to perswade and not authoritative to command because Pastors may as well erre in preaching as the Church may erre in Synods 2. Because what Pastors preach hath no more force over the conscience then they have warrant to speake from the Word of God as is cleare Ezek. 3. 7. Gal. 1. 9. 1 Thess. 2. 13. 2. All confessions of faith that are set downe by lawfull Synods are null 3. Libertie of prophecying and a Cassandrian licence of beleeving in things controverted any thing in this or on that side is lawfull 4. A perpetuall doubting of conscience except in two or three points fundamentall that all Christians beleeve yea and all hereticks is brought in in the Church 5. The Lords working with the word preached is but by way of morall perswasion 6. But our Divines hold the authoritie of Synods and of Pastors preaching the Word from the Scriptures but I find both our brethren and Arminians do misken the authority of the Church and of Pastors in both Preaching and Synods for they thinke to set up the authoritie of Synods is to cast downe the authoritie of the Scriptures because things to bee distinguished are confounded for wee deny that Synods or Pastors have peremptory absolute and illimited authoritie and power to determine as they please in Sermons and Synods their Power is limited according to the Word of God and their word is onely to bee beleeved in so farre as it is agreeable to the Word of God but hence it followeth not that Pastors and Synods have no power and authoritie at all to determine but onely to counsell advise and perswade for private Christians our equalls and inferiours have power to counsell perswade and advise in a private way by teaching admonishing exhorting rebuking conference They build upon the reproving of events of councells by
Nazianzen which is not against their authoritie and true fulnesse and he speaketh of the councells of his time and it is not to bee denyed but Panormitan saith well dictum unius privati est praeferendum dicto papae si ille moveretur melioribus rationibus veteris novi Testamenti and Augustine saith latter councells may correct older councells and Petrus de Monte under Eugenius complained that there was no godly and learned Bishops in his time to determine truth in a Synod when Doctors Professors Bishops and all have sworne obedience to the Pope to their Occumenick councells and to the wicked decrees of the councell of Trent as the Bull of Pius the fourth requireth But before I say any thing of the second question anent the magistrates power I shall close the other wayes of communion of sister Churches CHAP. 6. SECT 5. Three other wayes of communion of sister Churches A Fift way of communion saith the author is by helping and contributing to sister Churches Prophets and Teachers when they are in scarstie as Act. 11. 29. Rom. 15. 25. 26. Ans. This way of communion we acknowledg but we see not how this communion can stand wiâhout the authoritie of Synods if Churches bee not united in one visible body they cannot authoritatively send helpe of teachers one to another and this is a direct acknowledgement of a visible union of more Churches in one visible body for the Church of Jerusalem authoritatively sent Pastors Paul and Barnabas as Pastors to the Gentiles you will have them sent as gifted men and that they are not Pastors while they bee ordained and chosen by these Churches to which they goe A sixt way of communion saith hee is by admonition if a sister Church or any member thereof bee scandalous wee are then to send Elders to warn them to call Archippus or any other Elder to take beed to do their dutie if the Elders or Church bee remisse in consuring wee are to take the helpe of two or three Churches moe if yet that Church âeare not wee are to tell a Congregation of Churches together or if the offence bee weightie wee are to withdraw the right hand of fellowship from such a Church and to forbeare all such sort of exercise of mutuall brotherly communion with them which all the Churches of Christ are to walke in one towards another Answ. You acknowledge that same order which Christ commandeth Matth. 18. to gaine a brother is to bee kept in the gaining of scandalous Churches But 1. What warrant have you of the two first steps of Christs order against scandalous Churches and to omit the third judiciall and authoritative way when sister Churches turne obstinate Christs order for gaining the scandalous is as necessary in the third as in the former two 2. Why doe you allow the third in a sort for if the sister Church will not bee admonished you will have her rebuked before moe sister Churches that are conveened that is before a Synod is it because you thinke there is more authority in a Synod then in one sister Church then you thinke there is authoritie in a Synod for by good Logick wee may inferre the positive degree from the comparative and there is no other reason why the matter should come before a Synod for all in a Synod wanteth authority and power to censure as you thinke yet to complaine to a Synod is an acknowledgement of the authoritie of a Synod as Christs order saith Matth. 18. 17. If hee neglect to heare them tell it to the Church 3. What is the withdrawing of brotherly communion from obstinate sister Churches but as Amesius saith well excommunication by proportion and analogie Ergo say I in this a Synod hath a Synodicall authoritie over the Churches within the bounds of the Synod by proportion for who can inflict a punishment of a Church censure by proportion answerable to excommunication but a Church or a Synodicall meeting which hath the power of the Church by proportion Amesius would prove that a particular Church cannot bee excommunicated because a Church cannot bee cast out of communion with it selfe for then she should bee cast out of herselfe But this argument with reverence of so learned and godly a man proveth onely that a particular Church cannot excommunicate herselfe which I grant but it concludeth not but a particular obstinate Church may bee excommunicated out of the societie of all sister Churches who meeting in a Synod in the name of Jesus Christ have power to save the spirits of sister Churches in the day of the Lord and are to edifie them by counsell and rebuking as the Author granteth and why not by an authoritative declaring that they will have no communion with such an obstinate sister or rather daughter Church Wee have never saith the Author been put to the utmost extent of this dutie the Lord hitherto preventing by his grace yet it is our dutie The Church Cant. 8. tooke care not onely for her owne members but also for her little sister that had no brests and would have taken care if having breasts they had been distempered with corrupt milke if the Apostles had a care of all the Churches 1 Cor. 8. 11. is that spirit of grace and love dead with them ought not all the Churches to care for sister Churches if not virtute officii by vertue of an office yet intuitu charitatis for charities sake Answ. That you have never beene put to these duties to the utmost will never prove that the government is of God for Corinth Ephesus Pergamus Thyatira which were glorious Churches by your owne confession were put to a necessitie of the utmost extent of these duties yea it proveth your government to bee rather so much the worse because Christs government is opposed by secret enemies in the Church 2. You make the spirit of love in a pastorall care over other Churches to bee dead because none have any pastorall care over any other Churches but the particular Congregation over which they are Pastors and pastorall love to unconverted ones as pastorall you utterly deny The last way of communion saith the Author is by propagation or multiplication which is as the Apostles had immediat calling from God to travell through the world and to plant Churches so have particular Churches given to them immediatly from Christ the fulnesse of measure of grace which the inlargement and establishment of Christs kingdome doth require that is when the Bee-hive a parishionall congregation is surcharged they have power to send forth their members to enter by Covenant in Church-state amongst themselves and may commend to them such able gifted Ministers as they thinke may bee Ministers in that young Church Answ. 1. This way of inlarging Christs kingdome is defective 1. It sheweth the way of inlarging the number of invisible Churches and multitudes of converts into new incorporations but doth shew no way how to
plant soules who were non-converts and branches of the wild olive in Christ Jesus and to make new visible Churches but it is certaine that the Apostles as Apostles and as Pastors by vertue of their office converted obstinate sinners to the faith of Christ and planted them in a visible Church consisting of professors of the faith partly converted partly not converted but the pastors by your doctrine have no power as Pastors or by any Pastorall authoritie to plant the Gospell where it hath never beene that pastorall spirit is dead with the Apostles and in this contrary to all reason and sense and contrary to the Scriptures you make private Christians the successors of the Apostles to plant Churches and to convert soules and to make them fit materialls for the visible Church of regenerate persons for Pastors as Pastors and visible Churches as visible Churches doe nothing at all to the multiplying of Churches seeing Pastors and visible Churches as they are such by your doctrine are but nurses to give suck to those who are already converted but not fathers to convert them for private Christians or pastors as Christians gifted to prophesie not as Pastors doe multiply Churches and convert men to Christ as you teach now wee all know that nurses as nurses doe not propagate or by generation multiply people in the Common-wealth that fathers and mothers onely can doe your Churches have no ministeriall breasts but to give suck to babes who are already borne but wee see by your doctrine no ministeriall power of Pastors or Churches to send forth members to enter in a Church covenant or to enter in a new Church relation of a daughter or a sister visible Church if they send a number to bee a new Church your Pastors or visible Church did not multiply them it is presumed they were converts before they were members of the visible Church which now sendeth them out and if they bee multiplied in the bosome of your visible Church and converted they were not truely members of that visible Church before their conversion and also that they were not converted by any publike ministery but by private Christians gifted to prophesie who are the onely successors of the Apostles to plant visible Churches but what pastorall authoritie have you to send them forth to bee a new visible Church none at all they have as beleevers power to remove from you and because of multiplication to make themselves a new Church and this ministeriall power of making themselves a new Church they have not from you but from their fathers who converted them so that you make a visible Church within a visible Church but not a Church begotten or borne of a visible Church as a child of the mother and wee desire a word of God either precept promise or practise of such a Church multiplication mans word is not enough 2. Wee hold that the sending of the Apostles to all the world was not in it selfe that which essentially distinguisheth the Apostle from the now ordinary Pastor who is fixed to a single Congregation but the gift of tongues to preach to all the world upon the Lords intention to send the Gospel to all nations that as many as were chosen to life might beleeve was that which essentially differenceth the Apostle from the ordinary pastor together with a speciall revelation of God to goe to such and such people to Macedonia and not yet to Bythinia And now seeing these two are taken away the ordinary Pastors which now are have as Pastors a sufficient calling to preach the Gospel to all nations to whom by Gods providence they shall come and can understand their language whether of their owne Congregation or not Neither is a Pastor tied as a Pastor by Gods Word to one onely Congregation for then it should bee unlawfull for a Pastor as a Pastor to plant a new Church but shall it bee lawfull for private Christians to plant new Churches who are not the Apostles successors and yet it shall bee unlawfull for Pastors who are the undoubted successors of the Apostles to plant new Churches I would think that admirable doctrine for so you give to private Christians that which you make essentiall to the Apostles and you deny it to the undoubted successors of the Apostles to wit to Pastors But we hold a lawfull Pastor is a Pastor in relation to all the world with this distinction hee is by Christs appointment and the Churches a Pastor to all congregations to plant and water and preach but by speciall designation of Gods providence and the Churches appointment designed and set apart for such a determinate flock just as the Apostles in generall were made Pastors to all the world Matth. 28 19. Go teach all nations but by speciall revelation and Apostolick appointment Peter was appointed the Apostle of the Jewes Paul of the Gentiles Gal. 2. 9. yet Paul was a Pastor in relation to the Jewes and Peter also in relation to the Gentiles so by speciall revelation Act. 16. they are forbidden to preach the word in Bythinia and commanded to preach it elsewhere and for this cause pious antiquity as Morton observeth called some learned fathers Pastors of the World Athanasius is saluted Pontifex maximus as Russinus saith and Origen magister ecclesiârum master of the Churches so Hieronymus and Cyprian totius orbis praeses Cypâian the Bishop of all the world yea and Pope so Nazianz. Hilarius is called by Augustine insignis ecclesiae doctor a renowned teacher of the Church and Nazianzenus calleth Basilius the light of the word and Damascenus the light of the whole world and Theodoret saith Chrysostome is called totius orbis terrarum doctor the Doctor and teacher of the whole world all which titles saith evidently that antiquitie beleeved never a Pastor or Bishop not to bee a Pastor onely in relation to the one single Congregation whereof hee is Pastor but a Pastor in relation to the whole visible Church though by designation of the Church his ministery bee appropriated to one particular Church Thus it is cleare that our brethren deny all communion of Churches while they confine a visible Church to one onely single and independent Congregation subjected in its visible government to Christ Jesus immediatly and to no universall visible Church or Synod on earth Quest. II. Whether the Magistrate hath power to compell persons to a Church profession Anent Magistrates sundry things are questioned to make presbyteriall government odious And first our brethren complaine that our Churches are constitute by the authoritie of the Magistrate Robinson saith it was a presumptuous enterprise that people were haled against their will into covenant with God to sweare obedience to the protestant Faith being a profane multitude living before in grosse idolatry and that by the authority of the supreme magistrate for the commandement of the magistrate say they can make no members of the visible Church or of
Reformation of the Congregations of England IN the first article the Author acknowledgeth the Church of England was once rightly and orderly gathered either by Apostles ââ apostolick men whether Philip or Joseph of Arimathea or Simon Zelotes as we may read in Fox c. Sothat all the worke now is not to make them Churches which were none before but to reduce and restore them to their primitive institution Answ. Though the Churches of England were planted by the Apostles yet since Popery universally afterward prevailed in both England and Scotland as Beda and Nicephorus and ancient histories witnesse we thinke by our brethrens grounds England losed the very essence of a true Church So that there be neede of the constituting of a new Church and not of simple restitution to the first restitution 1. Because the Congregations wanteth the essentiall constitution of right visible Churches as you say 2. Because you receive none comming from the Church of New-England to the seales of the Covenant because they are members of no visible Church Sect. 2. Certaine propositions tending to Reformation In the third or fourth Proposition the Author condemneth Laicks Patronages 2. Dedicating of Lands to the Ministry to these adde what the Ministers of New-England say in their answer to the thirty two Questions sent to them from Old-England where they condemne stinted maintenance Though the right of Church Patronages were derived from Romulus it is not for that of noble blood âor Dionysius Halicarnasseus saith Romulus instituted Patronages when he had divided the people in noble and ignoble called Patricii Plebeii But this Patronage was civill and when servants and underlings were hardly used it hath a ground in nature that they choose Patrons to defend them therefore hee who gave libertie to a a servant amongst the Romans was called a Patron and he who defended the cause of the accused as Valla saith was called a Patron If it bee said that the servant was the proper goods and part of the Masters patrimony because hee might sell his servant and therefore there could bee no Law given to prove men may limit the dominion of the master over the servant I answer the servant was a part of his masters patrimony but a part thereof for sinne not as his Oxe or his Asse is a part of his patrimony therefore by the Law of nature whereby the weaker imploreth helpe of the stronger as the Lambe seeketh helpe from the mother and the young Eagle from the old the slave might well have libertie to choose a Patron and this is a ground that the Magistrate the Churches nurs-father by office should plead the Churches cause as her Patron and every one in power is to defend the Church in her liberties and patrimony and therefore in the Apostles time when holinesse and the power of Religion did flourish and was in court there was not need of any positive civill or Church Law for a Patron to the Church every beleever in power is oblieged to defend the Church but when men became Vulturs and ravenous birds to plucke from the Church what was given them the Councell of Millian in the yeare of God 402. wherein some say Augustine was president under Honorius and Arcadius some holy and powerfull men were sought from the Emperour to defend the Church in her patrimony and rights against the power and craft of avaritious men and they were called Patrons and the same was desired in the first Councell of Carthage but with the Bishops advice cum provisione Episcoporum Hence it is cleare patronages from their originall were not Church priviledges and Bishops being a part of the Church could not be the Patrons quia nemo sibi ipsi potest esse patronus and for this cause that learned thinketh this was the originall of Church Patronages but the Patrons have beene chosen with consent of the Church hence they were not as our Patronages are now which goeth 1. by birth 2. and are a part of a mans patrimony and civill thing that the Patron hath right unto under the Kings great Seale but as a Minister is not a Minister by birth neither was a Patron a Patron by birth and from this wee may collect that the Patrons right was but a branch of the Magistrates right and accumulative not primitive and that hee could take nothing from the Church and ãâã lesse might the Patron forestall the free election of the people by tying them and their free suffâages to a determinate man whom hee presented and it is not unlike which Aâentinus ãâã when Bishops gave themselves onely to the Word of God to preaching and writing bookes in defence of the truth the Emperour tooke care that they should bee furnished with food and âaiment and therefore gave them a pâtronus quem ãâã patronum curatoremque vocabant whom they called a patron and here observe the Bishop of old was the client and the sonne and Pupill now hee must bee the Patron and Tutor and therefore in time of Popery Antichristian Prelates would bee Patrons both to themselves and to the Churches But this seemeth not to bee the originall of patronages because this ground is common to all Churches but not all but onely some certaine Churches have patronages therefore their ground seemeth rather to bee that some religious and pious persons founded Churches and dotted and mortified to them benefices and the Church by the Law of gratitude did give a Patâonage over these founded Churches to the first foundators and their heires so as they should have power to nominate and present a Pastor to the Church But there were two notable wrongs in this for 1. If the fundator have all the Lands and Rents in those bounds where the Church was erected hee is oblieged to erect a Church and furnish a ââpend both by the Law of nature and so by Gods Law also Ergo the Church owe to him no gift of patronage for that nor is hee to keepe that patronage in his hand when hee erecteth a Church but and if hee being Lord heritor of all the Lands and Rents both erecteth a Church and dotteth a stipend sub modum eleemosynae non sub modum debiti by way of almes not by way of debt then is there no gratuitie of honour nor reward of Patronage due to him for almes as almes hath no reall or bodily reward to bee given by those on whom the almes is bestowed but onely the blessings of the poore Joh 31. 20. it being a debt payed to God hee doth requite it And Calderword saith no wise man would thinke that the Church men should allure men to found Churches and to workes of Pietie by giving them the right of presenting a man to the change and also hee would call it Simonie not pietie or religion if one should refuse to doe a good worke to the Church except upon so deareât rate and so hard a condition as to
acquire to himselfe poâer over the Church of God Though the âight of presenting a man to benefice were a meere temporall thing yet because it removeth the libertie of a free election of the fittest pastor as Origen saith it cannot bee lawfull but it is not a temporall or civill right but a spirituall right though wee should grant that the people have a free voyce in choosing and that the patron were oblieged to present to the benefice the man onely whom the people hath freely chosen and whom the Elders by imposition of hands have ordained 1. Because the Pastors hath right to the benefice as the workeman is worthy of his hire and hee hath a divine right thereunto by Gods Law 1 Cor. 9. 8 9. c. Gal. 6 6. Matth. 10. 10. Ergo if the patron give any right to the Pastor to the benefice it must bee a spirituall right If it bee said hee may give him a civill right before men that according to the Lawes of the Commonwealth hee may legally brook and injoy the benefice this is but a shift for the civill right before men is essentially founded upon the Law of God that saith the workeman is worthy of his hire and it is that fame right really that the Word of God speaketh of now by no Word of God hath the Patron a power to put the Preacher in that case that hee shall bee worthy of his wages for hee being called chosen as Pastor hee hath this spirituall right not of one but of the whole Church 2. It is true Papists seeme to bee divided in judgements in this whether the right of patronage bee a temporall or a spirituall power for some Canonists as wee may see in Abb. decius and Rubio and the Glosse saith it is partly temporall partly spirituall Others say it is a spirituall power as Anton. de Butr. and Andr. Barbat and Suarez and whereas Papists doe teach that the Church may lawfully give a right of presenting to Church benefices even to those who are not Church men the power must bee ecclesiasticall and spirituall and cannot bee temporall also Suarez saith that the right of patronage may bee the matter of Simâny when it is ââld for mâney Ergo they thinke it an holy and spirituall power It is true the Bishop of Spalato calleth it a temporall power which is in the hand of the Prince but there is neither reason nor Law why it can bee called a temporall power due to a man seeing the patron hath amongst us a power to present and name one man whom he conceiveth to be qualified for wee find the nomination of a list or the seeking out of men fit for the holy ministry some times ascribed to the Church as Act. 1 23. Then they appointed two Joseph called Barsabas who was surnam d Jusâus and Matthias which words may well bee referred to the eleven Apostles and so they nominated men or to the Church of beleevers and so though it bee not an authoritative action it is an ecclesiasticall action and belongeth to the Church as the Church and so to no Patron and the looking out of seven men to be presented as fit to bee ordained Deacons is expresly given to the Church of beleevers Act. 6. 3. Wherefore Brethren looke yee out amongst you ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã seven men of honest report and sometimes the Apostles doe nominate men for the ministery but never doth the holy Ghost mention a Patron But if the thing it selfe say they hee necessary then is the office not unlawfull But it is most necessary that some one or more eminent and powerfull men should have power to see that the Church goods bee not delapidated Answ. It is a part of the Magistrates office with his accumulative power whereby hee seeth that every one doe their dutie to take care that vulturs and sacrilegious devourers of Church livings bee punished and the Church themselves are to censure all guiltie of Simony or delapidation of the rents of the Church as may bee gathered by due analogie from Peters punishing with death the sacriledge of Ananias and Saphira and the Simony of Simon Magus 2. The ancient Church âooke care of dividing of the Church rent very carefully in foure parts one was given to the Pastor who was not to imploy âents of the Church upon Horses and Coaches and conquering Baronies and Lordships to their sonnes as our idle belleys were in custome to doe but the Bishop was to entertaine Hospitalls and to feed the poore to take care of bridges repâring of Churches so as Ambrose saith what ever is the Biships it is the poores a second part was given to the Elders and Deacons a third part was for the repairing of Churches and a fourth part for Hospitalls for poore and strangers this distribution with some other order is made if wee beleeve Papists in a Synod at Rome under Silvester the first though Socrates Theodoret Sozomen and others well versed in antiquitie speake nothing of this Synod but you may see this cleare in Synodo Bracarensi in Aventinus in Gregorius so there is no need of a Patron nor was there any in the Apostolick Church Deacons were to take care for tables and the goods of the poore no reason that men seeme more carefull for the good of the Church then Jesus Christ. 3. Though there bee a necessitie that the Church bee defended in her liberties yet is there no reason an office should be made thereof as the Canonists make it an office with a sort of stipend And therefore to make a Patron they require not onely the founding of a Church but also the building of the house upon his owne charges and the dotation of a maintenânce for the Church and for this cause the Patrou hath a buriall place in the Church and if hee or his children become poore they are to be entertained of the Church rents and therefore they call it jus âuti'e a gainefull power 2. It is jus bânorifioum hee hath power to nominate and present a man to the benefice of the vaiking Church 3. It is jus onerosum because hee is oblieged to defend the Church see theâ Law for this so see also Calderwood Gerardus Suarez Anton. de dom arcb Spal Hâspinianus yet Justinianus himselfe forbiddeth that the Patron should present a man to the Bishop to bee examined and tryed and certainly this place and charge for the defending of the Church of Christ from injuries and wrongs ãâã Christ of want of foresight and providence who hath not appointed officers civill and eccleââasticall to take care of his Church for no power over the Church was ever given to builders of Synagogues and therefore a calling by the Patron is no more Christs way then a calling by the Prelate and his Chaplaine 2. Nor would the Church receive the ministers from Christ Jer. 2. 5. and the laying
sinnes before Christs Resurrection Ioh 2. so the Cardinall Tolet and Maldonat Cajetanus but the Truth is what is given here Mat. 16. Is but repeated and enlarged Joh 20. And they are now sent to the whole World whereas before they were to preach to Iudea only but this Ioh 20. sayth Rollocus is but a reiterated power it was given before his Resurrection and Beza sayth the same and Bullinger sayth the promise is made here and fulfilled Ioh. 2 c. and Pareus expoundeth what thou shalt loose here by these words Ioh. 20. So Calvin VVhittaker Zwinglius Musculus Now this same Author acknowledgeth that Ioh. 20. Christ gave pastorall power to all the Apostles to forgive sins 2. To bind and to loose are act s of officiall power and of Princes Rulers and Feeders Ergo they are not given to the Church destitute of Feeders and Governors I prove the antecedent 1. To bind and loose by all Interpreters Augustine Cyrill Chrysost. Câprian Euthymius Hyeromi Basilus Ambrose Sedulius Primasius and by our owne Calvin Musculus Gualther Pareus Beza Zwinglius Rolloc VVhittaker and the evidence of Scripture iâ by publick and pastorall preaching to reânit and retaine sins to believers or unbelievers and Bullinger saith it is taken from the Scripture Isa. 52. 49 v. 9. where Christ is said to loose the prisoners and so Musculus Beza and Calvin will have them to be words signifying the âfficiall authority of Princes Ambassadours to set at liberty prisoners or to cast malefactors in bands and prison as Magistrates and Rulers doe so binding in Scripture is an authoritative act of Princes Superiors Governors and Rulers And so is loâsing a judiciall and authoritative act of Rulers and Overseers as Scripture teacheth us But the Church of believers wanting their Officers watchmen and Overseers though combined in a Church Covenant is not a company of Overseers and Rulers or judiciall and authoritative binders and loosers exercising power over themselves 4. Arg. If Christ doe not say in this place nor in Mat. 18. that the keys and the actes of the keys to wit binding and loosing are given to the Church of believers without their Officers then neither places prove that the keyes are given to such a Church But Christ doth not say it Ergo the Text cannot beare it the assumption I prove Christ Mat. 16. 18. speaking of the Church builded on a Rock sayth not I will give to the Church so builded the keys but he turneth the speech to Peter when he promiseth the keys V. 19. And I will give to thee Peter not to the Church the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven surely none needeth to teach our Lord to speak This change of the persons to whom the keys are promised wanteth not a reason Our brethren say the promise is made to Peter because he gave a confession of Christ in the name of all believers and because the keys are given to believers as the Spouse of Christ and as his body united to him but this author granteth every company of believers because they are believers are not an instituted visible Church but they must be a company of believers professing Covenant-wayes Faith in Christ and Church-communion But 1. then the keys are not given to believers because they are believers and the Spouse of Christ but because they are such professors so and so combined in a Church-covenant But yet I aske whether true or false profession be the neerest intervening cause of these to whom the keyes are given If a true profession then 1. Unbelieving Pastors are not Pastors for their profession is not true And children baptized by them are as not-baptized or as baptized by Women 2. If one shall be excommunicated by seven for such a number this Author requireth to make a visible Church even clave non errante and most deservedly he is not bound in Heaven and excommunicated in foro Dei before God for the profession of these seven may be false and so the Church actes performed by them are a non habentibus potestatem and null if they be no Church 3. We can prove by Scripture that Iudas though the child of perdition was a called Apostle But if a false profession be sufficient to make persons a true visible Church theâ 1. The keys are not given to believers because they are believers and united to Christ as his body and Spouse but. 2. This Author sayth amisse That the Church instituted by Christ is a company of believers and faithfull and godly men whereof Peter was one for a company of hypocrites are not such 2. Our brethren prove the keys to be a part of the liberty of the redeemed ones but counterfeit professors are not redeemed ones nor have they that liberty purchased to them in Christ. 4 It shall follow that our brethren widely mistake a supposed difference which they devise betwixt the Iewish and Christian Church to wit that to make men members of the Iewish Church externall holinesse as to be borne Jewes was sufficient and to be circumcised and not a bastard not descended within three or foure Generations of a Moabite or Ammonite but that the visible Church of the Gentiles after Christ must be the bride of Christ and by true Faith united to him Whereas the members of a Christian visible Church are and may be hypocrites though not known to be such as were the members of the Iewish Church Also Mat. 18 18 19. Christ changeth the persons v. 17. after he hath spoken of the Church v. 17. he sheweth v. 18. of what Church he speaketh and directeth his speech to these to whom he spake v. 1. to the Disciples who were Pastors verily I say unto you What soever yee shall bind on Earth shall be hond in Heaven and therefore none can make an argument from Mat. 16. to wit thus to as many are the keys promised as are builded on the Rock but all the faithfull are builded on the Rock Ergo to all the faithfull are the keys promised 1. The proposition is not in the Text either expressely or by consequent 2. The proposition is false for the Catholick invisible Church is builded on the rock but by our Brethrens confession the keys are not given to the Catholick invisible Church but only to such a company of professing believers as make a Parishionall Congregation 4. That Christ speaketh to Peter as to one representing the Apostles and not as to one representing all believers is cleare 1. Because by the confession of our Brethren binding and loosing are denyed to many that make Peters confession thou art Jesus the Son of the living God as to believing Women and children and many out of Church state 2. If believers as giving Peters confession and as builded upon the rock Christ by this place made a ministeriall Church by Christ and gifted with the power of the keys then the Ministery
together a visible act of government in sending messengers to ãâã Acts 15. 22. Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders and the whole Church our Brethren say the whole collective Church Men Women and Children at Ierusalem to send men of their own company to Antioch 23. And wrote Letters and some Decrees and Commandements to be observed Now the many thousands of the Church of Ierusalem by no possibility could meete aâ one Parish in one materiall house to administrate the Lords Supper farre lesse could they be as is said Acts 2. 42. all continuing stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and followship our Brethren say in Pârishionall or Congregationall fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayer nor could they dayly continue in the Temple and breake bread from house to house being all one Church or a fixed parishionall meeting in one materiall house Now it is cleare they were ãâã even after they exceeded many thousands in number in one Parishionall and Congregationall government as our Brethren would prove from Acts 15 22 23 24 25. And Acts 2. 42 43. Else how could they have all their goods common if there be not one visible government amongst them but this government could not be of one single Congregation for all who sold their goods and had all things common could not meete to give voyces in Discipline a judicatory of so many thousand Judges were impossible and ridiculous 2. Paul writeth to the Galatians where there were many Parish Churches Gal. 1. 2. as our Brethren teach yet doth he write to them as he doth to the Corinthians where our Brethren will have one Parish Church and writeth to them of uniformity of visible government that they meete not together to keepe dayes Sabbaths and yeers Gal. 4. 10. as the Iewes did that they keep not Iewish and ceremoniall meetings and conventions Gal. 4. 9. these Churches are called one lumpe in danger to be leavened as Corinth is a Parishionall lumpe in hazard to be leavened as our Brethren teach Now how could Paul will them that the whole lump of all the Churches and Congregations in Galatia be not leavened except he lay down a ground that they were with united authority to joyne in one visible government against the false Teachers suppose there were twenty sundry Kings in Brittaine and twenty Kingdoms could our friends over Sea write to us as to one Nationall lump to beware of the Spanish faction except they laid down this ground that all the twenty little Kingdomes had some visible union in Government and might with joynt authority of all the twenty Kingdomes concurre to resist the common Enemie Here that godly and learned Divine Mr. Baynes sayth Communion in government is not enough to make them one Church this sayth he maketh them rather one in tertio quodam separabili in a third thing which may be separated then one Church Government being a thing that commeth to a Church now constituted and may be absent the Church remaning a Church I answer this is a good reason against the Prelates Dioceseân Church which as Baynes sayth well is such a frame in which many Churches are united with one head Church under one Lord prelate common Pastor to all the Pastors and particular Congregations of the Diocese as part aking of holy things or at least in that power of government which is in the chiefe Church for all the others within such a circuit Now the prelâtes frame of a properly so called Church under one Pastor being a Creature with a hundred heads having Church and pastorall care of a hundred little Congregations and Churches is a dreame for we know no such Church fed by a Prelate nor no such prelaticall Argos to oversee so many flocks nor doe we contend that the many Congregations united in a presbyteriall government doe make a mysticall visible Church meeting for all the Ordinances of God But union of many Congregations in a visible government is enough to make all these united Churches one visible ministeriall and governing Church who may meete not in one collective body for the worship of God yet in one representative body for government though worship may be in such a convened Church also as we shall heare The name of the Church I thinke is given to such a meeting Mat. 18. 17. Acts 15. 22. though more usually in Scripture the Church is a fixed Congregation convened for Gods worship now government is an accident separable and may goe and come to a mysticall Church but I thinke it is not so to a Ministeriall governing Church So the Church of Ephesus is called a Church in the singular number Rev. 2. 1. and all the Churches of Asia Rev. 1. 20. but seven Churches and Christ directeth seven Epistles to these seven and writeth to Ephesus as to a Church having one government v. 2. Thou hast tryed them which say they are Apostles and are not and hast found them lyers This was Ecclesiasticall tryall by Church-Discipline yet Ephesus contained more particular Congregations then one 1. Because Christ speaking to Ephesus only sayth v. 7. He that hath an Earâ to heare let him heare what the spirit sayth unto the Churches in the plurall number 2. Because there were a good number of preaching Elders in Ephesus Acts 20. 28. 36. 37. and it is incongruous to Gods dispensation to send a multiude of pastors to over see ordinarily one single and independent Congregation 3. This I have proved from the huge multitudes converted to the Faith in Ephesus so huge and populous a City where many Iewes and Greeks dwâlâ and where the Word of God grew so mighââly Acts 19. 17 18 19 20. and Christ writeth to every one of the seven Churches as to one and yet exhorteth seven times in every Epistle that Churches in the plurall number heare what the spirit sayth Now as our Brethren prove that the Churches of Galatia so called in the plurall number were many particular Churches so doe we borrow this argument to prove that every one of the seven Churches who are seven times called Churche in the plurall number contained many Congregations under them yet doth Christ write to every one of the seven as having one visible Government 2. Concl. A nationall typicall Churchâ was the Church of the Iewes we deny But a Church nationall or provinciall of Cities Provinces and Kingdomes having one common government we thinke cannot be denyed so Paul Baynes citeth for this 1 Pet. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Though we take not the Word Church for a my sticall body but for a ministeriall company But Acts 1. Matthias was elected an Apostle by the Church as our Brethren confesse but not by a particular Congregation who met every Lords-Day and in ordinary to partake of all the holy things of God the Word and Sacraments 1. Here were the Apostles whose Parish Church was the whole World Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations 2. In this Church were the brethren of Christ
as you gather First they did not meet often together for prayer and spirituall conference while they were satisfied in Conscience of the good estate one of another and approved to one anothers Consciences in the sight of God as living stones fit to be laid in the Lords spirituall Temple as you require because frequent meeting and satisfaction in Conscience of the regeneration one of another could not be performed by three thousand all converted and added to the Church in one day for before they were non-Converts and at one Sermon were pricked in heart that they had slaine the Lord of glory Acts 2. 37. 42. and the same day there were added to them three thousand souls Our brethren say It was about the Pântecost when the day was now the longest and so they might make short confessions of the soundnesse of their conversation before the Apostles who had such discerning spirits Answ. Truly it is a most weake and reasonlesse conjecture for all the three thousand behoved to be miraculonsly quicke of discerning for they could not sweare mutually one to another those Church-duties except they had beene satisfied in Conscience of the regeneration of one another Surely such a miracle of three thousand extraordinarily gifted with the spirit of discerning would not have beene concealed though it be sure Ananias and Saphira who deceived the Apostles were in this number Secondly how could they all celebrate a day of fasting and prayer and from the third houre which is our ninth houre dupatch the confessions and evidences of the sound worke of conversion of thirty hundred all baptized and added to the Church Capiat qui volet because this place is used to prove a Church-covenant I will here once for all deliver it out of our brethrens hands The Author of the Church-covenant saith There was hazard of excommunication John 9. 22. and persecution Acts 5. 3. and therefore the very profession of Christ in such periââus times was a sufficient note of discerning to such discerning spirits as the Apostles Answ. If you meane miraculous power of discerning in the Apostles that was not put forth in this company where were such hypocrites as Ananias and Saphira Secondly this miraculous discerning behoved to bee in all the three thousand for the satisfaction of their Consciences of the good estate spirituall of all of them And if it be miraculous as it must be if done in the space of sixe houres as it was done the same day that they heard Peter vers 41. then our brethren cannot alleadge it for ordinary inchurching of members as they doe Secondly if it be an ordinary spirit of discerning then at one act of profession are members to be received and so often meeting for the satisfaction of all their Consciences is not requisite Thirdly if profession for feare of persecution be an infallible signe then those who are chased out of England by Prelates and come to New England to seeke the Gospell in purity should be received to the Church whereas you hold them out of your societies many yeeres Fourthly suffering for a while for the truth is not much Iudas Alexander Demas did that for a while The Apologie and discourse of the Church-covenant saith These converts professed their glad receiving of the VVord vers 37 38. in saving themselves from that untoward generation else they had not beene admitted to baptisme But all this made them not members of the Church for they might havereturned notwithstanding of this to Pontus Asia Cappadocia c. but they continued stedfastly ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in the doctrine of the Apostles Secondly they continued in fellowship this is Church-fellowship for we cannot say That it was exercise of Doctrine and Sacraments and confound this fellowship with doctrine no more then we can confound doctrine and sacraments which are distinguished in the Text and therefore it is a fellowship of holy Church-state and so noteth 1. A combination in Church-state 2. In gifts inward to edification and outward in reliefe of the poore by worldly goods Answ. 1. They could not continue stedfast in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship before they were added to the Church for stedfastnesse in Doctrine and saving themselves from the froward generation could not be but habituall holinesse not perfected in sixe houres Now that same day vers 41. in the which they gladly heard the VVord they were both baptized and added to the Church and therefore their stedfast continuing in Church-state can no wayes make them members in Church-state Secondly though they should have returned to Pontus and Asia c. they returned added to the Church Church-state is no prison-state to tie men to such a congregation locally as you make it Thirdly there is no word of a Church-covenant except when they were baptized they made it and that is no Church-covenant and that should not be omitted seeing it conduceth so much first to the being of the visible Church in the which we must serve God acceptably Secondly and is of such consequence to the end that the holy things of God be not prophaned as you say Thirdly that the Seales of the Covenant be not made signes of falshood Fourthly wee would not be stricter then God who received upon sixe houres profession three thousand to Church state Fifthly the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã fellowship is no fellowship of Church-order which made them members of the visible Church because the first day that they heard Peter they were added to the Church and being added they continued in this fellowship and in use of the Word Sacraments and Prayer as a reasonable soule is that which makes a man discourse and discoursing is not the cause of a reasonable soule Beza calleth it fellowship in Christian charity to the poore And the Syrian interpreter ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The Arablan interpreter saith the same The ancient Latine interpreter ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Fourthly if Baptisme bee the Seale of our entry into the Church as 1 Cor. 12. 13. as Circumcision was the Seale of the members of the Jewes visible Church then such a Covenant is not a formall reason of our Church-membership but the former is true as I shall prove hereafter Ergo so is the latter The Proposition standeth because all the baptized are members of the visible Church before they can sweare this Covenant even when they are Infants 5. Argu. This Church-covenant is either all one with the Covenant of grace or it is a Covenant divers from the Covenant of grace but neither wayes can it be the essentiall forme of a visible Church Ergo First the Covenant of grace cannot be the forme of a visible Church because then all baptized and all beleevess should be in Covenant with God as Church members of a visible Church which our brethren deny If it be a Covenant divers from it it must be of another nature and lay another obligatory tie then either the Covenant of workes
hands of the Elders Secondly the practice of the Apostles is our safe rule because at all ordination of Church-officers the Apostles and Pastors were actors and ordainers as Acts 1. 15 16. Acts 6. 2. 3. Acts. 14. 23. 1 Cor. 3. 6. Tit. 1. 5. and this Robinson granteth because the charge of all the Churches did lie on the Apostles As also before the Law the people did not ordaine the Priest hood but God ordained the first borne by succession to be teachers and priests and after he chose the Tribe of Levi without consent of the people though the Princes and heads of Tribes said hands upon them And also God of sundry other Tribes raised up Prophets and did immediately call them they had onely of the people not the calling buââât the least the silent approbation of the faithfull amongst the people Christ comming in the flesh chose twelve Apostles not knowing either the governing Church or the people at length when the Apostles established a Church-government and a Pastor to a certaine flocke they ordained that the châsing of the man should be with consen of the people and begân this in Maâthias then the seven Deacons then Acts 14. 23. Elders were chosen by lasting up of the peoples hands But that persons were ordained Pastors and sanctified and set apart for the worke of the ministery by the authority of the sole multititude and that without all Officers we never read And the laying on of the hands we see not in the New Testament we shall be dâsiâous to be informed of this by our deare brethren and intreat them in the feare of the Lord to consider of an unwritten calling of a Ministery Thirdly if ordination of Pastors bee laid downe in the Apostolike Canons to Officers as Officers then is not this a charge that doth agree to the people especially wanting Officers But the former is true Ergo so is the latter I prove the proposition What is charged upon Officers as Officers cannot be the charge of the people because the people are not Officers I prove the assumption because 2 Tim. 2. 1 2. To commit to faithfull men the things of the Gospell which Timothy heard Paul preach is a charge laid on Timothy in the very tearms that he is vers 4. not to intangle himselfe with the affairs of this life but to be separated for preaching the Gospell from all worldly imployment as a Souldier sworne to hiâ Captaine can attend no other calling vers 5. and as he is to put other Pastors in minde of these things and to charge them that they strite not about words and as he is to be an approved workman dividing the word aright vers 14. 15. But these are laid upon Timothy as a Pastor So 1 Tim. 5. as he sheweth the honour and reward due to Elders so doth he charge Timothy not to heare accusations of Elders but upon two or three witnesses testimony which is the part of Church-Iudges even as hee is to rebuke sinne publikely that others may feare vers 19 20. So according to that same office must imposition of hands be conserred upon Pastors advisedly vers 22. As the Apostle commandeth all beleevers to lay hands suddenly on no man Also Paul would have said I left a Church of beleevers at Crete to appoint Elders in every City if it be the Churches part even though destitute of Elders to appoint Elders over themselves but by what poâer Titus was to rebuke sharpely the Cretians that they may be found in the saith by that power was he left at Crete to appoint Elders in every City but this is an officiall power Titus 1. 13. due to Bishops as a part of their qualification vers 9. 4. Argu. The speciall reason against ordination of Elders by Elders onely is weake and that is a succession of Pastors must be granted ever since the Apostles times which is say ourbrethren Popish This reason is weak because a succession of Elders and Pastors such as we require is no more popish then a succession of visible beleevers and visible Churches ordaining Pastors is popish but our brethren maintaine a succession of beleevers and visible prosessors since the Apostles daye Secondly we deny the necessity of a succession perpetuall which papists hold Thirdly we maintaine onely a succession to the true and Apostolike Doctrine papists hold a visible Cathedrall succession to the chaire of Rome and titular office of Peter 4. Quest. Whether or not our brethren doe prove that the Church of believers have power to ordaine Pastors In answering our brethrens reasons I first returne to our Author secondly I obviate what our brethren say in the answer to the Questions sent from old England and thirdly shall answer Robinsons arguments Our Author saith Beleevers have power to lay hands on their Officers because to them Christ gave the keyes that is the ministeriall power of binding and loosing Matth. 16. 16 17 18. and Acts 1. The voices of the people went as farre as any humane suffrages could goe of an hundred and twenty they chose two And Acts 14. 23. The Apostles ordained Elders by the lifting up of the hands of the people Acts 6. They are directed to looke out and chuse seven men to be Deacons And the ancient Church did so from Cyprians words Vlebs vel maxime potestatem habet vel dignâs sacerdotes eligendi vel indignos recusandi Answ. The places Math. 16. and 18. give to some power ministeriall to bind and loose open and shue by preaching the Gospell and administring the Sacraments as to stewards the Keyes of an house are given but this power is given to Elders oâely by evidence of the place and exposition of all Divines 2. If the ministeriall power and the warrantable exercise thereof be given to all then are all Ministers for the faculty and exercise doth denominate the subject and agent but that is false by Scripture 2. That all the hundred and twenty did ordainâ Matthias an Apostle Act. 1. is not said they did nominate and present him 2. they did choose him But authoritative separation for the Office was Christs and his Apostles worke 3. That women and Mary the mother of Iesus v. 14. being there had voice and exercised authority in ordaining an Apostle cannot be orderly Yea the Apostles names are seâ downe and these words V. 23. and they appointed two are relative to v. 17. these words For he was numbred with us the Apostles and to these V. 21. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us c. and to these v. 22. must one be ordained to be witnesse with us of his resurrestion and they appointed two that is the Apostles and the rest are set downe as witnesses v. 14. These continued that is the Apostles with the women and Mary the mother of Iesus c. The women and others were onely consenters 3. Here is no probation that onely a company of believers wanting Pastors are
provinciae cum iis orainare sibi comprovincales Episcopos quod si id facero negligat populus convocare debet Episcopos vicinae provinciae peterâ sibi rectorem In the councell of Toledo it was ordained that the Bishop of Toledo might chuse in quibustibee Prâvinciis in any provinces about Bishops to be his successors salvo privilegio uniusânjusquâ provinciae Cardinalls are forbidden to usurp to chuse a Bishop if the see vace in the time of a generall Councell this was enacted in the councell of Constance and Basil. The Abbot of Panormo saith it was obtained of the councell of Carthage to avoyde dissension that they should transfer their right to the Cardinalls So Almain and Gerson prove the equity of this by good reasons That wicked councell of Trent labouring to exalt the popes chaire did abrogate these good acts to the offence of many as the Author of the review of the councell of Trent sheweth nor should good men stand for Leo his abrogation of what the councell of Basil did in this kinde as may be seene in that wicked councell of Lateran wherein much other wicked power is given to the pope and his Legates by Iulius III. and Paul the III. and Pius the IIII. and Theodoret saith all the Bishops of a Province ought to bee at the ordination of a Bishop The ordination of the worthy Ambrose as hee himselfe saith was confirmed by all the Bishops of the East and West Cornelius Bishop of Rome was confirmed by the Bishops of Africa More of this may be seene in Zonaras In Theodoret the councell of Carthage and Petrus a Navarre who all witnes ordination of a Bishop was never done in the ancient Church by one single Congregation and these destitute of pastors and Elders The learned say that Gregory the VII or Hildebrand did first exclude the people from voycing in elections of pastors Illiricus sayth onely from the time of Frederick the XI about the yeare 1300 they were excluded from this power And though it were true that the election of Alexander the III. was made 400 yeeres before that by the Cardinalls onely without the peoples consent the Law and Logick both say from one fact no Law can be concluded Yea the election of Gregory the VII saith Vasquez was five hundred yeeres before that and like enough that such a monster and such a seditious head to the Lords annoynted to Henry the IIII as this Gregory was could violate Christs order Platina sayth so yet Bellarmine Suarez and others grant in the Apostles time it was so bââ because it was a positive Law some say and others that it was a Church constitution not a divine Law the Pope might change it Yet the Jesuite Sanctius in his comment proveth it from Scripture Azorius sayth it should be common Law communi jure Krantius layeth the blame of wronging the people in this on Gregory the IX yea the councell of Bracare the second councell of Nice The councell of Constantinople 4 called the eight generall Councell the councell of Laodicea are corruptly expounded by Bellarmin Vâsquez and others because 1. They forbid onely disorder and confusion 2. That all the multiude without exceptionosage gifts or sexes should come and speak and voyce at the election For in the councell of Antioch it is expressely forbidden that the multitude should be debarred And wee will not deny but a pastor may be sent to a Church of Infidels that knoweth nothing of Christ without their knowledge as Ruffinuâ sayth that Frumentius was ordained Bishop to the Indians they knowing nothing of it Indis nihil scientibus neque cogitantibus Epiphanius writeth to Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem that hee had ordained Paulinianus a presbyter the people not consenting Gregorius ordained Augustine Bishop of England and sent him to them to teach them Anglis nescientibus And Gregorius II. ordained Bonifacius a Bishop to bee sent to Germany Germanis nihil de eare cogitantibus And thus Perkins if the Gospell should arise in America where there were no Ministers ordination might be wanting And why not say I election also in another case if as Petrus Martyr sayth well a woman may be a Preacher of the Gospell Yea and a Turke sayth Zanchius converted by reading the New Testament and converting others may baptize them whom hee converteth and be baptized where both ordination and election should be wanting and this may answer what Robinson saith for ordination by the people Nor did the people first begin to have hand in election in Tertullians time as Bellarmine saith nor yet that the people might love their Bishops nor yet by meere custome Conclus III. It is false our Brethren say that the calling of a Minister consisteth principally and essentially in election of the people for the Apostles were essentially pastors yet not one of them except Matthias was chosen by the people 2. If as our Brethren say the peoples after acceptance may supply the want of Election at first as Iacobs after consent to Leah made her his Wife yet all the pastorall acts of Word Sacraments and censures going before the after consent shall be null because he wanteth that which most principally and essentially is required in a calling And all baptized by him must be rebaptized And what if the people shall never assent and it is ordinary that hypocrites in hearts will never consent to the Ministry of a gratious pastor shall his acts of converting and baptizing be no pastorall acts and to the hypocrites no pastorall acts and shall all be Infidels who are baptized by him The people are not infallible in their choise and may refuse a man for a pastor whom God hath called to be a pastor election maketh not one a pastor in foro Dei then he shall be no pastor whom God hath made a Pastor because people out of ignorance or prejudice consent not to his Ministery Nor are we of Dr. Ames judgement that the calling of a Minister doth essentially consist in the peoples election for his externall calling consisteth in the presbyters separation of a man for such a holy calling as the Holy Ghost speaketh Wee finde no Church-calling in all Gods Word of sole election of the people and therefore it cannot be the essentiall forme of a right calling All the arguments of Doctor Ames prove that election is necessary to appropriate a made Minister to such a Congregation but concludeth not the poyn Qu. 5. From whence had Luther Calvin and our blessed Reformers their calling to the pastorall charge This question there is moved because of our Brethren who thinke 1. If ordination of pastors by pastors be so necessary for an ordinary calling to the Ministery and if Election of people be not sufficient though they want pastors and Elders then Luther and our Reformers had no calling
discipline doe leaven a Church yet it doth not as Robinson saith evert the nature thereof and turne it into Babylon and a den of Dragons Robinson will have prophanenesse and impiety by absolute necessity rooted out by discipline but he is too hasty Nay not by publique preaching of a sent Pastor through absolute but onely through ordinary and conditionall necessity You bind the Almighty too hard The other question is if conversion of sinners be an ordinary effect of a publique and sent ministery Our brethren in their answer to the 32 Questions sent to them deny this but no marvell seeing all conversion to them is done without the publique ministery by onely private Christians and in this we see no necessity of a called ministery to convert men to Christ which is the doctrine of Socinians and Anabaptists So Chemnitius so Gastius teacheth The Socinian Theo. Nicolaides Luther erred saith he when he asked from Muncerus his calling to preach Muncerus was an Anabaptist So Ostorodius in his institutions and Raddetius who objected the same that our brethren doe that the whole beleevers be a royall Priesthood But though we deny not but some may be converted by the teaching and private conference of private Christians yet the ordinary publique way is by the Word preached by a seââ Pastor as is cleare Rom. 10. 14. 1 Cor. 3. 5. Acts 9. 10. Acts 10. 5 6 c. CHAP. 10. SECT 10. Concerning our order and form in administration of Gods publique worship THe Authour here contendeth for the worship of God in its native simplicity without all ceremonies to which I can oppose nothing but shall prove the unlawfulnesse of humane ceremonies in another Treatise God-willing Of the communion of the visible Catholique Church IEsus Christ hath now under the N. Testament a Catholique visible Church on earth for of that part of the Catholique Church now triumphing in glory or of that part which onely is a Church of elected Saints and are not yet formally a professing Church but onely such in the predestinatiun of God I spake not now and to this Church universall visible hath the Lord given a ministery and all his Ordinances of Word and Sacrament principally and primarily and to the ministery and guides of this Catholique visible Church hath the Lord committed the Keyes as to the first subject and for the visible Church Catholique including also the invisible Church as for the object and end hath he given his ordinances and the power of the keyes And the Ministery and ordinances are not given to this or this Congregation which meeteth ordinarily in one place principally 1. The Lord Iesus gave this Ministeriall power to the universall guides of the catholick Church the Apostles as they did represent the Presbytery of the whole Catholick visible Church Ioh. 20. 21. As my Father sent me so send I you 22. And when he had thus sayd he breathed on them and said receive the Holy Ghost 23 whosoever sinnes you remit they are remitted and whosoever sinnes you retaine they are retained The Apostles here receive the keys in name of the whole Catholick Ministeriall guides For in this the Apostles must stand in the person and roome of a single society of believers united by a Church covenant in one parishonall Church if our brethrens grounds stand good so as a Parishionall Church must be the onely successors of the Apostles but this no Word of God can warrant Nor is the Eldership of a single Congregation that which the Apostles here represented except you say to this Eldership as to the first subject is this message of sending as the Father sent Christ committed and to this Eldership within one Congregation is the power Ministeriall of pardoning and retaining sinnes given For I aske from whence or from whose hands do the Eldership of a Congregation receive the keys from Jesus Christ say they but this is no answer the Ministery according to its institution is no doubt onely from the head of the body the Church from Iesus Christ. But I aske now of an ordinary Church-calling and I demand from whose hands under Jesus Christ have this particular Eldership received Ministeriall power they cannot say from themselves for they doe not make themselves Ministers they will not say from a Colledge of Presbyters of many congregations for they are flatly against all such presbyteries and that which they say indeed the Eldership of a congregation hath their Ministeriall power from the people Well then the Apostles when they received the keys they did represent the people but what people not the people of a classicall presbytery of a Province of a Nation of the whole redeemed Church but of one single congregation how shall this be made out of the Text or out of one Word of God I see not 2. Christ ascending on high and giving some to be Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers 12. For the perfecting of the Saints not of Ephesus far lesse of one single Congregation onely for the worke of the Ministery in generall for the edifying of the Body of Christ not a congregationall body onely 12. Till we all meet in the unity of the Faith and of the knowledge of the Sonne of God unto a perfit man unto the measure of the stature of the fulnesse of Christ. Consider I pray you that Christs intention in giving a Ministery is not for a congregation of forty or sixty or a hundred as if hee intended to impawn all power in that Congregationall body but hee intended the edifying of his body Catholick and the comming of all to the unity of the Faith A Congregation of sixty cannot be all Saints and this power is clearely given to that body which the Lord is to make a perfit man according to the measure of the fulnesse of the stature of Christ this is a mysticall man and the Catholick body of Iesus Christ. Call it a Congregation and you wrest the Scripture and vilifie the noble and large end for the which Christ hath given a ministery as aske to what end and to what first and principall subject hath the Lord given reason and a faculty of discoursing is it to Peter to Iohn c. as to the first subject and for them as for their good no no it is for and to the race of mankind The case is is just so here 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath placed some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers c. Is the meaning thus God hath placed in the body of a single Congregation Apostles Where do you read that I believe Apostles have the Catholick visible Church for their Parish and is it a Congregationall body wherein God placed such variety of members as Apostles Prophets Teachers Workes of miracles gifts of Healing Helps Governments c So Rom. 12. 5. So we being many are one body in Christ and every one members of another Hence hee
Text beare that the Elders set up a Court before the Eyes of all the people and delivered such a man to Satan so as this is called the head of Elders and people as our Brethren teach and here they distinguish where the Scripture distinguisheth not Fourthly if the Scripture give to us Thrones really different though names and titles cannot be found more then we find expresly and in words two Sacraments three Persons and one God Christ Iesus in two Natures and one Person then have we what we seeke but wee have these different in the things themselves as Acts 2. 46. wee have a Church meeting in an House for Word and Sacraments as Acts 20. 8. and a Congregation in Corinth meeting in an House 1 Cor. 11. 20. 1 Cor. 14. 23. and consequently here must bee some power in this meeting to order the worship of God this single meeting is to rebuke those that sinne openly and to hinder Women to preach in the Congregation and to forbid by the power of the Keys that two speake at once because God is the God of order to borbid Doctrine that edifieth not and speaking Gods Word in an unknowen Tongue c. 2. There is an Eldership ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in every City in Ephesus in Ierusalem who met for Jurisdiction Acts 21. 18. who layd hands on Timothy 1 Tim. 14. 14. in Antioch Acts 13. 1. 3. There is a meeting of a provinciall Church in Galathia where there are many Churches as may be gathered from Acts 5. 9. 10. who were to purge out the scandalous and false Teachers who leavened all others and who were Gal. 6. 1. to restore with the spirit of meekenesse any fallen Brother and 4. There a map and patterne of a generall Synod warranting both a nationall Church-meeting and an Oâcumenick councell And the like may be gathered from that Synod Acts 1. and Acts 6. where these universall guides of the whole Christian World to wit the Apostles were and did exercise Jurisdiction by ordaining of Officers and though instances of these could not be given in Scripture there is a morall ground and warrant for it 1. Because joynt power of Jurisdiction are surer and better then a lesser and dispersed power For if the Keys be given to the Church visible not to this or this little Church as meetting in a private House Acts 2. 46. Acts 20. 8. The division or union of this power the extension of it must be squared by the rule of most convenient edification and it cannot stand with edification if it be given to one Congregation onely The God of nature for conserving humane societies hath given the power of government originally not to one but to a multitude for one onely is not in danger to be wronged and oppressed in a society but a society is in this danger therefore hath God given this power to a multitude and a multitude is the formall object of policy and government and cannot but be dâssolved where Lawes and Government are not So the God of Grace must have given a power of government to a society and multitude of little Churches for a multitude of Congregations is a multitude and therefore this society and consociation cannot subsist except Christ have provided a supernaturall government for it It is not reasonable that some say a morall institution is not an institution for Magistracy is both morall and a Divine institution that God have a certaine day for his service is both morall and also a Divine institution all institutions are not meerly positive as some suppose such as is that the last day of the week be the Sabbath that Bread and Wine be signes of Christs Body brâken and his Blood shed for us So supposing that Christ have a visible Church it is morall that shee have power of government also in so farre as shee is a Church Yea power of government upon this supposition is naturall or rather con naturall so by the same ground upon supposall that Christ have in a Nation a multitude of consociated Churches who for vicinity may either edifie encourage comfort and provoke âre another to love and good workes they submitting themselves to the Lawes of Christs policy or may scandalize one another as many consociated Churches in Galathia were bent to bite devâure and consume one another Gal. 5. 15. it is morall yea and con-naturall that they be under a Divine policy externall Nor is it more agreeable to the Wisdome of Christ that a multitude of consociated Churches in one Land should be left to the Lawes of nature and Christian brother-hood and be loosed from all Lawes of externall policy then that the just Lord who intendeth the conservation of humane societies should leave every man to the Law of nature and not give them a power to set up a Magistracy and to appoynt humane and civill Lawes whereby they may be conserved And I thinke we should all say if God had appoynted every great Family yea or every twenty Families in the World to be independent within it selfe and subordinate to no civill law to no power to no Magistracy without that independent little incorporation that God had not then appoynted a power of civill Policy and civill Lawes for the conservation of mankind and the reason should be cleare because in one Shire Countrey Province and Nation there should be a multitude to wit ten hundred ten thousand independent Kingdomes subject to no Lawes nor civill policy but immediately subordinate to GOD in the Law of nature and when these ten thousand should rise up and with the Sword devoure one another and one society independent should wrong another the onely remedy should be to complaine to God and renounce civill communion with such Societies that is traffique not with them doe not take or give borrow or lend buy or sell with them but it is unlawfull to use any coercive power of naturall or civill reparation to compell them to doe duty or execute mercy and Judgement one toward another now seeing grace destroyeth not nature neither can there be a policy independent which doth contradict this maxime of naturall policy acknowledged by all in all policies civill naturall supernaturall God intending the conservation of societies both in Church and State hath subjected all Societies and Multitudes to Lawes of externall policy but so it is a Multitude of little Congregations is a Multitude and a Society Then it must follow that government of independent little bodies under no coactive power of Church censures must want all divine institution and so be will worship For these it shall be easie to answer the obloquies of some saying that a nationall Church under the New Testament is Judaisme Hence say they a nationall Religion a nationall Oath or Covenant is like a World-Church a Church a huge body as big as the Earth and so if some Augustus should subdue the whole VVorld to himselfe with the Sword Hee might compell the VVorld to bee
principally seated in the Presbytery in regard of the latter Synods are the first subject of the occasionall Church-power in things which âe in common belong to many Presbyteries or to a nationall Church But to returne if the Synodicall power bee different in essence and nature and not gradually onely from the counsell and advise of Christians then first it is not a determination that bindeth by way of counsell and brotherly advise onely but under some higher consideration which is as like a Church-relation of Church-power as any thing can bee seeing here bee Pastors acting as Pastors 2. formally gathered in a councell 3. speaking Gods Word 4. by the holy Ghost But this shall bee against the Church-government of New England 2. If it bee essentially different from an advise and councell and warranted by divine institution why doe not our brethen give us Scripture for it for if they give us Act. 15. then can they not say that the Apostles in this Synod did determine and voyce as Apostles by an Apostolick and immediatly inspiring Spirit for the spirit Synodicall is a spirit imitable and a rule of pertually induring moralitie in all Synods and must leade us for an Apostolick spirit is not now in the world 3. As they require a positive divine institution for the frame of a Presbyteriall Church in power above a Congregation and will not bee satisfied with the light of nature which upon the supposall of a spirituall government instituted by Christ in a Congregation which is a part may clearely by the hand lead us to the inlarging of that same spirituall government in the whole that is to a number of consociated Churches which are all interessed as one common societie in a common government so they must make out for their Synod endued with dogmaticall power a positive divine institution 4. We desire a warrant from the Word why a colledge of Pastors determining by the Word of God as Pastors having power of order and acting in a colledge according to that power should not bee a formall and ordinary great Presbytery 5. How can they by our brethrens determination exercise such pastorall acts out of their owne Congregations towards those Churches to which they have no pastorall relation virtute potestatis ordinis 6. How can the wisedome of Christ who provideth that his servants bee not despised but that despisers in a Church way should bee censured 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. cloth his messengers in a Synod with a power dogmaticall and deny all power of iâââdiction to them upon the supposall that their determinations be rejected I feare there bee something under this that none are to bee censured or delivered to Satan for heterodox opinions except they erre in points fundamentall But farther it may bee made good that a power dogmaticall is not different in nature from a power of jurisdiction for we read not of any societie that hath power to meet to make Lawes and decrees which have not power also to backe their decrees with punishments if the Jewish Synedry might meet to declare judicially what was Gods Law in point of conscience and what not and to tie men to it they had power to conveene and make Lawes farre more may they punish contraveners of the Law for a nomothetick power in a societie which is the greater power and is in the fountaine must presuppose in the societie the lesse power which is to punish and the power of punishing is in the inferior judicature so a nomothetick power ministeriall cannot want a power of censuring It is true a single Pastor may ministerially give out commandements in the authoritie of Christ but hee cannot his alone censure or excommunicate the contraveners of those commandements but it followeth well in an assembly hee hath power to censure and excommunicate now here Pastors and Elders are in an assembly It is objected Pastors in a Synod have no jurisdiction as Pasters for what they doe as Pastors that they may doe there alone and on of a Synod but they doe not nor cannot determine and give out Canons there alone and they cannot there alone determine juridically therefore they doe not wholly and poorely as Pastors in relation to those Churches give out these decrees yet doe they not give out the decrees as privite men wholly but in some pastor all relation for Pastors as Pastors have something peculiar to them in all Churches whither they come to preach so as a speciall blessing followeth on their labours though they be not Pastors in relation to all the Churches they come to even as a Sermon on the Lords day is instamped with a more speciall blessing bâââuse of Gods institution imprinted on the day then a Sermon preached in another day Answ. This argument is much for us it is proper to acts of jurisdiction ecclesiasticall that they cannot bee exercised by one onely but must bee exercised by a societie now a Pastor as a Pastor his alone without any collaterally joyned with him exerciseth his pastorall acts of preaching and of administrating the Sacraments but those who give out those decrees cannot give them out Synodically but in a Synod and Court-wayes as forensicall decrees and so in a juridicall way and because Pastors whither so ever they come doe remaine Pastors 1. The Apostles are not in this Synod as Apostles Secondly nor yet as gifted Christians to give their counsell and advise nor thirdly as this answerer granteth meerely as Pastors then it must follow that fourthly they are here as such pastors conveened Synodically by divine institution and that this is the patterne of a Synod Object 2. But there is no censuring of persons for scandalls in this meeting because there is nothing here but a doctrinall declaration of the falsehood of their opinion who taught a necessitie of circumcision and that all is done by way of doctrine and by power of the Keyes of knowledge not of jurisdiction is cleare from the end of this meeting Act. 5. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent from the Church of Antiocâ unto Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã concerning this question and v. 6. the Apostles and Elders came together to consider ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of this matter consideration of questions being the end of the Synod is a thing belonging to doctrinal power meerely so Mr. Mather Answ. 1. It is false that there is no censuring of persons here for to say nothing that Peter accuseth those of the wrong side as personally present at the Synod either being summoned or comming thither by appeale v. 10. Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoake upon the necke of the Discip'es c. which reproofe comming from one man onely cannot be called a Synodicall reproofe It is more then evident that the publick Synodicall censure of rebuke is put upon those who held and urged the necessitie of circumcision and why not excommunication also in case of obstinacy for the Synodicall censure
of a publick Synodicall rebuke is onely gradually different not specifically from excommunication and both must proceed from one and the same power Now the Synodicall censure is evident in the Text v. 24. certaine went out from us so it is cleare they pretended they were in this point followers of the Apostles and Lorinus thinketh that some deemed them schismaticks 2. They have troubled you with words Lorinus citeth the Sy ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã vedalacachum they have terrified you as if your salvation were not sure except you keepe Moses his Law of ceremonies and the morall Law 3. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã destraying by false arguments your soules it is a word contrary to building up in sound knowledge as Aristotle taketh the word saying that you must bee circumcised and keepe the Law 4. They abused the name of the Apostles as having an Apostolick commandement and so a divine warrant for their false doctrine and therefore are they refuted as liars ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã whence it is cleare they did labour to prove a necessitie of circumcision not onely from the old Testament and an expresse divine Law but also from the authoritie of the Apostles which was manifestly false out of which I argue thus If the Apostles doe not onely in a doctrinall way refute a false doctrine in this Synod but also in a Church-way and by a juridicall power rebuke and Synodically charge the authors as subâerters of soules and liars then they doe not onely use a meere doctrinall power in this Synod but also a juridicall power but the former is true Ergo so is the latter 2. Observe two things in these obtruders of circumcision First the error of their judgement It is more then apparent that they had a heterodox and erroneous opinion of God and his worship and the way of salvation as is cleare Act. 15. 1. And certaine men which came downe from Judea taught the brethren and said except yee bee circumcised after the manner of Moses yee cannot bee saved This doctrine is clearely refuted both by Peter v. 10. That yoake of the Law wee disclaime there is a way of salvation without that yoake v. 11. But wee beleeve that through the grace of the Lord Jesus wee shall bee saved as they and it is synodically refuted v. 24. wee gave no such commandement it is not the mind of us the Apostles of the Lord that you keepe Moses Law as you hope to bee saved there was for this error in their judgement required a doctrinall or dogmaticall power and this the Synod used 2. Besides this erroneous opinion in their judgement there was another fault and scandall that the Synod was to censure to wit their obtruding of their false way upon the soules and consciences of the Churches as vers 1 They taught the brethren this false doctrine 2. That they wilfully and obstinately did hold this opinion and raised a Schisme in the Courch v. 2. wherefore Paul and Barnabas had no small ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã dissention the word signifieth sedition which was raised by those who held that erroneous opinion and great disputation with them 3. They laid a yoake upon the brethren v. 10. and v. 7. They made great disputation against the Apostles and v. 24. They troubled the brethren and perverted their soules This was not simply an heterodox opinion which is the materiall part of a heresie but had something of the formall part of an heresie to wit some degrees of pertinacie of brutish and blind zeale even to the troubling and perverting of the soules of the Churches while as they would make disciples to themselves and lead away soules from the simplicitie of the Gospell now the Synod doth not helpe this latter simply in a Synodicall way by a dogmaticall and doctrinall power but by an authoritie Synodicall and therefore they authoritatively rebuke them as subverters of soules and whereas these teachers laid on an unjust yoake to keepe Moses his Law upon the Churches v. 10. the Synod by their ecclesiasticall and juridicall authoritie doth free the Churches of that yoake and they say in their decree v. 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us not to lay the yoake of Moses his Law on you as those who trouble you have done to lay upon you no greater burden then these necessary things c. now if there had beene nothing to doe but to resolve the question if this had beene the totall and adequat end of the Synod in a meere doctrinall way to resolve the question Whether must wee bee circumcised and keepe the Law morall and ceremoniall of Moses upon necessitie of salvation as the argument of our brethren contendeth Peter v. 10. 11. made a cleare issue of the question We are saved by the grace of God both âânes and Gentiles and it is to tempt God to lay the yoake of the Law of Moses upon the brethren the resolving of that question is the end of the Synod but not the adequat end for here that not onely the doctrinall power was to bee used but beside that 1. the schisme was to bee removed and the authoritie of the Synod to bee used against the wilfulnesse and obstinacie of those obtruders of circumcision in rebuking them as perverters of soules 2. For the scandall which might have been taken if the Gentiles should have eaten blood and things strangled and meats offered to idols and therefore the Apostles and Elders behoved as a conveened Synod to forbid a grievous scandall and a spirituall homicide against the Law of nature to wit that the Gentiles for feare of scandalizing weake beleevers amongst the Jewes should abstaine from the practise of some things at this time meerely indifferent in their nature though not indifferent in their use such as were to eate things offered to idols things strangled and blood and whereas our brethren 3. Object If the Apostles did any thing more then might have been done by private Pastors out of a Synod it was meerely Apostolicall and the Elders did but assent to the Apostles Apostolicall determination and every one did here Apostles Elders and Brethren more suo Apostles as Apostles Elders and Brethren as Elders and Brethren after their manner as consenters to the Apostles but other wayes it is a begging of the question for to say the Apostles and Elders rebuked Synodically the obtruders of circumcision it s but said because one Pastor might have rebuked those obtruders for the specification of actions must not bee taken from their efficient causes but from their formall objects therefore this is no good consequence the Synod rebuked those obtruders Ergo the Synod rebuked them as a Synod and by a power of jurisdiction it followeth not for Paul Gal. 2. rebuked Peter Ergo Paul had a power of jurisdiction over Peter I thinke your selves will deny this consequence I Answer 1. These two answers are contradictory and sheweth that our brethren are not true to their owne
principles for sometime they say the Apostles gave out this decree as Apostles and sometime there is nothing here done by a meere doctrinall power such as Paul had over Peter or one single Pastor hath over another now it is sure that Paul had no Apostolick power over Peter and that one Pastor have not Apostolick power over another 2. When our brethren say here that the Apostles as Apostles by an infallible spirit gave out this Decree they doe in this helpe the Papists as Bellarmine Becanus Grâârut and in particular the Jesuit Lorinus who saith decrâum authenticum cujus inspirator spiritus sanctâ and so saith Cornelius a lapide visiâm est nob is inspiratis decretis a Spiritu sanctus therefore saith hee the councell cannot erre and so Salmeron and Cajetan say and expresly Stapleton saith this Apostosack definition flowed from the instinct of the holy Ghost observandum saith Stapleton quanta habenda sit ecclesiae definienth authoritâs hence our brether here must yeeld either that all Synods are infallible as Papists say this Synod the patterne of all Synods being concluded by an Apostolick spirit could not erre and so neither can councells erre or they must with Socinians and Arminians say there is no warrant for Synods here at all And certainly though wee judge our brethren as farre from Popery and Socinianisme as they thinke wee detest Anti-Christian Presbytery yet if this Synod bee concluded by an Apostolick spirit it is no warrant to bee imitated by the Churches and wee have no ground hence for lawfull Synods Whittakerus Calvin Beza Luther and all our Divines do all alledge this place as a pregnant ground not of Apostolick but of ordinary and constant Synods to the end of the world and Diodatus good to the holy Ghost because they did treat of ecclesiasticall reders concerning the quietnes and order of the Church wherein ecclesiasticall authoritie hath place the Assembly used this tearme it seemed good to us which is not used neither in articles of faith nor in the commandements which meerely concerned the conscience and to shew that authoritie was with holy reason and wisedome there is added and to the holy Ghost who guided the Apostles in these outward things also 1. Cer. 7. 25. 40. 2. If our brethren meane that the Elders and brethren were in this Apostolick and immediatly inspired Synodicall determination not as collaterall penners of Scriptures joyned with the Apostles but onely as consenters and as consenters by power of an ordinary holy Ghost working consent in them more suo according to their capacitie as ordinary Elders 1. They yet more helpe the Papists because they must say onely Apostles and so onely their successors the Prelates had definitive voices in this Synod the Presbyters and Brethren did no more then Papists and Prelates say Presbyters did in generall councells of old and therefore the Presbyter is to subscribe Ego A. N. Presbyter consentiens subseribo whereas the Prelate subscribed say they Ego A. B. Episcopus definiens subscribo wee crave a warrant in Gods Word to make an Apostle or a Prelate a Synodicall definer having a definitive voyce and the Elder Brother or Presbyter to have a consultative voyce for here all the multitude if there was a multitude present doe make Synodicall decrees by consulting and consenting yea all the nation may come to a nationall Synod and both reason dispute and consent because matters of doctrine and government of the Church concerneth all therefore all have an interest of presence and all have an interest of reasoning and 3. by consequent all have an interest of consenting yea of protesting on the contrary if the Synod determine any thing against the Word of God If they say there is a threeford consent in this Synod 1. an Apostolicall 2. a second Synodicall agreeing to Elders as Elders and a third that of the people or a popular What a mixt Synod shall this be but 1. then as the Epistle to the Tlxssalonians is called the Epistle of Paul not the Epistle of Silvanus and Timotheus though Silvanus and Timotheus did consent so these dogmata or decrees should not be called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders as they are called Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 6. Act. 21. 25. but onely the decrees of the Apostles seeing the Elders did onely consent and had no definitive influence in making the decree by this doctrine as Silvanus and Timotheus were not joynt pen-men of Scripture with Paul 3. When as it is said the specification of actions must not bee taken from the efficient cause but from the formall object and all that a done in this Synod might have beene done by a single Pastor I answer wee doe not fetch the specification of this rebuke and of these decrees from the efficient causes but from the formall object for an Apostle might his alone have rebuked these obtruders of circumcision and made this decree materialiter for Paul did more his alone then this when hee wrote the Eâistle to the Romans but yet one Pastor could not have Synodically rebuked and given out a decree formally Synodicall laying an Ecclesiasticall tie on moe Churches then one there is great ods to doe one and the same action formally and to doe the same action materially and I beleeve though actions have not by good logick their totall specification from their efficient cause yet that ordinances of God as lawfull have their specification from the efficient causes in part our brethren cannot deny For what made the difference betwixt Aaron his fire offered to the Lord and Nadab and Abihu their strange and unlawfull fire that they offered to the Lord but that the on fire had God for its author the other had men and the like I say of Gods feasts and the feasts devised by Jeroboam else if a woman preach and administrate the Lords Supper in the Church that preaching and sacrament administrated by her should not have a different specification and essence if wee speake morally or Theologically from that same very preaching and celebration of the Supper performed in the Church by a lawfull Pastor it is as I conceive of the essence of an action Synodicall I say not its totall essence that it cannot bee performed by one in a Church-way and with an ecclesiasticall tie but it must be performed by many else it is not a Synodicall action and it is true that Paul Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. hath in substance the same Canon forbidding scandall which is forbidden in this Canon prohibiting eating of meats offered to Idolls and blood in the case of scandall but I pray you is there not difference betwixt the one prohibition and the other yea there is for Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 10. it hath undenyably Apostolick authoritie here it hath onely Synodicall 2. There it is a commandement of God here it is a Canon of the Church 3. There it commeth from one man here from a
and the Churches of Antioch had here Commissioners for Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas with certaine other of them ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã this must relate to Pastors and Elders if Syria and Cilicia had no Commissioners here as certainly they were oblieged to send Commissioners as well as Antioch seeing their case was one with Antioch v. 23. and they could not but heare of this Apostolick remedie to remove the scandall of false Doctrine and therefore their Commissioners were either here or then they were oblieged to bee here and here wee have the true essence of a Synod to wit a meeting of the Churches of Antioch and Jerusalem at Jerusalem to determine of this question But that the Church of Jerusalem did not determine all the businesse in a Presbyteriall way and that others had hand in it is cleare 1. Because Paul and Barnabas and others with them are expresly sent from Antioch to Jerusalem as Commissioners and Elders and here they reason and voyce as is cleare ch 15. v. 12. v. 22. v. 28. ch 16. 4. ch 21. 25 26. and the Acts and Decrees are ascribed to all the Apostles and Elders who were present at the councell ch 14. 4. ch 15. v. 22. v. 12. and amongst these were Paul and Barnabas with certaine others sent from Antiâb Act. 15. 2. and the Elders of Jerusalem Act. 21. 25. with the Apostles Act. 16. 4. 2. the reasons alledged are false for Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 22. Act. 21. 25. the Acts and Synodicall Decrees are not ascribed to Elders of Jerusalem onely but to the Apostles who were not Elders at Jerusalem and to the Elders in Jerusalem Act. 16. 4. not of Jerusalem 3. It is no matter though it cannot bee proven that the Churches of Syria and Cilicis had no Commissioners there for first the contrary cannot bee proven secondly they ought to have had Commissioners here thirdly the Acts are sent to them conjunctly with Antioch and messengers to report the mind and sense of the Assembly as to Antioch v. 23. 4. It is but a groundlesse conceit to say that Paul and Barnabas came to the Synod as Commissioâââs or as servants to receive information not as Elders to give their decisive voices because Paul carried himselfe in the assembly as Peter and James who were Elders in the assembly and they being Apostles the decrees are ascribed to the Apostles without any distinction Act. 15. 28. Act. 16. 4. And if Paul and Barnabas and Silas a Prophet of the Church at Antioch Act. 15. v. 32. with Judas v. 27. also a Prophet had beene onely Commissioners and servants of the Church at Antioch and not Elders and members of the Assembly how could they have voices in the Church or Congregation of Jerusalem for the messengers of one Congregation hath not place to voyce in another Congregation 2. It is said expressely It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send chosen men of their owne with Paul and Barnabas namely Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas chiefe men leading men amongst the Brethren now I desire to bee resolved in two 1. how Judas and Silas were men of their owne company ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã certainly ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã must relate to the Assembly to wit to Elders and Apostles by all good Grammar and how are they called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Captaines and leading men amongst the Brethren which brethren are certainly these mentioned in the same verse Apostles Elders and the whole Church and these mentioned in the next verse 23. Apostles Elders and Brethren that is chosen men of this Assembly now it is evident that Judas and Silas were no part of Elders of the Church of Jerusalem but Prophets at Antiab v. 32. and members of that Presbytery spoken of Act. 13. 1 2. and Act. 15. v. 35. And what power then had the Assembly to send them and especially what power had the Eldership or presbytery of Jerusalem to send men ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of their owne company who were not men of their owne company therefore they were called chosen men ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of their owne company and leading men ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of the Brethren because they were members of the Assembly and of that councell gathered together with one accord v. 25. and not because they were naked messengers of the Church of Antioch but Elders Prophets v. 32. and members of the Assembly v. 22. 23. And when as it is said Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 28. These decrees are ascribed to the Elders in Jerusalem I answer they are not called the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem as Revel 2. 1. To the Angel of the Church of Ephesus v. 8. To the Angel of the Church of Smyrna and v. 12. of the Church of Pergamus and v. 18. and Act. 20. 17. but the Eders which were at Jerusalem assembled and this doth no more prove that all these Elders were onely the Elders of the Church at Jerusalem then it proveth that the Apostles were the Apostles of the Church at Ierusalem which no man can say yea by the phrase of Scripture used in other places it is cleare they were not the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem and for Act. 21. 25. The Elders of the Church of Jerusalem taketh those Decrees upon them not as if they made the whole Synod but because they were a considerable part of the Synod for it is cleare from the story Act. 15. that the Apostles and others were members of that assembly and therefore that v. 25. Wee have written and concluded c. must bee expounded wee as a part of the Synod have written c. and it is a Synecdoche and the pronoune ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã wee includeth no Apostle but James whereas Peter Paul Barnabas Iudas Silâs and others Elders and Brethren were members of the Synod yea and as our Brethren say though to mee it is not probable the whole Church of Ierusalem from v. 22. c. 15. Object 7. They take away the scandall in a doctrinall way only declaring that they ought to abstaine from things scandalous Answ. The very delivering to Satan may thus bee called doctrinall because it is a Declaration that the mans sinnes are retained in heaven yet it is an authoritative declaration and if it bee meere doctrinall one Pastor and one Prophet might have done all which this venerable colledge of Apostles and Elders disputed reasoned and concluded Synodically A meere doctrinall power layeth not on burdens and Decrees Herodian calleth such ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã senatusconsultâin and Budeââs a man excellently skilfull in the Greeke language saith the like of it and so doth the civill Law make it a statute of the Senate Object 8. The reason why Patel could not though hee was an Apostle determine this at Antioch was not because hee wanted Apostolick authoritie but because his Apostolick power was more questionable hee not having seene Christ in the flesh
the supper at night and after Supper 1 Câr 11. 21. few thousands should bee able to communicate after Supper 2. There was no necessitie that these wise master-builders should divide the Church and the first visible Church in so many parts and this successive communion doth clearely prove our point that there were many Congregations for every successive fraction being a competent convention of beleevers having the Word and Sacraments and so power of jurisdiction not to admit all promiscuously to the Lords Table is to our brethren a compleat Church for to it indeed agreeth the essentiall Characters of a visible instituted Church for there is here a ministery the Word and Sacraments and some power of jurisdiction within it selfe and so what lacketh this successive fraction of an intire Congregation But what ground for so needlesse a conjecture that the Apostolick Church did celebrate the Lords Supper in the Temple never in private houses The contrary is Act. 20. 7. And upon the first day of the weeke the Disciples came together to breake bread Paul preached unto them v. 8. And there were many lights in an upper Chamber where they were conveened so the Text is cleare the first day of the weeke 1 Cor. 16. 1. was the day of the Christians publick worship and Augustine Calvin Luâher Melancthon Bullinger Diodatus and so Lorinus and Sanchius say this was the Lords Supper who can imagine that the Apostles did bring so many thousand Christians after Supper to the Temple to celebrate a new Evangelick feast and that immediatly after Peters first Sermon Act. 2. 42 1. Before the Apostles had informed the Jewes that all their typicall and ceremoniall feasts were now abolished yea while they stood in vigor and the Apostles themselves kept them in a great part was this like the Spirit of the Gospel which did beare with Moses his ceremonies for fortie yeares 2. The Apostles Act. 4. 1. are indited before the Synedry that they taught in the Temple Jesus Christ if they had with so many thousands gone to the Temple with a new extraordinary ceremoniall ordinance as a new Sacrament so contrary in humane reason to all the sacred Feasts Sacrifices and ceremonies should not this with the first have beene put in their inditement that they were shouldering Moses out of the Temple yet are they onely accused for teaching the people yea Christ the Law-giver who preached the Gospell daily in the Temple would not take the last Supper to the Temple but celebrated it in a private Chamber and Paul being accused alwayes as an enemy to Moses and the Temple his enemies the Jewes who watched him heedfully could never put on him that hee celebrated a Sacrament in the Temple as for Baptisme it being a sort of washing whereof the Pharisees used many Matth. 15. Mark 7. it was performed often sub diâ in rivers never in the Temple wee desire any author father Ocecumenius doubteth onely Doctor Divine Protestant or Papist late or old who said the Apostles celebrated the Supper in the Temple 3. Our brethren say all These did conveâne ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for Act. 4. 31. When they had prayed the place was shaken where they were assembled together ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Act. 2. 46. and they continued daily with one accord in the Temple and breaking bread from house to house did eate their meat with gladnesse Answ. The place Act. 4. 31. saith not that all the five thousand beleevers were in that one place which was shaken for v. 21. that when the Apostles were let goe by the Priests and Captaines of the Temple they returned to their owne company ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to their owne but no circumstance in the Text doth inferre that they came backe to the whole five thousand but onely to some few of the first beleevers that were converted before the first Sermon of Peter was made cap. 2 they returned Lyra and Hugo Cardinalis to their owne company ad domesticos suos and so saith Lorinus who citeth the Syriack ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã hachaiehin ad fratres suos Salmeron ad suos âapostolos sive condiscipulos domesticos fidei and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã doth not signifie the whole Church but friends and domesticks as Mark 5. 19. Goe home to thy own house and shew thy friends Luke ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã compared with Luk. 8. 39. and Gal. 6. 10 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and 1 Tim. 5. 8. therefore the place saith that the five thousand were gathered together in this one place which was shaken 2. Giving and not granting that they were all conveened to prayer it doth not follow that they did meet ordinarily in one place for partaking of Word and Sacraments as one Congregation for âoe might conveene to prayer and hearing the Word then could meet ordinarily in a Congregationall-way Neither will any Text inforce us to expone ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã collectively but distributively as wee say all the Congregations in Scotland met ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in one every Lords day that is every one of the Congregations is in one place but the sense is not that all the Congregations collectively are in one place And wee may justly aske what this place was which was shaken it is not like that it was the Temple that which should have beene more prodigious like and presaged a ruine to the Temple would not have beene concealoâ by the holy Ghost for it would have more terrified the Jewes and the Temple is never called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sine adjecto without some other thing to make it bee knowne to bee the holy place if it was a private house give us leave to say it could not containe five thousand to heare prayer farre lesse a more numerous multitude Wee reâit it to the judgement of the wise if the Apostles were so lazie to propagate the Gospell that where twelve of them were present undoubtedly Act. 4. 23 31. Act. 6. 2. and as many of the learned thinke the seventie Disciples that eleven Apostles did heare the Word onely and one did speake to one Congregation onely which consisted of so many thousands for to the five thousand if there were no moe c. 5. 14. mere beleevers were added to the Lord multitudes both of men and women who could not conveniently heare This I thinke not imaginable for 1. now the harvest was large thousands were to bee converted 2. The Spirit was now powred upon all flesh 3. Christ when hee sent the twâlve but to Judeâ hee sent them two and two and would have every man at worke and the Apostles went out in twoes Act. 13. Paul and Bârnaâas and sometimes but one Peter was sent to the Jewes Paul to the Gentiles and the world divided amongst them 1. of other officers Timothy is sent to Ephesus Titus to Crete that so they might the more swiftly spread the Gospell to all the world What wisedome could wee
imagine would lead the twelve Apostles to speake to one single Congregation met in one place at one time the rest to wit the eleven and the seventic Disciples being silent for in the Church the God of order will have one to speake at once 1 Cor. 14. 31. But our reverend brethren seeing and considering well that the Church at Jerusalem could not all meet in one Congregationall way and that they were a Christian Church and so behooâed to bee a Presbyteriall Church they doe therefore betake themselves to another Answer for they say that this Church at ãâ¦ã an extraordinary constituted Church and 1. wanted an Eldership and presbytery as Christian Churches have now 2. the government was meerely Apostolicall 3. the constitution was somewhat Jewish rather then Christian for their service was mixed with legall ordinances and Jewish observances for many yeares and therefore cannot bee a patterne of the Christian visible Church which wee now seeke To which I answer 1. Because our brethren consider that the Church of Jerusalem will not bee their independent Congregation before wee obtaine it for us as a mould of a presbâtâriall Church they had rather quit their part of it and permit the Jewes to have it for us both but wee are content that their Congregations in some good sense bee given to them and not to Jewes 2. There is no reason but the Church of Jerusalem bee a Christian Church 1. The externall profession of a visible Church maketh it a visible Christian Church but this Church professeth faith in Christ already come in the flesh and the Sacraments of the New Testament baptisme and the Sacramentall breaking of bread Act. 22. 41 42. wee desire to know how saving faith in a multitude constituteh an invisible Church and the externall and blamelesse profession of that same saving faith doth not contitute a visible Church also and how this is not a Christian visible Church not differing in essence and nature from the ãâã Churches that now are to which the essentiall note of a visible Church agreeth to wit the preaching or profession of the sound faith if it bee called an Apostolick and so an extraordinary Christian Church because the Apostles doth governe âit that is not enough if the Apostles governe it according to the rule of the word framing the visible Churches of the New Testament this way the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 5. shall bee an Apostolick and so an extraordinary Church which our brethren cannot say But wee desire to know wherein the frame of this first patterne Christian Church at Jerusalem is so extraordinary that it cannot bee a rule to us to draw the mould of our Churches according to it for if the Apostles make it a patterne of an ordinary Christian Church in Word and Sacraments to say it was extraordinary in the government except you shew that that government was different from the rule that now is in government is petitio principii to begge what is in question for these same keyes both of knowledge and jurisdiction that by your grant were given to the Church Matth. 18. 15 16 17. were given to the Apostles Matth. 16 17 18. and Joh. 20. 21. If you say it is extraordinary because as yet they had not Deacons for the Apostles did as yet serve tables where as afterward Act. 6. that was given to the Deacons by office and so they had not Elders nor Doctors nor Pastors as we now haâe but the Apostles were both Pastors Ruling Elders Doctors and Deacons and they were the onely governing Eldership and this was extraordinary that they had no Eldership and so they were for that same cause no presbyteriall Church whence it followeth that you cannot make this Church which had no presbytery a patterne of a presbyteriall Church But I answer this will not take off the argument if wee shall prove that after they were more then could meet in one Congregation and so after they were so numerous that they were moe Congregations then one they had one common government and 1. wee say though the Apostles had power to governe all the Churches of the world and so many Congregations yet if they did rule many Congregations as Elders and not as Apostles wee prove our point Now we say where baptisme and the Lords Supper was there behoved to bee some government else the Apostles admitted promiscuously to baptisme and the Lords Supper any the most scandalous and prophane which wee cannot thinke of the Apostles it is true say you they admitted not all but according to the rule of right government but this right government was extraordinary in that it was not in a setled Eldership of a Congregation which was oblieged to reside and personally to watch over that determinate flock and no other flock but it was in the hands of the Apostles who might goe through all the world to preach the Gospell and were not tied to any particular flock and so from this neither can you draw your classicall Eldership nor wee our Congregationall Eldership But I answer yet the question is begged for though it bee unlawfull for a setled Eldership not to reside where their charge is yet the question is now of a government in the hands of those who are oblieged to reside and give personall attendance to the flock and the government in the hands of the Apostles who were not oblieged to personall attendance over this and this particular flock which they did governe were governments so different in nature as the one is a patterne to us not the other and the one followeth rules different in nature and spirit from the other for though it were granted that the Apostles did governe many Congregations as Apostles not as Elders yet there was no extraordinary reason why these many Congregations should bee called one Church and the beleevers added to them said to bee added to the Church as it is said Act. 2. 47. And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should bee saved except this Church bee one entire body governed and ruled according to Christs Lawes 2. There bee seven Descons chosen to this Church Act. 6. and Deacons are officers of the Church of Philippi which our brethren calleth Phil. 1. 1. a Congregationall Church and Pnebe was a Deaconisse say they of the Church of Cenchrea Rom. 16. 1. and if they had Deacons they could not want Elders who are as necessary 3. This Church could not bee so extraordinary as that it cannot bee a patterne to us of the constant government of Churches by Elders which wee call Aristocraticall seeing it is brought as a patterne of the Churches government by the voices of the people which is called by Divines in some respect democraticall and this place is alledged by our brethren and by all Protestant Divines against Bishops and Papists to prove that the people have some hand in government to wit in election of officers and so the words are cleare Act. 6. 5.
formally in collegio this they did not nor could they doe in appointing the office for they were immediatly inspired by the Spirit to appoint new offices but in ordaining the officers in concreto that is in ordaining the men Steven Philip c. they proceed after a presbyteriall way every way as an ordinary presbytery doth Object But they ordaine Elders here upon this Apostolick âround because they were Apostles and Pastors to all the world c. if the ground was Apostolick the action was formally Apostolick Answ. Wee must distinguish betwixt ordination comparative and absolute ordination comparative is in relation to the place if the question bee upon what ground doe the Apostles ordaine in all the world I answer because they are Apostles and every where Ergo they may ordaine every where but as for absolute ordination here in Jerusalem if the question bewhy they did ordaine Stephen Philip c. tali modo by conveening the Church I answer because the Apostles were Elders But our brethren say Then the Apostles in this act laid downe their infallible Apostolick spirit I answer they laid downe the ininfallible spirit which they had as Apostles and tooke them to â fallible spirit but they did not operate and governe in this Act from this infallible spirit but from an ordinary spirit else you must say 1. when the Apostles did eate and drinke they laid downe an infallible and Apostolick spirit and tooke an ordinary and fallible spirit for they did not eate and drinke by immediate inspiration and as Apostles but as men 2. because they were Apostles where ever they came it shall follow by this that they did all by this Apostolick spirit as if the question bee upon what ground Did the Apostles every where baptize pray pasiâaâây exhort as Pastors governe in Corinth deliver the incestuous man to Satan at Corinth If you answer because they were Apostles then I say because they were Apostles alwayes and in every place they never used the ordinary power of the keyes given to them as common to them and all Pastors to the end of the world Matth. 18. 18. Matth. 16. 19. John 20. 23. and so they could not doe any thing as ordinary Pastors or ordinary Elders 2. Christ gave to the Apostles an ordinary power which they could never put forth in Acts 3. we have no warrant from the Apostles preaching baptizing exhorting governing retaining and remitting sinnes excommunicating rebuking to preach baptize exhort governe retaine and remit sinnes excommunicate and rebuke because the Apostles in Acts Apostolick and extraordinary are no more to bee imitated by us then wee are to imitate them in speaking with divers tongues and raising the dead Hence upon these grounds wee are certainly induced to beleeve that the Apostles did here ordaine not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders 1. Because in these Acts the Apostles are imitable but in what they doe as Apostles they are not imitable 2. What ever rules of the Word doth regulate the ordinary classicall presbytery the Apostles goe along in all these acts here condescending to these rules such as the meeting of the presbytery the twelve do meet 2. They tacitely acknowledge a neglect of the daily ministration to the widowes which is an act of misgovernment of the Deaconrie which is an ordinary office of the presbytery and therefore they desire of the Church to bee freed of this office 3. They referre the nomination and election of the seven men to the people 4. They ordaine seven constant and perpetuall officers as the presbytery doth Ergo they doe not ordaine by their transcendent power as Apostles 3. From this place our brethren prove their Congregationall presbytery which they would not doe if the Apostles did here manage affâires as extraordinary officers 4. This colleâium of Apostles doe nothing in all this which by confession of both sides may not bee done and to the end of the world is not done in the transacting of the like businesse by the ordinary presbytery 4. What the Apostles doe as Apostles agreeth onely to Apostles and can be done by none but Apostles or by Evangelists having their power by speciall warrantable commission from them as what a man doth as a man what a Pastor doth as a Pastor a Deacon as a Deacon a Prophet as a Prophet can bee done by none but by a man onely a Pastor onely a Deacon onely except whereas one Act as to teach agreeth both to a Pastor and a Doctor which yet have their owne differences but all here done the Apostles might have done if wee suppose they had not beene Apostles 5. If as Apostles they ordaine any one of the twelve Apostles should compleatly and entirely ordaine all the seven and so the seven Deacons should have beene twelve times ordained at this time which needles multiplication of Apostolick actions were uselesse served not for edification and is not grounded in the Word for the whole twelve in collegio doe ordaine and what any one Apostle doth as an Apostle by the amplitude of a transcendent power every Apostle doth it compleatly and wholly his alone as without helpe of another Apostle Peter worketh a miracle especially any one Apostle as Paul his alone might ordaine Timothy an Evangelist 6. If they did here act as Apostles any one Apostle might have ordained the Deacons in an ordinary way as here but that wee cannot conceive for then one and the same action should have beene ordinary and not ordinary for one man cannot bee a Church or a societie to doe the ordinary Acts of an ordinary societie for it should bee extraordinary to one to act that which is the formall Act of many as many and should involve a contradiction except it were an Act which cannot bee performed by many as when one Paster speaketh for many for a whole Church but that is ordinary and necessary because a multitude as a multitude cannot speake without confusion in a continuated discourse for that all the people say one word Amen is not a multitude as a multitude using one continuated speech Object 1. If the Apostles did not all their Ministeriall acts as Apostles they did not fulfill their commission given to them as to Apostles Matth. 28. Goe and teach all Nations Answ. The consequence is nought if they had not done all things which by vertue of their Apostolicall Office they were commanded to doe they had not then fulfilled their commission given to them by Christ. That is true but now the assumption is false they were under no commandement of Christ to doe all their Ministeriall Acts as Apostles prove that they did neither Preach nor Baptize as Apostles but only as Apostles they did preach infallibly 2. In all places of the world as Catholick Pastors 3. With the gift of Tongues 4. Working of Miracles which by divine institution were annexed to their preaching but their preaching according to the substance of the act was ordinary Object 2. The Apostles went
because the Apostle mentioneth onely one single Church-meeting I think not and therefore the Apostles mentioning of one assembling of the Church acts 11. 26. and of one multitude in the singular number acts 15. 30. can never prove that there was but one single Congregation at Antioch Therefore there be great âdds betwixt meeting in a Church and meeting in the Church Also Tit. 1. 5. for this cause was Titus left at Creet that he might appaynt Elders ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in every City if ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã be not all one with ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Acts 14. 23. acts 16. 4. 5. That is if ordaining of Elders of every City bee not as good as ordaining of Elders in every Church then must there be but in all and every City where ever the Apostles or Evangelists planted Churches but one single Congregation and not any more then could meet in a single Congregation which is a conjecture and much contrary to these times when the Gospell admirably grew in the World And it must follow that every City had but such a competent number as met in one place and if this hold as an uncertaine thing in great Cities then must we say an Eldership in a City and an Eldership of many Congregations were the first planted apostolick Churches and so rules to us also And looke what frame of Churches the Apostles did institute in Cities that same they behoved to institute in Villages also for places cannot change the frame of any institution of Christ. 2. The communion of Saints and Church-edification is as requisite for Villages as for Cities Arguments removed which Mr. Richard Mather and Mr. William Thomson Pastors in New England in their answer to Mr. Charles Herle do bring so far as they make against the authors former Treatises and a scanning of some Synodicall propositions of the Churches of N. England MR. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 1. 9. Governing power is only in the Elders 1 Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 12. 8. Heb. 13. 17. the people hath no power but rather a liberty or priviledge which when it is exercised about Ordination Deposition Excommunication is of the whole communiter or in generall but not of all and every member in particular Women for their Sex children for want of discrâtion are dâbarred Answ. If there be no governing power in Women nor any act at all in excommunication You loose many arguments that you bring 1 Cor. 5. to prove that all have hand in excommunication 1. Because Paul writeth to all 2. All were to mourne 3. All ware to forbeare the company of the excommunicated men Then belike Paul writeth not to all Saints at Corinth not to Women and Women were not to mourne for the scandall nor to forbeare his company 2. The priviledge being a part of liberty purchased by Christs Body it must be due to Women for the liberty wherewith Christ hath made Women free cannot be taken away by any Law of God from their Sex except in Christ Iesus there be difference betwixt Iew and Gentile male and female nor is it removed because iâ iâ a power or authority for the authors say it is no power but a priviledge 3. What priviledge the people have in ordination to confer a Ministery which they neither have formally nor vertually I know not But I doe willingly say something here of the peoples power The first Synodicall proposition of New England is 1. Propos. The fraternity is the first Subject of all Ministeriall power radicalitèr idest ãâã per modum collationis some say suppletivè non habitualitèr non actualit âr non formalitèr That is if I conceive it right The people voyd of all Officers have a vertuall power to conferre a Ministery on their Officers though they have not this power in themselves I could in some sense yield that Believers not Angells are capable of the Ministeriall power to exercise it formally but that Believers doe or can by any way of causative influence make Church-Officers I see not they may design a man qualified to bean Officer to the Office and that is all But say they people wanting or being naked and without all Officers hath not formally or habitually any power in them this latter part Igrant and the 2. Proposition I grant to wit That the presbytery is the first subject of all presbyteriall power habitually and formally But I doe not see how it standeth with the third proposition which is 3. The fraternity or the people without the Officers and without Women or children have an authoritative concurrence with the presbytery in judiciall acts Because if the Brethren have an halfe Ministeriall power with the Officers in acts of Jurisdiction and Excommunication Deposition and Censures I see not how there is not a Ministeriall power formally and habitually at least in part in the Brethren and so contrary to the third proposition the Prasbytery is not the first subject of all Prebyteriall power for the brethren are sharers with the Elders in this power 2. We desire to see it made good by Gods Word that the brethren have a joynt power of Jurisdiction with the Elders for the Table giveth them a brotherly publick power not by way of Charity but a politick Church power in many eminent acts especially in those eight and that constantly 1. In the admission 1. In Sending Messengers to the Churches 2. In the excommunication of members 2. 2. In interpretation of Scripture 3. In the calling 3. In a judiciall determination of controversies of Religion in a synod 4. And Deposition of Ministers 4. In a power of disposing of things indifferent I cannot see any judiciall power or any farther then a charitative yielding by way of a loving and brotherly consent that the Scripture giveth to brethren 3. How this can be denied to be a power of jurisdiction and governing and an actuall Ministeriall using of the Keyes of the Kingdome by those who ex officio by place and calling are no Officers I believe is not easily understood 4. The letter that I saw sayth that that learned and godly Divine Mr. Cotton and some others thinke that the Church as it is an Organicall Body made up of Elders and people is the first subject of all Ecclesiasticall power and they divide it into a power of authority and a power of liberty whereof the power of authority belongeth to the Elders or Eldership and the power of liberty to the Fraternity or Brethren that are not Officers and therefore these reverend brethren deny any authoritative concurrence to the brethren and they thinke that the Church as it is an homogeneall body that is a company destitute of Officers cannot formally ordaine excommunicate or censure the Elders though in case of obstinacy they may doe that which is equivalent and so separate from them The 4. Proposition is The fraternity or Brethren in an Organicall Body or in a ââmed and established Church consisting of Officers and people act and use
Christians Esal 54. 13. not denied to Women and believing Children who cannot lay on hands nor ordaine Ministers as the presbytery doth 1 Timothy 4. 14. Acts 6. 6. Acts 13. 1 2. 3. 1 Timothy 5. 22. 2 Timothy 2. 2. but for trying of Ministers if they bee the sonnes of the Prophets and must be apt to teach 1 Timothy 3. 1 2. able to convince subtile Hereticks and gain-sayers and to put them to silence Titus 1. 10. 11. there must be in a constituted Church a Colledge of pastors and prophets to try the prophets with a presbyteriall Cognizance But here some object If Election bee absolutely in the hââds of the people then is the peoples will because will the absolute determiner who shall be the Pastor to such a flock but people certainly may erre therefore the Presbytery must bee the last determiner in election And people have onely a rationall consent and if their consent be irrationall the Presbyter must chuse for them I answer shortly in these propositions 1 Pro. Neither is the People infallible in chusing nor the Presbytery infallible in regulating the peoples choice yet is power of regulating the choice the presbyteries due nor power of election to be denied to Gods people 2. Pro. You must suppose the Church a settled and an established Church of sound professors for if the Congregation or presbytery either of them be for the most part popish Arminian or unsound in the Faith in so far hath Christ given neither power to the one or other 3. Prop. When it is acknowledged by both people and presbytery that of two or three men any one is qualified for the place then the man is absolutely to bee referred to the peoples choice and though the people give no reason why they chuse this man rather then any of the other two yet iâ the Peoples choice reasonable for no doubt Acts. 6. there were more men then these seven of good report and full of the Holy Ghost and fit to be Deacons therefore the multitudes choice of these seven and their nomination of them to be Apostles rather then the nomination of any other men is rationall and approved by the twelve Apostles though they give no reason Yea though Nicolas be the Sâctmaster of the Nicolaitans as the learned thinke yet the election is Ecclesiastically lawfull and needeth not that a reason be given to the Apostles 4. Prop. We never read that in the Apostles-Church a man was obtâuded upon the people against their will And therefore Election by the people in the Apostolique Church as Acts 1. 26. Acts 6. 2 3 4. Revel 2. 12. Acts 20. 28. must be our rule any election without the peoples consent must be no Election for if it please not the whole multitude as Acts 6. 5. it is not a choice 5. Prop. We must distinguish Election and Regulation of the Election 2. There is a Regulation of the Election positive and a Regulation negative Hence the presbyteries power consisteth only in a negative regulation of the peoples choice not in a positive For example Election is an elicit act of the people and their birthright and priviledge that Christ hath given to them and it cannot be taken from them if there be any Election it must be made by the people the presbytery even in case of the peoples aberration cannot usurpe the act of Election because the Apostles who yet had the gift of discerning spirits in a greater measure then the multitude remit the choice of the seven Deacons to the multitude Ergo the presbytery should doe the same yet may the presbytery negatively reggulate the Election and if the people out of the humour of itching eares chuse an unfit man in that case the presbytery may declare the Election irregular and null as suppose the multitude Acts 6 had chosen such a man or all the seven men like Simon Magus the twelve Apostles by their Ministeriall power might have impeded that Election or rather nomination as irregular and put them to chuse other seven men but the Apostles could not have chosen for them other seven for then Election should have bin taken out of the peoples hands Hence that distinction of elicit and imperate acts even as the understanding commandeth and directeth the will to such and such elicit actions and regulateth the will therein and yet the understanding can neither nill nor will and the King may punish pastors who preach Hereticall doct in vitiate the Sacrament but the King can neither preach the word himself nor administate the Sacraments so the presbytery may regulate negatively and hinderth Election of an unfit man but the presbytery cannot do as the Pâelate did who would name a man to the people and desire their consent but consent is not all the presbytery and neighbour Congregations have consent but no elective liberty given them by Christ but if the people refused their consent he Prelate without more a do chose and ordained the man and so he was obtruded on the people without any Election at all Ordination of an ordinary pastor is always to a certain flock Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 1. Rev. 2. 1. yet here must we distinguish'd dedication to Christs service by the office 2. The exercise of the office in the former respect the pastor is a pastor every where and may be sent as a Pastor to plant Churches but ratione finis He is primariò principally to feed this flock and secundario and ratione medâi secondarily while he feedeth this flock he feedeth the Church universall Mr. Mather if people may not mâdle with ordination because it is proper to Timothy and Titus this may prove that they were Bishops who did ordaine Elders there alone which ministers may not do there for these Epistles are not written to them as Bishops alone nor as Elders alone but as to a mixt state including the people Answ. Some parcells of these Epistles are written to Timothy and Titus as Evangelists such as none may now do but they only ââ 2 Tim. 4. 4. 1 Tit. 1. 3. Tim. 1. 5. and some other things which they gave in charge to Elders 2. Some things are written to them as Christians as 1 Tim. 1. 19. Tit. 3. 3. finaliter or objectively all is written for the Churches good but 3 the builk of the Epistle is written to them as Elders and is a rule of perpetuall government and especially 1 Tim. 1. 22. 2. Tim. 2. 2. for these and the like they were to doe with the presbytery as is cleare 1 Tim. 1. 14. Object The Congregations of Jerusalem were not fixed in their members and officers onely the Apostles preached to them if they were many congregations which is possible in a circular way now one Apostle to this assembly then another But in regard not one Paster could say this is my flock not this nor any flock could say Peter is our Pastor not Andrew Therefore there was no Church-state in any
all fundamentalls 3. Totally and finally But wee are not to beleeve Papists who say things are fundamentall materially in themselves as all points necessary to bee beleeved but things are not formally fundamentall but such things onely as the Church dâfineth to be fundamentall But 1. the foundation of our Faith is Gods Word and Gods Word is necessary to be beleeved to salvation whether the Church define it or no to abstaine from Idolatry is necessary to be beleeved though Aaron and the Church of Israel say the contrary neither doth Gods Word borrow authority from men 2. If the Church may make points to be fundamentall by their definition whereas before they were not fundamentall then may the Church make articles of faith Sure I am Paipsts as Gerson Occam Almaine Suarez yea and a very Bellarmine is against this Yea and by that same reason they may make fundamentall points to bee no fundamentall points and they may turne the Apostles Creed into no faith at all for ejusdem est potestos creare annihilare 3. There cannot be a greater power in the Church to define Articles of faith then is in God himselfe but the very authority of God doth not define a matter to bee an article of faith except the necessitie of the matter so require for God hath determined in his word that Paul left his cloake at Treas but that Paul left his cloake at Troas is not I hope an article of faith or a fundamentall point of salvation 4. What can the Church doe saith Vincentius Lyrinens but declare that that is to be beleeved which before in it selfe was to bee beleeved and Bellarmine saith Councells maketh nothing to be of infallible verity and so doth Scotus say Verity before heresies erat de fide was a matter of faith though it was not declared to be so by the Church Determinatio non facit vertatem saith Oâcam The Churches determination maketh no truth 3. The evidence of knowledge of fundamentals is gravely to bee considered Hence these distinctions 1. One may beleeve that Christ is the Sonne of God by a Divine faith as Peter doth Matth. 16. 17. and yet doubt of the necessary consequences fundamentall Ergo Christ must bee delivered into the hands of sinners and bee crucified as the same Peter doubted of this for as one may fall in a grievous sinne though regenerated and faile in act and yet remaine in grace in habitu the seed of God remaining in him so may Peter and the Apostles doubt of a fundamentall point of Christs rising from the dead John 20. v 8 9. in an act of weakenesse and yet have saving faith in Christ as it is like many of of the Saints at Corinth denyed an article of their Faith the rising againe of the dead one act of unbeleefe maketh not an infidell 2. Dist. A simple Papist and a Lutheran not well educated doth beleeve upon the same former ground that Christ is true man hath an habitual faith of this article that Jesus Christ is truly the Son of David yet holdeth transubstantiation or consubstantiatiâ that Christs body is in many sundry places in heaven and earth on this side of the Sea beyond Sea yet the connâxion betwixt Christs humanitie and this monster of transubstantiation not being possible all the error may be meerely philosophick that the extention of quantitative parts without or beyond part is not the essence of a quantitative body while as the rude man beleeveth firmely that Christ is true man and so beleeveth contradictory things by good consequence therefore the qualitie of the conscience of the beleever is to be looked into since fundamentall heresie is essentially in the mind and pertinacy and selfe-conviction doth inseparably follow it 1. There is a conscience simply doubting of fundamentall points this may be with a habit of sound faith 2. A scrupulous conscience which from light grounds is brangled about some fundamentall points and this is often in sound beleevers who may and doe beleeve but with a scruple 3. A conscience beleeving opinions and conjecturing and guessing as in Atheists this is damnable but where obstinacy is as defending with pertinacie transubstantiation and that it is lawfull to adore bread this pertinacious defending of Idolatry doth inferre necessarily that the faith of the article of Christs humanitie is but false and counterfeit and not saving 3. Dist. There is a certitude of adherence formall and a certitude of adherence virtuall A certitude of adherence formall is when one doth adhere firmly to the faith of fundamentalls A certitude of adherence virtuall is when with the formall adherence to some fundamentall points there is an ignorance of other fundamentall points and yet withall a gracious disposition and habit to beleeve other fundamentalls when they shall bee clearely revealed out of the word so Luke 24. Christ exponed the resurrection and the articles of Christs sufferings and glorification vers 25 26 27. to the Disciples who doubted of these before and yet had saving faith of other fundamentall points Matth. 16. 17. 18. 4. Hence there be two sorts of fundamentalls some principally and chiefely so called even the elements and beginning of the doctrine of Christ as Credenda things to be beleeved in the Creed the object of our faith and pâtenda things that we aske of God expressed in the Lords Prayer the object of our hope specially 2. Agenda things to be done contained in the decalogue the object of our love to God and our brethren Others are so secundarily fundamentall or lesse fundamentalls as deduced from these yea there be some artcles of the Creed principally fundamentall these all are explicitely to be beleeved noted by Vigilius Martyr and Pareus as that Christ died and rose againe c. Other Articles are but modi articulorum fundamentalium and expositions and evident determinations of cleare articles As Christs incarnation and taking on our flesh is explained by this conceived of the holy Ghost and borne of the Virgin Mary the death and suffering of Christ is exponed by subordinate articles as that he suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucisied c. and these lesser fundamentalls are to be beleeved necessitate praecepti because God commandeth them but happily non necessitate medii It is possible many bee in glory who beleeve not explicitely but onely in the disposition of the mind as some are baptized in voto in their desire onely these lesser fundamentalls it is enough they have the faith of non-repugnancy or negative adherence to these so as they would not deny them if they had beene proponed to them in a distinct and cleare way 5. The faith of fundamentalls is implicit three wayes 1. In respect of the degree of beleeving 2. In respect of the object 3. In respect of the subject or our adherence to things beleeved In respect of degrees the faith is implicite and weake three wayes as Calvin may teach 1. Because we are
soules to Christs kingdome and visible Church even to the second comming of Jesus Christ. 4. Seeing the Lord doth so often complaine of idle Pastors of dumbe dogges by whose sleeping soules are losed Now this Argument for the proposition seemeth most reasonable In the old Testament Priests Levites Prophets and all the edifying officers are set downe there and so are the officers and canons anent their government set downe in the New Testament Eph. 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 3. 2 Tim. 2. Act. 2. 17 18. Ioâl 2. 28. Act. 20. 28. But no such things are written in the old or new Testament of gifted Prophets not in office 7. All lawfull officers have power authoritatively from Iesus Christ to remit and to retaine sinnes by the preaching of the Word But Preachers out of office have no such power Ergo Preachers out of office are not lawfull Preachers The proposition is Ioh. 20. 21. The assumption is evident for where are they sent as the Father sent his Sonne Christ and that promise is made onely to the Apostles and to their successors Prophets without office are not the successors of the Apostles Robinson saith the commission there given is peculiar to the Apostles onely and confirmed by the miraculous inbreathing of the holy Ghost and by them to be dispensed principally to unbeleevers of all which nothing is common to ordinary officers but else where this power is given to the whole Church Matth. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 2 Cor. 6. 6. Yea to every faithfull brother Matth. 16. 18. Ch. 18. 15. Luk. 17. 3. This is that which Anabaptists teacheth as Chemnitius saith and the very doctrin of Ostorodius Nicolaides Socinus but except the miraculous inbreathing of the holy Ghost there is nothing here peculiar to the Apostles onely for the loosing and retaining of sinne is nothing but binding and loosing of the sinnes and this is nothing but the forgiving and retaining of sinne by the preaching of the word and censures of the Church and that binding and loosing Matth. 16. is not given to the whole Church of beleevers for the Text saith no such thing but power of the keyes is given to Peter that is to the Church-guides the successors of Peter 2. Authoritative power of forgiving of sinne is not Matth. 18. said to bee ratified in heaven but onely when the Church doth bind and loose and forgiving Luk. 17. is betwixt sister and sister who have not power to bind and loose in heaven 8. All Prophets are either ordinary or extraordinary as is cleare in Gods Word extraordinary now are not in the Church and the ordinary Prophets now are not gifted to preach the Word except as Timothy from their youth they have beene trained up in the Scriptures and have learning sciences knowledge of the tongues if he would bee a man able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 3. 1 Tim. 3. hee must meditate reade and give himselfe wholly to these things 1 Tim. 3. 15 16. and so must leave his calling contrary to the Apostle his commandement 1 Cor. 7. 20 21 22. 1 Thess. 4. 11. Ephes. 4. 28. but if hee have a gift for publicke preaching he is to separate himselfe for it seeing a gift is a token of Gods separation Quest. III. Whether the Arguments of Mr. Robinson for the pâophecying of private persons not in office doe strongly conclude I shall set them downe in order and discusse them If a Bishop must be apt to teach then he must be tryed before he beâ admitted to the office Ergo while be is oât of office he must prophecie Answ. This Argument concludeth not the Question for by as good reason the sonnes of the Prophets or young Prophets who behoved to exercise their gift as 1 Sam. 10. 5. 2 King 2. 7. 2 King 4. 1. 1 King 20. 35. before they bee fully received as Prophets must be prophets and officers not in office differing from Prophets in office even as their lay Prophets are different from Pastors but an apprentise of a trade is not a different tradesman from the master to whom hee serves as apprentise but he is onely different from him in degree But their Lay-Prophets are tradesmen not sonnes of the Prophets not ayming at the pastorall charge but ordinary officers for converting of soules and doe differ from Pastors as those who are non-Pastors differ from Pastors Robinson If the Lords gifting of Eldad and Medad Numb 11. 29. with the spirit of prophecying inabling them to prophecy and made them extraordinary Prophets why should not by due proportion an ordinary gift inabling a man to an ordinary prophecy serve also to make him an ordinary Prophet Now Moses in wishing that all the people were Prophets wisheth as well the use as possession of the gift Answ. The Jewes say that Eldad and Medad were of the 70. Elders upon whom was powred part of that spirit of prophecy that was on Moses and they say they were written in the 70. papers but not elected because they drew the papers ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a part and not ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Senex but it is not like Joshuâ would have envied if they had beene now Judges or that Moses would have likened them unto the people However prophets they were But both the Antecedent is false and the consequence nulle for if you meane by the Lords gifting of Eldad and Medad a naked and a bare revealing to them of the visions of God without an impulsive commandement from God setting them on action to prophecie this impulsion is an authoritative sending and calling the antecedent is false for that gifting of them onely made them able but not formally authorized Prophets but if the gifting of them did include both the gift and the command of God to use the gift as certainly it did now the consequence is null for the naked giving of an ordinary gift except God by himselfe and now by the authority of his Church command the use of the gift no gifted man because gifted is by and by a Prophet but he must have a commandement ecclesiasticke now to preach as Eldad and Medad had impulsive commandement to prophecy and if any be gifted by an ordinary way as Eldad and Medad was extraordinarily then they are to be thrusted out to the pastorall calling and none but a fleshly man will envie them Robinson 2 Chron. 17. 7. Jehosâaphat sent his Princes to preach or teach in the cities of Iudah and with them the Levites so the 70. Interpreters so Pagnine so Ierom and the English translation Ergo Princes are Prophets not in office who may teach Answ. 1. Doctor Alexander Colveill my reverent colleague and as learned so well experienced in the Hebrew saith that ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is here taken for ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and noteth the accusative case and is to bee read And he sent the Princes as Buxtorfius noteth Thesaur l. 1. e. 12. and this Chaldaisme
Matth. 10. 5 6 7. they were members of the Jewish Church and called Apostles To the 3. I answer ignorance of fundamentall points not fully proposed and revealed if there bee a gratious disposition of saving faith to beleeve these when they shall be revealed such was as in the Lords Disciples Matth. 16. 16 17. Luk. 12. 32. Luk. 22. 28 29. may well stand with the dignitie of young and as yet limited Apostles Matth. 10. 5 6 7. who had not yet received the holy Ghost in that measure Act. 1. 8 9. that was requisite for Apostles in their full Apostolicke charge and made infallible pen-men of Canonick Scriptures sent to preach to all the world To the 4. I answer They were not non-residents because they returned to reside with Christ after they had casten out devils Ioh. 4. 1 2. which your lay-Prophets by your owne confession cannot lawfully doe not to bee idle but to learne more and to be eye and care witnesses of the doctrine life death resurrection and ascension to glory of Christ 2 Pet. 1. 16 17 18. 1 Joh. 1. 1 2 3. Matth. 26. 37 38 39. Luk. 24. 50 51 52. Joh. 20. 19 20. Act. 4. 20. which was necessary that they might preach these things to the world Nor is a Pastor in his studie attending reading as 1 Tim. 3. 15 16. though he be not then teaching a non-resident To the 5. I say when Christ ascended unto heaven Ephes. 4. 11. He gave some to bee Apostles c. but that gifting of Apostles is not to restrict the institution of Apostles to the precise time of his ascension for you grant that after the Lords resurrection and before his ascension they were ordained Apostles Matth. 28. 19. Joh. 20. 23. but the full sending of the holy Spirit to Apostles Evangelists Pastors and Teachers is ascribed to his ascension as a speciall fruite of his ascension Act. 1. 8 9. Joh. 16. v. 7 8 9. and therefore is their sending called an effect of the holy Spirit For the second point Giving and not granting that the Apostles were not Apostles till after the resurrection yet will it not follow that they were lay-Prophets or Prophets out of office for they might have beene Pastors in office though not Apostles in office for there were beside these others in the Jewish Church else where were Scribes Pharisees Lawyers Doctors all sitters in Moses his chaire They were not Apostles sure what were they then all teachers out of office No If then I prove that the Apostles were teachers in office though it were granted that they were not Apostles as in the fulnesse and plenitude thereof they were not till Christ arose from the dead I prove as much as taketh this argument for lay-prophets out of their hands But that they were not non-officed teachers but called Apostles or Pastors I prove 1. Argum. Judas was chosen one of the twelve and an Apostle Ergo farre more were the rest I prove the Antecedent 1. Act. 20. Let another take his ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã his charge 2. v. 17. He took part with us say they in this ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in this ministery 3. Matthias v. 25. was chosen in that place and Apostleship from which Judas fell Now Lay-Prophets have no officiall Episcopacie no Ministery nor can any chosen in their place said to bee chosen to an Apostleship Ioh. 6. 7. Have not I chosen you twelve this choosing was to an Embassage saith Cyrill Augustine Euthymius and all our Divines with them 2. Matth. 10. 2. These are the names of the twelve Apostles v. 5. he send them What power he giveth to them in respect of al the world to remit and retaine sinnes Iob. 20. that hee giveth to them toward the house of Israel v. 11 12 13. under the name of offered peace Magis minus non variant speciem Mark 13. 14. Mark 3. 14. hee ordained twelve ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã hee made twelve to be with him which he might send to preach Luk. 9. 1. and he called the twelve and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã be sent them hee tooke them from their fishing and made them fishers of men and Matth. 10. 10. hee calleth them workmen worthy of their hire private Prophets are not gifted nor sent nor taken from their callings nor are they workmen deserving stipend for that is due to Prophets by office 1 Cor. 9. 13. 14. Gal. 6. 6. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 3. Those who have power to dispense the seales of grace and to baptize are not private or unofficed Prophets but sent of God and in office as Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 1. 17. and Robinson granteth this and so doe Separatists teach But the Disciples of Christ before his resurrection baptized Ioh. 4. 2. 4. Those who were witnesses of the life miracles doctrine of Christ and preached the same and confirmed it by miracles were pastors 5. Those who were twelve selected men chosen Luk. 6. 13. named Apostles Mark 9. 35. Mark 10. 32. Luk. 8. 1. to whom the keyes of the kingdome were given Matth. 18. 17 18 19. Matth. 16. 19. are not unofficed men 6. This is a Popish opinion and to be suspected for Papists to advance Peter to a Popedome will have him no Apostle while after the resurrection for Bellarmine saith Imposition of hands is essentiall to holy orders and that the Apostle ordained no Presbyters while Christ was risen and made the Apostles and gave them the holy Spirit The Councell of Trent hinteth at the same opinion Bellarmine saith the Apostles were made Priests at the last Supper to sacrifice Christs body but not Presbyters till after that when they received the holy Ghost and Cardinall Hosius Martinus Ledesma Petrus a Soto say the Disciples are made Apostles Ioh. 21. Toletus saith they had power before this time to preach but not to forgive sinnes in the Sacrament of pennance while now And Cardinall Cajetan saith here was first the Sacrament of pennance ordained and it is true Cyrillus and Chrysostome say that Iohn 21. Soli sacerdotes onely Pastors by this place have power to forgive sinnes but not by this place onely for they say that Matth. 16. power is given Joannes de Lugo the Popes Professor at Rome teach that Joh. 21. the Apostles first received this power And jayne with him Suarez Thomas Sanchez Aegidius Coniuk and Vasquez though as good as they say the contrary as Panormitanus a late Schooleman Avila and Sylvester and John Bishop of Rochester writing against Papists and their Popes power of dethroning Kings saith how could the Apostles who are examples of good order preach and baptize if they were meere Layicks and not Pastors while after Christ was arisen from the dead Robinson citeth Luk. 8. 39. Christ biddeth the dispossessed man gâshew what great things the Lord had done for him and hee went and preached it now
should call Christs doctrine blasphemy Caesar and his deputie Pontius Pilat as Judges civill are to judge it truth Neither would I ââiâââly here contend for whether the Kings knowledge of herese in the major proposition bee judiciall or the knowledge of discretion onely as some say wee agree in this against Papistâ that the King is not a blind servant to the Church to punish what the Church calleth heresie without any examination or tryall but though the Kings knowledge of heresie in the proposition and in Law bee judiciall and kingly yet because hee is to cognosce onely in so farre as hee is to compell and punish with the sword not by instructing and teaching It would not hence follow that hee is to make Church constitutions as King but onely that hee may punish those who maketh wicked constitutions because the Canon maker is a ministeriall teacher the King as King may command that hee teach truth and hee may punish hereticall teaching but as King he is not a teacher either in Synod or Senate in Pulpit or on the Throne now if the King by office ordaine Pastors and deprive them by office hee is to know who are able to teach others aâd must bee able also to stop the mouthes of the adversaries and to rebuke them sharpely that they may bee sound in the faith and this is required in Titus Ch. 1. 5 9 10 11 12 13. as a Pastor and as an ordainer of other Pastors therefore that which is required of a Pastor by his office must also bee required to bee in the King by his office 6. It is admirable that they give to Kings power to deprive ministers but with these distinctions 1. He may not discharge them to preach and administer the Sacraments but to preach and administer the Sacraments in his kingdome or dominions because the King hath a dominion of places 2. Hee may discharge the exercise of the ministery but hee cannot take away the power of order given by the Church 3. Hee may deprive say some by a coactive and civill degradation because the supreme magistrate may conferre all honours in the Christian common-wealth Ergo hee may take them away againe but hee cannot deprive by a canonicall and ecclesiasticall degradation 4. Hee may causâtively deprive that is compell the Church to deprive one whom he judgeth to bee an heretick and if the Church refuse hee may then in case of the Churches erring and negligence as King deprive himselfe But I answer the King as King hath dominion civill of places and times as places and times but not of places as sacred in use and of times as sacred and religious for his power in Church matters being accumulative not privative hee cannot take away a house dedicated to Gods service no more then hee can take away maintenance allotted by publick authority upon Hospitalls Schooles Doctors and Pastors God hath here a sort of proprietie of houses and goods as men have Places as sacred abused are subject to regall power hee may inhibit conventions of hereticks 2. The Apostles might preach in the Temple though civill authoritie forbid them 3. Kings are as much Lords of places as sacred and publick as they have a dominion of civill places in respect the King may be coactive power hinder that false and hereticall doctrine bee preached either in publick or private places for this hee ought to doe as a preserver of both tables and a beare of the Sword for the good of Religion and if they may command pure doctrine to bee preached and sound discipline to be exercised they may command the same to bee done in publick places The second distinction is not to purpose 1. To discharge the exercise of a ministery saith Calderwood is a degree of suspension and suspension is an ecclesiasticall degree to the censures of excommunication and therefore the King may as well excommunicate and remit and retaine sinnes which undoubtedly agreeth to the Apostles as hee can suspend 2. As for taking away the power of order it is a doubt to formalists if the Church can doe that at all seeing they hold Sacraments administred by ministers justly deprived to bee valid Ergo they must acknowledge an indeleble character in Pastors which neither King nor Church can take away If then the King deprive from the exercise hee must simpliciter deprive by their grounds it is weake that they say the King may deprive from the exercise of a ministry within his owne dominions for saith Calderwood they all know well that the King hath not power to deprive men from the exercise of the holy ministery in ether forraine Kingdomes For the third way of deprivation it hath a double meaning also 1. If the meaning bee that as the King by a regall and coactive power may take away all honours either civill or ecclesiasticall as hee giveth all honours then this way of depriving Ministers cannot bee given to the King for the King may give and take away civill honours for reasonable causes according to the Lawes But in ecclesiasticall honours there bee three things 1. The appointing of the honour of the office to bee an Ambassadour of Christ. 2. To give the true foundation and reall ground of a Church honour that is gifts and gracious abilities for the calling neither of these two doe come either from King or Church or from mortall men but onely from Jesus Christ who ascending on high gave gifts unto men and appointeth both office and giveth grace for to discharge the office Yea since morall philosophy maketh honor to bee praemium ãâã a reward of vertue the King doth not give that which is the soundation of honour civill for civill vertue is a grace of God but in Church honour there is a third to wit a deââânation of a qualified man for the sacred office of the ministry and an ordination by the imposition of hands used in the Apostolick Church Act. 6. 6. Act. 13. 3. Act. 14 23. 1 Tim. 4 14. 1 Tim. 5.22 Whether imposition of hands bee essentiall to ordination or not I disput not it is apostolick by practise yet there is something ecclesiasticall as praying of Pastors and an ecclesiasticall designation of men or the committing of the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 22. No Scripture can warrant that the King ordaine Pastors by publick praving by laying on of hands or ecclesiasticall blessing or by such an ordination as is given to Timothy and the Elders of the Church Acts 13. 3. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5,6 7,8 9. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2. If any say the King hath a publick and regall power in ordaining of Ministers and so in dâpriving them or a mixt power partly regall partly ecclesiasticall as hee is a mixt person and the Church hath their way of purely and unmixt ecclesiasticall calling or ordaining of Ministers or the Church and the Magistrate
both doth elect and choose the man yet so that he is not elected without the consent of the King or Magistrate in the Kings roome I answer many things are here to be replyed 1. That the King who may be borne an heire to an earthly Kingdome is also borne and by nature a mixt person and halfe a Minister of the Gospell is against Gods word ministers in whole or in part are made so of God not so borne by nature in Aaronâ Priesthaâd men by birth came to a sacred office but that is done away now in Christ. 2. With as good reason may the King preach and administer the Sacraments as a mixt person as he may ordaine by ecclesiasticall blessing imposition of hands ecclesiasticall designation any person to the Ministery that same auth nity of Christ which said to Timoth Lay hands suddainly ãâã man said also to him 2 Tim. 2. 15. Study to be approved unto ãâã a workeman that needeth not to be ashamed dividing the word right that is both ordaining of Ministers and pastorall preaching of the Word or pastorall acts flowing from an ecclesiasticall power How then can the one be given to the King by vertue of that same mixt power especially seeing baptizing it directly called 1 Câr 1. 17. a lesse principall worke of the ministery then preaching It it be said as ordination is performed by the King is not an ecclesiasticall action but civill or mixt partly civill partly ecclesiasticall I answer by that reason if the King should preach and administrate the Sacraments these actions should not be called ecclesiasticall actions and Uzzah's touching the Arke should not be called an action by office incumbent to the Levites only and it might be said the person being civill the actions are civill And Uzziah's burning of incense upon the Altar of incense was not a Priestly act but an act of a mixt power he was partly a King and partly a Priest who did performe the action but he was a Priest by sinfull usurpation in that action as we know 2. This answer is a begging also of the question 2. Whereas it is said that the Church ordainech Pastors and the King also but divers wayes the one by a regall power the other by me elâsiasticall power I answer this is spoken to make the people ad saciendum populum for ejusdem potestatis est saith the Law constituere destiââere it is the same power to ordaine and to destroy The high-Commission by the Kings authority doth deprive Ministers without so much as the knowledge of the Church If then the King as King may deprive ministers without the notice of the Church then may the King as King also ordaine Pastors without the notice of the Church For the action of the instruments as such is more principally the actions of the principall cause 3 Election of a Pastor is farre different from ordination of a Pastor the whole multitude as Christians have voyces in the election of a Pastor and so hath the King or his Magistrate as a part and member of the Church but this giveth no negative voice to the Magistrate in election but ordination is not done by all the multitude it is a worke of authority done onely by the Church-officers 4. The coactive and civill degradation must have also correspondent thereunto a coactive and civill ordination of Pastors Now I ask what is a coactive ordination If it be the Kings royall and civill authority commanding that the Church officers ordaine Pastors at Christs commandement This we deny not they fight with a shadow or a night ghost not against us who contend for this But if they meane a coactive degradation by the Sword in banishing imprisoning yea and for just causes punishing Ministers to death with the Sword this indirect deprivation we doe not deny But so the King depriveth a man from being a Minister when he is beheaded or hanged or banished for civill crimes no other wayes but as he depriveth a man from being a Fashioner a Saiââr a Plower a Souldier or a Father to his owne barnes a husband to his owne wife for when the man is beheaded or hanged by the sword of the Magistrate he is dâprived from being a fashioner a sailer a father a husband and Solomen did not other way deprive Abiathar from the Priest-hood then indirectly by consining him for treason at Anathoth so as he could not exercise the Priests office at Jerusalem So after Junius Calderwood Gul. Apollonius Sibrandus yea Muketus a man for the times denyeth that the Prince can take away that ecclesiasticall power that the Church hath given And so acknowledgeth Wedelius the same That reasonlesse lyer Lysimach Nicanor in this and in other things hath no reason to say we borrow Jesuites doctrine to answer this argument for the Jesuite Becanus is not ânacquainted with Jesuits doctrine against the power of Kings yet he answereth that Solomen as King had no power over Abiathar for treason or any other crime and therefore following Bellarmine and Gretserus saith that Solomon did this by an extraordinary propheticall instinct yet Abulensis a great textuall Papist and Bânaventura a learned Schooleman saith this pâoveth that the King is above the Priest and that Priests in the Old Testament were not eximed from the civill Judges sword and power this is very doubtsome to Suarez who âaith that it was a tempârall civill punishment of exiâe and that âââsitiân from the exercise of the Priests office followed upon the other But we neede not this answer for Solomons sentence containeth in târminis a meere civill punishment and these words 1 King 27. S. Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord seem not to be words of the Kings sentence of banishment but are relative to the fulfilling of the Lords word and a consequent of divine justice relative to the prophesie against Elies house Though verily I see no inconvenience to say that Solomon did indeed deprive him from the Priest-hood by an extraordinary instinct of the Spirit as he was led of God to build the Temple 1. Because the text saith so Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord and ver 35. and Zadok the Priest did the King put in the roome of Abiathar which is a direct deprivation from the Priest-hood but I contend not here But that the King causatively may deprive that is command the Church to cast out hereticks and to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. wee confesse as for the power of convocating of Synods some thinke that the King may convocate Synods as men but as Church men they have power if the Magistrate bee averse to convocate themselves see Junius who insinuateth this distinâtion But certainly though the Kingly dignity be thought meerely civill yet let this be thought on it may be thought that the Kings power is divine three
cata-Baptistarum erroribus lib. 1. pag. 35. It is a vaine thing to say that teachers of all Israel remaining in Israel were non-residents that is Pastors not attending their charge a Iustific pag. b Confess of Separatists Art 21. c Bellarmin desacr ord lib. 1. cap. 9. d Concil Trident. Sess. 23. cap. 4. e Hosius in confes Polonica tit 50. f Martinus Ledesma in 4. quâst 36. art 4. ad 1. g Pet. a Soto de sacram ordinis Lect. 5. h Toletus com in Ioan. 21. an 21 i Cajetanus comment in Ioan. 21. ideo hoc loco instituitur promulgatur Sacramentum poenitentiae k Cyrillus lib. 112. cap. 56. l Chrysostome in Ioan. homil 88. m Joan. de Lugo tomo de Saram paenit disp 18. sect 1. n Suarez disp 7. de censura sect 6. not 6. o Sanchez in decalog lib. 2. c. 13. n. 13. p Aegidius Coniuk de Sacr. disp 24. n. 236. q Vasquez Tom. de excom dub 18. n. 9. r Panoâmit in dicâ a nobis c. n. 10. s Avila de censur is part 2. cap. 7. disp 1. Dub. 9. t Sylvester verbo subsolvo 1. n. 8. u Ioan. Episcop Rossens de potest Papae in temporabus lib. 2. cap. 3. x Peoples plea pag. 42 43. Pag. 44. Pag 44 45 46. Pag. 46 47 48 49. Calvin Com. in Act. 11 21. Pag. 49. a Iunius annot in locum Apocalyps b Cooper on Revel 10. c Pareus comment in Apocalyps cap. 10. Pag. 52 53. d Iunius annot in cap. 14. e Paraeus in locum f Napper Comment on the Revel ch 14. Par. 54. 55. Pag. 97. pag. 59. and 63. Pag. 59. a Irenaus adversus Hares lib. 2 cap. 57. b Fusebius bistoria eccles l. 5. cap. 7. Tertullian Cyrill Chrysostom Theophylact. Robinson pag. 66 67. Parâus com ibi Pauls presbytery chap. 16. pag. 251 252. pag 69. 70. a Stapleton apud Whittaker de sac Script Authorit l. 3. c. 3. arg 3. sect Bellarmine Valentinian Gretserus b Transenius harmon c. 36. c Cajetan com in loan 5. in hoc ab hoânine non accipio d Toletus in Ioh. 5. tom 1. e Rivetus tom 1. contrav trac 1. q. 6. f Whittakerus to 2. desac Scrip. authorit lib. 3. c. âr 5. g Bucer in Ioan. 5. de testimonio Baptistae h Calvinus in art 17. v. 10 11. i Theaplâyâ in aât 1â ibid. k Chrysost in Ioan. hom 39. l Beda in Ioan. cap 5. m Ambrosius in â Tim. n Occam dâale l. 5. ca. 2 par 1. c. 3. probatuâ quod papâ Canonice electus manens papa potest errare a fide bareticari quindecem rationâbus o Gerson de infallibilitat Papae consid 12 p Robinson Pag 70. 71. q Synod of England r Ambrosius com in 4 Eph. ut âresecret plebs multiplicaretur omnibus inter initia concessum est Exangelizare Baptizaâe s Origenin Num. hom 11. cap. 8. t Hieronymus comment in Matth. in prcaemiâ u Theophylact in art 20. x Augustin contr Faustum lib. 16. c. 12. y Coachman z Gerard. loc com tom 6. de Minister eccles c. 3. sect 1. n. 70 pag. 78 79. a Lutheâus tom 2. Com. in Ps. 8. fol 96 lat tradidiâ quidem Dominus talenta servis sed non ââsi ââcatis expecta igitur âu donec voccâ is intereane ambââs b Fugeniâ de ãâ¦ã c Scotus in l. 4. d 24 q. 1. d Concilâi Tâi. dântine sâss 14. cap. 1. e Lodo Meratius tom 3. trac de erdi disp 7. sect 1. Bishops preach not nor is it essentiall to their office and therfore Papists by contempt call our Ministers predicant preachers saith Gerard tom 6 q. 3. n. 294 pag. 336. f Bellarm. tom 3. de sacr ordin l. 1. c. 4. g Guliel Estius l 4. dist 24. s. 3. h Aquinas supplem q. 34. act 4. 5. i Canon Aposto lic 2. 9. 17 18. 25. 42. 43. k Clemens in Epist. 3. ad Iacob Manuscript The way of the Churches of Christ in New England In the Answ. 10 32. quest 9. 15. Answ. to the 15. quest Answ. to quest 15. a Arâin in declar sen. p. 57 b Armin. antâperkins pag. 224. quaândâu amâr Det in ipsoâuân cordâbus vigebit impedâen ui ne âccedant â Dâo c Remonstâan confess c. 18. Sect. 6. 7. d Episcopius disp 27. ch 9. e Socinus de justââ ââl 10. quod si aâ hac obedientia deficiamus c. f Smalcius ãâã 7 in Ioan fol. 78. Answ to 32. quest q. 15. a Morton Grand Imposture Sect 5. Pag. 47. Arâ 1547. 9. Sess. of Trent April 21. An. 1548. a Bellar. l. 1. de concil c. 12. b Harding 4. Article of Peters supremaââe as ââwell saith c Suarez tâ detriplââ vitr disp 10. de sam âonâ Sect. 1. Num. 22. d Bellarm. de Pânââf Rom. l. 1. c. 22. Peââus in concâlââ primo ãâã lâquttur e Harding loco citaâ f ãâã kerus tom 2. contrev 4 9 2 c. 14. Responde ãâã posse colligi ex hoc loco Petrum esse ãâã ãâã citio primum naâ constat ante ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã quis priâus ãâã suâ ãâã evangelâsta tacuit g Gerson tâ 4. in propos utâââ ad ââter scbisma h Lyranus in ãâã i Carthusian in locum a Bellar. l. 1. de conc c. 12. b Suarez de tripl tra Theo. disp sect 3. c Pighius l. 6. c. 18. d Cajetan de âuthorit Pap. â 16. Also your unofficed Prophets may as well denounce judgement against an Apo staâ Church as they may publikely preach mercy in the Gospel and sâ this is no officiall act of authoritie The way of the Churches of Christ in New England a Answorth pag. 42. 43. in his Animadver b Best the Churches plea. pag. c Chap. 4. Ser. 5. d Chap. 4. Sect. 6. e Chap. 1. Ser. 2. Manuscript 6. It is true none should remove from one congregation to another without God goe before them nor can they change countries without Gods warranting ãâã Gen 12. 1. chap. 45. 4. but that such removall is a matter of Church-discipline and must be done by a ministeriall power is unwarâanted by any word of God a Fac de Almain de pâtesta eccles et lav c. 15. est congregatio authoritate legitime facta ad aliquem locuâ ex omni statu Hierarchico nulla persona fideli perente audirâ exclusa ad nactandum ea quae concernunt publicam ecclesiae utilitatem et ipsius mares b Geâsân de pâtest eccles d Schola Paâsârâ de poust Eccles. pag. 17. A Pastor may propone James the Apostles mind aneut fornication blood c. Act. 15. permodum consilii as a counsel to some other Pastor but it hath the power of a Synodicall decree not from Iames though an Apostle but from the joynt voyces of the Synod and it is not like that Iames as an Apostle said Wherefore my sentence is c. as an Apostle hee should have said as Paul doth what I received
Church v. 22. let me terme it so had not more power extensively to determine that same controversie in behalfe of both Antioch and of all the particular Churches subordinate powers are not contrary powers CHAP. 5. SECT 5. PROP. 3. QUEST 6. Manuscript ALL who would be saved must be added to the Church as Acts 2. 47. If God offer opportunity Gen. 17. 7. Because every Christian standeth in need of all the Ordinances of Christ for his Spirituall edification in holy fellowship with Christ Jesus Answer for clearing of this we are to discusse this question Whether all and every true believer must joyne himselfe to a particular visible congregation which hath independently power of the keys within it selfe God offering opportunity if he would be saved 1 Dist. There is a necessity of joyning our selves to a visible Church but it is not necessitas medii but necessitas praecepti it is not such a necessity as all are damned who are not within some visible Church for Augustine is approved in this there be many Wolves within the Church and many sheepe without but if God offer opportunity all are oblâged by God his Commandâment of confessing Christ before men to joyne themselves to the true visible Church 2. Dist. There is a fâllowship with the visible Church internall of hidden believers in the Romish Babel this is sufficient for salvation necessitate medii but though they want opportunity to joyne themselves to the Reformed visible Churches yet doe they sin in the want of a profession of the truth and in not witnessing against the Antichrist which is answerable to an adjoyning of themselves to a visible Church And so those who doe not professe the Faith of the true visible Church God offering opportunity deny Christ before men and this externall fellowship is necessary to all necessitate praecepti though our Lord graciously pardon this as an infirmity in his own who for feare of cruell persecution often dare ãâã confesse Christ. 3. Dist. The question is not whether all ought to joyne themselves ãâ¦ã âisible Church God offering occasion but if all ought by Christs command to joyne themselves to the Churches independent of their visible Congregations if they would be saved our Brethren ãâ¦ã it we deny it 1. Concl. An adjoyning to a visible Church either formally to be a member thereof or materially confessing the Faith of the true visible Church God offering occasion is necessary to all 1. Because we are to be ready to give a confession of the ââpe that is in us to every one who asketh 1 Pet. 3. 15. 2 Because he who denieth Christ before men him also will Christ deny before ãâã Father and before the holy Angells Mat. 10. 33. 3 Yet if some die without the Church having Faith in Christ and want opportunity to confesse him before men as repenting in the hâuâe of death their salvation is sure and they are within the invisible Church so is that to be taken extra Ecclesiam nulla salus none can be saved who are every way without the Church both visible and invisible as all perished who were not in Ncahs Arke 2. Concl. When God offereth opportunity all are obliged to joyne themselves to a true visible Church 1. Because God hath promised his presence to the Churches as his Sonne walketh in the midst of the golden candlesticks Rev. 2. 2. 2 Because Faith commeth by hearing a sent Preacher Rom. 10. 4. 3 Separation from the true visible Church is condemned Heb. 10. 24. Iud. v. 19. 1 Iohn 2. 19. 4. Good men esteeme it a rich favour of God to lay hold on the skirt of a Jew Zech. 8. 23. and to have any communion even as a doore keeper in Gods House and have desired it exceedingly and complained of the want thereof Psal. 84. 10. v. 1 2. Psal. 27. 4 Psal. 42. 1 2 3 4. Psal. 63. v. 1 2. 3. Concl. Our brethren with reverence of their godlinesse and learning erre who hold all to be obliged as they would be saved to joyne to such a visible congregation of independent jurisdiction as they conceive to be the only true Church visible instituted by Christ. That this is their mind is cleare by the first proposition of this Manuscript and by their answer to the 12 Question where they say that all not within their visible congregation as fixed sworne members thereof are without the true Church in the Apostles meaning 1 Cor. 5. 12. what have I to doe to judge them also that are without doe not yee judge them that are within which is a most violent torturing of the word For 1. without are dogs Rev. 22. so our brethren expound the one place by the other then all not fixed members of the congregationall Church as they conceive it of Corinth are dogs what was there not a Church of Saints on earth at this time but in one independent congregation of Corinth and were all the rest Dogs and Sorcerers 2. If judgeing here especially is the censure of Excommunication used according unto Christs institution that the spirit may be saved in the Day of the Lord and so to be used only toward regenerated persons then Paul was to intend the salvation of none by Excommunication but these who are members of one single congregation who are within this visible house of Christ then all the rest are without the house and so in the state of damnation 3. These who are without here are in a worse case then if they were judged by the Church that their spirit may be saved So they are left v. 13. to a severe judgement even to the immediate judgement of God as Cajetan doth well observe for sayth Erasmus Sarcerius Deus publica occulta sceler a non sinet impunita and Bullinger maketh as it is cleare an answer to an objection shall these who are without even the wicked Gentiles commit all wickednesse without punishment The Apostle answereth that saith he God shall judge them Non impune in vitiorum lacunis se provolvent prophani sed destinato tempore commeritas dabunt Deo ultori paenas And Paraeus num impune ibunt eorum scelera âmo Judicem Deum invenient 4. These who are within here are these who are of Christs family sayth P. Martyr and opposite to Gentiles and infidels saith Paraeus for all men are divided into two ranks some domesticks and within the Church and to be judged by the Church and some strangers without the covenant not in Christ neither in profession nor truth as Gentiles who are left to the severity of Gods judgement but our Brethrens Text shall beare that Paul divideth mankind into three ranke 1. Some within as true members of the Church 2. Some without as infidels and some without as not members of a fixed congregation now Believers without and not members of a fixed congregation are not left to the severity of the immediate judgment of God as these who
evident that the Apostles were persecuted cast in prison and beaten Act. 4. 3. c. 5. 18. 26. 33. 40. it is as evident that they had Assemblies and Churches meetings Act. 2. 37. 41. 46. c. 4. 1 2 3. c. 5. 10. v. 25. now the question then is not if they could not meet for extrinsecall impediments of persecution for both our brethren and wee agree in this that they had their Church-assemblies for Word and Sacraments then the question is upon the supposall of Church assembles which the persecution of the Jewes then fearing the people was not able to hinder c. 5. 26 whether or no was the Church at Jerusalem of such a competent number onely as that they could meet not occasionally onely to heare a Sermon but in an ordinary Church-meeting to heare the Word and communicate in the breaking of bread and seales of the Covenant and though the want of a capacious house bee also an extrinsecall impediment why they could not meet yet that they wanted such a capacious house as the Temple will prove nothing but it cannot bee said that they wanted a capacious house for the ordinary meeting of a Congregation the ordinary and genuine use whereof is to bee edified by the Word and Sacraments and that an ordinary house could containe such a number of thousands and multitudes as can bee edified in a Congregationall way is denyed 2. Our brethren say that they did not eate the Supper in private houses for the breaking of bread Act. 2. 46. was common bread and they had the use of the Temple and taught in the Temple for the Senate of the Jewes durst not extend their malice to the highest Act. 5. 26. for they feared the people and Act. 4. 21. So when they had sâââher threatned them they let them goe finding nothing how they might punish them because of the people for all men glorified God for that which was done so the people favouring the Apostles they made use of their libertie to the full and bad their publick meetings for Word and Sacraments in the Temple and did meet in private houses Act. 20. 20. in a private way not in a Church way So Act. 2. 47. They had favour with all the people Answ. It is said these beleevers v 44. were ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in one place and those who v. 46. did eate bread ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã from house to house met then being in one place and eating of bread from house to house must bee exponed as wee doe distributively that is divided in small Assemblies for the argument that we bring militateth against the eating of their common meat in houses all being in one private house were three thousand in âne place ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã all at one banquet and that daily 2. It is true divers expone the breaking of bread v. 46. not of the Supper of the Lords yet of the banquets of love where there was an assembly of many but v. 42. It is cleare these three thousand did receive the Supper of the Lord together and it is so true that the Syriack hath it in his exposition thus ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã unâisht anâhephin bavau but luthi uâaktsaâa deuâhaârskia it is memorable saith Lorinus that hee retaineth the name of Eucharistia it is rendred Et communicaâant in oratione fractione Eucharistia yea and Lutherus and Calvin both expound it so and as Lorinus Cajetanus Cornelius a Lapide they bee all spirituall exercises named here But how can wee imagine that many thousands could in one meeting communicate at one Table in the Lords Supper and that ordinarily 1. What voyce could reach to so many thousands as they did grow unto 2. What Table could suffice to a Congregation of so many thousands added to the Church for the supper is a Table ordinance and requireth Table communion Table gestures which the Apostles could not so soone remove and change into an Altar that all might conveniently heare and bee edified 3. Can wee beleeve that seeing Congregationall meetings of fewer and that in private houses was lesse obnoxious to the indignation of authoritie then meeting in the Temple as is most evident Act. 4. 1 2. and seeing the Apostles had libertie to meet Act. 5. 26. that they would draw the first mould of the Christian visible Church after the patterne of a convention most unfit yea unpossible for attaining the intended end to wât edification especially not being compelled thereunto by an extrinsecall necessitie Our brethren say three thousand five thousand might all communicate in one place though not at one time súccessively as it is in many numerous Congregations But I answer 1. after they were five thousand ch 4. I dare say taking in the hundreth and twentie the five hundreth brethren that all saw Christ at once 1 Cor. 15. 6. and the fruit of the preaching of the other ten Apostles all now present at Jerusalem when the ãâ¦ã the Spirit on all flesh joe 2. 28 29. ãâã 15 16 17. was now to take effect at this time there were ãâã thousand but after there all it is said Act. 6. 1. The ãâ¦ã were multiplyed v. 7. And the Word of God ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The ãâ¦ã Disciples grew exceedingly and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a great ãâã the Priests were obedient to the faith how many of the people were then obedient to the faith could all these make on Congregation to eate at one Table But 2. when they are put to this shift to say that they did communicate suc ãâã ãâã Table and which must bee not all in one day then ãâã brethren grant there was not here such a Congregation as is 1 Cor. 11. 20 When you come together therefore into one ãâ¦ã eat the Lords Supper 23. Wherefore my brethren ãâ¦ã together to eate ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã tarry one for another when ãâã come to eate at the love-feasts especially at the Lords Supper saith Diâdatus if every one of the Congregation bee to waite on while another come then in the Apostolick Church all the Congregation came together to the Lords Supper to one place and at one time and this is not the Congregation where of hee speaketh 1 Cor. 14. 23. if therefore the whole Church câme together to the same place and all speake with tongues ãâ¦ã in thâse that are unlearned and unbeleovers will they ãâ¦ã mad Hence all the Congegration come together to one place at one time and the place was so that heathen and unbeleevers might come into their worship of the Congregation but our brethren make the meeting of this Congregation such as they were not to sâay one for another ãâã ãâã all at one time but successively and so as the whole Congregation could not come to one place at once but by ãâã and quarters and fractions and divided parts now one ãâã or two thousand then another two thousand the next day for the Apostles then celebrating
of these congregations as where there is not a head of a Family and members there is not a Family and so you prove not Jerusalem a presbyteriall Church over many fixed and formed Churches as they are in Scotland and if the Apostles were pastors in a circular and fluid way to many congregations every one was a pastor to many congregations and so elected by many congregations which is absurd Ans. 1. Fixed or not fixed cannot vary the essence of the government 1. The Priests Levites and Prophets teaching in the wildernes from place to place and the people by war scattered to sundry Tribes doth not make these meetings not to be under the government of the great Sanedrim more then if the meeting made a fixed Synagogue divers members and dverso heads in one Family occasioned by death and pestilence diverse Souldiers and new Commanders in a Regiment diverse Inhabitants yea and weekly altered rulers and watchmen in a City doth not infer that that family Regiment and City is not under one government of the City one of the whole army and one parliamentary law of the whole kingdome no more then if all were fixed in members and heads 2. Churches their persecution may have both members and teachers removed to a corner and altered yet they remain the same single Congregation having the same government 3. Officiating in the same word seales censures by Peter to day and by Andrew to morrow though members also be changed is of the same species and nature even to the worlds and if we suppose the Church of Ierusalem to be one Congregation induring a patterne these sixteen hundred yeares members and officers must be often altered yet it is one Congregation in specie and one single Church in nature though not in number and the government not altered through the fluidity and alteration of members and officers as it is the same Parliament now which was in the raigne of King Iames though head and members be altered fluidity and alteration of rulers and members must be by reason of mortality accidentall to all incorporations and yet their government for all that doth remaine the same in nature if these same Lawes and Government in nature by these Lawes remaine CHAP. 4. SECT 5. Why we doe not admit the Members of the Churches of Old England to the Seales of the Covenant Quest. I. VVHether the Seales of the Covenant can be denyed to professors of approved piety because they are not members of a particular visible Church in the New Testament Our Brethren deny any Church Communion and the seales of the Covenant Baptisme to the children of Beleevers the Lords Supper to beleevers themselves who come to them from Old England because they be not members of the particular Congregation to which they come and because there is no visible Church in the New Testament but one particular Parish and all who are without a particular Parish are without the visible Church and so are not capable of either Church censures or the Seales of the Covenant because ãâã have right to the seales of the Covenant but onely this visible Church We hold all who professe faith in Christ to be members of the visible Church though they bee not members of a visible Congregation and that the seales of the Covenant should not be denyed to them And for more full clearing of the question let these considerations be observed First Dist. All beleevers as beleevers in foro Dei before God have right to the seales of the Covenant these to whom the Covenant and body of the Charter belongeth to these the seale belongeth but in foro Ecclesiastico and in an orderly Church-way the seales are not to be conferred by the Church upon persons because they beleeve but because they professe their beleeving therefore the Apostles never baptized Pagans but upon profession of their faith Second Dist. Faith in Christ truely giveth right to the seales of the Covenant and in Gods intention and decree called voluntas beneplaciti they belong onely to the invisible Church but the orderly way âf the Churches giving the seales is because such a society is a professing or visible Church and orderly giving of the seales according to Gods approving will called voluntas signi revelata belongeth to the visible Church Third Dist. The Church may orderly and lawfully give the seales of the Covenant to those to whom the Covenant and promises of grace doth not belong in Gods decree of election Fourth Dist. The Church may lawfully adde to the Church visible such as God addeth not to the Church invisible as they may adde Simon Magus and the Church may lawfully cast out of the visible Church such as Christ hath not cast out of the invisible Church as the Church may excommunicate regenerate persons for scandalous sinnes Fift Dist. Then the regenerate excommunicated have right to the seales of the Covenant as they have to the Covenant and yet the Church doth lawfully debarre them hic nunc in such a scandalous case from the seales of the Covenant Wee hold that those who are not members of a particular Congregation may lawfully be admitted to the seales of the Covenant First Because those to whom the promises are made and professe the Covenant these should be baptized But men of approved piety are such though they be not members of a particular Parish The proposition is Peters argument Act. 2. 38. Secondly Those who are not Members of a particular Church may be visible professors and so members of a visible Church Ergo the seales of the Covenant belongeth to them Thirdly The contrary opinion hath no warrant in Gods Word Fourthly The Apostles required no more of those whom they baptized but profession of beleefe as Act. 10. 47. Can any forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we Act. 8. 37. If thou beleevest with all thy heart thou mayest he baptized no more is sought of the Jaylor Act. 16. 31. 34. The Authour saith To admit to the Seales of the Covenant is not an act of Christian liberty that every Christian may dispense to whom he pleaseth but an act of Church power given to the Ministers to dispense to those over whom the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers but we have no Ministeriall power over those of another Congregation and who are not members of a particular Congregation Answ. First To dispense the Seales to whom we please as if mens pleasure were a rule were licentiousnesse not Christian Liberty There may be a communion of benefits where there is no communion of punishment Beneficia sunt amplianda Secondly It is false that Pastors have no Ministeriall power over those who are not of their Congregation for if so all communion of Churches should fall for Letters of recommendation from other Churches whereof they are Members cannot make Pastors of New England to have a Ministeriall power over those of another