Congregational Church for there can be no appeals to that it being the lowest Church that can be The particular Synagogues were rather Types of the Congregational Churches for they are called by the same name Jam. 1.2 And the Ministers under the Gospel are called by the same names that the indefinite Officers of the Jewish Church were viz. Priests and Levites Isa 66.21 which place is spoken of the time under the Gospel And if it be granted that the Ministers of the Gospel be given to the whole Church as the Priests and Levites were indefinitely to the whole Church of the Jews notwithstanding any particular relation to the particular Synagogues and places they resided in and taught or judged in it is as much as I contend for And if by mystical he meaneth the elect only or entitively only it could not be a type of the Church-Catholike so for the Jewish Church was visible and organical His second proof is from Mat. 18. Tell the Church which saith he was a particular Congregation which was endued with entire power even to excommunication Whatsoever ye shall binde c. Answ This was not the Institution neither was there any donation of the keys but a supposal of the keys in the particular Churches which is a thing confessed by all and this power was also in the Jewish Synagogues But this is not spoken exclusively that this power is no where else If the rulers of the Synagogue had power to excommunicate to which it is like Christ alluded in that speech then much more the Sanedrim or highest Court and so I conceive it is in the Church of the New Testament If the least combination of Elders have this power given them for matters that concern that Congregation only then much more a greater company and combination for matters that concern a greater part of the Church under their combination and for matters of greater moment then can be transacted by the smaller company But the donation of the keys was to the Apostles together and they were general Officers and stood in relation to no particular Church and therefore the keys come to the particular Congregation or Ministry there as to parts of the whole company of Organs yet immediatly and not by commission from any Catholike Court. His third proof is because the first execution of the greatest act of entire power was exercised in a particular Church without consulting with the universal Church though the Apostles were then surviving 1 Cor. 5. Answ For ought that I know the Church of Corinth was a Classical Church and not a meer Congregational one for there were Churches in it 1 Cor. 14.34 Besides the probability that Cenchrea was a member thereof But Sir who requires the consulting with the Church-Catholike in admitting or ejecting members Or did the particular Synagogues consult with the Sanedrim or the whole Church of the Jews when they excommunicated any man Surely they had work enough to do then His fourth proof or argument is Because entire power was committed to particular men viz. the Apostles severally and to all jointly and therefore not to one visible governing Church Vind. p. 23. Answ By this argument it appears the power is given not to the Congregation but to the Ministers whose representatives the Apostles were in receiving the keys severally and jointly which is as much as the Presbyterians require viz. that the Ministers have power to exercise their ordinary power jointly together upon a call as well as severally in their particular Congregations as the Apostles did their extraordinary Their receiving the keys together signifyed their representation of the Ministers not multiplyed only as M. Ellis would evade it but conjoyned His fifth argument is from the reproofs given by Christ to the 7. several Churches in the Revelation and not to the combination of them though near one another Answ For ought appears they might be all Presbyterial Churches and not Congregational only The Church of Ephesus was one and that was of more Congregations then one as hath been shewed before But how doth this prove these Churches were nor or might not actually have been in combination if civil authority would have permited Were not the Elders of the several Churches worthy of blame for not doing their duty in their several Churches Or will combinations of Congregations now in Classes or Provinces free their Ministers from blame in neglecting their duâ—â—es in their particular Congregations A Classis or Synod is not to be blamed for the faults in a particular Congregation which ought to be censured in the particular and not there neither indeed can be except they had been brought before them The several Churches there had their several faults and therefore though the Epistle is written to the seven yet it was needful the reproofs should be applied to rhem severally And yet some think that the whole Epistle was writeen and sent to all the 7. Churches from Rev. 1.4 11. His second sort of Arguments are from the matter and members of the Church Sect. 9. and he makes it necessary that the whole Church should be gathered together into one place as the Jewish Church was and Corporations in their hals and Kingdoms in their Parliaments And this he saith I deny against all experience and reason Vind. p. 24. Answ This hath been answered before among the Objections I adde further that though usually it is so that there are some general meetings in worldly polities that are several actual governments yet it is not alwaies so as hath been shewed and where it is so it is a fruit and effect and token of liberty but ariseth not meerly from unity because there have been polities that had them not for this Kingdom was one a good while before there were any Parliaments and after they were granted they were but occasional and so there may be occasional meetings in general Councels only the vastnes of the Church and diversity of civil governments and governours render them very difficult in our daies But he saith that such an oneness as is in regard of kinde and nature in all the Churches and in relation to the same head and in order to and dependance upon one rule or Law the word of God is no actual or real onenesse but in imagination and conceit Ans It is not actual indeed but habitual as hath been said many times over yet it is real as well as the four monarchies were real monarchies and not in imagination only and conciet He might as well make the head of the Church and the Laws of the Church and the Covenant of grace and the seals of the Covenant to be but imaginary and in conceit as the Church-Catholike for they are the bonds of the unity and real visible bonds make not an imaginary integral but a real And where I pray is this onenesse denyed by the brethren as you alledge Vin. p. 24. The enlargement and confirmation of this argument A non existentiâ
that the Presbyterians hold that there is one general Church of Christ on earth and that all particular Churches and single Congregations are but as similar parts of the whole and the Independents say they hold that there is no other visible Church of Christ but only a single Congregation meeting in one place to partake of all Ordinances The London-Ministers affirm only that the Independents deny one general Church of Christ on earth not the similarity of particular Congregations But it will necessarily follow that they deny them to be similar parts if they deny the whole to which the parts must relate And if they make the whole Church a genus as they do then must they make the particular Churches similar species which is little lesse then a contradiction for the formality of a species lieth in dissimilarity and difference from the opposite species Now to shew that this assertion of the similarity of particular Churches crosseth mine own scope M Ellis sets down mine opinion with a mark as if the words were mine own which neither are my words nor my sense viz. That the Church visible Catholike is an Organical ministerial governing body i. e. saith he not such a body as is the element of water and air every part whereof is of the same nature vertue and power in it self considered but such a body as a man hath which is distinguished by several members c. And such a body as all Corporations are Now this saith he contradicts plainly the former both opinion and expression for if the Church-Catholike be a similar body and all Congregations alike and the whole nothing differing in nature or constitution from the parts then the Catholike visible Church is no more the governing Church then a particular Ans To let passe his unfair dealing with my self and others in misreciting my words I said indeed the Church-Catholike was an Organical body but not a ministerial governing body For the scope of my Thesis was and is to prove the Church-Catholike as it consists of Officers and private Christians to be the prime Church to which the Ordinances are given respectively as the Officers or private members are capable and to particular Churches secondarily I spake not of the Organs or Governours only The body of Officers is indeed a governing body called a ministerial Church but the whole Church either particular or general is no governing body no more then a whole Corporation or kingdom can be said to be a governing body but they are governed bodies and so is the Church both particular and general Indeed I finde the words ministerial governing Church in M. Rutherford in his due right of Presbyt 177 178 179. c. but it is clear that he takes it not in M Ellis's sense but for a Church furnished with Officers and having discipline and government exercised in it for he was farre from making the body of the Church to be the receptacle of the keys and having power of governing He saith the keys were given for the Church but not to the Church It is only a Scottish expression not to be so expounded and strained as M. Ellis doth who bendeth his whole reply against a sense of it which I beleeve was not M. Rutherfords meaning Neither did I make the whole to differ any thing in nature constitution or power from the parts but said they have the same kinde of intensive power but in the Church-Catholike it is of larger extension Similar bodies conjoyned exert their power more intensely and extensively then when single All the water of the Sea will cool and moisten more and further then one drop a great fire will warm yea burn more and further then a spark a great heap of stones extends further and will weigh more then a little one So all Churches if they could meet have no other power when met together then a single Church but being combined the power both reacheth further in extension of places and it more august and solemn and to be the rather respected and submitted unto But this he saith crosseth Apollonius whom saith he I follow but indeed I never saw his book nor heard of it until a good while after I had composed my Thesis and then inserted I think but 2. or 3. sentences of his Apollonius saith he saith that Eph. 4.16 is meant of an organical ministerial body differing in members which M. Hudson expounds to be meant of a similar body whose parts are all alike Answ They are alike in the integrals as I said before but not in the essentials But where doth Apollonius deny the particular Congregations to be similar integrals parts of the Catholike There is therefore no disagreement among the Presbyterians in this point as M. Ellis suggesteth vin 54. that one of them would have one thing another another But the main question comes now to be discussed Sect. 3. It is one Organical body viz Whether the whole Church-Catholike visible be one Organical body which if it can be made appear will end the whole controversie The Church is distinguished into Entitive and Organical The Church visible is called Entitive not because of the inward grace which is essential to an invisible member but from the reception and embracing the Christian Catholike faith which is essential to a visible beleever And it is called Organical in reference to the Officers thereof which are the Organs of the Church or in regard of the Offices which Christ hath instituted to be in his visible Church This distinction halteth as much as that of the Church-visible and invisible for the Organical Church is also Entitive viz. it is of such as have received and embraced the Christian faith and is made up of such and only of such yet there is a difference in notion but not in persons Indeed in some sense a company of visible beleevers may be said to be a Church-Entitive and not Organical because they are not actually under any particular Officers as a company of visible Christians in New England inhabiting together to make a Congregation but as yet have chosen no Officers may in reference to other organized Congregations be said to be inorganical and entitive only but this sense is not the most proper sense of the word For if they be then but a Church-entitive then also after they have Officers if those particular Officers die they should return to be a Church-Entitive only again in the interim before they have chosen any new ones Now though in consideration we may distinguish between the essence of beleevers as beleevers embracing the Christian faith and their existence under Officers especially under particular Officers yet the existence of visible beleevers members of the Church-Catholike can hardly be without reference to Officers For the ministery of the Officers is the usual means of their conversion and to be sure they cannot be admitted to be actual members of the Church-Catholike by baptism but by some of the Officers though
which is the way our brethren now practise vind pag. 9. Here he granteth what is contended for if the whole were convenable i. e. as I conceive all the Officers of the whole Church But if that could be I doubt he holds they must either act as men out of office or an particular Officers every one in reference to his particular Congregation or can their convention together put a general office upon them which they had not before or draw forth general actions that concern the whole from them that had no habitual power reaching the whole but if all the Officers met together can rule the whole because every particular Congregation hath its Officer there why hath not a part thereof convened power to rule that part also seeing the right and reason is the same seeing the Church is a similar body in regard of the integrals and the parts are similar parts And if so here will be an unavoidable ground for classical associations where all the Officers may meet And himself freely acknowledgeth the conveniency and necessity of Classes yea and Synods also for direction and determination and that by divine right though not with power properly juridical vind pag. 3. But then their directions and determinations must be by his opinion but charitative and by their skill only and not by vertue of their office But the reason why his parallel of a Kingdom where a part cannot make laws for that part holdeth not is because the whole Kingdom is under one legislative power and combined together in a body representative under one head who have power to make uniform laws for the whole but neither the Church-Catholike nor any particular Church can make any new divine laws or abrogate any of them which Christ hath set down but explain them and make particular rules according to the general and not otherwise and put Christs laws in execution and this a particular combination may do in their sphear for their limits And so as farre as their Commissions reach the Officers in a Corporation may make constitutions for the Corporation so they be not contrary to their charter and the Justices or Committees for a County may make Orders for the County so they be agreeable to the Laws of the Land whereof the County is a part and have habitual power to execute justice in any part of the County as occasion serveth though they for conveniency sake do usually act in their several divisions A Justice or Mayor or Constable cannot act beyond their County Corporation or Town though they be desired and called without a new Commission but a Minister may preach and administer Sacraments in any part of the Church-Catholike upon a call and why not also act judicially and juridically and where according to the foresaid limitation if he hath a call to bring his habitual power into act seeing the keys are commensurable Sect. 3. But then he comes to state the question positively what it is And he sets it down thus viz. Whether the whole company of Christians on earth are in their ordinary and setled Church-constitution so one intire single Common-wealth Corporation and Congregation as that of right and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ it is the first subject of all Church-power by authority whereof and commission from which all particular Churches act and to the determinations of the major part whereof they are to yield obedience if not apparently contrary to the word of God and the Catholike governing power whereof resides immediatly as in its proper subject under Christ only in the Ministers and Elders and they not taken severally but jointly as one entire College or Presbytery to whose charge severally and jointly the whole and every particular Church is committed c. And this assertion M. Ellis sets down with in the margin and cites Apollonius and the London-Ministers as the Authors of it as if they were their very words but they are niether their words non sense I wonder Sir who ever dreamed of such an assertion but your self It is not honest dealing to lay the births of your own brains at other mens doors to make them father them The like stating of it is again vind pag. 40. where the same Authours are cited viz. Apollon cap. 3. sect 4. And Jus Divinum pag. 43. and pag. 163. And again vind p. 27. and there are cited for it Apollon cap. 3. pag. 41. And Hudson p 25. as assertors of this opinion expresly But I am sure there in no such thing asserted by these Authours in any of those places And if he saith it is drawn by consequence from their tenets I answer it is not accounted fair dealing to affirm those consequences that may be drawn from any mans opinion to be his opinion when haply he was never aware of any such consequences or doth deny the consequence of them from his opinion Much lesse is it fair to set them down in capital letters and with marks in the margin which usually importeth them to be their very words or to make that the main controversie which is not owned by the opposite partee but haply may be drawn by consequence The scope of Apollonius and the London-Ministers is to set down the proper subject and receptacle of the keys first negatively not the people or catus fidelium nor the civil Magistrate though they grant him a defensive diatactick compulsive cumulative power a power circa sacra non in sacris nor Papal Officers as Cardinals c. nor prelatical as Deans Arch-Deacons c. nor political Officers as Committees Commissioners nor Deacons But positively all those Church-guides extraordinary and ordinary which christ hath erected in his Church vesting then with power and authority therein viz. Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastours and Teachers governments or ruling-Elders these Christ hath made the immediate receptacle and first subject of the keys or of Ecclesiastical pover from himself So say the London-Ministers expresly Now suppose they had undertaken to set down who were the proper subject of civil authority under the King and should first negatively say it is not the Physician nor the Chirurgion nor the Mathematician nor the Merchants nor Mariners nor Tradesmen nor Husbadmen and Farmers but positively they are the Judges Sheriffs Justices Maiors Bayliffs and Constables Would any one gather from hence that all these Officers not taken severally but jointly are one entire actual college of Officers to whose charge severally and jointly the whole and every part of the Kingdom is committed by authority whereof and dependance upon which common Officers the Officers of every particular Town do act Besides this stating of the question is not consistent with it self for it makes the Church-Catholike the first subject of all Church-power and then makes the Ministers and Elders the proper subject thereof but the proper subject is the prime subject Unlesse he means in a logical sense as sight is predicated of the whole man and yet
is seated properly in the eye or reason is given to the whole man and yet is seated in the understanding Christ hath given all his Ordinances to his visible Church for the publike dispensation of which he hath instituted Church-Officers to whom he hath committed that power respectively these officers are distributed among and setled in their several Congregations and there actually and constantly dispense their Ordinances to them as by their office they are enabled according to the word and yet because there are some things of common concernment with other Congregations and of greater moment and difficuly then can be transacted by a few Elders in a particular Congregation therefore upon such occasions they make act conjunctim with the Elders of other Congregations and may also dispense both Word and seals occasionally to other Congregations upon a call by opportunity want or desire of other Congregations Yet do not the Presbyterians hold that the particular Churches or Officers act by authority of and commission from the one entire single Common-wealth Corporation and Congregation of the whole company of Christians on earth as M. Ellis is pleased to set it down to render their tenets odious but they hold that every Minister by vertue of his office hath an immediate habitual power from Christ to dispense his Ordinances but the conâ—tant exerting and exercise of this power is called forth into act by that parcel of the Church-Catholike which hath given him a call to take the particular immediate inspection and care over them in the Lord yet upon occasion for the honour of God the vindicating of his truth the suppressing of more general errours and scandals the propagating of the Gospel and the good of others as God gives opportunity it may be exerted and exercised in other places and to other persons so confusion and disorder be avoided Neither do the National Churches act by commission from the Catholike nor the Provincial from the National nor the Classis from the Provincial nor the Congregational from the Classis but every Minister acts by commission from Jesus Christ by vertue of his Office And the Congregational Eldership is first in acting though last in Christs intention in instituting the office Every drop of water is similar to the whole element and is cold and moist but receive not those qualities from the whole Element but hath them immediatly in its self and though it actually exerts them only where it is placed and applied yet hath an habitual power to exert them any where else if applied So the Church-Officers have their powder neither from the Church Catholike nor from their particular Congregation but from their office which they receive from Christ though ministerially admitted thereto by the Presbytery which power though ordinarily and constantly they exert in their own Congregation yet can elsewhere upon a call Neither do the Presbyterians say that the Church-Catholike or the whole campary of Christians on earth are in their ordinary and setled Church-constitution one entire single Common-wealth Corporation and Congregation actually but one habitual Common-wealth and Corporation made up by the aggregation of all the single actual Congregations of Christians in the world as an Empire of all the Provinces and Kingdoms under it and that beside the particular actual constant affairs of the Congregations which are properly to be managed by such as are the particular actual Officers thereof there are some things that concern more then themselves and those are to be transacted as such occasions arise by the Officers of so many Congregations as they concern they belonging properly to the cognizance of Officers as Officers and if those matters be of more general concernment then that all the Officers concerned therein can meet without confusion to transact them then they are to delegate some choice Officers from the several vicinities to transact them as hath been shewed before and as the call of the Congregation draweth forth the power of the Officers to act among them constantly so this delegation cals forth their power to act occasionally pro tempore in this greater meeting The case was once that Totus mundus ingemuit sub Arianisino this concerned the whole or the greater part and could not be cured by particular Officers as particular in their several Congregations divisim and therefore required a more general meeting of Officers to whom by reason of their office it did appertain to consider of it and suppresse it conjunctim by confutations and censures and these having done the work they were called forth unto then are to return to their particular charges again for this work is but occaâ—ional and these occasions fall out very rarely This makes not the whole Church-Catholike under one actual constant regiment Yet because in Churches that are near together in a vicinity matters of common concernment or that require the help of more Elders then one or two Congregations can afford will frequently and constantly occurre and if there be not a set time and place appointed by consent for a certain number of Officers of that vicinity to meet they will be drawn together with much difficulty charge labour trouble and confusion and with lesse certainty as appears by the case of M. Ward in the Netherlands who being unjustly cast out of his place could not under two years get a meeting of neighbour-Elders to hear and right his cause and when he had obtained a meeting it was â—ut of very few viz. the Elders of Aruheim as I have been enformed therefore it is conceived that there should be a certain time and place appointed for the Elders of such a vicinity as are in combination for mutual assistance to meet in M. Ellis mistakes the state of the question in saying the Ministers and Elders of the Catholike Church not taken severally but jointly as one entire College or Presbytery have the charge severally and jointly of the whole and every particular Church committed to them vind pag. 9. For they are not actually Ministers and Elders of the Church-Catholike nor actually one entire College and Presbytery nor have not actually the charge of the whole and every particular Church but habitually only by reason of the indefinitenesse of their office They have power in actu primo by vertue of their office but not in actu secundo sive exercito they have jus ad rem every where but not in re any where without a call They are the Ministers of Jesus Christ and thereby have right and power to perform the acts belonging to their office but for the execution of it either in a particular Church constantly or conjunctim occasionally with others there is required a call thereunto And the not observing of this distinction is the cause of this difference in this question The Levites were by their office consecrated to do the service of the Tabernacle and to stand before the Congregation to minister unto them Numb 16.9 And the Priests to offer sacrifice and
one key shorter then the other It is granted also here that Councels have to do with matters of common right and joint concernment And thereby the necessity of Synods and Councels will follow seeing there are things of common right to many Churches and may be to all And this will necessarily require that they should be furnished with authority to transact those affairs of common concernment and that is as much as the Presbyterians contend for in the behalf of Synods No State saith he can take my wife from me or dispose of my children in marriage this is of peculiar right so in Churches Answ No more can the Elders of the particular Congregation nor the civil Officers of the particular Town But the civil Officers or State can dispose of mens children and good according to Law for the good and defence of the whole notwithstanding a mans peculiar right So the peculiar rights of persons and Congregations must be subservient and give way to the good of the whole or the greater part And though a master of a family ought not to yield up his family-government over wife children and servants to rule them in common with other Masters of families as M. A. and M. S. note in their Def. p. 110. yet if he abuse his government over them the wronged persons either wife children or servants may be relieved by the Magistrate who yet hath no constant actual hand in the family-government And whereas he saith all the Christians in England would be loth to stand bound to the determinations of 2. or 3. sent in their names to a general Councel I answer by retortion so would a Congregation or our Nobility and Gentry be loth to stand bound by the censures of two or three Elders in a particular Congregation without relief But it is pretended by M. Ellis to be new also relatively in reference to the Protestant Divines Calvin is brought in here vind p. 13 It is true Calvin saith Instit lib 4. cap. 1. sect 3. Ad amplexandam Ecclesiae unitatem nihil opus est Ecclesiam ipsam oculis cernere vel manibus palpare quin potius eo quod in fide sit◠est But his meaning i◠we cannot distinguish the elect from the reprobate by sense referring it to what he had spoken in the former Section Soli Deo permittenda est cognitio suae Ecclesia sect 2. Deus mirabiliter Ecclesiam suam quasi in latebris servat But here M. Ellis cites a man for him who is directly against him For Calvin makes the Ministry of man which God useth in governing the Church to be the chief sinew whereby the faithful cohere together in one body Inst l. 4. c. 3. s 2. where also he dilates upon Eph. 4.4 c. and saith it is meant of the Church militant only And in sect 7. he saith though the Minister be tied to the particular Congregation yet he may not only help other Churches but may be removed to other Churches of the publike utility require it And for Councels he saith l. 4. c. 9. s 1. That he reverenced the ancient Councels ex animo and wisheth all other men did so And saith the promise in Mat. 18.20 where two or three are gathered together in my name c. as it reacheth to particular Assemblies so also to a general Councel Sect. 2. And he giveth to Councels power dogmatical and saith there is no better remedy against errours as I cited the words upon the like occasion before Nullum est melius remedium c. and also Dialactick power c. 10. s 27. in making constitutions according to the general rules 1 Cor. 14.40 and jurisdiction c. 11. not only doctrinal binding and loosing but disciplinary by inflicting censures s 2. and c. 12. s 22. sheweth the ancient manner of yearly Synods and of appeals if any were wronged by their Bishops and not only the relief of the wronged person but the deposition of the Bishop or suspension for a time from communion And he saith that alwaies before one Synod ended the time and place for another was set and then complains that these things were now out of date So that Calvin was not against an habitual unity of the whole Church nor against the exerting of the Ministerial power beyond the particular Congregation or exerting it conjunctim in Synods and Councels Chamier also hath been alledged for it before And the difference is vast between the Church-Catholike visible which our Divines deny 〈◊〉 this as hath been shewed before Chap. 5. Sect. 4. M. Ellis's second just or rather unjust prejudice is from the dangerous consequences of this opinion But indeed they flow from his ill stating of the Question and not from the Tenet it self To the first viz. a necessity of universal and general Officers and some one above the rest to whom the particular Churches may have continual recourse hath been answered before Cha. 7. Sect. 6. To the second viz. the necessity of a continual standing Court Sect. 6. hath been already answered Cha. 7. Sect. 10. The suiting of the Church too much to worldly policy occasioneth this scruple And yet we see that Parliaments and Diets civil are not standing continual Courts no more need Councels Ecclesiastical be And whereas he saith it were notably vain to imagine that Christ hath committed the government of his Church first and chiefly to that body that should not meet six times in sixteen hundred years nay never I answer that I never affirmed a general Councel to be the first subject of the keys nor the London-Ministers that I can finde nor Apollonius that I remember But the Church-Officers in general in opposition to the caetus fidelium or the civil Magistrate c. A general Councel is but occasional yet is it Reverend and August and of more large extent by reason of the general delegation then any other meeting and is full of authority for the exerting of all Ecclesiastical power of the keys as I conceive The gift of the keys was primarily to the whole body of Officers or Organs of the Church respectively as their Offices were capable of them and as they were given to the Apostles together so they may he exercised together And secondarily to the particular Ministers or Officers as being a part of that body And though the power habitually considered be indefinite yet the constant actual exercise thereof is in their particular Congregations or Classes The Ordinances of God for the enjoyment and use of them were given to the whole visible Church for the conversion and edification of the Elect and if they could meet together as the Israelites did in the wildernesse and the Saints for ought I know shall in heaven they might partake of them together as their rightful portion but because they cannot meet but in parcels therefore they have right to enjoy them divisim by vertue of that general gift to the whole which every Congregation or parcel appropriates to
the Deacons office may cease at the dissolution of the Church that chose them because the subject of their office viz. contributions cease with the contributers and so it may be said of the ruling Elders also because the particular object of their office ceaseth and yet both of them while they are in their offices may extend the execution of their offices beyond the particular Church that chose them to a greater part of the Church and possibly to the whole 4. There is a great difference between the Minister of the word and the ruling-Elder the first hath two keys viz. of doctrine and discipline the other hath but one viz. of discipline The superiour order is conceived to comprehend the power of the inferiour and so the Apostles had all the power of the inferiour even of Deacons the like may be said of the rest 5. The key of discipline cannot be exercised but in a combination and therefore must cease when that ceaseth which must be at the dissolution of the particular Church whether Congregational or Presbyterial which chose them but the key of doctrine with which the Minister of the word is invested may be exercised by a single person out of combination and therefore that ceaseth not at such dissolution Indeed the exercise of his key of discipline is suspended by such dissolution yet is reserved in him habitually in actu primo because it is annexed to if not comprehended under his key of doctrine And if there can be any use made of that position of dispensing Ordinances to other Churches mediantibus candelabris it is more proper to this key then the other because his particular relation to the particular Church lets him into the particular combination and so into a greater upon occasion of a call 6. And for ought I know this might be the reason why the Apostle changed the manner of speech from the concrete to the abstract 1 Cor. 12.28 from teachers to helps governments to intimate that they that have those offices cease to be Officers when they cease to be helps or to be emploied in government but the others are affixed indelebly unto their persons and may be exercised more at large in the Church and out of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and singly without actual combination Suppose a part of a County wherein a Justice of peace formerly dwelt and executed his office should sink yet if he be preserved he remaineth still in his office and may execute it in any other place in the County where he shall dwell because his office stood in reference to the whole County though he exercised it actually but in one place So is the Ministers office as a Minister of the Gospel general though they take but particular divisions and parcels of the Church to feed and watch over actually and particularly and do not ordinarily stretch themselves within anothers particular line and limits without a call by permittance or entreaty or combination And that a Minister is a Minister of the Church Catholike visible appears thus He that can ministerially admit or eject a member into or out of the Church-Catholike visible is a Minister and Officer of the Church-Catholike visible But every Minister by Baptism or Excommunication admitteth or ejecteth members into or out of the Church-Catholike visible Therefore c. This Argument I finde more fully laid down by Apollonius Pastor ut Pastor exercet multos actus ministeriales non tantum erga Ecclesiam suam particularem cui ordinario ministerio est affixus sed erga Ecclesias alias particulares Provinciales Nationales imò erga Ecclesiam universalem Nam per Baptismum membra in Ecclesiam universalem admittir per excommunicationem membra non tantum ex sua particulari sed etiam Provinciali Nationali Vniversali Ecclesia eijcit Matth. 18.18 19. Ex â—ffiâ—â—â—o pastorali preces Deo offert pro omnibus alijs Ecclesijs labo antibus verbum Dei in alia Ecclesia particulari praedicare potest non tantum virtute ratione donorum sed cum pastorali authoritate ita ut verbo suo liget solvat peccatores vomittat retineat peccata ut legatus mâ—ssus a Deo obsecreâ— homines ut reconcilientur Deo Of excommunication I spake before proving that it ejecteth a man from communion with the whole Church-Catholike visible This M Ellis saith is not formally but virtually done But I answer then it will follow that by Baptism they are not formally admitted into the Church-Catholike but virtually But into what Church were they baptized that were baptized by John Baptist and the Apostles before particular Congregations were constituted And now they are constituted it cannot be said they are formally baptized into them for haply the person baptized in a particular Congregation will never be a member thereof but of some other Our brethren hold that it is entring into their particular Covenant that makes them actually members of their Congregation and that the children of their own Church-members are by baptism but incompleat members of that Congregation Our brethren will not say I suppose that those persons that go from hence to them being already baptized are heathens and without though they have lost their particular membership Surely they account them subjects of Christ and under his seal why else doe they admit any of them members of their Congregations into which they may admit only Christs Subjects and set no new seal of Baptism upon them And as Baptism admitteth primally formally and antecedenter into the Church-Catholike and secondarily and consequenter into that particular Congregation so the same order is in ejection by excommunication If a finger were added to a mans hand the primary consideration is that there is a limb given to that man such a man we say hath recovered his sight or hearing though it be seated in the eye or ear And if a hand could be conceived to cut nip or sear off a gangreened finger it would not be conceived as an act of the hand only but as an act of the man and the man would be said to loose a limb primarily and the secondary consideration is that the particular hand hath lost a finger When D. Cranmer burnt off his right hand it was not the act of the arm only but of the whole man primarily And if this be so of members that are fixed and have their particular place and office in the body and cannot be removed and set any where else then much more of the members of the Church which were members of the Church-Entitive before they received their particular membership in any Congregation and may be removed from one Congregation to another as oft as occasion or conveniency serveth But because excommunication is an act of many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2.6 I will therefore insist more particularly upon Baptism which is an act of a single Pastor or Minister though passed with the knowledge and consent of
in answer to M. Ball. It grieved me much that I saw them no sooner I have only inserted a few annotations upon those tractates because I was loth to make a Postscript and because I found that most of the material passages in them concerning this subject were already spoken unto in this book I have now shewed mine opinion on this question and submit it to your sage and mature judgements and should be glad that my betters would shew me theirs and either correct what I have erred or failed in or make more clear what I have endeavoured to prove and defend If I have herein erred I would not willingly be an heretick but shall be willing upon conviction and proof to retract the same but if I have defended a truth as I conceive I have I should be glad to be confirmed in it and gladder to have the truth confirmed that it may appear so to others Now God the Father who is the God of truth and Jesus Christ who is the way the truth and the life and the holy Ghost who is the Spirit of truth guide you and us into all truth So prayeth Your unworthy fellow-labourer in the Lord SAMUEL HUDSON Septemb. 8. 1649. AN EPISTLE TO THE READER THe Reverend Authour of this learned Tractate some few years ago did put forth a Book about the Essence and Vnity of the Church-Catholike visible and the priority thereof in regard of particular Churches This Book was written with so much ingenuity perspicuity and learning that Reverend and godly M. Hooker is pleased to passe his judgement upon the Authour and his Book in these words Survey of Church-discipline pag. 15. While I was enquiring and writing touching this Ecclesia Catholica visibilis an especial providence brought a book to my view which did purposely entreat of this particular subject The Author M. Hudson a learned man and a faithful Minister of the Gospel when I had considered his writing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I found his judgement sharp and scholasticall his spirit Christian and moderate his expression succinct and pregnantly plain to expresse his own apprehensions So that my heart was much contented with the acumen and judicious diligence of the Authour though I could not consent to what he writ yet I could not but unfainedly prize the learning perspicuity and painfulnesse expressed in his writing To this Book by him so much commended he returns an answer and before him one M. John Ellis junior And it seems there are two other Tractates about the same subject written from N. E. The one by M. Norton in answer to Apollonius the other by M. Allâ—â— and M. Shepherd in answer to M. Ball. For the truth is the â—â—â—tion there held forth if granted would utterly overthrow the grounds and pillars of the Congregational government For 〈◊〉 there be a Church-Catholike visible and this Church be not only a Church-Entitive but a Church-Organical and a Totum integrale having all church-Church-power habitually seated in the Officers of it which they have commission from Christ to exert and put into act upon a lawful call And if particular Congregations are integral parts and members of the Church-Catholike as the Jewish Synagogues weâ—â—f the Jewish Church And if the Ministry Ordinances and censures were given by Christ first to the Church-general-visible and secondarily to the Church-particular Then it will necessarily follow That the particular Congregation is not the first receptacle of church-Church-power And that all Church-power is not intirely and independently in a particular Congregation which are two of the chief foundations of the Congregational government I shall not at all speak to the first but as for this last That all Church-power is solely and independently in a particular Congregation it seems to me not only to be contrary to the Scripture a Act. 15. Mat. 18.17 Deut. 17.8 9 10 11 12. 1 Tim. 4.14 but to the very light of nature and to carry many great absurdities with it For 1. It takes away all authoritative appeals and all authoritative waies of uniting particular Churches one with another 2. Then the Churches of Jesus Christ should have no Church-communion in discipline one with another They may have Christian-communion but no Church-communion 3. Then no Minister could preach as an Officer out of his own Congregation but only as a gifted brother and as a private Christian 4. Then no Minister could administer the Sacraments which is an act of office out of his own Congregation nor as I conceive give the Sacrament to a member of another Congregation 5. Then when his particular Church is dissolved he ceaseth to be a Minister and must receive a New Ordination 6. Then a Minister baptizing a childe baptizeth him only into his own Congregation For if he be not an Officer of the Catholike Church he cannot baptize into the Catholike Church which is directly contrary to 1 Cor. 12.13 7. Then when the Officers excommunicate a person he should only be excommunicated out of that particular Congregation c. 8. Then Christ should have as many intire bodies as particular Congregations Christ should not only have one Body whereof particular Congregations are part but every Congregation should be a Body of Christ by it self 9. It would make way for toleration of heresies and blasphemies and let in as many religions as there are particular Congregations 10. It would make the Churches of Christ stand divided one from another in respect of government and thereby bring ruine upon one another Even as in a civil State if particular Corporations should be independent from the whole in point of government it would quickly bring destruction upon the whole For the removing of these and such like absurdities This learned and iudicious Authour in the Book fore-mentioned laid down a quite contrary Thesis That there is a Catholike visible organical Church to which Ordinances and censures are firstly given by Iesus Christ And that every Minister is seated by God in this Catholike visible Church and hath a virtual and habitual power to preach as a Minister in any place where he shall be lawfully called Indeed he is not an actual Minister of the Church-Catholike nor hath actually the charge of the whole Church as the Apostles had but habitually only by reason of the indefinitenesse of his office He hath power in actu primo by vertue of his office though not in actu secundo sive exercito he hath jus ad rem every where but not in re any where without a call He is a Minister of Jesus Christ and thereby hath right and power to perform the acts belonging to his office but for the execution of it there is required a call thereunto This position is opposed and confuted by the fore-named Authours And in answer to them but especially to M. Hooker and M. Ellis This Reverend Minister hath here written a Vindication which he hath done with so much meeknesse moderation ingenuity perspicuity and learning that
Section 3. Concerning Synods 158 The authours that handle this subject The nature kindes and authority of Synods 159 Section 4. A threefold power of Synods Dogmatical Diatactical Critical 160 A ground of a Synod in Scripture acknowledged by our Protestant Divines 161 The Synod Act. 15. exerted all those three kindes of power 162 Section 5. About the equality of power of single Congregations 163 Their subordination to the combined 164 This subordination is also a coordination Scripture-proofs for this subordination And reasons for it 165 The like subordination found in the Jewish Church And is dictated by light of nature and common to all societies Section 6. Divers Objections answered As 166 Obj. Then there must be 2. kindes of Presbyteries Then every particular Minister hath a very transcendent power and authority 167 Then they are standing-Officers of the Christian world 168 Then they are Christs Vicars general 169 Section 7. Then the Church of the whole world should choose every Officer 170 Divers exceptions of M. Ellis's 171 Section 8. Then the whole is to honour and contribute to the maintenance of of every Minister 173 Then the Ministers perform not their whole office to the Congregation that maintains them 174 This will be too great a burthen for Ministers to meddle in the affairs of many Congregations Then Ministers exercise rule where they do not ordinarily preach so the keys should not be commensurable 175 Section 9. This was a grand objection formerly against the Bishops that they ruled where they preached not 176 Then great and stubborn persons will never be brought to censure This will occasion much trouble and charge to the partie grieved Synods are in danger of erring as well as particular memberships 177 Section 10. The liberty of appeals proved But why then should Christ let his Church want general Councels so long 178 But how then dare particular Churches abrogate the decrees of general Councels 179 Chapter 8. An answer to M. Ellis's Prejudices Probabilities and Demonstrations against an universal visible and as he cals it governing but should have said organical Church And his wrong stating of the Question rectified 180. Section 1. What M. Ellis denyeth to be the question 1. He saith it is not meant of the essential onenesse Answ But this is meant and is the foundation of the other 2 It is not saith he meant of engagement to mutual care one of another 182 Answ Not amicitial or fraternal only but authoritative the greater part to regulate the lesse 3 Nor is it meant saith he of a voluntary association as occasion requires for mutual assistance Answ Their association though it be necessary yet it is voluntary but not arbitrary 4 Nor is it meant saith he whether all or most Churches may occasionally become one by messenger in a general Councel 183 Answ This is the highest effect this unity produceth Section 2. What M. Ellis grants in this question 1 An authoritative power from Christ to make directions and rules to which the conscience is bound to submit and which are to be obeyed not only because materially good but because formally theirs Answ This is even as much as the Presbyterians desire But this he denies to be done by Church-Officers as Officers 184 2 If the universal Church were convenible he grants what is contended for Answ The parts may rule themselves being similar as well as the whole the whole 185 Section 3. M. Ellis's corrupt stating of the question in divers places 186 Apollonius and the London-Ministers vindicated 187 The particular Churches act not by commission from the general 188 The whole company of Christians on earth are not in their ordinary setled Church-constitution one single actual Corporation but habitual 189 Yet there may be causes to draw the Officers of many Congregations together yea haply some Officers from the whole Church if it could be occasionally 190 The Ministers are not actually Ministers of the whole Church but habitually They are given to the whole Church as the Levites to the whole house of Israel 191 Section 4. Answers to M. Ellis's prejudices probabilities and demonstrations 192 His Objection of novelty answered That the Church is one habitually and that the particular Churches bear the relation of members to it is not novel That the Ministers are Ministers beyond their own Congregations and can perform duties authoritatively is not novel Divers instances given thereof out of Scripture Divers Canons regulate Ministers in the exercise of their functions abroad but none deny them power 193 Divers instances out of antiquity 194 Frequent coventions of Synods and Councels anciently and their acting authoritatively 196 Five answers of M. Ellis's hereunto considered of 197 Section 5. M. Ellis's witnesses against the unity and integrality of the Church considered viz Chrysostome Clemens Alexandrinus Cyprian Augustine Eucherius and the Councel of Trent 198 That it is not novel in respect of Protestant Divines 201 Some quotations out of Calvin c. 202 Section 6. M. Ellis's prejudice from the dangerous consequences of this opinion answered 203 Section 7. Another prejudice that it is Papal and Antiprotestant answered 205 Section 8. M. Ellis's arguments answered 206 His first argument from the silence of the Scripture herein 2 From the institution of Christ 207 3 From the first execution of the greatest act of intire power exerciseâ— in a particular Congregation 1 Cor. 5. 208 4 Because entire power was committed to particular men viz. the Apostles severally and to all joyntly 5 From the reproofs given by Christ to the 7. Churches of Asia in the Revelation Section 9. His second sort of arguments from the matter and members of the Church answered 209 Section 10. A third sort of arguments is from the form and nature of all bodies and corporations which consist of superiour and inferiour answered 210 Six pretended inconveniences answered 211 Section 11. A fourth sort of arguments from the authours of this opinion answered 212 An objection That the whole world is one humane society and yet this makes them not one Kingdom politically answered 213 The second Question Whether the Church-Catholike visible or the particular Churches be first Section 1. What kinde of priority is meant here 216 First Negatively not a priority of time 2 Not in regard of constitution by aggregation and combination 3 Not in regard of ordinary operation But positively the visible Church-Catholike is prime 1 In Gods intention 217 2 In regard of Gods institution 3 In regard of Gods donation of Ordinances and priviledges 4 In regard of dignity 5 In regard of perfection 6 In regard of the essence or entitivenesse 7 In regard of efficient ministerial causality 218 8 In regard of distinct and perfect knowledge or noscibility The difference between ortum and secundarium Section 2. The first argument for the priority of the visible Church-Catholike from the names that are given to the Church in Scripture 219 The second argument is because the Covenant Promises Laws and
Priviledges primarily belong to the Catholike Church The Covenant commission for gathering the Evangelical Church the promises made to it and Laws of it proved to be universal 220 The Priviledges are also catholike First Federal holinesse is a priviledge of the Catholike Church 221 Secondly Right to the Ordinances of Christ 222 Proved in regard of Baptism 223 And the Lords Supper 224 Hearing of the word and joyning in Praier 225 The query about the Ordinances of Discipline discussed 226 1 Every member of the Church though but entitive is bound to submit thereto 2 Every Minister hath an habitual indefinite power annexed to his office to administer them 3 The Ordinances of discipline were first given to general Pastors 227 4 The censures dispensed have influence into the whole Church 5 Otherwise great inconvenience will follow 6 All polities administer justice to strangers offending within their limits And the like power must be allowed to Ecclesiastical polities Section 3. The third argument is because Christs Offices are first intended for and executed on the Church-Catholike 228 The fourth argument is because the signs to difference the true Church from a false belong primarily to the whole 229 The fifth argument is because all the members are members of the Church-Catholike primarily 230 Both those that are born members and those converted This illustrated by three similitudes 231 Section 4. The sixth argument is because the Ministers are primarily Ministers of the Church-Catholike 232 Diverse proofs hereof The absurd consequences of binding the Ministers office to his particular Congregation only 233 The Ministers office and power ceaseth not by the dissolution of his particular flock 235 An Objection against this by M. A. and M. S. taken from the ceasing of the ruling Elder or Deacons office at such dissolution answered 236 It appears because the censure of excommunication inflicted by particular Officers reacheth the whole Church-visible 237 The distinctions of formally and virtually and of antecedenter consequenter discussed 238 It appears also because particular Officers admit into the Church-Catholike by baptism 239 Baptizing is an act of the ministerial office All are baptized into one body Many examples of persons baptized without relation to any particular Congregations Though it be objected that this was done by extraordinary Officers yet this salves it not because if it be an Ordinance belonging to particular congregational members these being not so they could have no right to receive it no jus in re 240 Some are called Ministers in Scripture in regard of more Congregations then one 241 And ruled in common over more Congregations then one Section 5. The seventh argument is because every Christian bears his first relation to the Church Catholike and that relation continueth last and cannot be broken off without sin 242 Hence strangers tried where they reside for the present Ephesus commended for trying strangers Rev 2.2 Non communion is a sentence denounced against strangers Hereticks and false teachers not fixed must not be suffered It is no sin to remove from one Congregation to another 243 The eighth argument is because particular Churches spring from the Church-Catholike and are an additament thereto 244 The Church-Catholike is as the main Ocean and the particular as the arms thereof A double rise of particular Churches out of the Catholike 245 First They are made up of members of the Church-Catholike i. e. of visible beleevers Secondly They finde the Church-Catholike constituted and invested before their addition 1 The Church-Catholike is instrumental to their conversion 2 And gives them ministerially their admittance both into the Church entitive and organical Section 6. What is sufficient in foro externo to make a man a member of the Church-Catholike visible 246 The absurdities of accounting true beleevers only members of the visible Church Apollonius and Mr Norton cited Obj. Holinesse of dedication is founded on holiness of sanctification answered 247 Instances out of the Old and New Testament for the contrary Personal and Ecclesiastical judgement differ 248 The rules of the invisible Church serve not for the visible There are the same qualifications for the members of the Church-Catholike visible as for the particular Churches 249 Two Objections against the priority of the Church-Catholike answered 250 The conclusion of the premises 253 Section 7. Corollaries from the former Thesis 254 24 Corollaries concerning the Church-Catholike 12 Concerning particular Churches 255 7 Concerning the publike Officers of the Church 256 12 Concerning private members 257 Section 8. An application of the Thesis bewailing our division 258 First in judgement 259 Diverse errours reckoned up that are broached Secondly in heart and affections 260 Thirdly in way or practice 261 An exhortation to unity in all these 3. respects 262 THE ESSENCE AND VNITY OF THE Church Catholike visible c. QUEST Vtrum Ecclesia visibilis universalis sive Oecumenica sit prima vel secundaria orta a particularibus Whether the vis Ch. Cath. or the particular Churches be first CHAPTER I. The Explication of the Tearms FOR the handling of this Question here are these four tearms to be opened First What is meant by Ecclesia or Church Secondly What by visibilis or visible Thirdly What is meant by universalis sive oecumenica or universal and oecumenical Fourthly What by prima and orta or the first Church and that which riseth of it or secondary 1. First What a Church is SECT 1. The word Church is taken in a civil or theological sense In a civil sense for a company of people summon'd or gathered together for some civil affairs Acts 19.39 It shall be determined in a lawfull assembly the word in the Original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Church Yea even the rout met together Acts 19.41 is called Ecclesia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He dismissed the assembly or the Church as the word is in the Original Secondly In a theological sense it signifieth a company of people that are called or to be called and joyned together standing in some spiritual relation to God And so the word is taken diversly First and most properly for the whole company of the elect as they are opposed to the reprobates whether Jew or Gentile and in this sense it is taken Ephes 5.25 26. As Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it that he might cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word So vers 23 27. and 32. Again Col. 1.18 His body the Church Interdum cum Ecclesiam nominant eam intelligunt quae rever à est coram Deo in quam nulli recipiantur nisi adoptionis gratiâ filij Dei sunt spiritus sanctificatione vera Christi membra Ac tunc quidem non tantum sanctor qui in terra habitant comprehendit sed electos omnes qui ab origine mundi fuerunt Calvin Instit. lib. 4. cap. 1. sect 7. where you may see more of this subject Of these there are three sorts The first are elect uncalled
which are not actually the Church but in potentiâ and in Gods decree the second sort are militant warring with principalities and powers with flesh world and devil being actually justified and sanctified persons the third sort are triumphant in Heaven having finished their course and are now the spirits of just men made perfect For the fourth which the Papists make viz. Ecclesia dormiens in Purgatory we acknowledge not Secondly The word Church sometimes signifyeth more then the elect viz. the multitude of beleevers whether truly or in shew only So Act. 8.3 Saul made havock of the Church Act. 12.1 Herod stretched out his hands to vex certain of the Church Now it is certain that neither Herod nor Saul knew who were elect but as himself expounded it He persecuted this way unto the death And he desired letters to Damascus that if he found any of that way he might binde them Act. 9.2 So Act. 5.11 Fear came upon all the Church Now it cannot be conceived that they were all elect that feared that judgement of God So 1 Tim. 5.16 Let not the Church be charged with them that it may relieve widows indeed Now we cannot conceive that only the elect gave collection but the whole number of professors which yet are called the Church In Ecclesia plurimi sunt permixti hypocritae qui nihil Christi habent praeter titulum speciem Calvin Institut lib. 4. cap. 1. sect 7. Thirdly The word Church is sometimes taken for the members of the Church as distinct from the officers Act. 15.22 Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church And ver 4. They were received of the Church and of the Apostles and Elders And this was before their convention in the Synod And Act. 14.23 Fourthly The word Church sometimes signifyeth the Governours of the Church to whom of right it belongeth to administer and dispense the censures of the Church Matt. 18.17 If he will not hear them tell it to the Church i. e. the Ministerial Church where Christ seemeth to me to speak of a Church that was in present being among the Jews because he applies his speech to the capacity of the Jews present Let him be to thee as an heathen and Publican who might not have communion with Heathens and would not with Publicans but Christians might eat and drink with both and the same course by analogy was to be taken by Christians when they had Churches set up as it followeth ver 18 19. Whatsoever ye shall binde on earth c. Now we know that matters of complaint were not among the Jews brought unto the Assembly or body of the people but to their Elders and Rulers And the word Kahal which signifieth Ecclesia or Church is frequently used in the Old Testament for a Court of Elders not only Ecclesiastical but even civil See 1 Chron. 13.1 2 4. And 1 Chron. 29.1 10 20. And 2 Chron. 29.28 31 32. And 2 Chron. 30.2 4. called Psal 82.1 The Congregation of the Gods Compare also Num. 35.12 24 25. and Deut. 19.12 with Iosh 20.4 6. By Congregation in one place is expounded Elders in the other Also Exod. 12.3 with v. 21. Deut. 31 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gather me the Elders or make a Church of Elders The same word we finde 1 Kin 8.1 of Solomons assembling the Elders of Israel And 1 Chr. 28.1 of Davids assembling the Elders The Septuagint translate Kahal Ecclesia or Church by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prov. 26.26 His wickednesse shall be shewed before the whole Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Compare also Deu. 23.1 2 3 8. No bastard Ammonite Moabite c. might enter into Kahal the Congregation which is rendred by the best Divines to be Consessus Iudicum the Congregation of Iudges For by Exo. 12.48 49. and Num. 15.14 15. and 9.14 and Lev. 22.18 All strangers upon circumcision were admitted into the Congregation of the people to offer to God as well as Israelites Chap. 1. Demosthenes useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro concione maguntum saith Pasor It is very frequent in the Scripture to speak of executing of judgement and justice and putting away of evil from the Congregation indefinitely by ye and thou as if it were spoken to the whole Congregation which was done by the Elders and Judges only judicially Levit 19.15 35. Deut. 16.19 Ier. 7.5 Amos 5.15 24. Zach. 7.9 16. 1 Câ—â— 5.4 7 12. Fifthly The word Church is sometimes used to signifie the faithful in some one family Philem. 2. c. To the Church in thy house Unlesse those families were the meeting places for the Christians that dwelt about to enjoy the Ordinances of God in because there were no publike meeting-houses built And to this I confesse I incline The second acceptation of the word Church sutes best with this question Sect. 2. The second 〈◊〉 to be opened is what is meant by Visible The Church is distinguished into visible and invisible which yet are not two distinct Churches or species of Churches but it is a distribution of the Subject by the Adjunct viz. a duplici modo communion is externo interno Such as have spiritual communion with Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inwardly are said to be invisible members which are only known to God and not to men having this seal The Lord knoweth who are his Such as have external communion in outward Ordinances 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are called visible members because their communion is visible and apparent I grant the internal communion is invisible but the external is as visible as of any civil society and Gods Ordinances are as visibly administred as justice at the Sessions or Assizes and the profession of Christianity is as visible as the profession of any tratle the general calling to be Christians by profession is as visible as the particular calling and trade of life The inward grace is indeed invisible but the outward administration of the Ordinances and communion in them is visible i. e. perceptible by the senses And this external communion in the Ordinances though it were distributively in the several places where men live which is confessed by all would serve my turn for this question which I have in hâ—â—â— But visible taken in the sense which M. Ellis takes it in in his Vindiciae Catholicae for that which Vno intuitu videtur is seen with one view was not my meaning and therefore to expound it so which he knows I did not is to prevaricate as he chargeth me pag. 59. If visible i. e. that which may be seen and visum that which is seen actually be the same then is not the world visible But when we say the whole world is visible there is required an act of the minde we conceive that all countries are visible as well as our own and if we were there we might see them They cannot be said to be invisible because we see them not actually
Nam visibile est quod videri potest licet nunquam videtur Visible is that which may be seen though it be never actually seen Videri potest or may be seen is referred to the capability of the object to be seen not to the particular act of every agent at all times But take visible in his sense Quod uâ—o intuitu videri potest as a Kingdom representative in a Parliament Is a Parliament only visible â—o such as do actually see it and invisible to all others Is it not visible because not visum Men know it may be seen though they see it not though they exercise their knowledge only about it and not their senses yet that makes it not a genus or secunda notio It is visible though not actually seen Cameron de Ecclesiae conspicuitate pag. 245. saith the Church is visible as the world is we cannot see the whole world together but secundum partes successivè non uno obtutu attamen nulla est pars terra habitabilis quae non possit cerni Now only the invisible company have internal spiritual communion and are elect many of those that have external communion and are visible members shall perish And yet by reason of their profession are said 2 Thes 1.1 to be in God the Father and the Lord Iesus Christ as Ames also confesseth Ames med lib. 1. cap. 32. art 9. Such was the Church of Corinth and Ephesus c. wherein all were not in communion for life And of such Christ speaketh Ioh 15. â— Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he takes away And vers 6. If a man abides not in me he is cast forth as a branch and is withered and men gather them and cast them into the fire and they are burned These are said to be redeemed 2 Pet. 2.1 denying the Lord that bought them And sanctified Heb. 10.29 And hath accounted the bloud of the Covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing And in Pauls exordiums to his Epistles To the Church of God to them that are sanctified in Christ Iesus called to be Saints 1 Cor. 1.2 These are called the sonnes of God Gen. 6.2 And Deut. 14.1 It is spoken of Israel in general ye are the children of the Lord your God And Gal. 3.26 Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Iesus Now it is not to be conceived that all the members of the Churches in Galatia were true beleevers They are called the children of the Kingdom Mat. 8.12 i. e. reputed so but yet many of them were cast out into utter darknesse And Act. 3.25 Ye are the children of the Covenant which God made with our fathers Their advantage by being of the visible body was great every manner of way Rom. 3.1 2. To them pertained the adoption Rom. 9.4 and the glory and the Covenant and the giving of the Law and the service of God and the promises Which adoption is not internal adoption proper only to true beleevers for it is a priviledge belonging to the body of that people but it is the honour of being separated and reputed the children of God and so to live under the external Covenant and service of God and promises though they had not grace to improve them They are called Ro. 11.17 branches of the true olive partaking of the root and fatnesse of the Olive which were broken off and others ingraffed in their room which cannot be meant of the invisible company of elect but the visible Church God did not blot some out of his book of election and put others in or break off any true beleevers and graff others in but only out of their visible Church standing and partaking in outward Ordinances Object But is not this absurd that Christ should have wicked men who are limbs of Satan to be of his mystical body Carnal wicked men to be members of such a gracious glorious head Answ If by mystical body be meant the company of elect faithful ones that are knit to Christ by the Spirit on his part and by faith on their part and receive spiritual sap and vertue and grace from Christ internally it were altogether absurd to suppose any limb of Satan were so but mystical body is taken in opposition to a natural and civil body Now draw a word as suppose head from its natural and proper signification to a civil use and head will signifie a King who is called a civil head and then draw it to a theological use and it is called a mystical use of that word and so Christ is called a spiritual or mystical head and the Church a mystical body And in this sense mystical and organical are competible for both visible and invisible members may be said to be of the mystical body of Christ though in a different respect in regard of their communion the one visibly only the other not only vâ—sibly but also invisibly And in this sense M. Cotton in his Catechism cals a particular Church a mystical body of Christ wherein all are not of the invisible company And as the body admits of such a distinction so doth the head also for Christ affordeth spiritual communion to some inwardly as well as outwardly by Ordinances even saving graces and comforts by the Spirit of grace to others only outwardly by Ordinances and by common works of his Spirit In the same sense that a visible Church may be called a mystical body of Christ Christ may also be called a mystical head thereof As Christ terms himself a Master so he hath evil slothful unfaithful servants and stewards as a King he hath rebels that will not have him to rule over them even in his Church Mat. 25.26 Luk. 19.14 as a shepherd he hath goats as well as sheep Mat. 25.32 as a housholder he hath vessels of dishonour as well as honour 2 Tim. 2.20 Mat. 25.2 as a bridegroom he hath foolish virgins as well as wise invited to the wedding as a husbandman he hath tares among his wheat Matth. 13.25 as a fisherman he hath rubbish in his net as well as good fish Mat. 13.47 as a vine he hath unfruitful branches as well as fruitful Joh 15.6 Christ saith my people are foolish they have not known me sottish children that have no understanding that are wise to do evil but to do good they have no knowledge Ier 4.22 yea stubborn and rebellious people In the N.T. there were some in the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 11. that had not the knowledge of God denying the resurrection guilty of drunkennesse at the Lords table guilty of fornication and uncleannesse and lasciviousnesse and had not repented And Tit. 1.16 Paul speaks of some in the Church that professed they knew God but in works denied him being abominable disobedient and to every good work reprobate And 2 Tim. 3.5 Having a form of godlinesse and denying the power thereof And Phil. 3.18 19. Enemies to the crosse of Christ whose end is destruction whose God
probable because of the conceived smalnesse of the place yet it is not certain for it was a port Town 8. miles from Corinth as Hâ—lyoke tels us and Gualter in Rom. 16. saith it was Oppidum Corinthiorum navium statione celeberrimum ideò frequens valdè populosum The clearest evidence is from 1 Cor. 14.14 for a particular Congregational Church Let your women keep silence in the CHURCHES which word Churches seems to import several Congregations meeting in several places to enjoy publike Ordinances by the Corinthians your women and these Congregations are called Churches and yet were all one combined Church of Corinth often spoken of in the singular number But this dispute belongs noâ— to this question yet the present difference of opinions and practices have caused me a little to dilate upon this subject beyond the explication of the term And I understand by particular Churches any or all the forementioned Churches whether National Provincial Presbyterial Classical or Congregational and this last principally for those that have first moved this question mean principally if not solely the Congregational Church because as I suppose they hold no other particular Churches but such The fourth term to be opened is What is meant by Prima Sect. 4. vel Secundaria Orta This distinction or at least in these terms is not ancient for M. Parker in his Politeia Eccles was the first that sprung it as far as I know Primum in Logick is defined to be Quod est suae Originis Ortum quod oritur a primo Secundarium is properly that which is next after the first in order for it is an ordinal I do not mean strictly next immediatly but in the largest sense for that which hath not the first right or first consideration but a Posterior In the Question Primum or first is meant that which hath the priority in consideration Whether in our apprehension of Churches we are to begin at the Church-Catholike and descend to particular Churches or begin at the particular and ascend to the Church Chatholike which notion is first in distinct knowledge whether Ecclesia Vniversalis aut Particularis Whether the nature priviledges and Ordinances belong first to the Church Catholike and secondarily to the particular Churches I do not mean as M. Ellis supposeth that the power of Ordinances go by way of discention or derivation of power from the Church-Catholike indispensation of Ordinances but in consideration for I acknowledge power to be given immediatly to every particular Church therein yet under regulation of a greater part of Church-Officers in case of male-administration The properties and power of water is primarily given to the whole element of water but is immediatly yet secondarily in the particular parcels thereof But the Catholike Church is the primary in a threefold respect First as the Orthodox Catholike Church is a means or instrument by the Ordinances Ministery and members thereof in the several parts and places thereof to convert adde and bring in more new members thereunto and in continually conquering out of Satans and Antichrists Kingdom and leavening the world with the doctrine of Christ Secondly as the Church-Catholike affords matters and members to make up or constitute the particular Congregations which consist only of the members of the Catholike Church gathered up from any place of the world into particular vicinities Thirdly in regard the Ordinances and priviledges of the Church are primarily intended and given by Christ by one Charter unto the whole Church and to particular Churches secondarily as parts thereof And so they partake of the benefits and priviledges of the Church not because they are members of the particular Churches though there they have the immediate opportunity but of the Church-Catholike As a Corporation already constituted by Charter receiveth in free men continually and giveth freedome to new members which come any way to have right thereto and those members have right to the priviledges of the City not because they are of such a street or ward or company but because they are tree of the City So that though I have retained the terms of M. Parkers distinction prima and Orta sive secundaria yet my question differs much from his For he compares the particular Churches who delegate and send members or commissioners to constitute a Classis or Synod with such a ministerial Church a Church of Officers so constituted for some especial ends pro tempore which some call a representative Church and I confesse with him that such a Church may well put on the notion of Ecclesia Orta and the particular Churches out of which these members are delegated may in some sense in reference unto them put on the notion of Ecclesiae prima Yet I do not conceive that those particular Churches give either the office or the power in actu primo whereby those delegated Commissioners do act when they are met but by such delegation they do evocate and call forth the exercise of that power which Christ hath annexed to their office habitually in actum secundum to act pro hic nunc for the good of all those Churches so sending which acts of theirs binde the delegating Churches to submission in the Lord. But in my Question the whole Church Catholike visible is compared with the particular Churches and they are considered as parts thereof CHAP. II. Proofs by Scripture that there is a Church-Catholike visible NOw I have opened the terms of my Question I finde two Questions in stead of one and whether of them is the most difficult I cannot tell Whereas the subject of every Question useth to be taken for granted and the predicate only to be proved I finde the subject of my Question exceedingly questioned and opposed Chap. 2. and that by some of our own Divines and therefore though my first aim in undertaking the Question was to clear the Predicate yet I must crave leave to confirm the subject or else whatsoever I shall say of the Predicate will be as a house built on the sand or a Castle in the air for if there be no universal visible Church then it is not capable of being either Prima or secundaria In handling both these Questions I shall follow my wonted method I preferre one Divine Testimony before ten arguments and one good argument before ten humane testimonies Sect. 1. First then Whether there be a Church-Catholike visible I know that our Divines in answer to the Pontificians do deny the Church-Catholike to be visible as Zanchy Gerard Whitakers Chamier and Ames against Bellarmine and Sadeel against Turrianus and against the Monks Confession of faith and D. Willet in his Synops For they restraining the signification of the word Church to the better part of the Church the Elect only and considering them in respect of their internal communion with Christ their head and not their external communion one with another by Ordinances did deny the Church-Catholike to be visible Nec
he speaks as well of in particular Church as of the general And to avoid the dirt of this Fort or Aâ—bâ—â—â—â—â— is he taâ—â— it viz. 1 Cor. 12.28 He brings in two significations of the word Apostle which worth alone saith he is the ground of the Objection And saith if we take the word for such Officers as were sent out with commission from any Church upon special occasion which is the literal signification of the word and is so taken 1 Cor. 8.23 of Barnabas and Phil. 2.25 of Epapbroditum so the Argument hence were voided Answ But there is not the least probability that the Apostle in setting down the Officers of the Church both extraordinary and ordinary should set down occasional messengers first before Prophets and Teachers And in Ephes 4.11 keeping the same Order should preferre them before Prophets Evangelists Pastours and Teachers And leave out in both places the highest office in the Church viz. Apostleship especially considering that the Apostle there doth not set down the Officers â—aptim promiscously but addeth an ordinal numeral with them first Apostles secundarily Prophets But again If it be taken properly in that he applieth his speech particularly though not exclusively to the Corinthians ye are the body of Christ to wit ye are a particular body and members in particular and so Chap. 3.21 22. All are yours whether Paul or Apollos or Cephar or life or death all are yours and ye Corinthians Christs Where all are the whole Churches and each Churches in particular as their occasions require each in their order He might also have said and each particular member So that the sense is saith he he hath given or set in the Church i. e. in this Church of Corinth and so in that of Ephesus c. Some Apostles c. as their need shall require yet not therefore making them one external society among themselves As some general Officers make not England and Scotland one Kingdom Answ M Ellis goes upon a mistake in all his book The Presbyterians say not that the Church-Catholike visible is one external constant actual society but habitual or in actu primo or constantly and actually in actu secundo sive exercite the regiment is exercised in the particular Churches or vicinities yet hath the whole Church or some great parts of it some common interests that may require to be handled in Synods and Councels by their combined or delegated Officers occasionally and those Officers therein act not as private men but as Officers and may exert their indefinite habitual power annexed to their office for the good of the whole or of so great a part of the Church-Catholike as did delegate them And as for the parallelling Apostles and Prophets in this case with life and death it is not equal for God did not set life and death as Officers in the Church but they are general accidents to the whole world over-ruled by God for the good of his people All things work together for the good of them that love him But in that he grants the word Church to extend to Corinthians and Ephesians c. he must grant it to comprehend all the Churches as well as them and that they all are one Church habitually having then some general Officers over them viz. Apostles Prophets Evangelists and Teachers and the same Apostle the same Prophet and the same Teacher if need required in any of them But fearing he could not keep that battery he retreats to a fourth and saith that though by Church were meant the Church-Catholike visible yet it follows not that because it was so then and in respect of the Apostles that therefore it was to be so to the end of the world and in it self pag. 37. Answ it is true it was not Christs minde that the extraordinary office of Apostleship should continue there were to be no more such men of extraordinary gifts and divine immediate mission of an infallible spirit that had actual regiment over the Churches of the whole world without any delegation from others but by immediate commission from Christ But how comes that which was an integrum in the Apostles daies to be now sublimated into it genus and lose the integrality and so prove a second notion existing only in intellectu nostro Did it cease to be one body as soon as the Apostles were all dead seeing the same doctrine worship laws discipline enrowlment by baptism confirmation and communion in the Lords Supper continued still and the liberty of all the members of the whole Church to communicate in these in any place of the world where they become though but occasionally continue still And by the same reason the habitual power in actu primo which the Officers have to dispense the Ordinances of God may be drawn forth in any part of the Church in actum secundum upon an occasion and call according to their measure which the Apostles had habitually and actually every where both in actu primo secundo extraordinarily Yea but saith he the Churches were not one in themselves but one in the Apostles and that by accident as England and Scotland were one in the King because he governed both Israel and Judah in David the whole world one in Nebuchadnezzar But they are not therefore one considered in themselves Vind. p. 37. Answ I grant the Church was but accidentally and temporarily one in regard of the Apostles but integrally one in it self It was not one because that they were set over it but it was one in it self integrally because Christ is set over it and therefore they by commission from Christ were set over it extraordinarily for the present good and necessity thereof An Empire being made one under one Emperour hath imperial laws and constitutions which being divided under divers governours it loseth again and ceaseth to be an Empire but the Church hath the same laws under the same head that it had then and ever shall have The world was one Empire under Darius by imperial laws not because the three Presidents were set over it neither did it cease to be so by their death or ceasing So c. But fifthly saith he though we grant that while the Apostles were living there was one body of Officers over the whole Church and so in respect of them the Church might be said to be one governed body yet it was never one governing body for whilest the Apostles lived the universal governing power was committed to the Apostles only and not with them to any other Officers or Churches no not to all the Churches together but they with their Officers were all in subjection to them Answ I acknowledge the Church-Catholike was never one governing body although M. Ellis is pleased to set down that expression in capital letters in the frontispiece of his book and upon the top of every page and in divers other places as the opinion of the Presbyterians But where doth he finde any such expression in
their writings It may more truly be affirmed to be the opinion of some of our brethren of the Congregational way who put government into the body of the Congregation whether M. Ellis be of that opinion or no I cannot say and so they are a particular governing body and if all the Churches in the world were of that way as certainly they desire and these Churches might in any sense be called one Church as is confest by all that they may then they must needs be one governing body But as they are now they not only govern their own body but passe the censure of Non-communion against all persons nay whole Churches if they judge there be cause But the Presbyterians hold that governments belong to the Organs i. e. the Officers of the Church not to the body It is for good of the body but belongs not to the body to exercise The Church-Catholike is the subject in quo exercetur or cui datur non ad utendum sed ad fruendum Neither are the Officers of the Church-Catholike one constant collective governing body actually but habitually for constantly and actually they are distributed into several Congregations for the exercise of government there But if the necessity of the whole when it could be or of any great part of the body call the Officers of many particular Churches together which may be by themselves or their Commissioners then can they exercise their office collectively conjunctim yet only according to the word of God And this M. Ellis granteth in effect p. 7.8 only he saith their power being met is only consultatory and suasory not obligatory it is the acting of officers but not as Officers but I suppose he cannot think that consultatory and suasory power is sufficient to cure the Church of the malady of obstinate hereticks whose mouths saith the Apostle must be stopped And though the universal constant actual power of government was given to the Apostles only yet we see they did joyn with the particular Elders in the government of their Churches when they were among them and did also joyn them with themselves in making decrees to binde the Churches Act. 15.6 and Act. 16.4 But fearing lest he had granted something too much in his former answer he plucks away part of it in his sixt and saith that the Apostles were not one joint Ministery For besides that each had intire power some had one part committed to them and some another Thomas sortitus est Parthiam Andreas Scythiam Johannes Asiam c. Answ The Apostles did first act in Jerusalem as one joint combined ministery and did afterward disperse themselves into several parts of the world according to their commission yet retained their power of uniting and acting together jointly without any delegation or commission from any Churches and this power of their 's no ordinary Ministers lay claim to And though the planting and watering of Churches required this dispersion and several lots voluntarily yet were they fixed in no Congregation as Elders are Seventhly He denyeth the consequence of a Church-Catholike visible from that place and that he proves by a parallel supposing such like words had been said of the whole world for civil government his words are these If it follow not when we say God hath set in the world some Emperors some Kings some Princes some inferiour Officers and Magistrates therefore the world is but one governing Kingdom and all particular Kingdoms do but govern in the right of the Kingdom of the world in common the Officers whereof are the Kings of the several Kingdoms c. Neither doth it follow that because the Scripture saith God hath set some in the Church Apostles c. therefore the Church throughout the world is but one Congregation to whose Officers first as the general Officers of the whole Church not by way of distribution but as a notionally at least collected body of Officers the power of government is committed c. Answ He hath not paralleled the question rightly but it should run thus Suppose there were one Emperour over all the Kingdoms of the earth and he should set down one form of government and enrowlment for freedom in the whole world for such as will be his subjects and should first set 12 Presidents over the whole world to abide so for their life time as extaordinary Officers and for ordinary standing Officers should set in the several Provinces or Kingdoms several Officers that should rule under him or them in their several places and yet appoint that as every free member of the whole though his fixed habitation be in one place yet is free of the whole habitually and upon occasion can make use of it to trade freely in any place so the several governours though ordinarily fixedly and actually they constantly govern their own Provinces yet upon occasion of difference danger or for the good of the whole or any great part of the same they shall have power to convene either all if it may be or some of them by way of delegation to act for the good of the whole or so many Provinces as the matter concerns and their delegation is for Whether would not this prove the world one intire Empire and body politick habitually And so is the case of the Church-Catholike But take earthly monarchies as they have been on earth and we finde that the several kingdoms of the Empires did enjoy their several liberties with respect had to the whole that nothing should be prejudicial to the Empire that the Emperour should have no damage Dan. 6.2 And yet in reference to the Emperour and some certain common laws they were one monarchy Because the Emperour could send messengers and Officers of any countrey and commands to them all and all were to take care in their places for the whole though haply there was no general convention of all Officers and to keep as much as lay in them neighbour Kingdoms from rebelling even where they had no ordinary jurisdiction and to subdue them to the Emperour if they did rebel and yet not retain ordinary power over them Now these things agree to this spiritual monarchy the Church yea and much more For they are all one in the head one in all the laws and in one form of government and ought all to do what they do in reference to the whole as to admit every where into the whole by baptism to eject out of the whole by excommunication to keep any neighbour Church from defection and to reduce them if fallen off though they have no ordinary jurisdiction over them Christ can send a Minister out of any Kingdom into any not only occasionally pro tempore as a messenger but settle him there as an Officer and call back or remove him any whither else And therefore the Church-Catholike is one Kingdom in general and yet particular rights and liberties of particular Churches be preserved so far as may stand with the good of the
whole There is one Objection which M. Hooker in Surv. c. 15. p. 273. hath against this proof in this text which is of some difficulty vix That Church where Deacons are set is not an unlimited Church But ordinary Deacons were set in the same Church wherein the Apostles were set as in the place 1 Corinth 12. it is affirmed jointly and indifferently of them both Therefore that Church doth not argue an unlimited power Answ It is not affirmed that the Church-Catholike hath an unlimited power but unlimited extent of the power given them by Christ in regard of place within the compasse of the Christian world and so I conceive M. Hookers meaning is But to the Objection itself First I premise that Deacons were not primarily set in a particular Congregational Church but 7 of them were at the first institution of the office set in the Church of Jerusalem over Jews and Grecians where there were many Congregations and therefore a Classical Presbyterial Church divided into many Congregations necessarily at least for some Ordinances as the Lords Supper c. yet governed by one common Presbytery and yet alwaies called one Church But whether their Officers were fixed in the several Congregations or no I know not neither do I think it can be proved Secondly The subject about which their office was exercised was not the Ordinances of worship or discipline as the other offices were but about alm◠which in their own nature are or ought to be and were then voluntary And in regard those alms come not by divine dispensation as the immediate gift of Christ to the Church though they be commanded indeed by Christ but out of mens purses by contribution being a money matter in which the Congregation hath or had propriety there may be something said for the limitation of that office in their act of ordinary distribution to the members of that single or combined Church contributing that it may be performed according to the will of the donors to whom also the Deacons are to render an account Thirdly I desire the manner of the Apostles speech in setting down Deacons and governours may be considered not adding an ordinal numeral unto it as to Apostles Prophets and Teachers but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deinde and 2ly interposing 2 extraordinary endowments of miracles and gifts of healing and 3. the change of speech from the concrete to the abstract helps governments Which though they imply men by whom they are to be exercised viz. helpers and governours yet are not so set down what the meaning of the holy Ghost is herein I cannot affirm but I conceive that the office of Apostles Prophets Teachers is of somewhat more large extent then the other two because they were executed as well without the Church though set in it as within it viz. among heathens for their conversion And in Ecclesia constituendâ the other in constitutâ only and the exerting of the Deacons office not so usually and frequently out of the limits of their particular Churches as theirs that are intrusted with the preaching of the word nor yet their call thereunto so facil as the others for to the exerting of government there is required a voluntary combination of many instituted Churches and for distribution to other Churches there is required a more then ordinary necessity and the consent of the particular Church contributing but no such solemn call is required to the preaching the word in any other Church or Churches But fourthly more directly to the Objection Though alms which is the subject of the Deacons office be not reckoned among the Ordinances given by Christ but are the gift of particular men in particular Congregations as the rest of them yet the necessity command and distribution of them may extend further then the particular Church and in that regard the office of Deacons which is to collect and distribute extends it self equally We are bidden to do good to all but especially to the houshold of faith i. e. as we have occasion and ability which is as extensive as the Church-Catholike Any forreign Church may stand in need of our contribution and distribution And even the Law of our land enjoyneth that if any Congregation cannot maintain their poor there should be help by collections from other neighbouring Congregations And the maimed souldiers of the whole County are maintained by constant collection from every town in the County and there are County Treasurers that receive it which are as it were County-Deacons And if a great Town be visited with the plague or suffer losses by fire c. it is frequent to make collections for them in many Countries Yea for whole Counties as the whole Kingdom hath lately done for Lancashire yea for a whole Kingdom as for our own Kingdom under war yea for forreign Kingdoms as England yea and the Netherlands though under another civil regiment have done for Ireland And we reade what the Churches of Asia did for the Churches of Jerusalem And we have had contribution to redeem captivated Christians under the Turk and not only of our own Nation but other Nations sometimes Grecians Now though these contributions and collections run among us in another channel viz. through the hands of Church-wardens Overseers Constables Collectors yet this is the proper work of the Deacons and therefore that office in regard of the extent of their possible object may well be said to be habitually Catholike or given to the Church-Catholike though their constant distribution should be limited to their own Congregations Another proof is from 1 Tim. 3.15 Sect. 5. These things I write unto thee that thou maist know how thou oughtest to behave thy self in the house of God which is the Church of the living God the pillar and ground of the truth This Church must be the visible Church where he and others must exist and converse together and carry themselves in mutual duties Also it must be an organical Church for the Epistle containeth directions about Bishops and Deacons yea even in the context Neither can the directions be solely concerning Ephesus for they are written to Timothy an Evangelist the limits of whose office are commensurable to the Apostles though under them Neither do they concern Ephesus in any especially manner but all Churches where ever Timothy should come Therefore not to it particularly For he prescribeth canons concerning publike praier and the habit and carriage of women in the Church concerning the office of Bishops and Deacons concerning the censuring and reproof of all degrees the Ordination and maintenance of Elders the choice and provision for widows concerning the duties of servants and a charge to rich men not of Ephesus particularly or only but every where Neither did they concern Ephesus primarily for the Officers were already set in that Church Paul found Elders there Act. 20.17 in his visitation of them and had lived there three years vers 31. as himself
external donative regiment of Christ over his visible Church-Catholike dispensed by Ordinances and Officers here below which shall then cease And though the Ordinances as he alledgeth are distinct from the Kingdom in sense and signification Yet they strongly argue a Kingdom constituted and governed by them as the Kings laws argue a King and Kingdom As from helps and governments 1 Cor. 12.28 we gather the consequence of helpers and governours as officers in the Church so from the external laws of this Kingdom we necessarily conclude there is such a Kingdom commensurable to the extent of these laws and that external Organical and Catholike which is spoken of Isa 9.6 And the 25. ver makes it plain for he must reign until he hath put all enemies under his feet which reigning relates to professed Subjects as well as professed enemies and these Subjects comprehended in a Kingdom Again Heb. 12.28 Wherefore we receiving a Kingdom which cannot be moved let us have grace whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear This Kingdom cannot be meant of the internal Kingdom of grace in the heart for that was also exercised by Christ in his peoples hearts under the old Testament but it is meant of the external unalterable perpetual Ordinances of worship and government which differed from those under the Law else the Apostles antithesis of the Church under the Law and the Church under the Gospel had not been good which are the things he compares in that place Externals under the Law are opposed to externals under the Gospel It cannot be meant of the Kingdom of glory for they had not yet received that And it is plain he speaks of a Kingdom wherein we may now serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear Now these Ordinances of worship and discipline being Catholike or universal and relating to a Kingdom and therefore set down under the name of a kingdom by a Metonymy of the subject for the adjunct the Kingdom for the Ordinances of the Kingdom do strongly argue the being of the Kingdom Can we conceive that the holy Ghost would chuse to use such a metonymy of the subject where there is no such subject It is true as is alledged the unalterablenesse lyeth in the adjunct Ordinances i. e. in regard of God who will not alter them and that the subject or kingdom may be moved and shaken by persecutions or heresies and so may the Ordinances also and have been we know but that kinde of alteration moving or shaking is not meant in the text neither was intended by me I have the rather mentioned this text because I finde one of our brethren for Congregational Churches viz. M. William Sedgwick giving this Exposition of it in a Sermon of his in print which was preached before divers members of the House of Commons Sect. 6. Again 1 Cor. 5.12 The Apostle saith what have I to doe to judge those that are without The preposition or adverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I desire to know what it doth relate unto Is it not meant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the Church And can we think that that Church was the Church of Corinth only Had Paul nothing to do to judge any that were out of the Church of Corinth when he was an Apostle all over the Christian world This could not be meant of the invisible company only what had Paul nothing to do to censure any but invisible members Why did he then excommunicate Hymenaeus Philetus Phigellus Hermogenes and Alexander And saith I would they were cut off that trouble you Also it must be meant of an Organical body because here are censures mentioned as belonging to all within And therefore it must be meant of the Church-Catholike visible Organical What have I to do to judge those that are not brought into the Church They are not under my power or cognizance but belong only to the civil Magistrate And we usually speak of the Countreys that are within the Pale of the Church and those that are without And we have an axiome Extra Ecclesiam non est salus which cannot be meant of any particular Congregation in the world but is true of the Church-Catholike visible typified by the Ark of Noah without which ordinarily and visibly there is no hope of salvation Extra ejus gremium non est speranda peccatorum remissio Calv. Inst l. 4 c. 1. S. 4. Again Eph. 4.4 5. The Apostle proveth the Church to be but one by divers Arguments First saith he There is one body of Christ which is therefore called Eph. 3.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both of Jews and Gentiles i. e. the same body And this an Organical body because Paul addeth ver 7. whereof I was made a Minister Secondly there is but one spirit in that whole body which is as one soul in one body Thirdly there is but one hope of their calling Fourthly There is but one Lord or King over the whole Church Fifthly There is but one faith i. e. One religion doctrine worship the same Commands and Statutes for all Sixthly There is but one Baptism to admit into this Church Now if the whole world were under one King and governed by one Law and all one body and all capable of the same priviledges and all made Denizons by the same way of enrowlment it would make but one Empire yet so it is with all the Christians and Churches in the world they have the same King Law Word Sacraments of admission and nutrition which they visibly subject themselves unto and receive therefore they are all one visibly Church Upon this text ver 12. Beza in his large Annotations hath this note Being the Church is to be considered either as a Communalty of a sacred Common-wealth or as a spiritual Temple or as a mystical body the ministery of the word ought likewise to be referred to these three heads c. All which 3. considerations shew the unity and integrality of the whole And that this is meant of the visible Church and not invisible or Triumphant as M. Ellis conceiveth appeareth because it is the Church to whom Officers are given ver 11. to be edified ver 12 13. compacted together by joints ver 16. of whom mutual duties both religious and civil are required for such are set down in that Chapter and the following And so M. Hooker understands it Surv. p. 3 where he cites this text for the political body or Church visible of Christ ruled by the donative delegated power of Christ and that visibly by his Ordinances and officers It is therefore the militant visible Church which holdeth forth the truth Phil. 2.16 contending for it Jude 3. Into which the thief may possibly enter Joh. 10. Act. 20.29 30. Again Christ saith Mat. 16.18 On this rock will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it Was this a particular Congregation No surely but the Church Catholike for any particular Church may
throughout the whole world c. Rom. 10.18 Col. 1.6 The Gospel is come unto you as it is to all the world and bringeth forth fruit Also Tit. 2.11 appeared unto all men 4. If the Charter whereby the Church is constituted be Catholike then the Church constituted thereby is one Catholike body But the Charter constituting the Church is Catholike Therefore c. The major is clear of it self One charter makes one polity The minor will appear by those places of Scripture wherein the right of all Nations indefinitely is set down Mat. 28.19 Go teach all Nations baptizing them c. Mar. 16.15 Ioh. 3.16 Eph. 3.6 That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same body and partakers of his promise in Christ by the Gospel whereof I was made a Minister When the partition wall was broken down between Jew and Gentile and then the Church began to be Catholike what second limits did God set unto his Church none except men would sever themselves by rejection of the Gospel but external vocation and submission gave right in foro Ecclesiae to be admitted members of the Church and that was universal If there be any particular Charter by which any particular Church was constituted beside the general let that be produced I know none For if there were then that particular visible Church could never fail or else a Gospel Charter must be lost But all particular Churches hold their priviledges by the general Covenant applied to themselves as all the twelve Tribes did theirs by the Covenant made with Abraham and his seed And all the several promises which are as appendices to the Covenant are made to the whole Church-Catholike and commensurable therewith respectively without any respect to any particular Congregation or membership therein 5. If there be Officers of a Church-Catholike visible Sect. 2. then there is a Church-Catholike visible But there are Officers of a Church-Catholike visible Therefore c. The major cannot be denied The minor appears by the donation of the Ministery to the Church-Catholike visible Maâ— 28.19 Go teach all Natons baptizing them c. They are not circumscribed or limited to any one place but are sent into the whole world to all Nations 1 Cor. 12.28 God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secundarily Prophets thirdly Teachers Eph. 4.11 He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastours and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the body of Christ These two last places M. Hooker himself confesseth to be meant of the external political body and Kingdom of Christ Now these extraordinary Officers Prophets Evangelists were Officers of the Church-Catholike visible for they had no limits of place but were over all the Churches and yet are said not to be set in the Churches but in the Church And this is granted by some of our brethren for Congregational Churches that they were Catholike Officers and therefore did not baptize in reference unto particular Congregations And this M. Cartwright also in his Catechism acknowledgeth The Apostles are usually called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 universal Judges M. Hooker in answer to this argument Surv. c. 15. pag. 272. First mistakes my words and meaning for whereas I proved the universality of their office from the unlimitednesse of it he conceives it of having no limits in their works and so set down but I meant no limits in regard of places And then he saith the reason of their unlimitednesse arose from their commission because it was general being immediatly called by God to preach to all nations and they had vertually all Church-power in them but this did not issue nextly from the Church in which they were firstly set Answ I confesse it did arise from their commission which commission being general made them general Officers for what more can be required to make a general Officer but a general commission it did not issue nextly from the Church I confesse neither doth the power of any particular Minister but his power is given him by Christ and not from the people but is annexed unto his office only the exercise thereof is drawn forth by the people pro hic nunc and so the necessity of the whole Church drew forth their Apostolical Office into execution and the necessity of a greater part of the Church may draw forth the exercise of any particular Ministers office beyond the limits of his Congregation occasionally 6. If there be a general external vocation wherewith all Christians are called and a general external Covenant whereinto all Christians voluntarily and externally enter and are therein bound up in an unity then there is a general external Catholike Church But there is such an external general visible vocation and external individual visible general Covenant c. Therefore c. I mean by general Catholike Universal Oecumenical in regard not only of kinde but of places The major appears by evidence of reason and experience for one Covenant with one King in any extent of compasse makes it one Kingdom So c. The minor appears as evidently For first there is but one external general vocation divine distinct from all other particular vocations not only civil buâ— Ecclesiastical which is usually called our general calling and this is external else none but invisible beleevers were members of the visible Church which is that we speak of And there is one individual expresse external Covenant not only on Gods part Act. 2.39 The promise is to you and to your children and to as many as the Lord our God shall call Which is an external Covenant and call relating to baptism which they were invited to in the former verse yet not excluding the inward Covenant or call but oft separated from the inward and yet the right to baptism remain in forâ— Ecclesiae But also it is one external visible Covenant on mens part which all Christians as Christians enter into by their professed acceptance and expresse restipulation and promised subjection and obedience though not altogether in one place or at one time 7. If the initial visible seal admittance and enrowlment be Catholike and Oâ—cumenical then so as the Kingdom into which members are so initiated But the initial seal admission and enrowlment by baptism is Catholike Therefore c. The major is clear without control be that takes up his freedom into a whole Corporation or Kingdom is free of the whole and in every part thereof and hath right to all the general priviledges and immunities thereof The minor also appears both by â—he patent for Baptism Go baptize all Nations And by the consequences and priviledges thereof they that are baptized in any Church are accounted visible subjects of Christs Kingdom in all places of the Christian world no new baptism is required of them upon any removal and also by the tenor thereof for they are not baptized into
confederation were they not judged to be subjects to Christ and visible members of his body and in external Covenant before their admittance How then could that be the ground thereof Indeed there are some particular duties and priviledges which relate in an especial manner to the particular Congregation and a particular unity of a particular Church as a member of the whole body resulteth therefrom but not the general duties priviledges or membership Suppose a man be a freeman of some Corporation as Ipswich though thereby he hath the priviledges of the particular Corporation belonging to him and particular duties belonging to the Corporation are required of him and he requires and receiveth the priviledge of a subject the execution of the laws of the Kingdom there yet he must be conceived a member of the Kingdom before he can be admitted a free man of the Corporation and he receives the general priviledges and performs the general duties in reference to that and not in reference to the particular Corporation and his membership thereof though he hath the opportunity of enjoying the one and performance of the other in that particular society And yet this doth not make the kingdom a Genus and the Corporation a species thereof but the kingdom an integral and the Corporation a member thereof So is the case between the whole Church and the particular Yet with this difference all the particular Churches are similar patts of the whole Church so are not all Corporations nor all villages they differ sometimes in kindes of Officers sometimes in particular immunities Also the similarity of the parts of the whole Church gives the same denomination to the particular Churches with the whole the particular Congregation is called a Church as well as the whole whereas no particular Corporation is called a Kingdom and this is the cause why the particular Churches are deemed to be species whereas indeed they are members of the whole viz. because of the identity of denomination but identity of denomination or similarity of parts are not sufficient to make a genus and species especially where the whole is constituted by an external Covenant 4. If the Officers which Christ hath given to the whole Church be visible then so is the Church But the Officers are visible Therefore c. That the Officers are visible none will deny because they are visibly called ordained and execute their office visibly That visible Officers argue a visible polity is as clear such as the Officers are in respect of visibility or invisibility such is the Kingdom That the ministry is given to the whole Church as the Levites were to all Israel and that they are all Officers of the whole habitual and habitually have power to dispense the Ordinances of Christ in any part of the whole Church upon a call shall be proved c. 6. s 4. 5. If the admittance into the whole Church and ejection out of it be visible then the whole Church is visible But admittance by Baptism ejection by excommunication are visible Therefore c. That admittance and ejection being publike acts before the whole Congregation are visible none will deny That such as the admittance or ejection is in regard of visibility such is the society or polity is as clear That the admittance is into the whole and ejection out of it hath been proved already and shall more fully afterward Either by Baptism men are admitted into the particular Church or the whole Church or no Church but not into the particular Congregation no man is baptized into the particular Congregation it is not the seal of the particular Covenant therefore it is into the whole or none If a heathen be converted in a Congregation first he receives baptism afterward is admitted a member of the particular confederation Sect. 3. 6. If the Doctrine Laws Ordinances Charter and Covenant of the whole Church be visible then so is the whole Church But they are visible Therefore c. That the Doctrine Laws Ordinances Charter and Covenant of the whole Church are visible none will deny for they may be seen read preached and heard That they belong to and constitute the whole is as undeniable Of the same nature that the laws and charter of a kingdom is in respect of visibility of the same nature is the kingdom Now it is not the invisible law of nature written in the heart that constitutes the visible Church for the heathens have that Rom. 2.15 nor is it the invisible law of grace promised to be written in Gods peoples hearts Jer. 31.33 for many members of the visible Church have not that but it is the visible systeme of laws and Covenant given by Christ to his visible Church And these Laws Charter and Covenant are the very copula or bond of the external body and kingdom of Christ and thereby they are bound to worship and discipline Now where the copula or bond uniting visible parts together is visible there the whole is visible But the copula or bond is visible Therefore so is the whole A visible bond cannot unite invisible members Against this it is objected by M. Hooker That divers several kingdoms may be governed by the same laws and yet remain several kingdoms Answ It is true it is possible that all the kingdoms of the earth may submit to and be governed by the same systeme of laws and many now are by the civil law and yet remain several But they arise not from the same fountain the same King or Governours nor binde not in subjection and obedience unto the same King nor to mutual duties of subjects between themselves as fellow-subjects but are embraced vi materiae or formae because found convenient and receive a several stamp of authority from the several States or Governours whereby they are obliging in the several kingdoms But these laws proceed from the same fountain the same Lord Jesus the king of the whole and are obliging from the same authority to all Christians in the whole world therefore they are one visible Church or kingdom mystical If the whole Church be a Genus it is constituted and united together by a visible external Covenant and Laws which is not consistent with the nature of a Genus as a Genus 7. If all the administrations and dispensations and operations of the whole Church be visible so is the whole Church But they are all visible Therefore c. That they are all visible being publikely done none will deny Obj. But these administrations dispensations and operations are acted in the several Congregations and are not actions of the whole Church Ans So is justice administred at Assizes and Sessions in several Counties and Corporations but is it the justice of the whole because it is administred by the same laws and by the same authority and is common to all the subjects of the kingdom A man dwelling in any part of the kingdom being tried at Suffolk Assizes may receive his sentence and
Oecumenical be one visible Church it is necessary that they should all meet together at some times Answ It is not at all necessary neither to the unity nor yet to the visibility of the Church It is sufficient that the persons be visible in their several places and that they be combined together under the same head by visible laws and profession under the same visible seal and enrowlment walk visibly in the same godly conversation before men pray one for another as fellow-members rejoyce in the wel-fare and mourn for the ill-fare one of another and contribute assistance one to another as occasion is offered As therefore it is not needful to the unity or visibility of a kingdom or Empire that they should meet together sometimes so is it not needful for the whole Church indeed there may be some conveniency in both ad benè vel optimum esse sed non ad esse simpliciter This M. Ellis excepteth against vin p. 55. First he asketh whether ever there were such a kingdom in the world that the members did not meet sometimes if it be not a meer visible monarchy as under Popery If there be any liberty left to the Subjects c. Answ Let him shew that ever the four Monarchies did meet together respectively either in their persons or deputies or delegates from every Province yet that hindered not their unity nor visibility And his answer implyeth that the Ecclesiastical Monarchy under Popery did never meet He makes it but a sign of liberty to meet not a sign of visibility And for the point of liberty inherent in the subjects as their proper right distinct from what is derived and given by Christ as their head there was never any Monarchy so meerly depending on the will of the Monarch as the Church-visible on Christ for the Church deriveth all its power from Christ and hath all its laws given and imposed only by Christ without any vote of the Churches in the making of them It is probable that the kingdoms under the four Monarchies had some enjoyment of their municipal laws only might have some imperial general laws superadded but it is not so in this for the whole Church as a Church hath no laws but of Christs arbitrary donation Christians are not subdued by Christ as Englishmen were by William the Conquerour viz. on condition that he would suffer them to enjoy their former rights and the Laws of Edward the Confessor but absolutely to receive Laws from him And yet this can neither be thought tyranny in Christ nor yet slavery in us for Christs Laws are more beneficial to us then any of our own making and his service is perfect freedom And yet we reade of general Councels of the Church by their delegates which were as it were a ministerial Church-Catholike which in former times of the Church under Christian Emperours were frequent and there is no intrinsecal let in the Church that they do not meet so still but only extrinsecal and extraneous by reason of the divisions among the civil Governours but even in our daies a great part of that great body hath met as in the Synod of Dort c. by Commissioners D. Whitakers and Apollonius acknowledge the meeting Act. 1. to be a general Councel The members were the Apostles who were Pastours of the Church-Catholike and brethren out of Galilee and Jerusalem The work was to elect an Apostle who was to be a Pastor of the universal Church and they that undertake and dispatch such a businesse which concerns the extraordinary teaching and government of the whole Church should represent the whole Church-Catholike M. Ellis vin p. 25. utterly denyeth that ever there was any general Councel which might be said to be the Church-Catholike viz. ministerially But I took general in the usual sense of it and not precisely considered He knows the four Councels are known by the name of The four general Councels And so himself cals them vind p. 15. l. 37. I took the term general in the sense that we cal the four Monarchies the Monarchies of the whole world and yet we know there were many countries that were never under them And as Luke Act. 2.5 saith there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews devout men out of every nation under heaven and yet there were many Nations where Jews never dwelt some of which were discovered lately But let him look into Euseb de vita Constantini lib. 3. and Socrates Scholast lib. 1. cap. 8. and he shall finde from how many Countries the first Councel of Nice was gathered There were gathered saith he together into one the chief Ministers of God inhabiting all the Churches throughout all Europe Africk and Asia That sacred Synod framed as it were by the handy-work of God received also both Syrians and Cilicians and such as came from Phoenicia Aegypt Arabia Palaestina Thebais Lybia and Mesopotamia There was also in this Synod the Bishop of Persis of Pontus Galaâ—ia Pamphilia Cappadocia Asia and Phrygia Moreover the Thracians Macedonians Achaians Epirotes Also of the Spaniards there was an eminent man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishop of the imperial city 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Rome by reason of his old age absented himself yet there were present of his Presbyters which supplyed his room Divers things M. Ellis excepteth against that Councel as some extraordinarinesse in the summoning of the members of it without election and delegation of the particular Churches And that Constantine was the visible head of it and that he called for Bishops chiefly if not only which will not be pertinent here to answer Something there might be extraordinary in the summons for the civil and Ecclesiastical State not concurring together until Constantine haply there could not be a regular election In extraordinary times and cases our brethren will grant something may be done extraordinarily as there is in the calling of this present Assembly as is acknowledged by M. Gillespy There were also others besides Bishops and Ministers Neither did Constantine either sit as President of it nor presume to be head but confesseth himself to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but by his civil sanction he did confirm their decrees and send them abroad Neither is there any ground that in that or any other Councel the members acted only each for his own particular Church that sent him as M. Ellis suggesterh but the whole for the whole as far as their delegation was I acknowledge there is power given to every particular Church to rule it self and exercise the discipline of the Church for the being and well-being of it ordinarily Yet so as it is a part of the whole Church into which also the censures there passed have influence And on some great occasions there may be cause to ferch help further as Cranmer appealed to a general Councel But if that extensive power cannot be had as now it is very difficult then must the particular
national provincial classical or congregational Church rest in that intensive power that remains within its own limits or also if they stand so as that they cannot combine with neighbours or have recourse unto them Extraordinary cases cannot be regulated by ordinary rules And this I conceive is the reason why the Scripture hath not determined more particularly the Synodical Assemblies but only giveth general rules that may be drawn to particulars because all Churches and seasons are not capable of national or provincial Synods in regard of many things that may be incident In some cases also all civil power must rest in one Congregation as if it were in a wildernesse where there were no neighbour Towns or cities to which it might be joyned Yet it followeth not that it must be so in England or any other kingdom where there are Counties Shires Cities great Towns or a Parliament Yea I know not but a particular family may yea must be independent in such an extraordinary case both in Ecclesiastical and civil matters also yet it follows not that there is such an inherent right in every town or family all over the world and that therefore particular Towns and families in England are debarred of an inherent priviledge belonging to them because necessity may put such an Independency on some in an extraordinary case as by shipwrack or being cast into some Iland not inhabited Here M. Ellis chargeth me to say that the power of a general Councel or of a Church-Catholike visible is but extensive and only extensive and not intensive and the power of the particular Churches is intensive But Sir do as you would be done by It is not fair dealing to note them as my words which were none of mine nor my sense For first I never conceived a general Councel to be the whole Church-Catholike visible but only an oecumenical ministerial or representative body of Officers or Organs of the Church much lesse the prime Church to which the Ordinances and priviledges of the Church were first given of which I spake as appears in my second part Secondly I never said the power of a general Councel was only extensive for as the particular Officers have intensive power over their particular Congregations so hath a general Councel intensive power also but their power is larger in extension actually then the particular Officers is being Officers sent from a larger part of the Church-Catholike and intrusted by more and acting for more then one Congregation or one Eldership This distinction M. Parker de polit Eccl. lib. 3. p. 121. setteth down in these words Distinguo de potestate clavium quae intensiva aut extensiva est Intensivâ potestate caret nulla Ecclesia prima viz. particularis ne minima quidem extensivâ verò eâ—â— caret quam habet Synodus cum potestas ad plures Ecclesias extenditur And so it neither overthroweth my first nor second tenet as he inferreth Sect. 6. Obj. If there be a Church-Catholike visible here on earth it is fit it should have a visible head over them that so the body and head may be of the same nature Answ This was indeed used as a main argument by the Ponficians for the supremacy of the Pope The avoiding whereof made our Divines so shy of granting a Church-Catholike visible but it was not necessary that they should deny upon this ground as M. Hooker conceives Surv. p. 251. I say it is not necessary to grant a visible head to the Church-Catholike visible no more then to a particular visible Congregation which our brethren hold to be a body of Christ And though they call it a mystical and spiritual body yet that doth not imply it to be invisible The Sacraments are called mysteries and mystical and the Ordinances are called spiritual and yet are visible though the grace signified or conveyed by them to the Elect is invisible They are spiritual in respect of the authour God and the divine subject about which they are in opposition to natural and civil and so our Ecclesiastical Courts were called spiritual though indeed as they managed them they made them carnal and sinful The members of the particular Congregations are visible members and their union and confederation is visible and they are a visible body mixed of true beleevers and hypocrites as Gerard Whitakers Cameron and even M. Bartlet in his model confesseth And their communion is visible and yet there is no visible head on earth required for them and why then should there be for the Church-Catholike Such a head therefore whether visible or invisible present or absent as will serve a particular mystical body of Christ as M. Cotton cals a particular visible Congregation will serve the Church-Catholike visible I answer further that the Church-Catholike visible hath a head of the same nature consisting of body and soul who sometimes lived in this visible kingdom of grace in the daies of his flesh and did visibly partake in external Ordinances though indeed now he be ascended into his kingdom of glory yet ceaseth not to be a man and so visible in his humanity as we are though glorified and glorious yet not lesse visible in himself for that but rather more and ceaseth not to rule and govern his Church here below for it is an everlasting Kingdom Esay 9.7 As when King James was translated from Scotland to England and lived here he did not cease to be King of Scotland so neither doth Christ cease to be the head of his Church though he be translated and ascended to his other kingdom the kingdom of glory And as for a Vicar or Deputy here below it is not needful We confesse the government of the Church in regard of the head is absolutely Monarchical but in regard of the Officers it is Aristocratical This second answer is excepted against both by M. Ellis vind p. 56. and M. Hooker Sur. p. 258. It is insufficient saith M. Ellis for Christ is head invisible and thence our Divines affirm his body the Church to be mystical also and invisible taken properly I answer That Christ is not only head of the invisible company which headship and body allude to the natural head and body which is indeed the Church in the most proper and prime sense but he is head also of the visible company or Ecclesiastical body in allusion to a civil head or governour Christ not only affordeth invisible communion to his invisible members but externally by Ordinances to both invisible and visible members of the Church yet to both visibly For Christ by his Ambassadours and in his written word speaks externally to their senses and they speak externally to him in praier and singing And as he was once visibly on earth in our nature a visible head of his Church so also if the millenary opinion be true which some of this way hold he shall come again and shall sit and reign a thousand years visibly But whether that opinion be true or no
which I much doubt yet he shall come again visibly as the Sonne of man at the end of the world and take account of the managing of these Ordinances and of the carriage both of Officers and private Christians and the elect shall be gathered together into heaven and enioy him visibly to all eternity and he shall visibly condemn the reprobates and every eye shall see him So that this is but an interval wherein Christ though he be now visible in himself yet appears not to us visibly ordinarily though he did to Paul and Steven even after his ascension Yet now he affords visible communion to his people by his Ordinances and they do visible service unto him though he resideth not with them If the absence of the King make the kingdom invisible then Ireland is an invisible kingdom M Hooker affirms this opinion to be not only untrue but very dangerous to hold that Christ as meer man consisting of body and soul is a visible head of his Church And thereupon citeth Whitakers words that Christ did not reside in the Church as a visible Monarch nor came into the world to set up a visible Monarchy Answ I do not conceive that Christ as meer man consisting of body and soul is the head of the Church either invisible or political but as God-man yet that person was visible though but in one of his natures and in but half of that neither viz. his body The visibility of one nature makes visibility to be predicated of the whole person else no man is visible for his soul is invisible It is the meanest half of him that is visible and so no earthly King should be visible Christ is called God manifested in the flesh 1 Tim. 3.16 And the word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the Father Joh 1.14 We were eye-witnesses of his majesty 1 Pet. 1.16 That which was from the beginning which we have heard which we have seen with our eyes which we have looked upon and our hands have handled of the word of life 1 Joh. 1.1 I hope these speeches are neither untrue nor dangerous And for his donative power and authority Christ saith of himself Joh. 5.27 that the Father hath given authority to execute judgement because he is the son of man The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sinnes and that was a kingly action And the Apostle saith Act. 17.31 God hath appointed a day wherein he will judge the world in righteousnesse by that man whom he hath ordained It is true indeed all the vertue and power come from the deity to gather and perfect the Saints forgive sinnes raise the dead judge the world and by his deity only he is present with us now yet as man also he is head of his Church and not as God only for had he been only God he could not have been a sutable head or second Adam but that he became by becoming man and taking our nature upon him The seed of the woman must break the Serpents head The governing power and wisedom of a King is in his invisible soul yet he is a visible King It is true also that Christ came not in the daies of his flesh as a visible temporal Monarch in Davids civil throne yet Christ confesseth then unto Pilate that he was a king though his kingdom was not of this world i. e. civil to oppose Caesars yet it is in this world and external in this world also God over-ruled Pilate to set a true title over Christ on the Crosse Jesus of Nazareth king of the Jews As a King he had all power in heaven and earth given hem Mat. 28.10 19 and immediatly thereupon as a King he issues out his Commission to his Apostles Go ye therefore and teach all Nations c. It is not because Christ died for all as a Priest that this commission is so general but because all power in heaven and earth was given to him therefore as a King he summons in all even the very rebels to yield obedience to his lawful authority but only such as yield obedience and come in are saved by him He set Officers and offices and gave commandment to his Apostles Act. 1.2 And appointed the form of Ecclesiastical proceedings in discipline in case of scandal Mat. 18. And this is no other doctrine then our reverend Assembly hath set out both in their larger and shorter Catechism That Christ our redeemer executeth the offices of a Prophet a Priest and a King both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation Neither can I see any reason why Christ should be denied to execute his kingly office while he was here below any more then his Priestly or Prophetical If he was then a King and had all power given him he did not suspend the execution of it while he was on earth Joh. 5.17 neither doth Beza in conf fid ob 5. art 5. cited by M. Hooker deny Christ to be head as man though he acknowledge him to be head as God also And though he saith that he communicates that degree of dignity to none else He by those words excludeth the Pope c. but not Christs own humane nature by which it is indeed that we come to our union with God All that can truly be alledged in this case is that Christ is not now visibly seen as King with our bodily eyes nor can we come to him bodily nor receive any verbal commands from his mouth as we may from an earthly King But how few subjects have that priviledge in regard of their earthly Soveraigns The legal commands are counted the Kings commands and not his verbal only nor chiefly Yet we finde that Christ after his ascention did in Rev. 2. and 3. Chapt. write a letter by John unto the 7. Churches of Asia and reproves or commends and exhorts them particularly and in the inditing of it appears as a man to John and useth arguments therein from things betiding him as man as that he was dead and is alive again and washed us from our sins in his own bloud c. Object Though there be a Church-Catholike yet it is not visible because it is the object of our faith it being an Article of our faith I beleeve the holy Church-Catholike Now faith is the evidence of things not seen Heb. 11.1 Things seen are the object of sense and knowledge not of faith For what a man seeth how can he be said to believe faith and sense are opposed each to other by the Apostle Answ If indeed we take the Catholike Church in the largest sense for the elect past present and to come as some do the Church-Catholike is invisible Also the grace of such as are invisible members is invisible but that is not the Church we are speaking of The Church we have in hand is the whole company of visible believers in the world considered as visible Secondly
I answer it is not true that that which is in it self visible cannot be the object of faith Indeed that which is actually seen is the object of that mans sense and knowledge that seeth it but that which is visible i. e. which may be seen may be the object of faith to him that seeth it not actually I believe there is Orbis universus a whole world but I never saw it and yet it is visible I believe that there is a kingdom of Spain and Empire of Germany and they are visible but I never saw them nor am ever likely to see them I believe there are constellations about the South-pole but I never saw them and yet they are as visible as those about the North pole So I believe that the Church visible is now no longer included in the land of Canaan but is spread over many kingdoms and may be into all but I never saw it in the extent thereof and yet it is visible in it self The extent of place though it lessens the visibility yet it takes it not away I know this was an argument of an eminent Divine of ours against a Jesuite and it holds strongly against the visibility of the Church-Catholike taken in the first sense but not in our sense Yea grant the Church-Catholike to be a Genus yet the argument reacheth it not for a Genus is not the object of faith but of knowledge because the assurance thereof ariseth not from the credit of any ones word but from our own understanding CHAP. VI. That the Church-Catholike visible is an Organical yet similar body Yea one Organical body THat the particular Churches are or ought to be organized Sect. 1. It is Organical is not a thing questioned by M. Ellis or M. Hooker nor any one that I know of And therefore I shall neither trouble my self nor my reader about that It may not only be drawn from Mat. 18. Tell the Church which cannot be referred only or chiefly to the Church-Catholike for that even in a general Councel ministerially is seldom convened and cannot be informed by every one that it scandalized But also from Tit. 1.5 I left thee in Crete that thou shouldest ordain Elders in every city And Heb. 13.6 17 24. Remember obey and salute them that have the rule over you Of the Elders of Ephesus we reade Act. 20.17 And of the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia Rev. 2. and 3. Chapt. And yet many of these were combined Churches of many Congregations and might be so all for ought I know And we reade of the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem in the Acts but whether fixed to particular Congregations or no I know not to be sure they ruled in common Only we finde Rom. 16.1 Of Phaebe a servant of the Church at Cenchraea which is the most probable example of a Congregational Church as I said before but not certainly But I shall take that for granted that particular Churches ought to be organized But with what Officers whether with a Pastor and a Teacher or with preaching and meer ruling-Elders Or by whom these ought to be elected or ordained or how maintained Or whether their power be from Christ immediatly or from the Congregation the Officers being as their stewards and servants Or whether the Congregation hath votes and suffrages in the dispensing of censures and the Elders but their mouth to pronounce and execute their censures as he that sits for judge and gives the charge at a Sessions or a chair-man at a Committee is in regard of the rest of the Justices or whole Committee to propound gather their votes and passe sentence accordingly whether their work in such Ecclesiastical meetings be only to convene and dissolve Chap. 6. and to bring things into order for the hearing of the rest are different questions which are not to my purpose and therefore I will not meddle with them Now seeing every part is or ought to be organized the whole may be said to be Organical in that sense Sect. 2. It is similar If all the species be be organized supposing they were species the genus in a logical consideration must be said to be organized because it is the common nature of the species so to be Much more if we consider the several Congregations as members as indeed they are Now because I said that these particular Congregations thus organized are similar integral parts of the whole M. Ellis chargeth me with a contradiction to mine own end and scope and disagreeing with Apollonius vind 54. First he thinketh he hath caught me upon the hip of such a contradiction against my self and scope and that I can come off no otherwise then with a Veniamque damus petimusque vicissim nor any otherwise be relieved but by the charitable benevolence of my readers ingenuity But if there had been such a palpable contradiction it is a marvel that reverend judicious M. Hooker should not finde it and shew it as well as he If all the countries in the world had the same kinde of civil government both officers and laws respectively though not dependent were it a contradiction to say they were similar integral parts of the world And if all the Corporations in a Kingdom though organical bodies were of the same constitution and had the same Officers as Maiors c. would they not be similar integral parts of the kingdom yea even in physical mixed bodies as medicinal potions compounded of several ingredients yet because the mixture is alike in all parts they may be said to be similar parts of the whole Materialia componentia sunt dissimilaria partes integrales compositi constituti sunt similares So the Church-Catholike in regard of the constituent materials or essential parts viz. Officers and private Christians is dissimilar but in regard of the several Congregations constituted which are integral parts of the whole it is similar because they are similar I did not mean by similar quarto modo similare as I may say in the strictest sense as haply the pure element of fire is but such a similarity as is consistent with a mixture of ingredient materials Every Congregation in reference to other Congregation is similar being of a like constitution but in reference to it self it is dissimilar consisting of Officers and private Christians This assertion need not seem so harsh seeing D. Ames as I shewed before asserteth the same And M. Bartlet in his model p. 45. confesseth the particular Churches to be similar parts of the Church-Catholike and saith the Independents have left it upon record that they are so and for that cites Ames medul c. 32. And M. William Sedgewick in his Sermon before divers of the Parliament pag. 4. And chargeth the London-Ministers for an untruth in affirming in the preface of Jus divinum that they deny it But the charge is unjust they only set down the difference between the Presbyterians and Independents there to be in this
not considered as their particular Officers yet Officers in general And such persons as receive the doctrine of Christ which denominates them to be beleevers are bound to receive his commands also to submit themselves to his Ministers for their edification And though they have no particular Officers yet as they look upon the Church as a society of men and fellow-members to whom they joyn themselves in the general though not as yet in any particular membership so they look upon the Ministers as Christs Ministers to whom they are to be subject in the Lord to receive their doctrine exhortations and reproofs and from whom also if they prove scandalous heretical infectious or apostates they must expect disciplinary censures though they be no particular members under a particular Minister There is a question whether the Church or the Ministers be first because the Ministers are the instrumental cause of the conversion of the Church and the Church of the choice of the Ministers which is something like that Philosophical question Whether the hen or the egge were first for as the egge comes of a hen so the hen comes of an egge And as that is resolved by the consideration of the creation and then God made the hen first so is this question by consideration of the first institution and setting up of the Evangelical Catholike Church and then we finde that Christ set up the Officers first to convert men to be beleevers and they being converted to the faith of Christ are bound to submit themselves to Christs Ministers in the Lord. And because they will stand in need of constant inspection teaching and ruling which they cannot enjoy from Ministers in general as so considered because they are dispersed into several places for habitation and take particular parts of Christs Church to watch over therefore they are to desire and endeavour to have some of Christs Ministers to take the particular inspection of them But we know that at first they receive Baptism not from their own particular Minister or not as so considered for being newly converted into the Church and not baptized they cannot as I conceive be members of a particular Congregation until after baptism but they receive it as from one of Christs Ministers in general and are by him admitted into the visible body the Church and after this have liberty to choose under the inspection of what Ministers they will put themselves See more of this Qu. 2. S. 2. 4. Now before the proof of this assertion it will be needful to explain a little what I mean by one Organical body I doe not mean that there is one universal visible actual society consisting of all such as are accounted or to be esteemed Christians subjected actually to one or many universal general actual Pastors or guides from whom subordinates must derive their office and power and with whom they must communicate in some general sacred things which may make them one Church as the Jews were And which general sacred services or duties can be performed by that universal head or heads and that Church only Such an universal Christian Church Christ never ordained no not in the daies of the Apostles to whom the extraordinary care of all the Churches was committed Nor that all the whole Church should be subjected to one supream Tribunal of Officers constantly erected and continued among them Nor yet to communicate with Christ himself though in some sense he may be said to be a visible head in some worship to be performed by all joyntly assembled at some especial solemnity as the Jews at the Passeover But an habitual Politico-Ecclesiastical society body flock in one sheepfold of the militant Church in uniform subjection to the same Lord the same Laws in the same faith and under the same visible seal of Baptism performing the same worship and service in kinde and though the members be dispersed far and wide yea divided into several particular places and secondary combinations of vicinities for actual constant enjoyment of Ordinances as particular Corporations in a Kingdom which is an accidental not essential relation to them as subjects of the Kingdom yet still those Ordinances admissions ejections have influence into the whole body as it is a polity and the members indefinitely may of right communicate one with another in any place or any company of Christians though every person so meeting but occasionally may be of a several particular Church and the Minister dispensing a particular Pastor to none of them all yea though none of them all be fixed members of any particular Congregation nor the Minister dispensing fixed to no particular Congregation neither by vertue of their general membership in the visible body and kingdom of Christ and of the habitual indefinitenesse of the Ministers office and the common donation of the Ordinances by Christ to his whole visible Kingdom and to all the subjects and members thereof which have a common freedom therein And in this sense the word Church is taken in Scripture His bodies sake which is the Church whereof I Paul am made a Minister The house of God which is the Church Now because there is no such civil society or kingdom that will in every thing parallel this but there use to be some general offices and officers and some inferiour subordinate receiving power and authority by descention derivation or subordination and the inferiour Officers of lesse extent of place and power then the superiour As the Lord chief Justice of England is above inferiour Justices and his warrant can reach all persons in all the Counties of the Kingdom and there be constant Courts of Kings bench and Common Pleas for judicature for all the Subjects of the whole Kingdom though haply it was not so in the four Monarchies this make men stumble at the name and notion of a Church-Catholike visible But as in other things Christs Kingdom is neither of this world not like unto worldly polities so neither in this But every Minister of the Church in his particular place serveth the Church-Catholike visible in admitting members to general freedom in it and ejecting out from general communion prayeth publikely for the whole body and manageth his particular charge in reference to and so as may stand with the good of the whole body whereof his Congregation is but a member And the Ordinances therein administred are the Ordinances given to the whole not as to a genus which is but a notion and can have no Ordinances but as to a spiritual kinde of an habitual organical body and polity as to a sort of men so and so qualified bound up in an union and unity of the same head laws seals worship and communion Now the same arguments which prove the Church-Catholike an Integral will serve to prove it one organical body also Sect. 4. and therefore I shall take some of them into consideration again under this head and in this notion 1. It will appear by the names
the former And indeed upon this hinge hangeth the whole question of the Organical integrality of the Church Catholike visible And turn the question which way you will it will rest on this center viz. Whether a Minister be a Minister to any but his own Congregation I finde M. Ellis affirming that a Minister is an Officer only to his own Congregation vind p. 8. And the answer of the Elders of several Churches in New-England unto 9. Positions p. 8. Their words are these If you mean by Ministerial act such an act of authority and power in dispensing of Gods Ordinances as a Minister doth perform to the Church whereunto he is called to be a Minister then we deny that he can so perform any Ministerial act to any other Church but his own because his office extends no further then his call So M. Best in his Church-Plea p. 30 saith Officers of Churches may be helpful to other Churches as Christians but not as Ministers To the same purpose M. Bartlet in his model p. 69. Hereby it appears they suppose the Ordination of a Minister to his office is limited to the particular Congregation that call him Indeed the call of the people exerts or cals forth the exercise of his office unto them in particular constantly but his Ordination to his office is more general and giveth him habitual power in actu primo to exercise and perform the acts belonging to his office elsewhere upon a call Christ giveth the office and hath annexed power of dispensing his Ordinances the Presbytery ministerially admit this or that man into it not as a Presbytery of that particular Congregation for they may none of them belong unto it but as a Presbytery of Christs Ministers having a call to give that Ordination in a regular way and the particular Congregation by desire and election give a call to the exercise of this power among them pro his nunc Habitu potestate omnes Episcopi sunt Episcopi cujusvis in orbo vel paraecia vel provinciae quia in quavis apti sunt habiles idonei exercere Episcopalia sua munera quando illuc legitimè vocantur ac mittamtur Actu verò quoad legitimum exercitium ibi solummodò Episcopi sunt ubi per missionem vocationem illam modiatam Dei c. huic illive Paraeciae c. praeficiuntur Crakenthorp Def. Eccl. Aug. c. 28. Now that a Minister is a Minister and so habitually in office to more then his own Congregation and therefore indefinitely to all the whole Church will appear by these proofs First because the donation of the keys and the institution and commission of the Evangelical Ministery was in reference to the whole Go teach all Nations and baptize them Whenas yet there was no distinction of Congregations God set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers 1 Cor. 12.28 So Eph. 4.12 As God gave the Levites to the whole house of Israel and they did at first in the wildernesse serve all the Tribes conjunctim as one body of Officers over one combined large Congregation but afterwards when the Tribes were dispersed in Canaan the Levites were dispersed among all the Tribes and exercised their office of teaching and judging in the several places where they dwelt yet this divested them not of their general habitual power this made not their office to stand in relation to the particular city or Synagogue vvhere they did constantly exercise and when they removed from place to place as the wandring Levite Jud. 17.8 did they still retained their habitual office and power and needed no new consecration but by vertue of their office did exercise the acts belonging to it where they had their particular station and call So is it with the Evangelical Ministery of the New Testament a Minister of the Gospel bears a double relation one to the Church-Catholike indefinitely another to that particular Congregation over which he is set for the constant exercise of his office And if he removes to another place he needs no new Ordination for that continueth and abideth still upon him it being to the essence of his office and not in reference either to the place from whence he cometh or to which he goeth only A Physician or Lawyer needeth no new license or call to the Bar though they remove to other places and have other patients and clients The Justice of peace who is in commission for the whole County though he exercised it in one part of the County while he lived there yet if he removes to the other end of the County he needeth no new commission to execute his office there where he never did before because it was habitual to the whole County though actually exercised where he lived so though a Minister removes he needeth no new Ordination but a new call to the exercise of his office there no more then a private Christian by removing into another Congregation needeth a new Baptism because neither Ordination nor Baptism stand in relation to the particular Congregation but the Church-Catholike As he that is admitted a freeman in any Hall of any Company in London is admitted a freeman of the whole City as well as of that Company and he that by reason of his birth hath right to be baptized in any Congregation is admitted a member of the whole society of the Church-Catholike visible as well as of that Congregation so he that is ordained a Minister as by the occasion of the call of a particular Congregation he is ordained their particular Minister so also is he ordained a Minister of Christ and the Gospel and Church in general Ordination saith M. Rutherford maketh a man a Pastor under Christ formally and essentially the peoples consent and choice do not make him a Minister but their Minister the Minister of such a Church he is indefinitely made a Pastor for the Church Ruth peaceab plea. 263. And to the same purpose it is that M. Ball saith A Minister chosen and set over one society is to look unto that people committed to his charge c. but he is a Minister in the Church universal for as the Church is one so is the Ministery one of which every Minister sound and Orthodox doth hold his part And though he is a Minister over that flock which he is to attend yet he is a Minister in the Church-universal The function or power of exercising that function in the abstract must be distinguished from the power of exercising it concretely according to the divers circumstances of places The first belongeth to a Minister every where in the Church the latter is proper to the place and people where he doth minister The lawful use of the power is limited to that Congregation ordinarily the power it self is not so bounded In ordination Presbyters are not restrained to one or other certain place as if they were to be deemed Ministers there only though they be set over a
the dust of their feet for a witnesse against them They are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under-suitors for the Bridegroom Joh. 3.19 to woo such as are of themselves unwilling and to make motions for Christ to such as either heard not before of him or had not before consented unto Christ Fourthly It appears from the actions which every particular Minister doth perform both in his own Congregation and out of it Every Minister doth in his own Congregation serve the Church-Catholike by admitting members into the Church-Catholike and by preaching the word to strangers that come to his Congregation both fixed members of other Congregations and such as are not fixed in any and administring the Lords Supper to members of other Congregations and in other Congregations by preaching or administring the seals there upon a desire And by excommunication they eject not only out of their own but out of the whole They also can keep lectures in other Congregations frequently If it be objected That this is occasionally done and a charitative act and not an act of office I answer indeed charity and necessity may be the occasion of the performance thereof pro hic nunc but that cannot enable them to do it if their office did not give them right and power habitually thereunto no more then to private Christians It is observable what M. Ball in his Trial of the new Church-way saith p. 80. That to suppose a Minister to be a Minister to his own Congregation only and to none other society whatsoever or to what respect soever is contrary to the judgement and practice of the universal Church and tendeth to destroy the unity of the Church and that communion which the Church of God may and ought to have one with another For if he be not a Minister in other Churches then are not the Churches of God one nor the Ministry one not the flock which they feed one nor the communion one which they had each with others Again p. 90. he saith If a Minister may pray preach and blesse another Congregation in the name of the Lord and receive the Sacrament with them we doubt not but he being thereunto requested by consent of the Pastor and the Congregation he may lawfully dispense the seals among them as need and occasion require That distinction of preaching by office and exercising his gifts only when it is done by a Minister and desired of none but Ministers and that in solemn set constant Church-Assemblies we cannot finde warranted in the word of truth and therefore we dare not receive it The Ministers are the light of the world and though they stand like a light upon a particular Candlestick yet are occasionally to enlighten all that they can either that come to them or that they occasionally go among Reverend M. Norton in his answer to Apollonius saith this is mediantibus candelabris Ecclesiarum His words are these cap. 7. pa. 91. Nobis ergo judicibus Ministri ordinarij virtute muneris Ecclesiastici sunt pastores certis Ecclesijs mediantibus candelabris Ecclesiarum ministri omni creaturae pro occasione data c. But this concession is too narrow for every Minister giveth light to others not only as he standeth in his own Candlestick viz. when others come to him but also out of his Candlestick when he goeth to them And when he preacheth or administreth Sacraments abroad he doth it not as the Minister of such a particular Congregation but of the Church-Catholike for the particular Congregation hath nothing to do to send an Officer to exercise his office in another Church if it be confined and peculiar to that particular Congregation only no more then a Corporation can send their Mayor to exercise his office in another Corporation no not charitativè It is therefore mediante officio sive munere by reason of the indefinitenesse of his office not of his particular station and relation that he can dispense the Ordinances to other Congregations M. Norton p. 80. acknowledgeth that a Minister hath potestatem exercendi actus officij charitativè modo debito in aliis Ecclesiis and that this ministerial power whereby he exerciseth such acts in an Ecclesiastical power p. 81. and that it is Ecclesiastical not only in regard of the dispenser and administrer as it is when he preacheth to heathens but in regard of the receivers or people to whom he doth dispense and that Churches non tantum sub ratione Christian â exercent communionem Christianam sed etiam quâ Ecclesiae exercent communionem Ecclesiasticam inter seipsas in seipsis ad invicen quare etiam Ministri praecipuè cum sint partes ejusdem totius organici etiam quà Ministri actus ministeriales officii in Ecclesiiâ— non exercerent And even from this concession of his as I conceive will necessarily follow that every Minister hath an indefinite habitual Ecclesiastical power by vertue of his office in the whole Church-Catholike visible in toto eodem organico which if it may be brought into act and exercise by charity then much more by necessity combination mission or delegation and if for the exercise of one key why not of another so it be in a due manner They are the Stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4.1 and though by particular assignment they dispense the Ordinances to a particular company of Christs family yet may not deny them to others of the family that have the same right thereto They are spiritual fathers and do not only beget their own people to Christ ministerially but strangers also They are Christs shepheards and are to neglect none of Christs sheep as opportunity is offered though they have a particular charge of a set flock When M. Ellis preached before the Parliament did he preach as a private Christian a gifted brother or as a Minister Surely they summoned him as a Minister and heard him as a Minister for they could have found many able Gentlemen members of Parliament Lawyers or Citizens who could have spent an hour or two in praier and exposition and exhortation but they never summoned any such to perform that work Or had they summoned him to have been a member of the Reverend Assembly would he have acted there as a private man or as a Minister Or do the dâ—ssenting brethren sit there as private men or keep Lectures in London as private men Indeed skill fitting endowments and willingnesse give a capacity to be called to the office but Ordination and mission giveth habitual power and a call giveth occasion of exercise thereof and of drawing forth that power and office into act A private souldier may have as much skill to leade a Troop as a Captain but he cannot do it authoritatively without a commission so haply many private Christians are able to preach and govern in the Church by reason of their skill knowledge wisedom and faithfulnesse but cannot do it authoritatively having no commission by office thereunto
And should such private man passe the censure against a scandalous brother that the Elders would do yet it is not Ecclesiastical binding yea though such a scandalous person should referre himself to them as arbitrators and promise to submit to their censure yet they cannot Ecclesiastically excommunicate him or restore him no more then private men in an arbitration can condemn and execute a malefactor or absolve him though he be innocent if indited Many times private men standing by and hearing the evidence at the Assizes against a malefactour will say he is but a dead man yet that is no judicial condemnation of him though it be materially according to the law of the land yet it is not formally for so is the act of the Judge only who is in office for that purpose Fifthly If private Christians bear a double relation Sect. 7. one to the Church Catholike visible as members thereof and another to the particular Congregation where they are particular members then so do the Ministers also The universality of private Christians membership necessarily requires an universality of the ministerial office for dispensing the Ordinances to them though but occasionally As particular members agree with other particular members in Christianity so particular Ministers agree with other particular Ministers in the ministerial office If particular private members can joyn with any Congregations in the Word Sacraments and praier and are bound to contribute to them as members of the same general body if there be need though in forreign countries then may also particular Ministers dispense the Ordinances of Jesus Christ as generally if there be necessity or occasion Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus ordained a Deacon and Presbyter at Bethlehem in monasterio Bethlemitico in the jurisdiction of John Bishop of Jerusalem when they were almost destitute of spiritual food and defended his action thus Oh Dei timorem hoc facere compulsi sumus maximè quum nulla sit diversitas in sacerdotio Dei ubi utilitati Ecclesia providetur Nam et si singuli Ecclesiarum Episcopi habent sub se Ecclesias quibus curam videntur impendere nemo super alienam mensuram extendatur tamen praeponitur omnibus charitas Christi It seems he accounted his office habitually generaâ— and though the order of the Church required him to keep within his own bounds ordinarily yet necessity the profit of the Church and the love of Christ might draw forth the execution of his office further He addeth further Non considerandum quid factum sit sed quo tempore quo modo in quibus quare factum sit i. e. if it be not done to make a schism in the Church as he expresseth himself afterward ne que feci quicquam ut Ecclesiam scinderem Afterwards he adds Multi Episcopi communionis nostrae presbyteros in nostrâ ordinaverunt Provincia Ipse cohortatus sum beata memoriae Philonem Episcopum S m Theopropum ut in Ecclesiis Cypri quae juxta se erant ad meae autem paraeciae Ecclesiam vide bantur pertinere ordinarent presbyteros Christi Ecclesiae providerent Epiph. Epist ad Johan Hierosol quam Hieronymus lutinam fecit Extat in Hieron Ep. T. 2. in Ep. Hieron ad Paumachum T. 2. Vide Baronium Anno Christi 392. Sect. 42. c. The universal pastoral care which lieth on all Bishops as Bishops saith Crakanthorp puts forth it self both in general Councels yea and out of Councels this universal care of the Church lyeth upon all Ministers that they provide for the safety of the Church as much as lieth in them consulendo hortando monendo arguendo increpando scriptis simul voce alios omnes instruendo cum vel hâ—resis ulla vel schismain Ecclesia grassari caeperit velut incendium publicum illud restinguendo ne latiùs serpat providendo Def. Eccl. Angl. c. 28. Sixthly There will follow divers great absurdities if the office of a Minister stands only in relation to his own Congregation For then he cannot preach any where as a Minister but in his own Congregation nor yet to any that come to his own Congregation occasionally much lesse administer the seals of the Covenant to them though they come never so well approved by testimonials or by their own knowledge of them which yet hath been the ancient custom of the Church and is practised still among our brethren in New-England by vertue of communion of Churches as they say but this being an act of office cannot be done except there be an habitual indefinite power of the ministerial office which by this desire of strangers and their testimonial is drawn forth into act Also hereby a Minister is rendred but as a private Christian to all the Christian world except his own Congregation and if his Congregation be any way dissolved he is but a private man again Also the censore of excommunication which hath been inflicted by such Officers in such a Congregation can never be taken off by any other Officers in any other Congregation after the dissolution of that for no Congregation can receive an excommunicated person to be a member before absolution and absolve him they cannot because he is none of their members Ejusdem est ligare solvere yea and if he be wronged by censures in any particular Congregation no Church in the world can relieve him except there be an indefinite habitual power of office which by such occasions can be drawn forth into act It maketh way also for any private man to preach publikely if he be able for Ministers themselves by this opinion should preach but as private men if they preach out of their own Congregation Also it necessarily implyeth that a Minister cannot remove from his particular Congregation though for the great advantage of the Church unlesse he will divest himself of his former Ordination which was in reference only to his particular Congregation by this opinion and take a new Ordination to his Ministerial office again as if he had never been ordained before And all acting in Councels must be the actings of private Christians And all the Lectures that are kept by neighbour-Ministers in combination or singly except by the particular Ministers of that Congregation where the Lecture is kept are performed by private men for so by this opinion they are to all the world except their own Congregations And so if any of their own members come and hear them preach at any such Lectures Funerals Marriages or Baptizings it is authoritative preaching indeed to them because of their particular relation to him but only a charitative exercising of gifts as a private man out of office to all men else And if this opinion be true what shall become of all the unfixed visible Christians in New-England who by reason of their unresolvednesse where yet to fix their civil habitations or of scrupulosity or want of ability utterance and boldnesse to expresse themselves so as
to obtain an admission into a particular Congregation or haply though visible Christians under the seal of the Covenant yet have not the inward true work of grace in them yet are neither ignorant nor scandalous but live inoffensively and willing to joyn in and submit unto all Gods Ordinances I say what shall become of them and their seed Shall they all be left without the Church in Satans visible Kingdom because they are no particular members and there is no extension of the Ministerial office beyond the particular Congregations Sect. 8. Object If every Minister be a Minister of the Church Catholike visible then what do they differ from Apostles and Evangelists for that was their especial priviledge that their commission extended it self to all Churches This Objection M. Bartlet hath in Model p. 69. Answ There is this difference Every minister hath by his Ordination power in actu primo to administer the Ordinances of God in all the Churches of the Saints yet not in actu secundo without a special call But the Apostles and Evangelists which were vicarij Apostolorum had both and the Evangelists power was called forth by the Apostles for they exercised their function where the Apostles appointed them The Apostles received their office immediatly from and by Christ The Evangelists theirs from Christ by the Apostles ordinary Ministers theirs from Christ indeed but ministerially by the Presbytery The Apostles and Evangelists were not fixed officers in any particular Congregation but itinerant from place to place ordinary Ministers are fixed in their own Congregations They served the Church-Catholike actually wheresoever they became and could draw forth the exercise of their offices without any mediate consent or call of the particular Churches or places but so cannot particular ordinary Ministers So that ordinary Ministers they are Ministers of the Church Catholike though not Catholike Ministers actually But if Ministers be Ministers only in their particular Congregations where they are fixed and to which they were called by the Congregation I marvel that our brethren of the Congregational way here in England are so desirous to have itenerant Ministers to be sent into all parts of the land that shall be fastned to no particular Congregations yea and also to have gifted men not ordained at all to be suffered to preach publikely and constantly in Congregations surely these things are not consistent with their principles CHAP. VII About Combinations of particular Congregations in Classes and of them in Synods A further question is about the combination of Congregations and Elderships in Classes and Synods Sect. 1. For though it cannot be denied but that particular Ministers in their particular Congregations do serve the Church-Catholike in their admissions ejections and other Ordinances as preaching to praying with and administring Sacraments to members of other Churches in their own meeting-houses and upon occasion in other meeting houses for the case is the same whether they come to him or he go to them yet it may be doubted whether the Ministers and Elders may combine together and jointly exercise acts of government c. And though this doth not necessarily belong to my question yet because it hath some reference to the integrality of the Church-Catholike I shall speak something of it Now there is a double Integrality of the Church-Catholike the first is Entitive whereby they are all bound together in the visible embracing profession of and subjection unto the visible doctrine covenant and laws of Christ whereby they become Christians in the genera◠whereby all Christians are bound as opportunity is offered to perform Christian duties one to another as fellow-members ex officio charitatis generali not only by vertue of the moral law but by the law of Christ and to Christ as the King and head of his Church As all dwelling within the kingdom of England are members of the Kingdom and bound to carry themselves as subjects to the governours and laws and as fellow-subjects one to another though they be fixed members of no Corporations nor Townships And this integrality is alwaies actual The second is as it is organical by combination as all the Counties and Corporations and Towns by combination make one kingdom so all the particular Christian Congregations Provinces and Kingdoms by combination make one Church-Catholike visible under Christ Chap. 7. and this is an habitual integrality Of this it is that Ames speaks the Church-Catholike in regard of the external state thereof Per combinationem habet suam integralitutem Am. med l. 1. c. 33. f. 18. There is likewise a double combination one habitual whereby all Churches and Christians are united and habitually combined into one political Kingdom under Christ and are obliged to be mutually helpful one to another as need requires as becometh fellow-subjects and fellow-members secondly there is actual combination whereby any particular Churches shall actually agree and so unite together for mutual help of each other and for transactions of businesses of common concernment And this is either a constant combination of vicinities in a Classis because there will be constant cause or occasional and more seldome as of a whole Province or Nation and may be of the whole Church-Catholike if convenible by their delegates This latter combination is fundamentum exercitij by the former they have jus adrem by this latter they have jus in re to act conjunctim for the good of those Churches so actually combined And of this second kinde of integrality and combination it is that we are now speaking which necessarily ariseth from the former as the organical integrality of a Kingdom ariseth from the Entitive For seeing all are fellow-subjects under the same Soveraign and Laws though they have particular Counties Corporations and Towns wherein they live and actually enjoy constantly the general priviledges of subjects under the King and Laws yet there will necessarily result a community and habitual integrality of the whole by coordinate combination The civil and Ecclesiastical combinations as they proceed from a parallel ground viz. subjection to the same laws and Soveraign I mean respectively so they must necessarily run parallel in things that are general and essential to combination Our brethren make them run parallel in the two first steps viz. in combining particular persons into families and particular families into Congregations of them that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dwellers together in some vicinity which is nothing else in English but Parishioners the English word comes of the greek The Christians dwelling together made one Church at Jerusalem Ephesus Corinth c. by Ecclesiastical combination as well as one city by civil combination respectively And I doubt not but if all the Inhabitants of any one Town in New-England were judged fit to be members of the Church they would combine them as members of the Church in that Town and that Town would give denomination to them all as the Church in or of such a Town And seeing
the subjects of Christs Ecclesiastical Kingdom â—unne parallel further with the subjects of a civil Kingdom they all being Christians Why may not the combination also run parallel and the denomination be parallel for transaction of common Ecclesiastical affairs as well as civil if prudence so dictate it and the Churches in a hundred if they lie convenient combine â—to a Classis as well as into a hundred for civil transaction And the Classes into a Province as well as hundreds into a County or Shire and the Provinces into a national Church as well as the Counties into a civil Kingdom and seeing Christs Ecclesiastical Kingdom reacheth over many Kingdoms why may they not make one habitual Church-Catholike as well as many Kingdoms under the same laws and head make one Empire The actuality indeed may cease where the constant or frequent community of acting ceaseth whether at the Congregation or Classis where all the Officers are combined in frequent common acting or at the National Church where the civil community ceaseth and so the frequent occasion of common acting by delegates cease I determine not but the habituality ceaseth not in the whole Church-Catholike visible I shall first speak of the combination of particular Congregations into a Presbyterial Church Sect. 2. commonly called for distinction sake a Classis That there may be a college or body of Elders that can act conjunction as well as divisim appears from 1 Tim. 4.14 where the Presbytery are said to lay their hands on Timothy There is the name and thing and their acting conjunctim in Ordination which was not the Presbytery of a single Church or at least not so considered in their Ordination of an Evangelist an itinerant universal actual officer under the Apostles Our brethren also in New-England joyn the Elders of divers Congregations together in ordaining Elders for a new-erected Congregation and not only the erecting of new Congregations will require it necessarily but the supplying of other Congregations vacant by death for there are but few Congregations so well stored with preaching Presbyters as can ordain new ones if one or two of them die Also we finde an Eldership acting together Act. 15.6 The Apostles and Elders came together to consider of this matter Also Act. 11.30 and Act. 21.18 Christ gave the keys to the Apostles together Mat. 28.19 Go ye and teach and baptize c. who though they received their extraordinary calling of Apostleship for themselves only yet they received the ministerial office for all succeeding Ministers and we finde no other especial donation of the keys and this appears by the following words Lo I am with you alway even to the end of the world which must needs be meant of the succeeding Ministers for the Apostles were not to last to the end of the world neither their persons nor their office Therefore as the Apostles could from that donation exercise the keys conjunctim divisim in their extraordinary function so may the Presbyters exercise theirs also and some keys cannot be used but conjunctim as in Ordination and dispensing censures and if Elders of several Congregations can act together as Elders in ordination even in New-England and in censures much more thâ—â— in a greater body And if our brethren in New-England dared admit private men to lay on their hands in ordination of their Ministers doubtlesse they would appoint some of their own private members to do it that so according to their tenet they might enjoy all Gods Ordinances independently in their particular Congregations and not admit of a forreign Officer to come and act as an Officer among them That divers Congregations may combine and make one Presbyterial Church appears by divers instances in the New Testament The Congregations in Jerusalem are called one Church Act. 8.1 Act. 11.22 Act. 15.4 The Congregations in Antioch are called one Church Act. 1â— 1 and Act. 11.26 The Congregations in Ephesus are called one Church Act. 20.17 Rev. 2.1 And the Congregations in Corinth mentioned in the plural number 1 Cor. 14.34 are called one Church 1 Cor. 1.2 and 2 Cor. 1.1 Now that there were several Congregations in each of these cities appears because there were in each of them so great a multitude of beleevers as that they could not meet together to partake of all Gods Ordinances especially if we consider that they had no publike eminent buildings for meeting-houses but met privately 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 2.46 in an upper room Act. 1.13 and in the house of Mary Act. 12.12 in the school of Tyrannus Act. 19.9 in the house of Aquila and Priscilla 1 Cor. 16.19 in Pauls hiâ—ed house at Rome Act. 28.30 in the house of Nymphas Colos 4.15 c. therefore called the Church in their houses And this manner of meeting continued in the times of persecution in that age and some succeeding Also it appears by the multitude of Church-Officers Elders Prophets and Teachers that were in each of them which could not busie themselves in one Congregation and sure they were not idle in those daies Also by the variety of languages especially at Jerusalem Act. 2.5 8. c. See these and other arguments of this nature more fully explained and more particularly proved and applied in Jus Div. part 2. chap. 13. And if these Churches were such as in all rational probability they were then that position That there are no other Ecclesiastical societies instituted by Christ but particular Congregational-Churches will not hold good and the Basis of the Congregational way will fail and the partition wall that seemeth thereby to be between them and the Presbyterians must fall down And this unity of these Churches was not a spiritual unity in regard of saving grace for all the members had not that nor in regard of judgement belief heart and way for that was common to all the Christianâ— in the world but a political union by an especial Ecclesiastical obligation together though we finde no mention of any explicit Covenant as the constituent form of the particular Churches nor only in regard of the administration of Word Sacraments and Praier for these were dispersed in their several Congregations and could not be jointly together in regard of their multitudes Neither were they one in reference to the Apostles general power and office only they being universal Pastors for so the universal Church over the whole world was one but in regard of the common Presbytery whereby they were governed constantly and the Apostles themselves being in these several Churches did act as co-Presbyters with their Elders and so they call themselves Elders 1 Pet. 5. â— and Joh. 2. And though indeed it cannot be peremptorily affirmed that these Presbyterial Churches had their several Elders fixed to their several Congregations yet that as I conceive varies not the question at all And yet it is very probable that the Elders in those cities did divide those cities between them for particular teaching and inspection of
manners to avoid confusion and for a better means of conversion and edification of the whole that so the members and others might the better know where they should be baptized taught and instructed so far I mean as the persecutions and â—angeâ—s of those times would permit and yet for more weighty manners of ordination excommunication or confuting any heresies or transacting any businesse of general concernment they did meet together Now that these several Presbyterial Churches had each of them a common Presbytery set over them to govern in common appears for Jerusalem by Act. 11.27 30 and Act. 15.2 and at Antioch by Act. 13 1 2 3. with Act. 15 35. and at Ephesus by Act. 20.17 28. 〈◊〉 at Corinth 1 Cor. 1.12 and 1 Cor. 4.15 and 14 29. and at Philippi Phil. 1.1 And not only Scripture proves it in the practice but right reason and necessity requires that there should be a combination of particular Congregations for the attaining the end for which government was appointed both because there are many things that jointly concern many particular Congregations and therefore it â—s fit they should be transacted in common as also some particular Congregations are too weak to perform some things that may concern themselves as probation and ordination of their own Ministers and censuring of persons of great external 〈◊〉 or civil dignity the resolving of difficult controversies and cases of conscience the confuting of subtle and dangerous errors and learned subtle hereticks There may also be through mens weaknesse and corruption male-administration or presumption thereof in a particular Congregation which without combination and appeal cannot be remedied There may also fall out a difference between the Congregation and their particular Presbytery and then who shall decide it yea the very Presbytery in a Congregation may differ and be equally divided among themselves and who shall decide that difference There may be some great difference between one Congregation and another Congregation and they being equal in authority as Congregations are Par in Parem non babet imperium who then shall end these differences if both be resolute and will not yeeld each to other or to the advice counsel and perswasion of neighbour-Churches Therefore it is necessary that there be an authoritative conjoyned Presbytery wherein the whole hath power to regulate the parts the greater part of the body to heal and help the lesse either in keeping them from division or to cure them of divisions when they are risen Sometime again many neighbour Congregations are scandalized by some notorious evil breaking out in one Congregation or their members endangered by the evil example of some persons dwelling in one of the neighbour Congregations and having recourse unto and converse with the members of the rest and haply that Congregation cannot will not or do not censure that offendour shall there be no means to bring him to censure and afford a remedy for the rest Some heretick may endanger the members of divers Congregations and yet live but in one and that one not able haply to grapple with him or haply he be a fixed member of none as may easily fall out especially if Churches consisted only of gathered members as some would have them or one that shifteth up and down to avoid Congregational censure how shall he be dealt withal without combination of Churches Sometimes the offendour or scandalous person is a member of one Congregation and the witnesses live in two or three neighbour Congregations how shall this mans cause be brought to trial The Elders of that Congregation where the accused person dwelleth cannot authoritatively send for witnesses out of another and if they will come voluntarily they cannot by our laws safely administer an oath unto them neither can the Elders where the witnesses dwell send for the accused person authoritatively nor censure him if he will come voluntarily And yet many such like cases may and will fall out If all civil causes were confined to the trial of the chief men in the several Parishes we should soon finde the difficulty disability mischief and impossibility thereof and the case is the same for Ecclesiastical causes for ought I know There is no way saith M. Rutherford to reduce or judge scandalous dissenting Elders without there be a combination for they will not censure themselves and the people cannot Peaceab Plea 191. But saith he the spirits of the Prophets must be judged by the Prophets 1 Cor. 14.39 And otherwise we must leave all scandalous Elders to the immediate judgement Christ Sect. 3. But still there remaineth a greater Query about Synods consisting of delegated Officers of particular Churches which because they are most properly Ecclesiae ortae I shall say the lesse of them as being not so pertinent to my question it being about the whole Church consisting of both Officers and private members respectively Concerning Synods and the subordination of the particular Churches unto them divers have written so fully learnedly and punctually that I shall referre the reader to them See M. Paget in his defence of Church-government par 2. and of the power of Classes and Synods ch 6. And M. Gillespies Assertion of the government of the Church of Scotland And the four Leiden Professors Synops purior Theolog. disp 49. The advice of our Reverend Assembly concerning a Confession of faith and a form of Church-government And Jus Divinum by the London Ministers And M. Parkers Polit. Eccl. The nature of Synods is all one whether they be Provincial National or Oecumenical and they only differ as greater or lesse but their power in reference to their precincts and delegation is alike They differ from Presbyteries called Classes because the Provincial is constituted only of certain delegated members from the classical Presbyteries of the same Province the National of delegated members from the Provincial Synods and the Oecumenical of delegated members from the National Synods whereas the Classis is constituted of the Elders of the particular Congregations combined together The Classes are more frequent constant and ordinary in their meetings the other more rare and extraordinary The power of Synods is not at all civil but Ecclesiastical neither is it destructive to the power of Classes or single Congregations but perfective and conservative They are not infallible but may erre as well as a Classis or single Eldership yet are not so subject thereto because in the multitude of Counsellours there is safety and they consist of more choice able men and not so liable to personal prejudice against the accused nor likely to be swayed by fear or favour or sinister respects Their power is not meerly consultatory and suasive but authoritative and to be submitted unto by those for whom their delegation is so farre as their acts are according to the word of God In Synodo est authoritatis apex totius Ecclesiae unitas ordinis firmamentum Leid profes de concil If it be no more but consultatory and
power or by immediate inspiration as in the penning of the Scripture but the matters were carried on in an ordinary Synodal way by disputes and discourses they deliberated about the true state of the question and the remedy thereof and after deliberation and disputes they decisively conclude and determine the matter and put forth all the three fore-named power First they exert their dogmatick power in confuting of the heresie and in vindication of the truth of justification by faith without the works of the law and their critical power in branding the false teachers with the infamous brand of troublers of the Church and subverters of souls and of belyâ—rs of the Apostles and Elders of Ierusalem and their diamctick power in ordering and framing practical rules or constitutions for the healing of the scandal They passed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 16.4 they imposed them for they are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 15.28 29. yet were not all the things they imposed necessary in themselves as abstaining from things strangled and from bloud they are called necessary not intrinsecally for then they are so to us but for that time because those things were so odious to the Jews who could not be so suddenly brought from all ceremonies It is true our Divines in their writings against the Papists do cry down the infallibility of Councels and the over-high esteem they had of them and the injurious and sinful decrees of their Popish Councels but they honour the general Councels and account Synods an Ordinance of God Calv. Inst lib. 4. cap. 9. sect 13. saith Nos certè libenter concedimus siqua de dogmate incidat disceptatio nullum esse nec melius nec certius remedium quà m si verorum Episcoporum Synodus conveniat ubi controversum dogma excutiatur Multò enim plus ponderis habebit ejusmodi definitio in quam communiter Ecclesiarum pastores invocato Christi Spiritu consenserint quà m c. Whitak de consilijs cap. 2. not only alloweth but commendeth Synods and Councels from the necessity and utility of them and marvelleth that Nazianzâ—n should say he never saw a good end of a Synod alledging the good end and profit of the Councel of Nice And citeth Augustine in Ep. 118. Conciliorum in Ecclesia Dei saluberrimam authoritatem esse And addeth further Etsi Concilia non sunt simpliciter absolutè necessaria tamen multùm conferunâ— valdè utilia sunt idque propter multas causas And then reckons up the causes And divideth Synods in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And bringeth Act. 15. for an example and warrant of them And Chamier in his Panstrat tom 2. lib. 10. cap. 8. De omnium toto orbe Ecclesiarum politia sheweth the lawfulnesse and use of Synods And lib. 5. saith Ad Synodos convocatos fuisse atque admissos omnes Episcopos nemo dubitat sedisseque judices suo jure prout fieri solet in Aristocratia And M. Parker in Polit. Eccl. l. 3. p. 355. saith Fundatur haec progressio a Presbyerio ad Classem a Classi ad Synodum in instituto Christi Mat. 18.17 ex proportione And p. 123. he foundeth them upon the same Scripture Per gradationem ratiocinandi a little after he saith they follow from that place per sequelam ratiocinandi per consequentiam Innumerable might be the citations of Protestant Divines in this kinde It is confest Sect. 5. that particular Churches are endued with the power of discipline within themselves if the matter doth particularly and peculiarly concern themselves and none others or if there be no others that can joyn with them they may do much alone but that case is extraordinary It is confest also that every single Congregation is equal in power to any other single Congregation considered as a Church only one may be greater and purer then another and furnished with more and more able officers And therefore how one sister Church by its single power can non-communion another that is of equal power with it I know not for it is a censure and no lesse then a vertuâ—â— excommunication and the other Church hath as much power to non-communion them and so there is a principle laid of perpetual and frequent division and splitting asunder of Christâ— political body and kingdom Such a principle in a Common-wealth between Town and Town in civil affairs would be very dangerous and bring deadly feuds and civil wars and at last ruine to the whole And though there be a subordination of particular Churches to greater Assemblies yet it is not absolute and arbitrary but in the Lord also it is a coordination because the Officers of the particular Congregations are there and help to constitute the â—lasses or if it be a Synod they are vertually there by their delegates or Commissioners as the Counties and Corporations are in a Parliament The subordination of particular Congregations to greater Assemblies consisting so of members taken out of the particular Congregations and the authoritative power and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of those greater Assemblies over them appears because we see the Church of Antioch was subordinate to the Synod at Jerusalem Act. 15. Also Christs direction to deal with an offending brother Mat. 18. ascends by degrees from private adâ—onition to admonition before two or three and from them if he amend not to the Church but what if the greater number of a Church or suppose a whole Church offend by the same rule of proportion they are to be brought before a higher Assembly else no remedy can be had for offending Congregations as well as offending persons But neighbour-Congregations or particular persons may be offended by a neighbour Church and there is no reason that that Church should be partee and judge also in their own case and therefore it is requisite that there should be a greater combined Assembly to complain unto And as the unity of the whole visible Church and political Kingdom of Christ requires this as the London-Ministers have well noted wherein all things are to be managed as between members and fellow-subjects and the greater part in coordination to rule the lesse in the Lord and the whole the parts so also there is the same necessity of Synods as of Classical combinations and otherwise there will be irremediable difficulties Also we may observe the like subordination and appeals in the Jewish Church the several Synagogues were subordinate to the great Assembly at Ierusalem and had their appeals thither in greater causes Deut. 17.8 12. 2. Chron. 19.8 11. Exo. 18.22 26. And this could not be a ceremonial Law for it did typifie nothing The appeals were not to the high Priest typifying Christ but to their highest Court and though it were judicial to them yet the equity of it remains and so far as it was grounded on common right it is moral Now the like difficulties and dangers that occasioned that Law then remain still as great among
us and ever will And it is observable that this thing was not learned by Moses in the pattern shewed him in the Mount but was taught by the light of nature to Iethro and by him was given in advice to Moses Exo. 18.22 and afterward was approved by God as being according to right reason and a thing common to all societies as societies not Ecclesiastical only and not a positive law only but dictated by the light of nature right reason and necessity and therefore is practised in all ages nations armies and societies though not in every particular circumstance And therefore except it were forbidden or some other way instituted to avoid those difficulties and dangers that will arise it ought to be in use also in the Church under the Gospel as well as summoning convening in fitting times and places and a moderatour or chair-man and silence obedience and respect and due order in proceedings according to allegation and probation which are things common to all Judicatories as Judicatories And surely God would not have Christians under the Gospel under a more grievous yoke and irremediable inconveniences then the Jewish Church that if any of them be oppressed by the ignorance or ill will of their Elders they should have no relief Sect. 6. Obj. If their be appeals from one Presbytery to another that is higher then must there be two kindes of Presbyteries and two kindes of Presbyters but the Scripture speaks but of one and giveth no rules for any Presbyteries but one Indeed in Universities the same men may be heads of the Colleges respectively and heads of the Universitie also but there are differing and distinguishing names relations and Statutes but it is not so for Elders of particular Congregations to be Elders of Classes and Synods c. Answ The Church is but one visible political Kingdom of Christ made up by the collection and aggregation of all visible beleevers who are called into an unity of Covenant and laws and way and all the Ministers and Officers of the Church are given to the whole primarily for the gathering and edifying of it and they are all to teach and rule and perform all their administrations respectively with reference to and the best advantage of the whole And they did serve the whole as one actually when they were convenible but their number encreasing they divided into several companies for their better ordering edification and encrease and therefore the instance is not parallel for the office of the Ministers is first to the whole and the Charter and Statutes of the whole and of every particular Church are but one and therefore the Ministers though they ordinarily act in their particular Congregations as it were in their particular Colleges being called by them to take the immediate constant particular inspection of them yet can they exercise their general office when and wheresoever they have a call thereunto Now this call is not that which giveth them their office but is proximum fundamentum exercitij only Neither is the particular Congregation the adequate correlate to an Elder for it doth not mutu◠ponere tollere but the Church-Catholike only But of this see more in the 2d question S. 4. But against this M. Ellis vind 40. brings an Objection which he ushers in with a Let it be observed by all sorts By this means saith he the power being given not to any one Church but to the whole Church as one body and not to the members with the Officers but to the Officers only there is derived a very transcendent power and authority upon every particular Minister more then any Parliament man hath yea more then a King who is limited to his dominion But I answer that the Presbyterians acknowledge that power of government is given immediatly to every Congregational Eldership or at least to such a College of Elders as may frequently and constantly meet and rule in common as they did at Jerusalem and it is not derived unto them by any superiour authority on earth by way of descention except by a Ministerial investment by Ordination And this power is to be constantly exerted for the actual Ecclesiastical regiment of that Congregation or those Congregations over whom those Elders are set in the Lord yet with reference to the rest of the body whereof they are but a parcel and they may stand in need of the help of more Elders then their own upon occasion It is true government is not given to the members with the Officers but to the Officers only not to the body of the Congregation as the subject of it either in whole or in part as they are private members distinct from the Officers much lesse are they the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first receptacle thereof And for the inference hence of such a transcendent power and authority upon every particular Minister more then a Parliament man or a King I suppose M. Ellis is not ignorant that the office of every particular Minister in his Congregation giveth him authority to do more in administring Gods Ordinances as authoritative preaching and administring the seals of the Covenant and the Officers in administring spiritual censures then a Parliament man or a King can do Remember Vzziahs example And yet in all civil affairs they are as dutiful subjects as any else and as much subject to civil authority Because the Priests and Levites were in the matters of God set over all Israel will it therefore follow that the meanest Levite was greater then the Nobles Princes and Kings of Israel Indeed the meanest Priest might offer sacrifice which the King could not do but this was no disparagement to the Nobles or to the King No more it is to them that the meanest Physician may administer physick virtute officij and the meanest Pilot guide the Ship which the greatest Princes may not doe The office and power and honour that belong thereto is of another kinde then Parliaments and Kings it is not civil but spiritual You know Gods Ministers have power to baptize Parliament men Nobles and Kings and their children and to give them the Lords Supper and to teach admonish reprove and from God to threaten and denounce judgements against them even eternal destruction if they go on in sinful courses They do doctrinally binde and loose Princes and their whole Kingdoms and the whole world as occasion serveth And can any man say that the greatest men are by their greatnesse free from Church-censures if they be notoriously vile and yet none can impose them but Ecclesiastical Officers Suppose divers Parliament men or Noble men yea a King himself were members of a Congregational Independent Church would not the Officers of that Congregation account it their duty to administer all Gods Ordinances to them as occasion requires yea the Ordinances of discipline and censures if there be just cause Sir would you now be willing to have a retortion of your own kinde with a Let it be
observed by all sorts that by the Independent way power is given to 2. or 3. Officers in a Congregation or as others of them say if the particular Congregation joyn to censure yea excommunicate Parliament men Nobles and Kings if they judge there be cause and all the Churches in the world shall have no power to relieve them except that Congregation or those Elders please It makes saith M. Ellis every Minister one of the standing Officers of the Christian world to whom with his collegues not severally and by distribution but jointly and as one body is committed the government of the whole Christian world and managing the affairs of the son of God throughout the face of the earth And this is marked with as if these were the very words of the Presbyterians which are but his own paraphrase and collection and not their sense much lesse their words But I answer Every Ministers office is habitually indefinite but he is not actually a standing Officer of the Christian world But as a Physician by this calling profession and license is a Physician to the whole world habitually and may act upon the bodies and about the lives of men of what nation soever where and when he hath a call And as a Lawyer is a Lawyer to the whole Kingdom and hath power by his call to the bar to deal about any mans case or estate so far as the Law alloweth and his calling serveth where and when he is required and yet these are but professions not offices which would make the habitual power haply more reducible into act upon a lawful cal but Christs Ministers have an indefinite habitual office beyond their particular Congregations yet in regard of exerting and constant exercise thereof it is distributively over their own flocks which are as their constant Patients and Clients but if there be necessity just occasion and a call to be helpful to any others joyntly with them that have the same office they may exercise their power in any part of the whole body And so saith M. Ellis he is one of Christs vicars general and not particular only which I acknowledge every Minister to be in his place magnum surely memorabile nomen But this is but magnum memorabile scomma and so I passe it by M. Ellis knows that thâ—s power though habitually it belongeth to the office and so to the person that hath that office yet is not drawn forth in a general Councel for the actual immediate service of the whole Church once in many hundred years and divers generations of Ministers die and it is not called forth in their ages and when it is they are usually the most able and eminent persons that have that call and not one of many hundreds of them neither therefore that scoff might well have been spared But he confesseth every particular Minister in his place to be Christs Vicar as he terms him i. e. to act vice Christi and all distributively to be Christs Vicars general I see he is not sublimated so high as some are as to make the Ministers to be the Vicars or Stewards of the Congregation and to carry their keys for them But can they act vice Christi no where else in whose name doe they preach baptize administer the Lords Supper and blesse the people when they act abroad occasionally This ariseth from that principle disclaimed in all former ages of the Church that a Minister is a Minister but in his own Congregation and out of office to all the Church besides Sect. 7. But M. Ellis hath another Objection against it viz. If it be so saith he great reason it is that the Church of the whole world should choose these universal Officers and so the Church of a Nation the National Officers c. by whom they are to be governed in that which is dearest and of highest moment viz. the precious soul or else their condition is most sad Answ Is there not the same reason that the whole world should have a hand in the choice of every Physician and the whole Kingdom of every Lawyer And by the same reason it will follow that the whole Christian world should have a consent in the admitting of every member of the Church seeing they be members not of the particular Congregation only into which by particular association they are admitted but of the whole Church-Catholike visible But as every Minister is entrusted with the admitting of members into the whole and every Eldership with casting out of the whole so may every conjoyned Presbytery be also with the admittance of an Officer It is impossible that the whole Church should meet about admittance either of members or Officers but the particular parts are entrusted in the places where they live and if any man or woman can give in any just exception against either member or Minister that is to be admitted it shall debar their admission or procure an ejection The new Jerusalem Rev. 21. it said to have 12. gates and there was an admission into the whole city by every gate so is there admission into the whole Church by baptism in every Congregation The Temple spoken of in Ezek. 40. c. is conceived to typifie the Evangelical Church in general and the several chambers the particular Congregations now as those that were admitted into any chamber had thereby admission into the whole house so they that are admitted in any Congregation are admitted into the whole Church And though the admission of particular Officers or members is not done interventu totius Ecclesiae yet it is done intuitu totius Ecclesiae with reference and respect had to the whole But secondly I answer That when that habitual power is drawn into act in a partâ—cular Congregation as their particular Minister then that Congregation meets to give him a call and if an unworthy unskilful man get into the profession of Physick or Law for all his habitual power by license he may have patients and clients few enough to call his power into act the like may be said of an unworthy Minister if Churches have their right of calling or approving their Ministers Or if there be a call to act in a Synod so great a part of the Church as the Synod extends unto have a hand to call to that action Indeed in a Classis the whole vicinity of Officers may meet personally by their actual combination but if it be a provincial Synod every Classis in the Province chooseth the members thereof severally if in a National Synod every Province chooseth and calleth the members thereof and so there is a call of the whole Kingdom and if it be a general Councel of the whole Church all the Christian Nations elect and call the members thereof respectively and so this sadnesse he speaks of is salved And for unworthy persons intruding into the Church by a little learning to live idlely on the sweat and cost of others or that shall have a
are not commensurable Answ The keys are commensurable though the exercise of them be not alwaies commensurable Neither is a Minister bound alwaies to put forth the exercise of every key where he puts forth one A man may preach where he administreth no Sacraments Paul preached much at Corinth but was not bound to baptize there though no doubt he converted many yet he baptized but few 1 Cor. 1. Christ himself preached much but baptized not Joh. 4.2 Peter preached to Cornelius and his company but baptized them not it is said he commanded them to be baptized And the Apostles usually carried about with them a Minister to baptize those whom they converted as shall be shewed more in the second question A man may administer Sacraments where he preacheth not as the Apostles baptized but Christ only preached there And he that baptized Cornelius and his company did not preach unto them but Peter only preached We reade not that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Minister which Paul and Barnabas carried about with them did preach A Minister may both preach and administer Sacraments where he rules not As Philip to the Eunuch The Apostles and the 70. in Christs time and Ministers that preach abroad in a journey or at a Lecture Also a Minister may rule where he neither preacheth nor administreth any Sacraments for all the Elders in Jerusalem ruled in common but preached and admnistred Sacraments from house to house and could not preach to every Congregation whom they ruled Also the Elders at Jerusalem Act. 15. did exercise discipline in making decrees for Antioch Syria and Cilicia where they preached not Object Sect. 9. This formerly was a grand Objection against the Bishops that they undertook to rule where they preached not Answ The exceptions against the Bishops were first That they or most of them arrogated that power of rule to themselves upon a wrong ground viz. not as Presbyters but as men of a superiour order and office viz. of being Bishops and so above Presbyters even Pastors of Pastors Secondly They challenged that to be due to one that belonged to a College or Eldership or combination of Elders Thirdly They rob'd the people and Postors of their liberty and power for they did not associate Congregations with them but subdued them unto them They were not mutually subject to Presbyteries but made the Presbyteries subject to themselves They did not carry things in way of consociation and confederacy as inter Pares but as Lords both of Ministers and people They took the whole Diocese to be their actual cure and all Ministers were but their Curates They forced men to bring in presentments to them and their delegates which concerned the particular Congregations only and ought and might have been transacted there But it was not for exercising an act of discipline meerly where they did not preach but because it was not on a right ground nor in a right way See these things noted by the Assembly in their answer to the dissenting brethren pag. 11. Obj. If there be superiour and more general Assemblies and appeals unto them then great and stubborn persons will never be brought to censure for they will appeal higher and higher even to a general Councel which haply will not convene in their life time Ans The Officers of the particular Congregation have power to inflict the censure if they finde just cause and that censure remaineth on them notwithstanding their apppeal until their cause be heard in a greater Assembly and if it then be found to be just they confirm it and leave it upon them if unjust they ought to relieve them Obj. If appeals be admitted to greater Assemblies as Provincial National and much more Oecumenical Councels it will occasion much trouble and charge to the partee grieved and to the witnesses and prosecutours to go so far to bring their causes to trial This Objection or to this purpose M. Ellis maketh vind pag. 16. Ans That may be prevented by stating the question in difference and putting it inter controversias juris and so it may be determined indefinitely and the matter of fact may be proceeded in accordingly in the particular Congregation or Classis in application to the particular persons secundùm allegam probata Obj. But if appeals be admitted from the Congregational Eldership because they may erre the same danger will lie against Classes Synods and Councell for they may erre also and by the same reason a man may appeal from a general Councel for that may erre Ans The appealing from the particular Eldership to superiour assemblies is not because they are infallible and cannot erre but because there is lesse danger of erring and fewer temptations to erre or be swayed then in the particular Eldership In the multitude of Counsellorâ— there is safety Many eyes see more then a few and those greater Assemblies consist of more choice eminent persons usually then the particular Elderships And they are freer from all suspition of personal grudg or animosities and not so subject to fear of revenge from the censured person This liberty of appeals as it is founded in the law of nature Sect. 10. and seen by the light thereof and in use in all societies and granted to the Jewish Church and practised by the Church of Antioch in Act. 15. and in use anciently in the primitive times Providendum est â—neâ—innocens damnetur ideò habeat potectatem is qui abjectus est ut Episcopos finitimos interpellet Conc. Sard. Can. 17. c. So also it is in effect granted by the Apologists themselves Apol. Nar. p. 21. It is the most abhorred maxime that any religion hath ever made profession of and therefore of all other the most contradictory and dishonourable unto that of Christianity that a single and particular society of men professing the name of Christ and pretending to be endowed with a power from Christ to judge them that are of the same body and society with themselves should either arrogate to themselves an exemption from giving an account or being censurable to any other either Christian Magistrate above them or neighbour Churches about them But what kinde of account or censurablenesse they mean I know not But as the censurablenesse from the Christian Magistrate above them must be meant of a judicial censure in his kinde which is civil so that from the neighbour-Churches about them should be judicial also in their kinde which is Ecclesiastical Object But if general Councels be an Ordinance of God and the supream Ecclesiastical judicatory it is a marvel that Christ should suffer his Church to be so many hundred years without it it should then rather be a constant standing Court. Ans It is not necessary that there should be a standing Court Catholike consisting of constant Officers of the Church-Catholike actually as there is of particular Churches but only occasionally pro re nata for there is power put into particular Churches for the
the same reason in some cases for the censure of some private members So that by their tenet their right to Gods Ordinances neither ariseth from their being in the general Covenant for so they were before their confederation nor yet from their organicalness for they have power to organize themselves and disannul those Organs again and to perform some Church-acts before and without Organs but it ariseth meerly from their particular covenant and consederation 2. Neither is the Query saith he whether the several companies or Churches of this profession as they are one in nature so also in spirit and affection and thereupon in engagement of mutual care one of another and to take notice what doctrines are dispersed what conversation used among the Churches pag. 7. If by Engagement he meaneth anâ—amicitial or fraternal Engagement as he seems by his paralleling it with the Engagement of brethren of the same family indeed it cometh not up to the question in hand but if he meaneth an Engagement not only founded upon similarity of nature and unity of Spirit and affection but upon an expresse command of Christ to his subjects in their places and Offices to uphold his honour and purity of his Ordinances and watch over their fellow-subjects to keep them from prophanesse and errour or cure them if they be fallen thereinto and this not by advice and perswasion but by Ecclesiastical censures if they be stubborn and obstinate then it comes up to the question in hand And surely the case may be so that the key of doctrine will not serve but the key of discipline which our brethren acknowledge is commensurable with it must be exerted also Stroakings and lenitives will not cure all maladies in the natural body nor good counsel all the distempers in the Common-wealth nor yet in the Church there must sometimes be corrosives of censures applied Nor 3. is it doubtful saith he whether such Churches may voluntarily as occasion shall require associate together for mutual assistance and act in many things by common and joint consent c. This the Scripture and light of nature dictates If by voluntary he doth not mean arbitrary but such a voluntary and yet necessary obedience to the dictates of Scripture and the light of nature as is in the observation of Gods commands and as the voluntary joyning of members to a particular Congregation then it is the very ground of Synodical Assemblies And though it be but occasional yet these occasions falling out frequently and constantly so ought those meetings to be as frequent and constant which is all the Presbyterians contend for And the same Scripture and light of nature that dictates this voluntary occasional meeting dictates also that they should have power to act together when they are met else to what purpose should they meet no occasion can warrant them to do that which God hath not given them power to do And whereas he saith the testimonies alledged by Crakenthop in Def. Eccl. Ang. cap 28. are meant of an obligation of charity and not of office it is utterly mistaken for they speak of their power as Bishops â—ura omnium ovium quà Episcopi sunt ad omnes spectat And Episcopi omnes quà Episcopi universalis Ecclesiae pastores sunt jure Divino sic pastores sunt Nor 4. saith he is it the scruple Whether all or most of the Churches in the world may not possibly become occasionally one by their messengers in a general Councel But as I concieve this is the highest thing that the Presbyterians aim at in such a Councel and is the thing which himself makes question of vind pag. 8. lin 1. and yet four lines further seems to yeeld it again Then M. Ellis vind p. 8. comes to state the power of associated Churches whether lesse or more Sect. 2. and especially a general Councel And there he grants an authoritative power at least virtual from Christ to act and give not only advice but directions and rules to which the conscience is bound to submit unlesse special cause disswade us And this authority is more august and solemn though not greater the greater the number is and the more publike the manner of giving forth the precepts shall be And a little further he saith in doubtful cases or upon occasion of grosser errours and scandals God hath by Ordinance virtual appointed recourse to others especially Churches whose prescriptions not disagreeing from the Word are to be obeyed not only because they are materially good but formally theirs Here he granteth almost as much as the Presbyterians doe desire yet plucks it away again in the very next words in saying That their acting in giving such directions and rules is the acting of Officers but not as Officers for such they are only in their several Churches but yet by reason of that relation they are the more fit for that work c. But hereby he overthroweth the analogy of their acting with the acting of an assembly of Lawyers or Judges or a College of Physitians convened by publike consent which he there makes the parallel of this Ecclesiastical acting for their acting conjunctim is by vertue of their office and professions respectively as much as divisim and not meerly as friends or men skilled in those subjects and sciences for it by their office and profession becometh as he confesseth authoritative and to be submitted unto not only because materially good but formally theirs who by office and profession have power and authority to give it If he would have made his parallel to run to his minde he should have resembled the actings in Councels to the advice of understanding friends and neighbours in matters of Law and Physick who have no office therein or profession thereof but have some knowledge and experience therein and thereby are fit to give friendly and neighbourly charitative advice and directions How men can have authority to make rules which are to be obeyed because they are formally their rules and yet do this as men without office I understand not The Synod Act. 15. did make decrees and give commands he confesseth but did not impose any penalty but surely the making decrees and commands implyed an authority and that conjunctim so to do and the imposing of them implyed a power of office and that a coercive also else decrees and commands are to little purpose And to passe by his second grant what power the Church-Catholike may possibly have in unusual and extraordinary cases or accidents I come to his third gram viz. what power the universal visible Church might have if possibly convenable together as it was at Jerusalem in which case saith he we grant what is coâ—tended for but the Query is What power the parts have asunder and without endeavouring the joyning with the other For even in a Kingdom though all the Corporations gathered in one have power over all particulars yet not some of these much lesse a few of them asunder
When they were abroad if they were recalled they were to return to their own charge Conc. Antioch Can 3. Many other provisions were made directing how Ministers were to carry themselves when they were abroad but none of those provisions of them off from officiating abroad only they regulate them in their carriage to prevent disorders Many examples antiquity affords us of the dispensing of Ordinances of worship ordination and discipline beyond the limits of the Ministers 〈◊〉 particular charge 〈◊〉 of Alexandria was famous this way Tantum studij in Scripturâ— propaganda posuisse serunt ut praeconem Evangelij Gentibus Orianâ—â—libus Indis sese conferret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is said also that there were many Evangelists and faithful messengers prepared to promote and plant the heavenly word after the guiâ—e of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 5. cap. 9 10. Auiciâ—us Bishop of Rome granted leave to Polycarpus Bishop of 〈◊〉 for the reâ—erence that he owed him to administer the Lorde Supper in his Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 5. cap. 24. So Nicephorus relates â— 4. cap. 39. And the Centurists Century 2. cap. 10. Anicetus Pius Hyginus Telesphorus and Xystus Bishops of Rome gave the Eucharist to the Bishops of other Churches that resorted to them though differing from them about Easter Euseb ibid. Athanasius consecrated Frumentius Bishop at Alexandria and sent him into India and there he converted many to the faith and builded many Churches Socrates lib. 1. cap. 15. Athanasius travelling from Jerusalem by Peleusium the ready way to Alexandria preached in every city where he came and exhorted them to eschew the Arians and in divers of the Churches he ordained Ministers though it were in other Bishops Provinces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. lib. 2. cap. 19. 24. Basil Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia fearing that the Doctrine of Arius would creep into the Provinces of Pontus went into those parts and instructed men in his doctrine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and confirmed the wavering Socrat. l. 4. c. 21 25. Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum did the like in many cities and often went to Constantinople for that end Ibid. Paulus Bishop of Emisa came to Alexandria in the daies of Cyril Bishop there and there he preached a famous Sermon And Cyril writes of him in an Epistle to John Bishop of Antioch that he laboured there in preaching beyond his strength that he might overcome the envy of the devil and joyn together in love the scattered members 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evagr. lib. 1. cap. 6. Epiphanius Bish of Cyprus came to Constantinople where John Chrysostome was Bishop and in a Church not far from the wals of the City he celebrated the communion and made a Deacon without the leave of Chrysostome And though Chrysostome reproves him for it yet only for the breach of an Ecclesiastical canon Multa contra canones agis Epiphani primùm quod ministros Ecclesia ordinas in Ecclesijs quae sunt in meâ Diocesi Soc. l. 1. c. 13. Moses a Saracâ—â— by birth an eminent man being much desired by Mavia the Queen of the Saracens to be their Bishop was sent to Alexandria to be ordained and though he refused to be ordained by Lucius the Arian Bishop yet certain exiled Bishops ordained him in a mountain Socrat. l. 4. c. 29. Theodorit l. 4. c. 21. Origen being sent for by the Churches of Achaia as he was upon his journey to Athens he went through Palestina and was ordained to be a Presbyter by Alexander Bishop of Jerusalem and Theoctistus Bishop of Caesarea though he was a man of Alexandria and went to officiate in Achaia Histor Magd. Câ—n. 3. c. 10. cited also by M. Pat. Symson History of the Church pag. 268. Yea the dividing of Dioceses and the same we may say of Parishes which are the bounds of particular Congregations was but an humane prudential act And therefore in the Councel of Nice they pleaded no higher ground for it but Mos antiquus obtinuit c. And in the Councel of Constantinople consisting of 250. Bishops it was forbidden by canon that Bishops should leave their own Diocese and intermeddle with forreign Churches for until that time by reason of the great heat and storm of persecution it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indifferently used Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 8. And what frequent use the Church anciently made of Syâ—â—â—â— and Councel and how authoritatively they acted M. Ellis cannot be ignorant whole Volumes might be written of this subject And thereâ—â—re Reverend M. Cotton in Keys chap. 6. handling the Question Whether a Synod hath power of Ordination and excommunication though his judgement seemeth to inclinâ— to the negative yet saith we will not take upon us hastily to censure the many notable precedents of ancient and latest Synods whâ— have put forth acts of power in both these 〈◊〉 Thâ— refoâ—â—â— of all arguments this of novelty might well 〈…〉 may most justly be retorted upon the contrary 〈◊〉 〈…〉 answers M. Ellis giveth against the antiquity of Synoâ—◠〈…〉 â—â—ndling of things of common concernment doth not conclude them one Corporation no more then the common Treaties of Nations in things of joint concernment vind p. 10. But this common concernment arose from the unity of the head body charter and Laws and the mutual relation of members and therefore that parallel holdeth not 2. Saith he this it is certain was at some distance of time after the discipline of the Churches were corrupt and declined to worldly policy vind p. 11. Ans Surely this is not so of all For the first convention Act. 1. about the installing of a new Apostle and that before the Church was divided into particular Churches and for a thing that concerned the whole Church a meeting which our Divines usually account a Synod yea a general Councel though not in all formalities where there was a joint exercise of the key of order this I say was before the corruption of discipline or declining to worldly policy And that Synod Act. 15. where decrees were made and imposed on the Churches and that by Elders of divers Churches as well as Apostles and concerning things indifferent in their own nature some of them though necessary in regard of that present time that Synod was not lyable to this exception Nor those two Synods in Asia where John the Apostle sate President mentioned by M. Patrick Symson in his first Century of Councels pag. 482. out of Euseb lib. 3. cap. 20. mentioned also by the Magdeburg Centurists 3. It might be saith he by decree and judgement only not by actual execution Or 4. Each Church might act its own power though in union with others as so many several and distinct Churches united and Elders congregated and so they might excommunicate from their own heap or Congregation only Ans The history of the Councels doth abundantly confute this for they acted as one body jointly for all the Churches they
met for and not severally and did both ordain Bishops and also actually excommunicate many hereticks For what several distinct Churches did the convention Act. 1. act seeing there were none then in being 5. It was saith he a voluntary association by right of fraternity and not onenesse of corporation which appears by astringing and confining in after times the power of Bishops and Ministers to and within Dioceses and Churches Ans Though it were voluntary yet might it be necessary and not arbitrary as was shewed before The onenesse of Corporation was not actual but habitual The astringing of them by canon to avoid confusion took not away their habitual power for by leave they might act any where as hath been shewed before But if they had not been endued with habitual power by office their voluntary association could not have enabled them to exert their power jointly when they were met Sect. 5. Let us now hear what witnesses he produceth against the unity and integrality of the Church and the habitual power of the Ministers beyond the limits of their Congregations or their joint acting together as Ministers upon a call First Chrysostome in Serm. 1. de Pash saith The Sacrifice or Passeover was to be eaten in one house and not to be conveyed out i. e. the house is one that hath Christ and the many houses of the Hebrews have but only one power nature and condition as the Churches throughout the whole world and in several Provinces being many in number are but one Church But wherein doth he differ from the Presbyterians herein They grant the Churches are many in number divisim and yet make but one conjunctim habitually But he is expresly against M. Ellis for he grants Provincial Churches and that all the Churches throughout the whole world are one and this must be one integral for a Genus is not made by aggregation of Provinces And all these though organized are similar parts of the whole having but one only power nature and condition 2. Clemens Alexandr lib. 7. Strom. There is absolutely but one ancient and Catholike Church in the unity of one faith And say not the Presbyterians the same also and it appears he held the Catholike Church to be an Integral because he saith it is ancient but a Genus â—ever groweth ancient He might haâ—e gone higher foâ— another Clemens in his constitutions who if he be of any credit speaks more home Nos Apostoli scripsimus vobis Catholicam hanc doctrinam ad fulciendum confirmandum vos quibus universalis Episcopatus creditus est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Constit. 6. c. 14. But Basil in Ep. ad Neo-Caesarienses will be of more credit Interrogate patres vestros annunciabunt vobis etiamsi loci situ divisae sunt paraeciae tumen veluti coronamento quodam unitae unâque sententiâ gubernatae fuerint Assidua quidem populi fuit inter se commixtio ipsi pastores verò tantâ praediti fuerunt mutuâ charitate ut alius alio praeceptore ac duce usi sunt And Cyprians testimony de unitate Ecclesiae is direct against him for he defineth the unity of the Church by doctrine and discipline As there is one God one Christ one faith so there is one Church one discipline in it one Bishoprick c. Episcopatus unus est cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur Now Bishoprick argueth the Church to be one politically though but habitually and as many that are bound in a bond pro toto in solido are every one liable to be arrested for the whole so many that have a joint interest in a thing in solidum have all a joint right to the whole Upon which words of Cyprian M Parker in Polit. Eccles lib. 3. pag. 122. hath this inference Quid ni unitas Ecclesiae in uno Petro primitùs designata unitatem idest aequalitatem authoritatis in singulis Ecclesijs quibusque denotet sic ut Ecclesia una sit Ecclesiastica potestas una cujus ab Ecclesijs singulis pars in solidum tenetur Cyprian is abundant in this point Episcopatus unus est Episcoporum multorum concordi numerositate diffusus Cypr. Ep. 53. Etsi pastores multi sumus unum tamen gregem pascimus oves universas c. colligere foâ—ere debemus Ep. 67. Cyprian gathered together an authoritative Synod He stoutly opposed Steven Bishop of Rome for receiving some Bishops that were justly deposed pro suâ quam gerebar universalis Ecclesiae curâ Cyp. lib. 1. Ep. 4. Vt unitatem Dominus manefestaret unam Cathedram constituit unitatis ejusdem originem ab uno incipientem sua authoritas disposuit Cyp. de unitate Upon which words Salmasius hath this Comment Omnes Ecclesiae una sunt unitatem conspirantes faciunt omnes Cathedrae unam Cathedram De Prim. pag. 87. Ecclesiae nomine non tantum una sed multorum unitas designatur Bernard in Cant. Serm. 61. Augustine in Tract in Joh. 1.14 is more against him then for him And whereas he saith universa Ecclesia ligat solvitque peccam He cannot mean thereby that the Church is only one in nature and kinde but not in number because he speaks of Priesthood and what one Minister doth binde is bound to all so that he violates saith he the rights of holy Priesthood that joins him to himself that is cast out by another Neither doth Eucherius by his own relation for I have not seen him say any other thing then the Presbyterians in that he saith the Church dispersed throughout the whole world consisteth in one and the same faith and fellowship of Catholike truth And whereas there is an innumerable multitude of the faithful yet they are rightly said to have one heart and one soul in respect of their society in the common faith and love For he grants in these words an universal visible Church and that to be a society now every society of men is one external visible integral And M. Ellis granteth that there doth flow an external communion from the internal and that the mystical union doth imply an union visible also vind paâ— 34. His quotation out of the Councel of Trent might well have been spared for it crosseth himself most Therein is confest a general Councel and that with authority and the major part to binde the rest Indeed they contend that a Councel bindeth not the absent Churches which have no delegates there and who saith the contrary But as those Churches who had delegates there are concerned in their decrees so they be agreeable to the word and that formally because they are their decrees so should the Church-Catholike if the whole had delegates there But this we gain by this quotation that a general Councel is confessed by him to have doctrinal authority and are not the 〈◊〉 equally extensible Have they power to decide points of doctrine as iâ— there confest by M. Ellis and not to exercise discipline who cut
it self as being a member of the whole and yet it is not notably vain to say The gift of them by God and his intention in giving them was to the whole though they never meet nor can meet together in this world So is the case of the Ministers also the Ministry is primarily given to the whole body of them and if they could meet together they might exercise the keys together conjunctim a representation or an epitome whereof is in a general councel but because they cannot meet but in parcels where they are seated and have a particular call to give especial attendance therefore they exercise them divisim yet as parts of the whole body of Organs of the Church and there they serve the whole Church and their dispensations have influence into the whole The third danger viz. the trouble and charge of appeals and the tryal of causes by them that can have no personal knowledge of the cause or persons to be tried but by information hath been answered before c. 7. s 9. Sect. 7. His third prejudice is that this opinion is Papal and Anti-Protestant And to prove this he bringeth in Bellarmines description of the Church-Catholike viz. That it is one visible Church or Congregation of men bound together by the profession of the same faith and participation of the same Sacraments under the government of lawful Pastors and especially of that only Vicar of Christ on earth the Pontiffe or Bishop of Rome This latter clause indeed is papal properly and therefore justly rejected by the Protestants But the former part if it be understood of one habitual body or Congregation is not to be accounted Papal because set down by a Papist for then all the Articles of the Creed which they hold as well as we though not on the same ground should be accounted Papal also Where they differ from the Scripture therein they erre and therein only we dissent from them Neither is it Anti-protestant unlesse as he hath stated it Calvins judgement whom he citeth here again I have shewed before and it is opposite to M. Ellis in point of the power of the ministerial office beyond one Congregation which is the very hinge of the question and in the power and use of Synods Chamier indeed makes the Church to be one general or universal yet he makes it to be aggregated of many particular Churches which strongly argues an integrality for no Genus is made by aggregation and he saith it is compounded of infinite particular Churches but no genus is made by composition Omne aggregatum compositum est integrale He makes it also to consist of many parts yea to have partes extra partes which is the Logicians definition of an integral But how all the Kingdoms in the world as he saith to make a parallel with the universal Church may be called one Kingdom in the general except by logical abstraction I understand not Certainly it cannot be by aggregation and composition and by apposition of them as parts of that general Kingdome he speaks of which yet he yieldeth in the Church-Catholike They have not all the same systeme of written Laws authorized by the same authority neither have they indefinite habitual Officers as the Church hath And for Bishop Iewel in his answer to Harding he disputes against the headship of the Pope but denyeth not Christ to be head of the visible Church And though indeed he rightly cals it a new fancy to prove the Pope to be head of the Church from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if there were therefore but one King to rule over the whole world yet he denieth not that Christ rules over the whole Church but cals the Church One Kingdom One body One sheepfold And he citeth for the unity of the Church many sentences out of Cyprian viz. Vna est Ecclesia a Christo per totum mundum in plura membra divisa Item Episcopatus unus Episcoporum concords numerositate diffusus Cyp. l. 4. Ep. 2. Also Ecclesia una est connexa cohaerentium sibi invicem Sacerdotum glutine copulaeta Ep. 9. Quandoâ—oramus non pro uno oramus sed pro toâ—o populo quia totus populus unum sumus Cyp. in Orat. Dominic Again Hanc unitatem firmiter tenere vendicare debemus maximè Episcopi qui in Ecclesia praesidemus ut Episcopatum quoque ipsum unum indivisum probemus Cyp. l. 3. Ep. 13. Et si pastores multi sumus unum tamen gregem pascimus c. Copiosum est Corpus Sacerdotum concordiae mutua glutine atque unitatis vinculo copulatum ut si quis ex collegio nostro haeresim facere gregem Christi lacerare ac vastare tentaverit subveniant caeteri Ibid. So that Jewel was far from restraining the Ministers office or power to one Congregation or from denying the authority of Synods and Councels And for M. Rutherford in his Due right of Presbytery I marvel M. Ellis should cite him who is professedly point black against him and hath handled both parts of my question and concludes them affirmatively Due Right of Presbyteries p. 55. c. and 418. Now whose fault is it to cite authors for him that are known to be against him Sect. 8. I come now to view his greater Artillery as he cals it and his first argument is because saith he the Scriptures Christ and his Apostles are silent and speak nothing of one Catholike visible Church yea I may adde and all men else as he hath stated it But for Scripture-proofs I referre the Reader to what I said formerly and now have added Chap. 2. But my proofs from Scripture he was pleased to runne over in vind pag. 42. in 7. lines without any answer to the particulars His second argument is from the institution of Christ because saith he the keys of government were given first and fully entirely and immediatly to the particular Congregation and this he proves from the Church of the Jews to which all church-Church-power was given first and fully but this was saith he a particular Church not the universal unlesse by accident because there was no other Church-state in the world at that time And though he grants it to be a Type of the Church of the New Testament yet not as Catholike but as Congregational as it self was or else as mystical Vind. pag. 21. Answ It cannot be denied but there were some things peculiar to the Church of the Jews as typical Ordinances and a typical high Priest and that it was bounded within certain limits and they were bound to meet in their males three times yearly which pertain not to the Evangelical Church But in that one Church there were particular Assemblies for ordinary worship and extraordinary also and for acts of government and they had particular Officers and Ecclesiastical rulers over them and there were appeaâ—s reserved to the great Councel at Jerusalem and so it could not be a type of a
ab impossibilitate existendi have been answered before Ch. 7. Sect. 10. Sect. 10. A third sort of argument he takes from the form and nature of all bodies incorporate which consist in order of superiour and inferiour c. But Christs Kingdom is not to be regulated herein according to worldly polities as himself also elsewhere in his vind hath noted so also Christ hath said of the Officers of his Kingdom that it shall not be so among you Mat. 20.26 i. e. there shall be no superiority among you and yet they were to be Officers of a body a kingdom an Ecclesiastical polity But this difficulty is easily salved because though one particular Officer hath not power over another yet the greater number in actual consociation or combination hath over the lesse as it is in a Parliament or any meeting of the like nature where all the members are equal divisim severally taken yet the lesse number is ruled yea censurable by the greater if there be cause Divers inconveniences he raiseth from hence As 1 a necessary existence in one place and why not at Rome 2. Constant standing Officers To these have been answered before 3. A common form of faith discipline worship and profession agreed on and formally propounded and taken I answer these are for the essentials one in the Church-Catholike set down in the word and so acknowledged often by himself and they are submitted unto divisim by the whole Church 4. that all must act by authority and by vertue of commission from the Church-Catholike and in the name of the Church-Catholike and this the Assertors of this opinion saith he say expresly I answer it is a meer figment of his own brain and a great injury to those he fastens it upon And hence the fifth inconvenience viz. that the Magistrate cannot reform within his own dominions before he hath authority derived from the Church-Catholike either in a general Councel or from their Committee fals to the ground For as the Ecclesiastical Officers of particular Churches have power from Christ and not from a general Councel to reform their own Congregations if they be able so also the Magistrate within his dominions is Custoâ— utriusque tabulae and hath a power circa sacra though not in sacris not intrinsecally as a Church-Officer yet extrinsecally as a nursing father and so the Kings of Judah had without authority derived to them from the Sanedrin But I should think that this Inconvenience lighteth unavoidably upon such as derive the power of the Minister from the people of a particular Congregation and make them to act as their servants in their name and according to their votes for then If the Congregation grow corrupt they may cast off their faithful Elders but their Elders cannot reform them if they be unwilling and in a corrupt or infected condition whether by errour or prophanenesse they will not be willing to reform The sixth inconvenience of a solemn meeting for the election of such general Officers is answered already C. 7. S. 7. The inconvenience of meeting in a general Councel by reason of multitude is salved by delegates rightly chosen And the difference of languages is salved by learning That was no impediment in the Councel of Nice or any of the general or large Councels Neither doth this hinder Princes as himself confesseth from one end of the world to another to hold mutual correspondency Sect. 11. His fourth sort of arguments that so he might seem to fetch an argument from every cause is from the end of the Authours of this opinion â—ind pag. 29. Either it is faith he to found the right of Presbyterial government as is now endeavoured and to deprive particular Churches of entire power in themselves or at least of Independency in their government from other Churches or else to lay a ground work of a more effectual cure and remedy then hitherto for all distempers of particular Churches An. The Presbyterial government spoileth not Congregations of that due power which Christ hath given them but helpeth and strengthens them in things of greater difficulty wherein they are too weak and regulateth male-administrations in the particular Congregations it serveth for the transacting of business of common concernment it preserveth unity in the Church which is the body and family of Christ it suppresseth errours and heresies that arise and spread to the infecting of more Congregations then one or which particular Congregations cannot suppresse And as for absolute independency as it is disavowed by M. Ellis and as he saith by the greatest patrons of that way in this Kingdom and beyond the seas so that way which is provided thereby for the curing of errour and scandal meerly by advice and swasion which may or may not be followed ad libitum it is not a sufficient remedy against obstinacy therein and for the Non-communion of Churches by sister-Churches without authority I fear it will prove unwarrantable and is a vertual though not formal censuring of them though their equals and is a way not to cure Churches but to cause rents in the Church of Christ and confusion Neither can this associating of Churches together open a wide gap to tyranny as M. Ellis affirms any more then associating of families into Congregations where the irregularities and miscarriages even in their particular houses are reproveable and censâ—rable is a spoiling of families of their liberties and a tyrannizing over them The actual union of a Congregation and the constant near inspection of the Officers over the the particular families will more in the eye of reason intrench upon family-liberties and call them oftner to censure then the habitual 〈◊〉 of the whole body or association of Churches remote who can when they meet which is but seldom handle only matters of joint concernment and of presumed male administration brought to them by complaint can infringe the liberties of those Congregations And if the Church in general be a society to all its members to which there belong certain common rights and priviledges as spiritual food the Word and Sacraments as M. Ellis confesseth why not spiritual physick also which is as necessary Obj. The whole world is one humane society under God the creatour and governour thereof 1 Chron. 29 11. All that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine thine is the Kingdom O Lord and thou art exalted as head above all And yet this makes them not one Kingdom politically no not habitually but they are distinct Kingdoms notwithstanding they have the same head and the same Law of nature common to them all And therefore the identity of the head and Laws of the Church-Catholike are not sufficient to make them one Ecclesiastical visible though but habitual Kingdom or body Ans There is not parratio For first the laws of nature are not one entire explicite body of written Laws as Christs Laws for his visible Church are but internal and invisible written in the
heart only and that but dimly and not apprehended by all in all the parts thereof alike through ignorance rudenesse barbarism or evil customes Secondly There are no Officers of the whole world as it is a society directed by the internal Law of nature but so there are of the visible Church and Therefore the visible Church is more then a society it is Christs external political Kingdom Thirdly There are several chief governours over the several Kingdoms of the world which are Gods vicegerents and Gods annointed ones in their Kingdoms and written municipal laws belonging to every Kingdom distinct from other Kingdoms and priviledges proper to the several Kingdoms wherein the subjects of other Kingdoms partake not But Christ hath set no such several supream annointed ones over the several Churches nor permitted the several Churches to make any different laws from his nor from those laws which are common to the whole Church And the priviledges of the Church are common to all the members of the several Churches and they have freedom to communicate together in the holy Ordinances whereever they dwell Fourthly The Law of nature is given by God as an invisible Creator the Laws of the Church are given by Christ a God man as a Mediator As he is God he hath an essential right to be governour of angels and men and all other creatures but as Mediatour he hath a donative Kingdom of grace and is a political head of an external visible Kingdom which is but one Fifthly All mankinde are not entred into one body by one external instituted sign badge enrowlment and initial seal not are entred into one explicit actual Covenant nor make an explicit actual profession of subjection to the same God or to the same systeme of written Laws And therefore that parallel which these two reverend Ministers M. Allen and M. Shepard whom I love and reverence much in the Lord endeavour to draw between mankinde and the Oecumenical Church in their Defence unto the nine questions or positions p. 79. will not suit and agree in all things 6. Yet as all men are one society though they want Officers as such yet are they bound to combine even from that internal union to preserve themselves and maintain the Law of nature Suppose there were some circumcelliones or some conjurers that sought to destroy mankinde in general not because they are of this or that Kingdom upon some particular quarrel but because they are men or that endeavoured to poison and infect the air or let in the sea to drown the earth or take away the light of the Sun if such things were possible or any kinde of wilde beast should multiply that would destroy all mankinde then all mankinde setting aside their particular immunities combinations Laws yea and quarrels ought and would unite themselves as men to preserve mankinde and oppose such common enemies of mankinde Forreign Nations will combine to vindicate Jus Gentium if it be violated All Nations combine against Pirates notwithstanding particular distinctions and oppositions yea so far as mens positive laws are general as the civil Law reacheth far over many Kingdoms if there be any oppositions or obstructions that hinder the exercise thereof for common good all that submit themselves thereunto would notwithstanding their particular distinctions joyn together to remove the same Much more then ought there to be an union and combination between the several parts of the Church which hath the same head and King over the whole of our own nature who hath given us one systeme of written laws and but one charter for the whole and made Officers for the good of the whole enduing them with an habitual power of office to administer all his Ordinances in any part of the Church upon a call And if they could meet together they might actually teach and rule the whole Church as one Congregation as M Ellis granteth and because they cannot so meet yet by the same reason if a great part of them meet together the Elders set over them may teach and rule them joyntly together as well as severally asunder For the greater number of Churches being considered as combined and consociated parts of the whole bear the same relation in a proportion to the lesse that the greater number in the same Congregation do to the lesse and therefore if the major part in the Congregational Eldership shall overrule the lesse by their votes so by proportion shall the greater number of any greater Presbytery whether Classical Provincial or National c. being in actual consociation and combination overrule the lesse if they dissent But because there are so many superstitions errours and heresies in the Asian African European and American Churches as M. A. and M. S. in their defence p 92. do take notice of which book I confesse it was mine unhappinesse not to hear of until this tractate of mine was transcribed for the presse and who have dealt exceeding candidly upon this question and seem to yield the fairest concessions toward the universality unity integrality and priority of the whole Church in some respects of reason pag. 77. though not so much as is contended for yet I say for these things sake I should be very tender in defining as the case now standeth what Churches or how farre the visible Churches may with convenience or safety enter into actual combination Quest 2. lest the truths of God or the liberties of the more sound and pure Churches should be prejudiced thereby The second Question I come now to handle the predicate of my Question which I may well call a second Question and that is Which of these two Churches is Prima or first and which Secundaria or secondary Sect. 1. BEfore I answer I desire it may be remembred that the comparison is not between the invisible and the visible Church but between the visible Catholike Church and the particular visible Churches And then I answer I conceive the Church-Catholike visible is priâ—â—a and the particular Churches are secundariae and in that sense orâ—ae as being ministerially converted and admitted by it But for our better understanding of this priority I shall first set down what kinde of priority this is and what not I doe not mean a priority of time as if the Church-Catholike should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 antiquius quid and yet the Evangelical Church was first set up in time before there were any divisions into particular Churches but now it is divided the members that are born in the several Congregations enter into the general and particular Churches simul tempore though not ratione naturei As a freeman in London takes up his freedom of the City 〈◊〉 of such a â—all or company at once But those that are born in it and converted to it finde the Church-Catholike already constituted before them even in time Also I do not mean in regard of constitution of the whole political Kingdom of Christ by
aggregation and combination as M. Hooker understands me for the particular Congregations must exist before they can be combined and aggregated Neither do I 〈◊〉 in regard of operation for now the Church is constituted and divided into particular combinations the particular Churches are first in their ordinary operations And yet the Evangelical Church did put forth operations at first before any such divisions and without any reference to them But positively I mean the Church-Catholike is before the particular 1. Intentione divinâ in Gods intention as Nature intends first the whole man and not any part of man although the parts are in some sense before the whole in consideration for the whole is made up of them 2. Institutione divinâ in regard of Gods institution God did first institute the whole by one Charter Covenant and systeme of Laws and the particular Congregations secondarily for convenient communication of persons and transactions of businesse Go teach all Nations was the first Commission after Christs resurrection 3. Donatione divinâ for the Ordinances and priviledges of the Church were first given to the whole and secondarily to the particular Congregations as the priviledges of any Kingdom and Corporation are 4. The Church-Catholike is prior dignitate in dignity a Kingdom is of more dignity and honour then any particular town and a city then any street or ward The whole hath more dignity then any part Yea and I may say also in authority for the authority of the whole is greater in divers respects then of the parts 5. Perfectione for the perfection of the whole is made up of the perfection of the parts a whole Kingdom of the parts of it and any whole comprizeth the perfection of the parts of it a particular street or ward is an imperfect incompleat thing and not consistent alone but as a part in reference to the whole and as a member in reference to the whole body The particulars may have the perfection of parts and some be more perfect then others but the whole is most perfect and the perfections of the parts concurre in the perfection of the whole 6. Entitivè or essentialiter the Church-Entitive is before the Organical for the organical is made up of the members of the Church Entitive and the Church-Entitive affords materials to the Church-organical And in this respect the particular Churches are properly ortae arising out of the Entitive and so also is the whole Church-organical for it ariseth out of the combination of the particular Congregations and both it and they consist only of members of the Church Entitive And herein I consent unto M. Parker in this sense but not that the habitual power of Elders should arise from the particular Congregations to act in Synods but only in regard of their evocation and exciting of their power to act in reference to them pro hic nunc 7. Causalitate efficientis Ministerialis For the Church-Catholike already converted is a means of converting more unto them as opportunity is afforded and of admitting ministerially into the Church-Catholike both entitive first and then organical both private members and also Officers into their habitual office 8. Cognitione sive noscibilitate perfectâ For though this or that Congregation be proprior ad sensum and so notior respectu nostri which is cognitione confusâ yet the Church-Catholike is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noscibilior simpliciter Distincta enim cognitio sequitur ordinem naturae in se in mente benè dispositâ As universalia sunt notiora minus universalibus species infima individâ—â—â— The Kingdom of England as a Kingdom is propius ad 〈◊〉 and so noscibilius distinctâ ratione but particular towns are propiora ad sensum The notion of an English man comes first upon a subject of this Kingdom before of a Suffolk man A man may have knowledge of England as a Kingdom and be well skilled in the polity laws and priviledges thereof and yet by sense have but little or no knowledge of particular Towns so a man may know much of the Church as Christs Kingdom and be well skilled in the Laws Ordinances and priviledges thereof and yet know but few particular Churches So that the priority of the Church-Catholike visible in respect of the particulars is like the priority of a Kingdom to the parts of it or of a Corporation in respect of the parts of it which is not meant in a mathematical or techtonical consideration for so the particular buildings are prima and the whole city ortae yet so M. Hooker understood me in his acute arguing about integrale Surv. pag. 255. But in regard of intention institution donation of priviledges dignity perfection essence instrumental efficiency and perfect cognition of it There is also a difference between ortum secundarium for every ortum is secundarium but every secundarium is not ortum But I principally meant secundarium or secundary yet in regard the particular Churches arise and spring out of the Church-Entitive and are converted and admitted ministerially by the Church-Catholike already in being they may truly be said to be ortae and the Catholike prima First Sect. 2. All the names that are in the Scripture given unto the Church-visible agree primarily to the Church-Catholike and secondarily to particular Congregations As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are first considered as called out from Idols and devoted to be the Lords people before we can be considered of this or that Congregation We know they were given even to the Jews before ever any Congregational Evangelical Churches had existence Act. 7.38 The Church in the wildernesse And the Jews are frequently called the Lords people So the Church is called the house of the living God 1 Tim. 3.15 And the ground and pillar of truth Gods vineyard Joh. 15.1 Wherein branches in Christ bearing no fruit are cut off Christs sheepfold Joh. 10.16 Barn-floor Mat. 3.12 Drag-net Wheat-field Kingdom of heaven Mat. 13.37 38. A great house wherein are vessels even of dishonour 2 Tim. 2.20 These names cannot be limited or appropriated to any particular Congregation but are first true of the whole Church and of every particular Church as a part thereof Congregationes particulares sunt quasi partes similares Ecclesiae Catholicae atque adeò nomen naturam ejus participant Ames med l. 1. c. 32. s 4. 2. That is the primary Church to which the Covenant Promises Laws and Priviledges of the Church do primarily belong but the Covenant Promises Laws and Priviledges do primarily belong to the Church-Catholike Therefore c. The minor I prove because the Covenant of grace and salvation by Christ and the first Evangelical promise that ever was made in the world was to Adam and Eve representing all mankinde and therefore consequently the whole Church of God This was before there was any division or distinction made of Churches into Jew and Gentile National or Congregational Again the main commission for gathering
Corporations and yet this hinders not the power of Parliaments or Officers called thereto to dispense justice to divers Counties yea to the whole Kingdom and to relieve such as are wronged in their particular associations Suppose an Apostle should have preached in a city and converted but a few haply most or all of them women as it was Pauls lot to preach to a company of women Act. 16.13 so that they could not be brought into an Organical Congregation could it be conceived that they though baptized were still without And were not their children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if any of them should miscarry in their judgements or practices had Paul nothing to doe to censure them because they were not congregated and combined by a particular Covenant in a Church-way as some term it but remain unfixed members of the Church-Catholike If they be liable to censure then doth discipline belong to the Church-Catholike primarily Nay let that be supposed for illustration sake which Paul Gal. 1.8 supposeth of himself that he or any of the Apostles should have apostatized and either preached another Messias or lived scandalously or proved a persecutour had Christ left the Church no key to binde him because he was a general Officer and a fixed member of no particular Congregation might not the rest of the Apostles excommunicate him then that censure would be Catholike without respect to any particular Congregation The Ordinances of Discipline were first given to the Church-Catholike because the keys were first given to the Apostles who were general Pastours and therefore the keys are Catholike Also the censures past in one Congregation reach the whole Church-Catholike visible and are binding to the whole and their absolution reacheth as far and â—ets the person into an habitual right to communicate any where again as hath been shewed before That which belongeth to every part of a similar body that primarily belongs to the whole but Discipline belongeth to every part of the Church-Catholike which is a similar body and therefore it primarily belongs to the whole If the keys be not Catholike then this inconvenience will follow that a visible beleever obtaining baptism before he be a fixed member may either through pretence of scrupulosity or perigrination factorship or frequent removing or refusal to joyn with any particular Congregation though never so heretical or scandalous shall thereby escape all censures because the keys are only particular and no body can inflict any censure upon him and yet being a visible member under the seal of the covenant shall converse with other Christians and haply upon his habitual right hear the Word or haply be admitted to the Lords table Which is as if a Subject of England because he will be a fixed inhabitant in no Town but wandring up and down drinking thieving and whoring thereby should escape all civil censures It is common to all polities that every County Corporation or division that have power to administer justice according to the â—ane of the policy shall apprehend malefactors within their 〈◊〉 whereever the malefactor hath his constant dwelling and either punish them themselves or turn them over to such aâ— are called to administer justice to the whole and otherwise outrages cannot be avoided or punished which are committed by men in places remote from their dwellings The like power must be allowed in Christs Ecclesiastical policy that the visible members of Christs Church may either be censured by the particular Church in whose limits they offend or be sent to the Church to which they belong which the offended Church hath no power by civil compulsion to do or that Church i◠〈◊〉 the off haply in another Countrey or haply they belong to none or else there must be a combined Eldership that may censure such persons Though civil limits be appointed for cohabitation of the members of particular Congregations and for maintenance of their Ministers and providing for the poor and 〈◊〉 essential to the Church but the members are to be accounted as members of that Congregation every where and the 〈…〉 in travel with any of their Congregation ought to watch over them and admonish them as their Elders and they to obey there whereever they become which sheweth that external limits bound not the Ministerial power as it doth the civil power of a Maâ—or or Constable yet there must be some kinde of proportion holden with civil polities for the censuring of wandring Christians else may hereticks and scandalous Christians come from forreign parts and do much hurt and yet avoid all censures Sect. 3. Thirdly Christs Offices are first intended for and executed on the Church-Catholike here below He is a King Priest and 〈◊〉 primarily in respect of the whole and but secondarily in respect of a particular Congregation or member Gods aim in redemnation was to redeem the whole primarily and secondarily the particulars God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Sonne c. i. e. not the Jew only but the Gentile also And so in the application of that redemption as Christ is a Priest be reconcileth and intercedeth for all the elect as a Prophet he teacheth all as a King he ruleth all primarily and particulars secondarily So is it also in Christs external Kingdom as well as his internal As an earthly King is indeed King of Thomas and John c. but not primarily but secondarily as they are members of his Kingdom And the natural head is indeed head to the little finger and toe but not primarily but as they are parts of the whole body whereof it is head so Christ is a mystical head of the whole Church primarily and secondarily of the particular parts contained in and under the whole Fourthly The signs that difference the true Church from a false do not primarily belong to a particular Congregation but to the Church-Catholike visible viz. Profession of the true faith administration of Gods true Ordinances for therein the whole Church agree and is thereby distinguished from those that are without not from those that are within These are no notes to know this or that particular Church by from another for they are common to the universal Church they distinguish them not among themselves but from the general common opposite the heathen or the grosse heretick A man being led into a vault where were the skuls of many dead men and understanding that Alexanders skull was there desired his guide to shew him that his guide told him it was that skull with the hollow eye-holes and grisly nose and futures crossing the brampan and when the man replyed that they had all so yea saith his guide there is no difference between Kings and other mens skuls when they are dead So if any man should ask which is the Church of Ipswich Deâ—ham c. it were a folly to say it is the Church where the word of God is preached and Sacraments administred and that professe Jesus to be crucified
dead and buried risen again and ascended into heaven c. for so do all the Church-Catholike but we must give other notes to distinguish any of them for these are not distinctive because common That which is primary to any thing is distinctive to that thing but that which is secondary and common is not distinctive from other particulars of the like kinde or from other parts of a similar integral Fifthly All the members of the particular Churches are members of the Church-Catholike yea that relation belongs first unto them If they be born within the pale of the Church they have federal holinesse and are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not because members of this or that Congregation but because born of parents within the general external Covenant and so within the Church-Catholike If they be converted from heathens they are not first converted into this or that particular Church but converted first into the Church-Catholike and then secondarily admitted members of this or that particular Congregation after they be baptized A man may dwell it one City and hear the word of God by accident in another city and thereby be converted but he is not converted to be a member of the Church where he was converted but into the Church-Catholike So that particular Congregations are made up of members of the Catholike and therefore most properly in that sense are said to be Ortae For such a convert may joyn himself after his conversion to what Congregation he pleaseth to inhabit among If a man comes into a Parish that is an heathen he is not a member of that particular Church though he shall be a civil member of the Town because be is not a member of the Church-Catholike but if he be a Christian then he is a member of that particular Church where he resideth or fit so to be and ought not to be denied admission or communion if no just exception lieth against him though he had never been a member of any other Congregation The particular companies in London are made up only of free-men that are joyned together in some particular body or society belonging to such or such a Hall now the first notion that comes upon any such persons or companies is that they are free-men of London and secondarily that they are distinct from other free-men by being of this or that particular company belonging to such a Hall So it is for all Churches first of all the members are conceived to be free of the Church-Catholike and secondarily distinct by their societies in this or that particular Assembly And though haply this similitude holdeth not in every thing as the not removing from one company to another and being received in there because he is a free-man yet it is free for any Christ to change his particular relation from one Congregation to another because he is a Christian and takes not up his first freedom into a particular Congregation or company but into the Catholike They are made members of the whole body and kingdom of Christ by conversion to the faith and initiated by the Sacrament of Baptism but are secondarily made members of a particular Congregation by cohabitation or consociation He that is free of one Corporation may not thereupon remove to another and set up his trade as a free-man there because they are constituted by several charters but the whole Church-Catholike hath but one charter and by that a Christian is free in any Ecclesiastical Corporation whereever he please to inhabit and may not by them be inhibited As he that was free of Rome was free whereever he became in all the Romane Empire Suppose a man had abundance of sheep as Abraham Isaac and Jacob and Job who had 14000. and these sheep had all one brand of the owners upon them and these sheep were divided into several flocks unister several shepheards in several sheep-walks of the same owners according to his appointment the primary consideration of any of these sheep or flocks is not that they are under such a keeper in such a sheep-walk but the first consideration of them is they are such a mans sheep bearing his brand and fed by his servants on his ground and then the more particular and secondary consideration and notion is that they are under such a particular shepheard in such a walk And the like may be said in a civil respect the first consideration of a man is that he is an English man and so a subject of this kingdom and the secondary that he is a Suffolk man or an Ipswich man So the first consideration in a spiritual respect of a man or a Congregation is that they are the Lords people that they belong to Christ and are his subjects born or converted to him fed and nourished and ruled by his Ordinances and Officers and then the particular secondary notion is that they are fed and ruled by such Elders in such a place or society It is an usual similitude on all hands to compare the Church to the Sea or Ocean which though it be one yet as it washeth upon this or that Countrey receiveth the name and distinction of the Germane Spanish Irish or British Seas And so when it puts in at any creek because it is continuous with the Sea we call it the Sea And we say the sea comes up at Harwich Ipswich Mâ—â—itras Colchoster now it were absurd for any man to think that the particular Seas were the prime Seas and the main is Mâ—râ—secundarinus or ortum Or because the name Sea iâ— indâ—â—â—ed to this or that arm or Creek that therefore that should monopolize the name Sea to it self that there should be no Sea but such Creeks or that any such Creeks should arrogate the came and priviledges of the Sea first to themselves and leave them but secondarily to the main So it is for particular Congregations which have the name and priviledges of the Church indulged to them as second or third hand because they are members and similar parts of the whole to usurp and challenge the name and priviledges given by God to the Church-Catholike primarily to themselves and leave them secondarily to the Church-Catholike Sect. 4. Sixthly The Ministers are primarily Ministers of the Church-Catholike secondarily of this or that particular flock or Congregation and therefore the Catholike is the prime Church And this appears thus That Church to which the donation of the Ministry was first made is the first subject thereof but that was the Church-Catholike Therefore c. For proof hereof see Mat. 28.19 and 1 Cor. 12.28 29. God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers Now this Church was the Church-Catholike and not any particular Congregation for it is the Church to which God gave Apostles Note also from hence that the same Church to which God gave Apostles and Prophets to the same he gave Teachers also though not with general actual power as to the
the Congregation That by Baptism we are admitted into the Church I think is without doubt for if persons baptized be not members of the visible Church then the seal of the Covenant is administred to those that are and remain oâ—â— of the Church and so were no initial seal which were absurd to say M. Ball in his Catechism hath this passage Baptism is a Sacrament of our ingrafting into Christ communion with him and entrance into the Church for which he citeth Mat 28.19 Act. 8.38 And afterwards explains himself It doth saith he solemnly signifie and seal their ingrafting into Christ and confirm that they are acknowledged members of the Church and entred into it And that we are thereby admitted members not of a particular Congregation but the Church-Catholike appears because we are baptized into one body 1 Cor. 12.13 And this appears further because he that is baptized in one Congregation is baptized all over the world and is not to be re-baptized but is taken as a member of the Church whereever he becomes See before Chap. 6. Now that baptizing is an act of office appears Joh. 1.33 He that sent me to baptize And Go teach all Nations and baptize them c. Mat. 28. was the substance of the Apostles Commission And though Paul 1 Cor. 1.17 saith Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel yet that is meant not principally for he was sent also to baptize else he might not have done it which we reade he did And that by an act of this office we are baptized into the Church-Catholike appears because John Baptist baptized all Jerusalem Judea and all the region round about Iordan And the Disciples of Christ made and baptized more Disciples then Iohn and that without any relation to any particular Congregations which had it been necessary or had baptism been ordained in reference to particular Congregations they could have combined them into So Peter caused Cornelius and his friends to be baptized Act. 10.48 but no mention is made of any Congregation into which they were baptized And Philip baptized the Eunuch but not into any particular Congregation Into what Congregation did Ananias baptize Paul Act. 9.18 Or how can it appear that Ananias was an Evangelist or any extraordinary Officer he is called a Disciple at Damascus it is probable he was one of the Elders there but that Paul was ever a fixed member of any particular Congregation it appears not That which is answered to this is that they which administred Baptism so indefinitely were extraordinary general Officers which are now ceased But this salves it not for if the immediate right to Baptism c. comes to the receiver by being a member of a particular instituted Congregation as M. Norton and M. A. and M. S. in Def. Ch. 4. pag. 73. tels us then John Baptist Christs Disciples Philip and Ananias though he had been an Evangelist administred it to such as had no actual and immediate right to receive it Indeed the answer implyeth a more large actual extensive power in the administrers either to have constituted new Churches or to administer in any constituted Churches but it gives not them power to administer any Ordinance of God to such as had no right thereto nor power to the receivers to receive it without actual right in an undue order It gives them not jus in re who had in themselves only jus ad rem as their distinction is And the proof brought p. 76. out of Act. 5.14 is as I conceive mistaken Their words are these Beleevers were added first they were beleevers standing in that spiritual relation to Christ and his whole body and then added to the Church by visible combination But it is not said they were added to the Church but added to the Lord and it were incongruous to gather thence that they were first beleevers and after that were added to the Lord by a second act seeing their adding to the Lord was by beleeving and that which added them to the Lord the head and King added them to the body and Kingdom And whereas they say that Justification and Adoption c. flow immediatly from internal union with Christ but instituted Ordinances and Priviledges mediatly and in such an order as Christ hath in wisedom ordained and the nature of visible government and Ordinances of Christ necessarily require pag. 76. If they mean by it being members of particular Congregations then would I know whether hearing the word publikely preached or read or joyning in publike singing or in keeping a day of publike thanksgiving or fasting or making rows or taking oaths which are instituted Ordinances may not be permitted to any but such as are members of particular Congregations The Apostles carried about one with them whom they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Minister Act. 13.5 who was no Apostle and he baptized for them into the Church-Catholike and when a sufficient number were converted and baptized then followed the particular relation of a particular Congregation by ordaining Officers to take the particular care over them So Tychicus Col. 4.7 is called a beloved brother and faithful Minister and fellow-servant in the Lord. And Eph. 6.21 he hath the same stile given him Certainly he could not be a peculiar Minister to both those distant Churches and haply he was so to neither of them if we may give any credit to Dorotheus who saith he was Bishop of Chalcedon in Bithynia Apollos baptized at Corinth 1 Cor. 3.4 and yet was no Apostle but a Minister and steward of the mysteries of God as well as they 1 Cor. 4.1 Hence is that distinction of Iunius in his Animadversions on Bellarm. c. 7. nor 7. Alia est electio sive vocatio communis quâ vir bonus pius doctus aptus absolutè eligitur ad ministerium verbi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alia particularis sive singularis quâ ad ministerium singulariter huic vel illi Ecclesiae praeficiendus eligitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Scripture alwaies calling the beleevers in one city one Church even Ierusalem though there were many thousands yea myriads i. e. many ten thousands of beleeving Jews therein as Iames tels Paul Act. 21.20 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were all probably of Ierusalem as appears first because they were not such as could bear any witnesse against Paul but by hearsay they are informed of thee But the Jews disperst amongst the Gentiles having seen and heard Paul could have testified of their own knowledge and would not be blinded with Pauls present conformity And secondly because they only or Ierusalem could receive satisfaction by Pauls conformity to the Law at Ierusalem at that time and not the others Also the holy Ghost calling the Elders of those cities the Elders of the Church in communi it leaveth it uncertain to me whether the several Elders were fixed over the particular Congregations or taught and ruled in communi as the Ministers do now in
vipers and yet addeth I indeed baptize you with water Matth. 3.7 11. Indeed they confessed their sins and it is like promised amendment and so will the worst in our Congregations doe though they never perform it The ground therefore upon which this supposal is to be must not be any mans personal particular judgement built upon such evidence as may convince the understanding of a judicious experienced Minister or Christian that the persons are truly godly but an Ecclesiastical judgement in foro Ecclesiae raised upon such grounds as the Ministers of God directed by God have formerly gone upon which conditions if they finde they are not to deny administration of the seals unto which are the seals of the visible not invisible Church The same causes and rules are of admission that are of ejection vice versâ and as no man is to be censured and cast out of the visible Church because the Elders particular judgement makes them think the man hath not the true power of godlinesse and grace of God in sincerity except he commit that which deserves an Ecclesiastical censure so neither is admission to be denyed to any man that desires to dedicate himself unto God and will promise and professe subjection to Christ in all his Ordinances though it be suspected by judicious Christians that he hath not the true work of grace in his heart The Church of God in their Ecclesiastical judgement censureth only ignorance errour and scandal A Scholar that is admitted into a school is not admitted because he is doctus but ut fit doctus and if he will submit to the rules of the school and apply himself to learn it is enough for his admission the like may be said of the Church visible which is Christs school Iohn Baptist did not in his conscience think they had all actually really and compleatly repented and reformed themselves whom he baptized but he baptized them unto repentance Mat. 3.11 and they by receiving the same bound themselves to endeavour the practice thereof It were a sad case for Ministers if they were bound to admit none or administer the Lords Supper to none but such as were truly godly or that they judged in their conscience to be so or were bound to eject all that they judged were not so I fear the Elders in New-England do not in their consciences judge so of all their members It is not confederation that can give right to Ordinances if by Gods laws they ought not to have them There is a great difference between the visible and invisible Church the rules of the one will not serve for the other No Minister could ever administer the Sacrament without sin if he ought not to administer it to any but such as are truly godly neither hath God given us any rules to judge certainly of the truth of grace in any man but the most judicious Divine in the world may be deceived by a cunning hypocrite And to salve this by saying we ought to think in our conscience that they are godly is vain for as we have no such rule to go by in Gods word so it is very harsh to passe an Ecclesiastical censure upon that ground and the like may be said of denying admission thereupon and it is also a very doubtful rule for a Minister to go by for some men judge very well of him that others judge but slieghtly of and there will be a division among people in their communicating together according to their several judgements one of another still suspecting that they have fellowship with unbeleevers and both Ministers and peoples judgement very very much concerning the same man according to the variety of his carriage there will sometimes be hopes and sometimes fears but Ecclesiastical judgement is not guided by such uncertain variable rules neither in admission nor ejection but upon clear evidence and palpable grounds which must reach all and may be clearly known and proved There are some I finde that distinguish between the qualifications of the members of the Church-Catholike visible and of the members of particular instituted Churches For the former viz. the general membership they acknowledge that these forenamed qualifications will be sufficient and therefore will admit such and their children to baptism which say they is an Ordinance of the Church-Catholike visible and every Minister being a Minister of the Church-Catholike visible besides his particular relation to his particular Congregation may say they administer baptism to them though they be members of no instituted Churches but to make a member of a particular instituted Congregation they require evident signs of true grace and a consent and submission to the Ordinances of Discipline dispensed by the particular Officers But this distinction of qualifications I finde not grounded upon the word of God nor that any should be fit to be members of the Church-Catholike visible and not to be members of a particular visible Congregation If they be brought into Christs sheepfold they are fit to have some of Christs shepheards to take inspection of them if they be admitted into Christs Kingdom City Family they are fit to be under the regiment of some of his Officers If the Ordinances of worship yea the seal of the Covenant be administred to them I see no ground that these should be freed from the Ordinances of Discipline who in all likelihood will stand in most need thereof The great Objection which M. Hooker urgeth against this assertion that the particular Churches are ortae and whereby he would prove the Church-Catholike to be Orta is because if the Church-Catholike be an integral it is made up of the aggregation of the particulars oritur ex illis And every Integrum is in respect of the parts Symbolum effecti And the parts must have a being before the whole can result out of them Answ My main intention in the Question was to prove the Church-Catholike to be the prime Church in those respects which are enumerated in the explication of this part or the predicate of the Question to which I referre you and that the particular Churches are secondary in the same senses also And for the particular Churches being Orta I have already both in the explication of the terms of the Question Chap. 1. Sect. 4. and in this second part expressed my meaning thereof Sect. 1. c. My meaning is not in regard of the aggregation and combination of the particular Churches to make one aggregated combined integral for so indeed the Church-Catholike puts on the notion of orta But I meant it first in regard the particular Congregations are made up of and arise out of the members of the Church-Entitive or of visible beleevers which are the matter thereof And whereas it is objected against this that that Church is no political body haply never had the sight or knowledge one of another never entred into agreement of government one with another and are wholly destitute according to reason and
or Integral 9. That the keys of Discipline are Catholike as well as of Doctrine 10. That the Church-Catholike is one similar body if considered as Entitive the members are similar parts of it if as organical the particular Churches are similar parts of it 11. The Promises Priviledges and Ordinances of worship and discipline belong primarily to the Church-Catholike 12. That the Church-Catholike is constituted by one Covenant Charter and Systeme of Divine Laws 13. That the Priviledges and Ordinances of the Church arise not from the Nature of it but from the covenant donation and institution of Christ 14. That the Church-Catholike is the prime Church 15. That the Church-Catholike visible is of greater dignity then the particular Churches 16. That the Church-Catholike visible is more august and of more large authority then the particular though the authority differs not in kinde 17. That the Church-Catholike is of greater perfection then the particular Churches 18. That the Church-Catholike visible is ministerially an instrument to convey the Nature Priviledges and Ordinances of the Church to such as are added thereunto 19. That the whole Church-Catholike is the primary and adequate object suo genere of Christs Offices and the particular Churches but as parts thereof Joh. 3.16 20. That the Notes and Signs of the true Church belong first to the Church-Catholike visible and therefore are distinctive to that only 21. That the Church-Catholike visible hath an existence accidents and operations of its own as it is Catholike 22. That the Church-Catholike visible hath an head or governour over it and but one head even Jesus Christ who is very Man as well as God 23. That though Christ be the only supream head and ruler of his Church yet hath it immediate rulers over it under Christ 24. That the unity of the Church-Catholike requireth not a meeting of the whole body together at any time Concerning particular Churches 1. That the particular Churches are made up of the members of the Church-Catholike Entitive 2. That the particular Churches organized and all visible beleevers make up the Church-Catholike Organical by aggregation and the particulars are inferiour thereunto 3. That the particular divisions of the Church-Catholike visible for convenient enjoyment of publike Ordinances have the name Church and the Priviledges and Ordinances as far as they are capable of them secondarily in consideration 4. That the particular Churches being similar parts of the whole Church having no essential specifical differences are to be distinguished by accidental differences and circumstances as their limits of place c. though they be heterogeneal to them 5. Many Congregations may be in the same community of discipline and be ruled by their Elders in communi by coordination and so be called one Church National Provincial or Presbyterial 6. If the particular Churches claim power of dispensing all the Ordinances of Christ by vertue of the general Charter Covenant and donation they being parts of the Church then much more may the whole Church-Catholike for which they were primarily intended and made 7. The greater the parts of the Church-Catholike be and the more united by combitation and coordination the stronger they be and the smaller the divisions be the weaker 8. The division of the Church Catholike into small parcels to stand alone by themselves without coordination is dangerous 9. Yet necessity in regard of distance of place c. may cause a particular Church to be Independent and stand alone in regard of actual external consociation or combination 10. The necessity of an explicit Covenant as the essential form whereby the particular Church is constituted implyeth a denial of all other Churches to be true that are not so constituted because they must want the essential form 11. The ordinary and constant operations of the Officers of the Church in dispensation of Christs Ordinances are in the particular Churches primarily 12. Any particular Congregation may fail apostatize or be dissolved and cease but should the Church-Catholike be reduced into so narrow limits and the being thereof be reserved therein and it sustain the notion of the Church-Catholike God would not suffer it in such a case to fail or cease for then the whole must cease also Concerning the publike Officers of the Church 1. Every Minister is an Officer of the Church-Catholike visible and that relation is primary to him yet the particular relation he stands in to a particular Congregation giveth him a more immediate especial call and charge to administer the Ordinances of God constantly to them 2. Any single Minister by vertue of his office hath power ministerially to admit a member into the Church-Catholike visible if he be fit 3. Although the election of a Minister to a particular Congregation be an act of liberty in the people yet his mission is from Christ primarily and ministerially by the Presbytery 4. He doth not administer the Ordinances of God in the name of the Congregation as their servant but as the servant of Christ As a Mayor in a Corporation though chosen by the people yet executeth his office in the Kings name 5. If he administreth any Ordinances out of his own Congregation he doth it not as a gifted brother but by vertue of his office 2 Cor. 5.20 And the like may be said of their dispensation of Ordinances to members of other Congregations that come to their Congregations 6. Although the particular flock over which a Minister was set be dissolved yet he ceaseth not to be a Minister because the Church to which he bare first relation is not dissolved which is the Catholike 7. The Elders of several particular Congregations as they may exercise the keys of their office divisim in their several Congregations so they may exercise them conjunctim in combinations if they be called thereunto Concerning private members 1. Particular converts are first converted into the Church-Catholike Entitive and secondarily conjoyned into particular consociations for the more oppurtune enjoyment of Ordinances actually and constantly 2. Every member of a particular Congregation is a member of the Church-Catholike Entitive and that relation doth primarily belong unto him 3. External profession of the true faith and subjection to Gods Ordinances is enough to make a man capable of being a member of the Church-Catholike visible and so also of a particular Congregation quoad externam formam 4. By Baptism members are visibly and ministerially admitted into the Church-Catholike visible 5. By excommunication rightly administred an offender is cast out of the Church-Catholike visible as much as out of a particular Congregation 6. Federal holinesse belongs to none primarily because born of members of a particular Congregation but of the Church-Catholike 7. They that are only in the Church-Catholike visible are not without in the Apostles sense 8. Children of beleeving parents have right to Baptism though their parents were not members of any particular Congregation and are debarred from their due if denyed it 9. Every visible beleever is
suasive that is no more then a few private men may do yea one man or woman may counsel advise and perswade By M. Ellis's opinion Councels and Synods being void of all authority are but as a company of private Christians met together to advise one with another how to act in their own Congregations where only saith he they are in office it may be an act of those that are in office but not as Officers so that in that act they are to be considered as private members who by such consultation take or give private advice how to act as officers where they are Officers Which is no otherwise then if in these times of trouble and danger a company of peti-constables should meet occasionally or by appointment together at a market-town and there consult together how to act most commodiously and uniformly in their several Parishes in the pressing of Souldiers or gathering Assessements or a company of Mayors of several Corparations should meet by appointment at London and there advise together how to order their several Corporations So that a Synod whether Provincial National or Oecumenical can have no power to summon any heretick or scandalous person and if any such should voluntarily come before them or be brought before them by the civil Magistrate that should before their faces blaspheme the whole Trinity or be convicted of Sodomy yea though any of their own members should curse God himself or be convicted of a present act of whoredom or of sorcery they have no power to censure him Ecclesiastically but fraternally admonish him and send him back to his own Congregation to be censured and they themselves only go thither as witnesses against him because they are there by this opinion out of office and all censures belong to the particular Elderships as particular But suppose now this heretick or scandalous person being departed haply from the Congregation where formerly he lived or that Congregation being dissolved be a fixed member of no Congregation as ten thousands of visible Christians i. e. that have received the doctrine of Christ and are under the seal of Baptism may be if particular Churches consist only of such as can give evidence of the work of true grace in themselves shall he remain an entitive member of Christs visible kingdom a gangreened limb a rebel and traitour under the name and notion of a subject and infect the rest of the body and there be no remedy Sect. 4. But as the subject matters that Synods have to deal with are of three sorts so their power and the acts of it which they put forth are of three 〈◊〉 likewise First they are to act in reference to matters of faith i. e. doctrines to be beleeved and embraced and of divine worship i. e. duties of worship to be performed unto God not to coin or frame or adde any new articles of faith or new acts of worship or alter any that God hath instituted but to explain prove and apply those Articles of faith and rules of worship laid down in the word and to confute and declare against the contrary errours heresies and corruptions and the power they exert herein is called dogmatical Secondly they are to act in reference to external order and polity in matters prudential and circumstantial which are determinable by the true light of nature right reason and general rules in the Scripture ◠to set things in order that all things may be done uniformly decently and in order and the power they exert herein is called diatactical Thirdly they are to act in reference to errour heresie schism obstinacy contempt and scandal and to represse them and to censure such persons as are guilty of any of them and are referred over to them and the power they exert herein is called critical This is none other power then the particular Elderships in their several Congregations or Classes may exert in their sphear and precincts with submission to the superiour assemblies and all must be according to the word of God As in the natural body God hath set several senses to act upon the several sensible objects visible audible tactile c. and several faculties in reference to truth and falshood good and evil to discern and embrace the one and avoid the other so in the body Ecclesiastical hath he set several powers in the organs thereof to act diversly according to the occurrent objects and incidents in the Church both in the particular Congregations for the good of them and in greater parts of the body for the good of them and in the whole if convenible for the good of that but because remote parts cannot meet personally and generally in all their Officers therefore that trouble and confusion is avoided by delegation of particular elected choice officers and is but occasionally and pro tempore A ground and pattern of a Synod is laid down Act. 15. and 16. which is acknowledged to be a Synod and warrant for a Synod by reverend M. Cotton in his keys of the kingdom of heaven cha 6. And is called an Oecumenical Councel by Chamier in Panstrat Tom. 2. lib. 10. cap. 8. sect 2. and Whitak cont qu. 6. And generally by our Protestant Divines And is abundantly proved and explained by the London Ministers in their Jus Divinum par 2. chap 14. and 15. to which I referre the reader for satisfaction The occasion of that Synod was an errour broached at Antioch and neighbour-Churches to enforce the observation of the ceremonial Law by all Christians and this was promoted by lying as if they were sent by the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem to preach this doctrine Hereby the Churches were much troubled and in danger to be subverted in their souls This could not be suppressed by the disputes of Barnabas and Paul hereupon the Elders of Antioch decreed and ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Paul and Barnabas and some others should go up to the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem about this question and they submitted to this order there was an authoritative mission and probably members were also sent from Syria and Cilicia for they were involved in the same danger by the same persons Act. 15.23 24 41. But if there were delegates but from two Churches it will justifie delegates from ten or twenty And as the Church of Antioch did not send Paul and Barnabas as extraordinary and infallible and authentical Oracles of God as M. Cotton noteth for then what need the advice and help of Elders that were below them being but ordinary and particular Officers of Ierusalem But as wise and holy guides of the Church who might not only relieve them by some wise counsel and holy order but also set a precedent to succeeding ages how errours and dissentions in Churches might be removed and healed And with Paul and Barnabas they joyned others messengers in the same commission So when this Synod was met the Apostles acted not by their Apostolical infallible transcendent