assertion I intend to satisfie the scrupulous and to put to silence the malicious so also to confirm the consciences of such as are friends and savourers to the right way of Church government Whatsoever is not of faith iâ— sin saith the Apostle yea though it be in a matter otherwise indifferent how much more is it necessary that we halt not in our judgement concerning the government of the Church but walk straight in the plerophory and full assurance of the same from the warrants of the word of God I say againe from the warrants of the word of God for as it is not my meaning to commend this forme because it is Scotlands so I hope assuredly that my Country-men will not dispise Gods Ordinance because it is Scotlands practice but rather follow them in so far as they follow Christ and the Scripture This therefore I pray that thy love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgement that thou maiest approve the things that are excellent Consider what I say and the Lord give thee understanding in all things Amen THE CONTENTS OF the first part of this Treatise CHAP. I. Of the words Elder Lay-Elder Ruling-Elder FOure significations of the word Elder in Scripture Of the nickname of Lay-Elders That the Popish distinction of the Clergie and the Laity ought to be banished Of the name of Ruling-Elders and the reason thereof CHAP. II. Of the function of Ruling-Elders and what sâ—re of officers they be OF the distinction of Pastors Doctors Elders and Deacons Of the behaviour and conuersation of Ruling-Elders Of the distinction of the power of Order and of jurisdiction That the Ruling-Elder his power of jurisdiction is to sit and voice in all the Consistories and Assemblies of the Church That his power of order is to do by way of authority those duties of edification which every Christian is bound to do by way of charity CHAP. III. The first argument for Ruling-Elders taken from the Iewish-Church THat we ought to follow the Jewish Church in such things as they had not for any speciall reason proper to them but as they were an Ecclesiasticall Republike That the Elders among the Jews did sit among the Priests and voice in their Ecclesiasticall Courts according to Baravias own confession but were not theirâ— will Magistrates as he alleadgeth Bilsons objections answered CHAP. IV. The second Argument taken from Math. 18.17 WHat is the meaning of these words Tell the Church Why the Presbytery may be called the Church Our argument from this place for Ruling-Elders CHAP. V. The third Argument taken from Rom. 12.8 THe words Rom. 12.8 expounded That by him that ruâ—eth is meant the Ruling-Elder The objections to the contrary answered CHAP. VI. The fourth Argument taken from 1 Cor. 12.28 THâ—t by governments the Apostle meaneth ruling-Elders Two glosses given by our opposites confuted CHAP. VII The fiâ—st Argument taken from 1 Tim. 5.17 OUr Argument from this place vindicated against â—en false glosses devised by our opposites CHAP. VIII The testimony of Ambrose for Ruling-Elders vindicated NO certain ground alledged against the authority of those Commentaries upon the Epistles ascribed to Ambrose Other answers made by our opposites to the place upon 1 Tim. 5. confuted CHAP. IX Other Testimonies of Antiquitie TEstimonies for Ruling-Elders out of Tertullion Cyprian Epiphanius Bâ—sil Chrysostome Hierome Eusâ—bius Augustine Origen Isidore the first counsell of Tâ—lido Other testimoâ—ies observed by Iustellus and Voetius Bilsons answer confuted CHAP. X. The consent of Protestant Writers and the confession of our opposites for Ruling-Elders CItatâ—ons of sundry Protestant writers to this purpose This truth hath extorted a confession from Wâ—itgist Saravia Sultiffe Camero and M. Io. Wemys of Craigtown CHAP. XI Dr. Fields five arguments against ruling-Elders answered HIs first reason that no foot-step of Ruling-Elders for many hundreth years could be found in any Christian Church answered five waies Footsteps of Ruling-Elders in the Church of England His second reason answered That we ought to judge of the Officers of the Church not from 1 Tim. 3. only but from that and other places compared together His third reason answered by the câ—rtain bounds of the power of Ruling-Elders His fourth reason answered by the distinction of the Ecclesiasticaâ—l Sanedrim of the Iewes from their civill Sanedrim His last reason concerning the names holdeth not CHAP. XII The extravagancies of Whitegift and Saravia in the matter of ruling-Elders THe one alloweth of Ruling-Elders under an Infidell Magistrate but not under a Christian Magistrate The other alloweth of them under a Christian Magistrate but not under an Infidell That Ruling-Elders do not prejudge the power of the civill Magistrate but the Prelacie doth which confuteth Whitegift That Christian Magistrates are not come in place of the Jewish Seniors which confuteth Saravia CHAP. XIII Whether ruling-Elders have the power of decisive voices when they they sit in Presbyteries and Synods THe affirmative proved by nine reasons Two objections to the contrary answered The place 1 Cor. 14.32 explained CHAP. XIIII Of the Ordination of ruling-Elders Of the continuance of their Office and of their maintenance THat the want of the Imposition of hands in Ordination the want of maintainance and the not continuing alwaies in the â—xercise of the Office cannot be prejudiciall to the Office it selfe of Ruling-Elders The Contents of the second Part. CHAP. I. Of Popular government in the Church THat this question is necessary to be clâ—â—red before the question of the authority of Assemblies That Jurisdiction ought not to be 〈◊〉 by all the Members of a Congregaâ—ion proved by 〈◊〉 reasons Objections answered The controversie 〈◊〉 CHAP. II. Of the independencie of the Elderships of particular Congregations Dr. Fields question whâ—ther the power of Jurisdiction belongeth to the Eldership of every Congregation or to a common Presbytery made up out of many Congregations answered by an eigâ—â—fold distinction A thrâ—â—fold conformity of those Parishionall Elderships to the primitive pattern CHAP. III. Of great Presbyteries which some call Classes THree false glossâ—s on 1 Tim. 4.14 confuted That the Apostle 〈◊〉 by the Presbytery aâ— Assembly of Presbyters whereof also Fathers and Councels do speak The warrant and authority of our Classicall Presbyteries declared both by good reasons and by the Apostolicall patern for assertion of the latter it is proved 1. That in many of those Cities wherein the Apostles planted Christian religion there was a greater number of christians then did or could ordinarily assemble into one place 2. That in these Cities there was a plurality of Pastors 3. That yet the whole within the City was one Church 4. That the whole was governed by one common Presbytery From all which a Corollary is drawne for these our Classicall Presbyteries CHAP. IV. Of the authority of Syâ—â—ds provinciall and Nationall THat the power of Jurisdiction in the Synod differeth from the power of jurisdiction in the Presbyterie The power of Jurisdiction
dead in sinnes to be meant but holy men who being indued with faith in God and walking in his obedience God authorising them and the Church his Spouse chusing and calling them undertake the government thereof that they may labour to the conservation and edification of the same in Christ saith Iunius A ruling Elder should pray for the Spirit and gifts of his calling that hee may doe the duties of his calling and not bee like him that played the Souldan but a Souter hee must doe his office neither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and pro forma hee himselfe being Parcus Deorum caltor infrequens nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doing all through contention and strife about particulars Si duo de nostras tollas pro nomina rebus praelia I may say Iurgia cessarent pax sine lite foret Nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Empiring and Lording among his brethren and fellow Elders Whosoever will bee great among you let him bee your minister and whosoever will bee chiefe among you let him be your servant saith the onely Lord and Head of the Church Nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 setting himselfe only to do a pleasure or to get preferment to such as he favoureth Nay nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely by establishing good orders and wholesome lawes in the Church but he must carry himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serviceably and ministerially for as his Function is Officium and Iurisdictio so it is Munus a burdensome service and charge laid upon him That a ruling Elder may bee such a one as hee ought to bee two sorts of duties are requisite viz. duties of his Conversation and duties of his Calling The duties of his conversation are the same which the Apostle Paul requireth in the conversation of the Minister of the Word That he bee blamelesse having a good report not accused of riot or unruly vigilant sober of good behaviour given to hospitality a lover of good men just holy temperate not given to wine no striker not greedy of filthy lucre not selfe-willed not soone angry but patient not a brawler not covetous one that ruleth well his owne house having his children in subjection with all gravity one that followeth after righteousnesse godlinesse faith love patience meeknesse c. These and such like parts of a Christian and exemplary conversation being required of Pastors as they are Elders belong unto ruling Elders also This being plaine let us proceed to the duties of their calling For the better understanding whereof we will distinguish with the Schoole-men a two-fold power the power of Order and the power of Jurisdiction which are different in sundry respects 1. The power of Order comprehendeth such things as a Minister by vertue of his ordination may doe without a commission from any Presbyterie or Assembly of the Church as to preach the Word to minister the Sacraments to celebrate marriage to visite the sicke to catechise to admonish c. The power of Jurisdiction comprehendeth such things as a Minister cannot doe by himselfe nor by vertue of his ordination but they are done by a Session Presbytery or Synod and sometimes by a Minister or Ministers having Commission and authority from the same such as ordination and admission suspension deprivation and communication and receiving againe into the Church and making of Lawes and Constitutions Ecclesiasticall and such like whereof we boldly maintaine that there is no part of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction in the power of one man but of many met together in the name of Christ. 2. The power of Order is the radicall and fundamentall power and maketh a Minister susceptive and capable of the power of Jurisdiction 3. The power of Order goeth no further then the Court of Conscience the power of Jurisdiction is exercised in Externall and Ecclesiasticall Courts Fourthly the power of Order is sometime unlawfull in the use yet not voide in it selfe The power of Jurisdiction when it is unlawfull in the use it is also voide in it selfe If a Minister doe any act of Jurisdiction as to excommunicate or absolve without his owne parish wanting also the consent of the Ministery and Elders of the bounds where he doth the same such acts are voide in themselves and of no effect But if without his owne charge and without the consent aforesaid hee baptise an infant or doe any such thing belonging to the power of Order though his act be unlawfull yet is the thing it selfe of force and the Sacrament remaineth a true Sacrament Now to our purpose We averre that this twofold power of Order and of Jurisdiction belongeh to ruling Elders as well as to Pastors The power of Jurisdiction is the same in both for the power and authority of all Jurisdiction belongeth to the Assemblies and representative meetings of the Church whereof the ruling Elders are necessary constituent members and have the power of decisive voycing no lesse then Pastors Howbeit the execution of some decrees enacted by the power of Jurisdiction belongeth to Ministers alone for Pastors alone exercise some acts of Jurisdiction as imposition of hands the pronouncing of the sentence of excommunication the receiving of a penitent c. Are not these things done in the name and authority of some Assembly of the Church higher or lower Or are they any other then the executions of the decrees and sentences of such an Assembly wherein ruling Elders voyced The power of Order alone shall make the difference betwixt the Pastor and the ruling Elder for by the power of Order the Pastor doth preach the Word minister the Sacraments pray in publike blesse the Congregation celebrate marriage which the ruling Elder cannot Therefore it is falsly said by that railing Rabshakeh whom before I spoke of Ep. pag. 7. That the ruling Elders want nothing of the power of the Minister but that they preach not nor baptise in publike congregations yet other things which the Pastor doth by his power of Order the ruling Elder ought also to doe by his owne power of Order And if we would know how much of this power of Order is common to both let us note that Pastors doe some things by their power of Order which all Christians ought to doe by the law of Charity Things of this sort a ruling Elder may and ought to doe by his power of Order and by vertue of his election and ordination to such an office For example every Christian is bound in Charity to admonish and reprove his brother that offendeth first privately then before witnesses and if he heare not to tell it to the Church Levit. 19.17 Matth. 18.15.16.17 This a ruling Elder ought to doe by vertue of his calling and with authority 1 Thess. 5.12 Private Christians ought in Charity to instruct the ignorant Joh. 4.29 Act. 18.26 to exhort the negligent Heb. 3.15 10.24 25. to comfort the afflicted 1 Thess. 5.11 to support the weake 1 Thess. 5.14 To restore him that falleth
of the Church of Ephesus it iâ— said that Paul kneeled down and praied with them all and they all wept sore Acts 20.36.37 compared with verse 28. Here is some good number imported To the Angell of the Church of Smyrna that is to the Pastors thereof collectively taken Christ saith The Divell shall cast some of you into prison Revel 2.10 which if not only yet principally is spoken to the Pastors though for the benefit of that whole Church This is more plaine of the Church of Thyatira verse 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnto you I say to the rest in Thyatira as if he would say saith Pareus Tibi â—spicopo cum collegis reliquo coetui dico Paul writeth to the Bishop at Philippi Phil. 1.1 and notwithstanding that there was already a certaine number of Bishops or Pastors in that City yet the Apostle thought it necessary to send unto them Epaphroditus also Phil. 2.25 being shortly thereafter to send unto them Timotheus verse 19. yea to come himselfe verse 24. so that there was no scarcity of labourers in that harvest Epaphras and Archippus were Pastors to the Church at Colosse and who besides we cannot tell but Paul sent unto them also Tychicus and Onesimuâ— Col. 4.7.9 Now touching the third proposition no man who understandeth will imagine that the multitude of Christians within one of those great Cities was divided into as many parishes as there were meeting places for worship It is a point of controversie who did beginne the division of parishes but whosoever it was whether Evaristus or Higinus or Dionysius certaine it is that it was not so from the beginning I meane in the daies of the Apostles for then it was all one to say in every City or to say in every Church That which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 1.5 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 14.22 This is acknowledged by all Anti-prelaticall writers so farre as I know and by the Prelaticall writers also The last proposition as it hath not beene denyed by any so it is sufficiently proved by the former for that which made the multitude of Christians within one City to be one Church was their union under and their subjection unto the same Church governement and governours A multitude may bee one Church though they doe not meete together into one place for the worship of God for example it may fall forth that a congregation cannot meet together into one but into divers places and this may continue so for some yeares together either by reason of persecution or by meanes of the plague or because they have not such a large parish-Church as may containe them all so that a part of them must meete in some other place but a multitude cannot be one Church unlesse they communicate in the same Church government and under the same Governours by one Church I meane one Ecclesiasticall Republike even as the like union under civill government and governours maketh one corporation when the Apostle speaketh to all the Bishops of the Church of Ephesus hee exhorteth them all to take heed to all the flocke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over which the holy Ghost had made them overseers so that the whole was governed by the common counsell and advice of the Elders as Hierome speaketh for the same reason we say not the Churches but the Church of Amsterdam because all the Pastors and Elders have the charge and governement of the whole From all which hath beene said I inferre this Corollary That in the times of the Apostles the Presbytery which was the ordinary Court of Iurisdiction which did ordaine depose excommunicate c. did consist of so many Pastors and Elders as could with conveniency meete ordinarily together which is a paterne and warrant for our Classicall Presbyteries I confesse there might be in some townes no greater number of Christians then did meet together in one place notwithstanding whereof the Pastor or Pastors and Elders of that congregation might and did manage the government of the same and exercise jurisdiction therein I confesse also that in those Cities wherein there was a greater number of Christians then could meet together into one place for the worship of God the Presbytery did consist of the Pastors and Elders within such a City for it cannot be proved that there were at that time any Christian congregations in Landward Villages the persecution forcing Christians to choose the shelter of Cities for which reason many are of opinion that the Infidells in those daies were called Pagani because they alone dwelt in Pagis and if there had beene any such adjacent to Cities we must thinke the same should have beene subject to the common Presbytery their owne Pastors and Elders being a part thereof Howsoever it cannot be called in question that the Presbytery in the Apostolicall Churches was made up of as many as could conveniently meete together for managing the ordinary matters of Jurisdiction and Church-government The Pastors and Elders of divers Cities could not conveniently have such ordinary meetings especially in the time of persecution only the Pastors and Elders within one City had such conveniency And so to conclude we doe not forsake but follow the paterne when we joyne together a number of Pastors and Elders out of the congregations in a convenient circuit to make up a common Presbytery which hath power and authority to governe those congregations for if the Presbytery which we find in those Cities wherein the Apostles planted Churches bee a sure paterne for our Classicall Presbyteries as wee have proved it to bee then it followeth undeniably that the authority of Church-government of excommunication ordination c. which did belong to that Primitive Presbytery doth also belong to those our Classicall or greater Presbyteries CHAP. IV. Of the authority of Synods Provinciall and Nationall TOuching Synods I shall first shew what their power is and thereafter give arguments for the same The power of Jurisdiction which wee ascribe unto Synods is the same in nature and kinde with that which belongeth to Presbyteries but with this difference that Presbyteries doe exercise it in an ordinary way and in matters proper to the congregations within their circuit Synods doe exercise this power in matters which are common to a whole province or nation or if in matters proper to the bounds of one Presbytery it is in an extraordinary way that is to say when either Presbytery hath erred in the managing of their owne matters or when such things are transferred to the Synod from the Presbytery whether it be by appellation or by reference The power of Jurisdiction whereof I speake is threefold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So it is distinguished by our writers and all these three doe in manner foresaid belong unto Synods In respect of Articles of faith or worship a Synod is Iudex or Testis In respect of externall order and policie in circumstances a contriver of a
against us our Saviours precept Tell the Church Wheresoever wee read in Scripture of a visible politicall Church and not of the invisible Catholike Church it is ever meant say they of a particular congregation used to assemble in one place for the exercise of Gods publike worship when the Scripture speaketh of a whole Province or Nation the plurall number is used as the Churches of Galatia the Churches of Macedonia the Churches of Asia c. Wherefore our Saviour in those words did deliver the power of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction neither to Classicall Presbyteries nor to Synods but to particular congregations only Answ. 1. This place proveth indeed that particular Churches have their owne power of Jurisdiction but not that they alone have it 2. Yea it proveth that they alone have it not for Christ hath a respect to the forme of the Jewes as is evident by these words Let him be unto thee as an Heathen or a Publican Now we have proved that there was among the Jewes an high Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim beside the particular Synagogicall Courts So that by pointing out the forme of the Jewish Church hee recommendeth a subordination and not an independency of particular Churches 3. By the Church in that place is meant the competent Consistory of the Church and so it agreeth to all Ecclesiasticall Courts respectively This sence is given by Parker though he be most tender in the vindication of the liberty of congregations Nam cum c. For saith he since Christ would have every man to be judged by his owne Church Matth. 18. or if the judgement of his owne Church should displease him yet ever it must be by the Church that is by a Synod of many Churches 4. As for the reason alledged for proofe of the contrary exposition I oppugne it both by reason and by their owne Tenents and by Scripture By reason because the rule of Geometricall proportion whereof we have before spoken proveth a congregation to bee a part of a Nationall Church even as one man is a part of a congregation for as five is the hundreth part of five hundreth so is five hundred the hundreth part of fifty thousand By their own grounds because they hold the forme of a visible Church to consist in the uniting of a number of visible Christians into one by the bond of a holy covenant to walke in all the wayes of God Then say I we may say the Church of Scotland as well as the Churches of Scotland because all the particular Churches in Scotland are united together into one by the bond of a Nationall oath and covenant to walke in all the waies and ordinances of God By Scripture also because Acts 8.1 we read of the Church at Hierusalem not the Churches Howbeit there were at that instant above eight thousand Christians at Hierusalem and all these still in the City for the first scattering of them followeth thereafter in that Chapter This great number neither did nor could usually assemble into one place for the worship of God but they met 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 house by house Acts 2.46 And whereas objection is made to the contrary from Acts 2.44 and 5.12 and 6.2 Wee have before answered to the first of these places for it is to be expounded by Acts 4.32 they were in one that is they were of one heart and of one soule The second place may be expounded of the Apostles and the preceding words favour this exposition but though it should be takeÌ„ of the multitude it proveâ—h not their meeting together into one place for the worship of God for it was an extraordinary confluence upon an extraordinary occasion of that which had befallen to Ananias and Saphira The last place proveth no more but an extraordinary and occasionall meeting and it is also to be understood that they met turmatim as foure hundred thousand men did assemble together Jud. 20.1 Another Scripturall instance we give from 1 Pet. 1.1 with 5.2 the Apostle writing to the dispersed Jewes in severall Provinces calleth them all one flocke Wee read that Laban had many flockes Genes 30.36.38 yet are they all called one flocke verse 31.32 so were all the flockes of Iacob called one flocke Genes 32.7 and 33.13 In like manner every one of the particular Churches among those dispersed Jewes was a flocke but compared with the whole it was but a part of the flocke It is no more absurd to say that a congregation is both a body in respect of its owne members and a member in respect of a Nationall Church then it is to say that every beleever considered by himselfe is a tree of righteousnesse and a Temple of God yet compared with others he is a branch of the Vine and a stone of the Temple for all those waies is hee called in Scripture Sundry particular flockes may bee called one flocke three waies 1. Respectu pastorum when the same shepheards oversee take care of the whole See an example both of the one kinde of shepheards Luke 2.8 and of the other Acts 20.28 2. Respectu pabuli So Paul Baynes speaking of the Low Countries where sundry congregations in one City make but one Church saith that the sheepe feed together into one common pasture though they bite not on the same individuall grasse 3. Respectu pedi when many congregations are governed by the same Pastorall staffe of Ecclesiasticall Lawes and Discipline It is further objected that Presbyteriall government and the authority of Synods doe rob the congregations of their rights and liberties no lesse then the Prelacy did so that the Churches of Christ in the removall of Episcopacy have changed Dominum only not Dominium Answer There is a vaste difference for 1. Episcopall governement is Monarchicall and Christ hath left no Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction to bee exercised by one man Presbyteriall and Synodicall governement is partly democraticall in respect of the election of Ministers and Elders and the doing of matters of chiefest importance with the knowledge and consent of congregations partly aristocratical in respect of the parity of Presbyters and their consistorial proceedings and decrees The Monarchicall part is Christs peculiarly 2. The Prelacy permitteth not to congregations any act of their owne Church government but robbeth them of their particular Elderships which as Parker well noteth the Classicall Presbyteries doe not 3. It is one thing saith Baynes for Churches to subject themselves to a Bishop and Consistory wherein they shall have no power of suffrage Another thing to communicate with such a Presbytery wherein themselves are members and Iudges with others 4. The congregations did not agree not consent to Episcopall government but were sufferers in respect of the same but they doe heartily agree to the governement of Presbyteries and Synods in witnesse whereof they send their Commissioners thither to concur assist voice 5. Speciall respect is had in Presbyteries and Synods to the consent of congregations in all
who have received Christ to salvation hath right and title to enjoy him in his politicall ordinances by their own exercising of all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and that independently this is more then either hath been or can be proved Object The union betwixt Christ and his Church is as strait and immediate as the union betwixt the Vine and the Branches betwixt the Head and the Body betwixt the Husband the Wife Therefore every true Church of Christ hath direct immediate interest in and title to Christ himself the whole new Testament and every ordinance of it Answ. The strait union betwixt Christ and the Church expressed by these comparisons cannot bee understood of the Church taken politically for then the union betwixt Christ and the Church might be dissolved as often as the Church ceaseth to bee ordered and governed as an Ecclesiastical Republick It is therefore to be understood either of the invisible Church or at most of the visible Church taken metaphysically or entitatively But I adde withall it is to be likewise understood of every faithfull Christian so that not onely every true Church but every true member thereof by vertue of this union hath direct and immediate title to Christ and to the benefit of all his ordinances for his edification and salvation This is all which the Argument can conclude and it maketh nothing against us Object If all things be the Churches even the Ministers themselves yea though they be Paul Cephas and Apollos then may every Church use and enjoy all things immediately under Christ. But the first is true 1 Cor. 3.24 Therefore c. Answ. Neither can this prove any thing against us for when the Apostle saith All things are yours whether Paul c. He is to bee understood not onely collectively of the Church but distributively of every beleever who hath right to the comfortable enjoyment and benefit of these things so farre as they concerne his salvation And in like manner I may say to the members of any particular congregation All things are yours whether Sessions or Presbyteris or Provinciall or Generall Assemblies And what wonder God is our Father Christ our elder brother the holy Ghost our Comforter the Angels our keepers heaven our inheritance It is therefore no strange thing to heare that as the supreame civill power so the supreame Ecclesiasticall power is appointed of God in order to our good and benefit that it be not a tyranny for hurt but a ministery for help These are the objections alledged for the independent and absolute power of congregations But this is not all Some seeme to make use of our own weapons against us making objection from the forme of the Jewish Church which wee take for a plat-forme They say that the Synagogues of the Jewes were not as the particular Churches are now for they were not entire Churches of themselves but members of the nationall Church neither could they have the use of the most solemne parts of Gods worship as were then the sacrifices That the whole nation of the Jewes was one Church having reference to one Temple one high Priest one Altar it being impossible that the whole body of a Nation should in the entire and personal parts meet and communicate together in the holy things of God the Lord so disposed and ordered that that communion should bee had after a manner and in a sort and that was by way of representation for in the Temple was daily sacrifice offered for the whole nationall Church So the names of the twelve Tribes upon the shoulders of the Ephod and upon the Breast-plate and the twelve loaves of Shew bread were for Israel signes of remembrance before the Lord. That now the Church consisteth not as then of a Nation but of particular Assemblies ordinarily communicating together in all the Churches holy things whence it commeth that there are no representative Churches now the foundation thereof which is the necessary absence of the Church which is represented being taken away in the new Testament That besides all this if wee take the representative Church at Jerusalem for a paterne then as there not onely hard causes were opened and declared according to the Law but also the sacrifices daily offered and the most solemne service performed without the presence of the body of the Church so now in the representative Churches such as Presbyteries and Synods consisting of Officers alone there must be not onely the use of jurisdiction but the Word and Sacraments whether people bee present or not for how can there be a power in the Church of Officers for the use of one solemne ordinance out of the communion of the body and not of another Answ. 1. To set aside the sacrifices other ceremonial worship performed at Jerusalem the Synagogues among the Jewes had Gods morall worship ordinarily therein as Prayer and the reading expounding of the Scriptures 2. Whatsoever the Synagogues had or whatsoever they wanted of the worship of God they had an Ecclesiasticall Consistory and a certaine order of Church government else how shall we understand the excommunication or casting out of the Synagogue the Rulers of the Synagogue and the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue of which things we have before spoken I will not here dispute whether every sin among the Jewes was either appointed to be punished capitally or else to bee expiated by sacrifices but put the case it were so this proveth that no excommunication or Ecclesiasticall censure was not then necessary for beside the detriment of the Common-wealth by the violation of the Law which was punishable by death and beside the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and guiltinesse before God the expiation whereof by the death of Christ was prefigured in the sacrifices there was a third thing in publike sinnes which was punishable by spirituall censures and that was the scandall of the Church which could not be taken away by the oblations of the delinquent but rather made worse thereby even as now a publike offender doth not take away but rather increase the scandall of the Church by his joyning in the acts of Gods worship so long as there is no Ecclesiasticall censure imposed upon him neither yet to speake properly was the scandall of publike offences punishable by bodily punishments but the Church being a politicall body had her owne Lawes and her owne censures no lesse then the Common-wealth 3. As the Synagogues were particular Churches politically so all of them collectively were one Nationall Church politically governed by one supreame Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim which is the representative wee meant of in our Argument 4. But if we take the Nationall Church of the Jewes metaphysically there was no representative thereof unlesse it were all the males who came thrice in the yeare to Ierusalem The daily offering of Sacrifices was not by a representative Church but by the Priests and though there were twelve loaves of Shewbread before
a reason of him or for writing a justification of the government of the Church of Scotland to such as did desire to be more throughly resolved concerning the same but that rather they will make use hereof as a key by divine Providence put into their hands to open a doore unto further light Secondly there is so much the more reason for asserting those two points by how much they have beene mainly opposed by Sathan for he it was whose cunning conveyance of old made the office of ruling Elders to come into dessuetude through the sloth or rather the pride of the Teachers as Ambrose complaineth and yet time hath not so obliterate that ancient order but that the footsteps of the same are yet to be seen in our Officialls Chancellors Commissaries Church-wardens and High-Commission men yea at Rome it selfe in the Cardinalls The same old Serpent it was whose instigation made Licinius whiles he did intend the totall ruine of the Church to fall upon this as the most effectuall means for his purpose that he should straightly inhibit all counsells meetings and conâ—erencies concerning the affairs of the Church By which meanes the Christians of his time were drawne into one of two snares Aut enim legem c. for saith Eusebius either it behoved us to be obnoxious to punishment by violating the Law or to overthrow the Rites and Ordinances of the Church by giving obedience in that which the Law did command for great and waighty deliberations undertaken about things controverted cannot proceed in any other manner or way but by the right managing of Councels The Arminians in the Netherlands found out another of Sathans wiles they were not able to hinder the assembling of a free and lawfull Synod but for their next best they required of the Synod of Dort twelve conditions and the ninth was that there should not be in that Synod any determination or decree concerning the matters in controversie but only an accommodation or conference and that still it should be free to the particular Churches to accept or to reject the judgement of the Synod this was a way of endlesse controversie and justly cried down in the Synod Moreover Satan ever wise in his own principles finding the Church of Scotland like an invincible Sampson by reason of such a constitution and goveâ—nment as being preserved in integritie could neither admit heresie nor schisme did make use of the Prelacie as his traiterous Dalilah to betray that Sampson into the hands of the now adverse Pâ—ilistines the Papists by stealing away both their ruling Elders and the authority of their Presbyteries and Synods for he had well observed that in these two things did their great strength lye and that without these two the Ministers of the Word being like so many scopae dissolutâ— both sparsed and by themselves alone might easily be brought under the yoke When thus the Romish-affected Dalilah had taken away their strength from them she was bold to uâ—tâ—r her insulting voice in the Service-book and book of Canons The Philistines be upon thee Sampson The Papists be upon thee Scotland In this case they did not as Sampson then presume that the Lord was with them as at other times they knew he was departed from them They cried out Return we beseech thee O God of Hosts look down from Heaven behold and visit this Vine and the Vineyeard which thine own right hand hath planted They did again ask the way to Sion with their faces thitherward saying come and let us joyn our selves to the Lord in a perpetuall Covenant that shall not be forgotten And now glory be to the great Name of God in the Church throughout all generations they have by his healing hand quickly recovered their strength Strength I may well call it for sayth a learned Divine as in things which are done by bodily strength so in things which are managed by counsells vis unita fortior power being put together is the stronger and in this he doth agree with Bellarm. that though God by his absolute power can preserve his Church without Synods yet according to ordinary providence they are necessary for the right government of the Church The interweaving and combining of strength by joyning the ruling Elders of every Congregation with the Pastor or Pastors thereof into a particular Eldership by joyning also Commissioners Pastors and Eâ—ders from many particular Elderships ordinarily into a classicall Presbytery and more solemnly provinciall Synod Finally by joynâ—ng Commissioners Pastors and Elders from many classicall PPresbyteries into a Nationall Assembly this doth indeed make a Church beautifull as Tirza comely as Ierusalem terrible as an Armie with Banners It is not to be expected but this forme of Church government shall still be disliked by some whose dislike shall notwithstanding the more commend it to all pious minds I mean by prophane men who escape not without censure under Presbyteries and Synods as they did under the Prelacie by hereticks who cannot finde favour with a Nationall Synod of many learned and godly men as they did with a few Popish Prelats by Matchavellians also who do foresee that Presbyteriall Synodicall government being conformed not to the Lesbian rule of humane authority but to the inflexible rule of Divine Institution will not admit of any Innovations in Religion be they never so conduceable to politicall intentions Some there be who whet their tongue like a sword and bend their bowes to shoot their arrows even bitter words They would wound both the office of ruling Elders and the authority of Presbyteries and Synods with this hateful imputation that they are in consistent with the honor and Prerogative of Princes Sure I am when our Saviour saith Render unto Câ—esar the things which are Caesars and unto God the things which are Gods he doth plainly insinuate that the things which are Gods need not to hinder the things which are Caesars And why shall it be forgotten that the Prelates did assume to themselves all that power of determining controversies making Canons ordaining suspending deposing and excommunicating which now Presbyteries and Synods do claime as theirs by right To me it appeareth a grand mistery and worthy of deliberation in the wise Consistory of Rome That the power of Presbyteries and Synods being meerly Ecclesiasticall being rightly used and nothing incroaching upon the civill power is notwithstanding an intollerable prejudice to Kings and Princes But the very same power in Prelates though both abused and mixed with civill power is not for aâ—l that prejudiciall to Soveraignty Yet if the fear of God cannot moliâ—ie the tongues of thâ—se men one would think that they should be brideled with respect to the Kings most excellent Majestie who hath been graâ—iously pleased to approve and ratifie the present government of the Church of Scotland perceiving â— truâ—â— that Gods honour and his honour Gods Lawes and his Lawes may well subsist together Lastly as in publishing this
in Synods is three-fold dogmatick diataktick and critick Whether the decrees of a Synod may be pressed upon such as professe scruple of conscience there anent CHAP. V. The first argument for the authority of Synods and the subordination of Presbyteries â—â—erto taken from the light of nature THat the Church is a certain kinde of Republike and in things which are common to her with other societies is guided by the same light of nature which guideth them Of this kinde are her assemblies CHAP. VI. The second argument taken from Christs Institution THe will of Christ for the authority of Synods is shewed two waies 1. Because else he hath not sufficiently provided for all the necessities of his Church 2. He hath committed spirituall power and authority to the Assemblies and Courts of the Church in generall yet hath not determined in Scripture all the particular kinds degrees and bounds thereof and that for three reasons The particular kinds of Synods appointed by the Church according to the light of nature and generall warrant and rules of the word are mixed thogh not meer divine ordinances CHAP. VII The third argument taken from the Iewish Church THat there were among the Jews aâ— least two Ecclesiasticall Courts the Synagogue and the Sanedrim That the power of the Synagogical conâ—istory was not civill but spirituall proved against Sutliffe That the Jews had a supream Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim distinct from the civill Sanedrim proved against the same Sutliffe both from the institution therof Deuâ— 17. and from the restitution 2 Chron. 19. and from the practice Ier. 26. The consequence of our argument proved against such as deny it That we ought to follow the Jewish Church in those things which it had not as it was Jewish but under the common respect and account of a politicall Church CHAP. VIII The fourth argument taken from Acts 15. THat we finde Acts 15. a Synode of the Apostles and Elders with authority imposing their decrees upon many particular Congregations Foure answers made to this argument found not to be satisfactory CHAP. IX The sixt argument token from the Geometricall proportion THis argument from proportion doth hold whether we compare the collectives of Churches among themselves or the representatives among themselves or the representatives and collectives together CHAP. X. The sixt argument taken from necessitie THat without the authority of Synods it is impossible to preserve unity or to make an end of controversie Other remedies declared to be ineffectuall CHAP. XI Objections made against the authority of Synods answered THe place Math. 18.17 discussed That one visible politicall Church may comprehend many Congregations proved That the authority of Presbyteries and Synods doth not rob the Congregations of their liberties as the Prelacie did A visible Church may be considered either metaphysically or politically This distinction explained serveth to obviat sundry arguments alledgeâ— for the independent power of Congregations Other two objections answered which have been lately made The first part CONCERNING RVLING ELDERS CHAP. I. Of the words Elder Lay Elder Ruling Elder THE word Elder answereth to Zaken in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek It hath foure different significations 1. It noteth Age. 2 Antiquity 3. Venerability 4. An office In the first signification Elder is opposed to younger as 1 Tim. 5.1 Rebuke not an Elder but intreat him as a father the younger men as brethren 1 Pet. 5.5 Likewise ye younger submit your selves unto the Elder In this sense was the Apostle Iohn called the Elder because hee outlived the other Apostles 2 Iohn 1. and 3. vers 1. In the second signification Elder is opposed to Moderne Mat. 15.2 Why doe thy Disciples transgresse the tradition of the Elders That is of them of old time Mat. 5.21 In the third signification we finde the word Isa. 3. where the Lord saith that he would take away from Israel the prudent and the ancient vezaken that is the worthies among them and such as were respected for wisedome The same word and peradverture in the same sense is turned Elder Exod. 2.16 Eth-zikne Israel the Elders of Israel So the Spanish Seijor the French Seigneur the Italian Signore all comming from the Latine Senior signifie a man of respect or one venerable for dignity gifts prudence or piety Contrariwise men of no worth nor wisedome men despicable for lacke of gifts and understanding are called Children Isa. 3.4.12 Ephes. 4.14 But it is the fourth signification which we have now to do withall and so an Elder is a spirituall officer appointed by God and called to the government of the Church Acts 14.23 When they had by voyces made them Elders in every Church They have the name of Elders because of the maturity of knowledge wisedome gifts and gravity which ought to be in them for which reason also the name of Senators was borrowed from Senes Before we come to speake particularly of those Elders of which our purpose is to treat it is fit we should know them by their right name lest wee nick-name and mis-call them Some reproachfully and others ignorantly call them Lay Elders But the distinction of the Clergie Laity is Popish and Antichristian and they who have narrowly considered the records of ancient times have noted this distinction as one of the grounds whence the mystery of iniquity had the beginning of it The name of Clergie appropriate to Ministers is full of pride and vaine-glory and hath made the holy people of God to be despised as if they were prophane and uncleane in comparison of their Ministers Gerard likeneth those who take to themselves the name of the Clergie to the Pharisees who called themselves by that name for that their holinesse did separate them from the rest of the Jewes for this Etymologie of the name Pharisee hee citeth Tertullian Origen Epiphanius Ambrose and confirmeth it from Luke 18.10 Hence was it that some Councels discharged the Laity from presuming to enter within the Quire or to stand among the Clergie neere the Altar Two reasons are alleadged why the Ministers of the Church should bee called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 First because the Lord is their Inheritance secondly because they are the Lords inheritance Now both these reasons doe agree to all the faithfull people of God For there is none of the faithfull who may not say with David Psal. 16.5 The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of whom also it may not bee said that they are the Lords inheritance or lot for Peter giveth this name to the whole Church 1 Pet. 5.3 Where if it were needfull we might chalenge Bishop Hall who borroweth a glosse from Bellarmine and Gregorius de Valentia telling us that Peter chargeth his fellow Bishops not to dominier over their Clergie so shutting out of the Text both the duty of Pastors because the Bishops onely are meant by Elders and the benefit of the people because the inferiour Pastors are the Bishops
Galat. 6.1 to visite the sicke Matth. 25.36.40 to reconcile those who are at variance Matth. 5.9 to contend for the truth and to answer for it Iude v. 3. 1 Pet. 3.15 All which are incumbent to the ruling Elder by the authority of his calling To conclude then the calling of ruling Elders consisteth in these two things 1. To assist and voyce in all Assemblies of the Church which is their power of jurisdiction 2. To watch diligently over the whole flock all these wayes which have been mentioned and to doe by authority that which other Christians ought to doe in charity which is their power of order And the Elder which neglecteth any one of these two whereunto his calling leadeth him shall make answer to God for it For the Word of God the Discipline of this Kirke the bonds of his owne calling and covenant doe all binde sinne upon his soule if either hee give not diligence in private by admonishing all men of their duty as the case requireth or if he neglect to keepe either the Ecclesiasticall Court and Consistory within the Congregation where his charge is or the Classicall Presbyterie and other Assemblies of the Church which he is no lesse bound to keepe then his Pastor when he is called and dessigned thereunto CHAP. III. The first Argument for ruling Elders taken from the Iewish Church HAving shewed what ruling Elders are it followeth to shew Scripture and Divine right for them Our first Argument is taken from the governement and pollicy of the Jewish Church thus Whatsoever kinde of office-bearers the Jewish Church had not as it was Jewish but as it was a Church such ought the Christian Church to have also But the Jewish Church not as it was Jewish but as it was a Church had Elders of the people who assisted in their Ecclesiasticall government and were members of their Ecclesiasticall Consistories Therefore such ought the Christian Church to have also The Proposition will no man call in question for quod competit alicui qua tali competit omni tali That which agreeth to any Church as it is a Church agreeth to every Church I speake of the Church as it is a politicall body and setled Ecclesiasticall Republike Let us see then to the Assumption The Jewish Church not as it was a Church but as it was Jewish had an high Priest typisying our great high Priest Jesus Christ. As it was Jewish it had Musitians to play upon Harpes Psalteries Cymbals and other Musicall Instruments in the Temple 1 Chron. 25.1 concerning which hear Bellarmines confession de bon oper lib. 1. cap. 17. Iustinus saith that the use of instruments was granted to the Iewes for their imperfection and that therefore such instruments have no place in the Church Wee confesse indeed that the use of musicall instruments agreeth not alike with the perfect and with the imperfect and that therefore they beganne but of late to be admitted in the Church But as it was a Church and not as Jewish it had foure sorts of ordinary office-bearers Priests Levites Doctors and Elders and we conformablie have Pastors Deacons Doctors and Elders To their Priests and Levits Cyprian doth rightly liken our Pastors and Deacons for howsoever sundry things were done by the Priests and Levites which were typicall and Jewish onely yet may we well parallell our Pastors with their Priests in respect of a perpetuall Ecclesiasticall office common to both viz. the Teaching and governing of the people of God Mal. 2.7 2 Chron. 19.8 and our Deacons with their Levits in respect of the cure of Ecclesiasticall goods and of the work of the service of the house of God in the materialls and appurtenances thereof a function likewise common to both 1 Chro. 26.20 23.24.28 The Jewish Church had also Doctors and Schooles or Colledges for the preservation of true Divinity among them and of tongues arts and sciences necessary thereto 1 Chron. 15.22.27 2 King 22.14 1 Sam. 19.20 2 Kings 2.3.5 Act. 19.9 These office-bearers they had for no typicall use but wee have them for the same use and end for which they had them And all these sorts of office-bearers among us wee doe as rightly warrant from the like sorts among them as other whiles wee warrant our baptizing of Infants from their circumcising of them our Churches by their Synagogues c. Now that the Jewish Church had also such Elders as wee plead for it is manifest for besides the Elders of the Priests there were also Elders of the people joyned with them in the hearing and handling of Ecclesiasticall matters Jer. 19.1 Take of the ancients of the people and of the ancients of the Priests The Lord sending a message by the Prophet would have a representative body of all Judah to be gathered together for receiving it as Tremellius noteth So 2 Kings 6.32 Elisha sate in his house and the Elders sate with him We read 2 Chron. 19.8 That with the Priests were joyned some of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel to judge Ecclesiasticall causes and controversies And howsoever many things among the Jewes in the latter times after the captivity did weare to confusion and misorder yet we finde even in the dayes of Christ and the Apostles that the Elders of the people still sate and voyced in Councell with the Priests according to the ancient forme as is cleare from sundry places of the new Testament Matth. 16.21 and 21.23 and 26.57.59 and 27.1.12 Mark 14 43. Luke 22.66 Acts 4.5 This is also acknowledged by the Roman Annalist Baronius who confesseth further That as this was the forme among the Jewes so by the Apostles was the same forme observed in their times and Seniors then admitted into Councels Saravia himselfe who disputeth so much against ruling Elders acknowledgeth what hath been said of the Elders of the Jewes Seniores quidem invenio in Consessu Sacerdotum veteris Synagoga qui Sacerdotes non erant I finde indeed saith hee Elders in the Assembly of the Priests of the old Synagogue which were not Priests Et quamvis paria corum essent suffragia authoritas in omnibus sufragiis sacerdotum cum suffragiis Sacerdotum c. And although saith hee their suffrages and authority in all judgements were equall with the suffrages of the Priests c. But what then thinke yee hee hath to say against us Hee saith that the Elders of the Jewes were their Magistrates which in things pertaining to the externall government of the Church ought not to have been debarred from the Councell of the Priests more then the Christian Magistrate ought now to bee debarred from the Synods of the Church Now to prove that their Elders were their civill Magistrates hee hath no better argument then this That the Hebrew word Zaken which is turned Elder importeth a chiefe man or a Ruler We answer First this is a bold conjecture which hee hath neither warranted by divine nor by humane testimonies
hee exercised of the Office of a Magistrate should have ceased But since they did onely assist the Pastor in matters Ecclesiasticall it followeth that as touching the Office of Elders there is no distinction betwixt times of Peace and Persecution Secondly There were Seniors among the Jewes under Godly Kings and in times of Peace Why not likewise amongst us Thirdly The Ecclesiasticall power is distinct from the civill both in the subject object and end so that the one doth not hinder the other The Magistrates power is to punish the outward man with an outward punishment which the Presbytery cannot hinder for he may civilly bind whom the Presbytery spiritually looseth and civilly loose whom the Presbytery spiritually bindeth and that because the Magistrate seeketh not the repentance and salvation of the delinquent by his punishment as the Presbytery doth but onely the maintenance of the authority of his lawes together with the quietnesse and preservation of the Common-wealth Whence it commeth that the delinquent serapeth not free of the Magistrate though hee bee penitent and not obstinate 4. How thought Whitgift that the christian Magistrate can doe those things which the Seigniory did under a Tyrant Can the Magistrate by himselfe determine questions of Faith Can he know what order and decencie in circumstances is fitteâ—t for each Congregation Can he excommunicate offenders c. 5. When Bishops exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction yea and the civill too this is thought no wrong to Princes Is it a wrong in the Presbytery yet not in this Prelacy Good Lord what a Mysterie is this 6. When Presbyters are established in their full power there remaineth much power to the Prince even in things Ecclesiasticall as to take diligent heed to the whole estate of the Church within his dominions to indict Synods and civilly to proceed in the same to ratifie the constitutions thereof and to adde unto them the strength of a civill sanction to punish Heretickes and all that disobey the assemblies of the Church to see that no matter Ecclesiasticall be carryed factiously or rashlie but that such things bee determined in free assemblies to provide for Schollers Colledges and Kirkes that all corrupt wayes of entring into the Ministery by Simony bribing patrons c. be repressed and finally to compell all men to doe their duty according to the Word of God and Laws of the Church 7. Whatsoever be the power of the supreame Magistrate Ecclesiae tamen c. Yet let him leave to the Church and to the Ecclesiasticall Rulers such as are the Ministers of the Gospell Elders and Deacons their owne power in handling Ecclesiasticall things untouched and whole saith Danaeus For the Ecclesiasticall power doth no more hinder the civill administration then the Art of singing hindereth it saith the Augustan confession 8. We may answer by a just recrimination that the Prelacy not the Presbytery is prejudiciall to the power of Princes and hath often incroached upon the same The Bishops assembled in the eight Councill of Constantinople ordâ—ined that Bishop should not light from their horses when they chance to meet Princes nor basely bow before them and that if any Prince should cause a Bishop to disparage himselfe by doing otherwise he should be excommunicated for two yeares They also discharged Princes from being present in any Synod except the Oâ—cumenicke The 1. Councill of Toledo ordaineth that Quoties Episcoporum Hispanorum Synodus convenerit toties universalis Concilii decretum propter salutem Principum factum peractis omnibus in Synodo recitetur ut iniquorum mens territa corrigatur From which canon Osiander collecteth that some of the Bishops were not faithfull and loyall to the Kings of Spaine The inquisition of Spaine Anno 1568. presented to King Philip twelve Articles against the Netherlands one whereof was That the King write unto and command the Clergie of the Netherlands that with the Inquisition they should accept of 15. new Bishops the which should be free from all secular jurisdiction yea in cases of Treason Now as touching the contrary conceit of Saravia he alloweth such Elders as the Iewish Church had to be joyned now with Pastors under a Christian Magistrate but under an Infidell Magistrate hee saith they could have no place for he taketh the Iewish Elders to have bin their Magistrates that in like manner none but Christian Magistrates should sit with the Ministers of the Word in Ecclesiasticall Courts Princes and Nobles in generall or Nationall Councills and Magistrates of cities in particular consistories This is as foule an error as that of Whitgift for 1. His opinion of the Iewish Elders that they were their Magistrates we have confuted before 2. Though it were so that no Ruling Elders ought to be admitted now except Christian Magistrates yet might they have place under an Infidell Prince as Ioseph under Pharaoh Daniell under Nebuchadnezar There have beene both Christian Churches and Christian Magistraâ—es under Hereticall yea Infidell Princes 3. If Christian Magistrates be come in place of the Iewish Seniors and ought to be joyned with the Ministers of the Word in the consistories of the church We demand quo nomine quo jure whither doe they sit as Christian Magistrates or as men of singular gifts chosen for that effect Jf as Magistrates then shall we make a mixture and confusion of civill Ecclesiasticall function else how shall men by vertue of civill places sit in spirituall Courts Jf as men of singular gifts chosen to sit then may others aswell as they having the like gifts and election be admitted to sit also 4. Saravia contradicteth himselfe for a little after he admitteth grave and godly men in the judicatories of the Church whither they be Magistrates or privat men sive illi magistratu fungantur sive in rep vivant privati CHAP. XIII Whether Ruling Elders have the power of decisive voyces when they sit in Prebyteries and Synods THere are sundry questions propounded by D. Field and other adversaries of Ruling Elders whereinto they thinke wee are not able to satisfie them as 1. Whether Ruling Elders ought to have decisive voyces even in questions of Faith and Doctrine and in the tryall and approbation of Ministers 2. Whether these Elders must be in every Congregation with power of ordination deprivation suspension excommunication and absolution or whether this power bee onely in Ministers and Elders of divers Churches concurring 3. Jf they be Ecclesiasticall persons where is their ordination 4. Whether these 〈◊〉 be perpetuall or annuall and but for a certaine time Whether they ought to serve freely or to have a stipend Touching the first of these since the reformation which Luther began it was ever maintained by the ProtestaÌ„t writers that not the Ministers of the word alone but some of all sorts among Christians ought to have decisive voices in Councils But Dr. Field will admit none to teach and define in Councâ—ls but the Ministers of the
expounded of maintainance and obedience for by double honour wee may either simply understand much honour or by way of comparison double honour in respect of the Widowes whom hee had before commanded to honour as Calvin expoundeth the place Both these Interpretations doth Oecumenius give upon the same place The other question propounded by D. Field concerning Ruling Elders shall have a resolution in that which followeth and so J will proceed conceiving that which hath beene said for Ruling Elders shall satisfie such as desire to understand though nothing can satisfie the malicious nor them who are willingly ignorant Here endeth the first Booke THE Second Part concerning the Assemblies of the Church of SCOTLAND and Authority thereof CHAP. I. Of popular Government in the Church THere bee some that call in question the Warrant and Authority of classicall Presbyteries of provinciall Synods and Nationall Assemblies as they are used and maintained in the Church of Scotland I meane not the Praelaticall faction whom we set aside but even some who are as Antiepiscopall as we are The Scrupulosity of such at least of many such herein doth we conceive proceed not from any perversnesse of mind but onely from certaine mistakings which better information may remove But first of all wee require those whom we now labour to satisfie to condescend upon another point viz. that the exercise of Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction in a particular Congregation ought not to bee committed to the whole collective body thereof but is peculiar to the Eldership representing the same for in vaine doe wee debate the other point concerning Presbyteries and Assemblies if this latent prejudice still occupy their minds that the Government of the Church must needs be popular exercised by the collective body which happily may in some sort bee done within the bounds of a well limited Congregation but is manifestly inconsistent with classicall Presbyteries Synods because the collective Bodies of all particular Congregations within the bounds of a shire of a Province of a Nation cannot bee ordinarily nor at all ordinatly assembled together and if they could I beleeve that the Separatists themselves would in that case allow a dependencie or subordination of particular Congregations unto the more generall Congregation So that the point of popular government being once cleared it shall facilitate the other question concerning the Subordination of particular Elderships to classâ—icall Presbyteries Synods Now there are good reasons why this popular government or exercise by jurisdiction by all can not be admitted into a Congregation First in every Christian Congregation there are some Rulers some ruled some Governors some governed some that command some that obey as is manifest from Hebr. 13.17 1. Thes. 5.12 1. Tim. 5.17 But if the whole Congregation have the Rule and Government who then shall be ruled and governed It will be answered that in the exercise of jurisdiction every Member is to act according to it's owne condition the head as the head the eye as the eye c. that the Rulers and Governors of a Congregation are to have the principall conduâ— of businesse and to bee Heads Eares Mouths c. to the Congregation But this simile maketh rather for us then against us for though every member bee usefull and steadable in the body according to it 's owne condition yet every member neither can nor doth exercise those principall actions of seeing hearing tasting c. I say not that other members cannot see heare taste as the eyes eares and mouth doe but they cannot at all see heare nor taste So if the Rulers of a Congregation be as the eyes eares mouth c. then other members of the Congregation cannot at all act those actions of government which they act Hence it is that some who make the whole Congregation the first subject of the power of spirituall Jurisdiction doe notwithstanding hold that the whole Church doth exercise the said jurisdiction as Principium quod the Eldership alone as Principium quo even as the whole man seeth as Principium quod the eye alone as Principium quo and so of all the rest Thus doe they put a difference betwixt the power it selfe and the exercise of it ascribing the former to the collective body of the Church the latter to the representative knowing that otherwise they could not preserve the distinction of Rulers and ruled in the Church Secondly it is well knowne that in Congregations the greater part are not fit to exercise Jurisdiction for they can not examine the Doctrine and abilities of Ministers how should they ordaine them They can not judge of questions and controversies of faith how shall they determine the same They can not find out and discover Hereticks how shall they excommunicate them It is answered that this evill proceedeth from another viz. That there is too much sloth and oversight in the admission of such as are to be members of a Congregation and that they would be fit enough to doe their duty if they were all Saints they meane appearantly and in the judgement of charity such Rom. 1.7 1 Cor. 1 2. Eph. 1 1. But say we againe 1. Why may wee not hold that when the Apostle writeth to the Saints at Rome at Corinth c. he meaneth not that all who were in those Churches were either truely or appearantly Saints for some wicked ones there were among them and manifestly vitious Rom. 16 17 18. 1 Cor. 5.9.11 But that his meaning is to direct his Epistles to so many as were Saints at Rome Corinth c. mentioning them alone because to them and to none but them did God send his word for a blessing it being sent to others that they may goe and fall backward and be broken and snared and taken as the Prophet speaketh 2. If it should be granted that the Apostle giveth the name of Saints to all and every one that were in the Churches of Rome Corinth and Ephesus yet Mr. Ainsworth himselfe answering Mr. Bernard holdeth that they are called Saints by externall calling onely wherewith many are called who are not chosen and who have no appearant markes of election Others say that they were called Saints in respect of their baptisme wherein they were all consecrated and devoted to God Some say that they were all Saints in respect of their profession 3. Howsoever it was that they were all called Saints yea put the case they had beene all truely Saints surely their sanctification can not import their fitnesse to exercise jurisdiction in the Church The former is a speciall grace of the holy Spirit given to one for his owne Salvation The other is a common gift of the Spirit given for the benefit of the Church Thirdly it were not possible to exercise jurisdiction by a whole Congregation without great confusion and disorder therefore this way cannot be from God who is not the author of confusion but of order If it be answered that order may be kept
knoâ—ledge â—nd at least tacite consent of the Congregation it selfe then doe we not onely sufficiently and abundantly preserve the liberty of the Congregation while as not the Pastor or Pastors thereof alone but sundry Ruling Elders also representing the Congregation doe manage the affaires aforesaid the Congregation withall understanding thereof and consenting thereto Tacitè if not Expressè I doe not thinke but those of the Separation at this time will easily assent to this resolution and reconcilement of the controversie and so much the rather because I beleeve they themselves doe seclude from the exercise of jurisdiction in the Congregation both children under age because of their defect of Judgement and women because they are forbidden to speake in the Church and whether they seclude any other I know â—ot but since according to their owne Tenets some must be secluded and the power given to the Church must in the exercise of it be restrained to some in the Church it is better to say with Aegidius Hunnius that when Christ remitteth us to the Church Mat. 18.17 He meaneth the prime and chiefe Members which represent the Church that is Pastors aâ—d Elders then to say that he sendeth us to the whole body of the Church One scruple more may peradventure remaine They will say it is well that we require the churches consent before any waighty matter which concerneth all be finished but what if this consent be not had Whether may the Eldership cut off an offender renitente Ecclesia For their satisfaction is this also wee say with Zepperus Quod si Ecclesia c. But if the Church saith he will not approve the sentence of Excommunication nor hold it valid and they see many disagreeing among themselves and schismes and greater evills in the Church to follow this sentence of Excommunication the Elders shall not proceed to Excommunication but shall patiently suffer what cannot with the good leave of the church be amended In the meane while they shall publikely and privately admonish and exhort So saith Zanchius that without the consent of the church no man ought to be excommunicated The B. of Spalato and before him Augustine hath given the reason hereof because the end of excommunication cannot be attained if the Church doe not consent thereto for the end is that the offender may bee taken with feare and shame when he findeth himselfe abhorred and accursed by the whole Church so that it shall be in vain to excommunicate him from whom the Multitude in the Church refuse to abstract their communion I conclude that in such cases though the Pastors and Elders have the power of jurisdiction it is not to exercise the same CHAP. II. Of the independencies of the Elderships of particular Congregations WEE have now rolled away one stone of offence but there is another in our way It were most strange if the collective body of a Congregation consisting it may bee of 10 20 30 or 40 persons according to the grounds of these with whom we deale should bee permitted to exercise independently all Eccleasisticall Jurisdiction but it is almost as great a Paradox to say that the representative of every Congregation which is the Eldership therof consisting it may be of a Pastor and two or three Ruling Elders ought independently to exercise the foresaid jurisdiction in all points I am debtor to D. Field for answering one of those questions before propounded concerning Ruling Elders and here it falls in my hand He asketh whether the power of Church-government and jurisdiction doth belong to the Pastor and Elders of every Congregation or to the Pastors and Elders of many Congregations joyned together in a Common Presbytery I beleeve his expectation was that while as we would sayle through betwixt the Caribdis of Episcopall tyranny and the Scylla of popular Anarchy wee should not know hoâ— to direct our course but should certainly either bee swallowed up in the waves of mighty difficulties or split our selves upon hid Rockes of division Our danger I hope is not so great as he did imagine for we hold that the particular Elderships of severall Congregations have their owne power and authority of Church-government but with a subordination unto the common or greater Presbytery whose power is superior and of a larger extent First then we shall take into consideration the bounds of the power of particular Elderships and how the same may be said to be independent and how not for this purpose I shall give foure distinctions out of Parker and to these I shall adde other foure of my owne The first distinction is betwixt things which are proper and peculiar to one Congregation and things which are common to many the former pertaineth to the particular Eldership the latter to the common Eldership Whence it commeth that in Scotland the cases of ordination suspension deposition and Excommunication are determined in the greater Presbyteries because it doth not concerne one Congregation alone but many who be taken into the common Presbytery and who be put out of the samâ— neither doth the Excommunication of a sinner concerne onely one Congregation but the Neighbouring Congregations also among whom as is to be commonly supposed the sinner doth often haunt converse Cyprian speaking of the admission of some who had fallen and who had no recommendation from the Martyrs to be received againe referreth the matter to a common meeting and his reason is because it was a common cause and did not concerne a few nor one church onely See lib. 2. Ep. 14. The second distinction is betwixt Congregations which have a competent and well-qualified Eldership small Congregations who have but few office-bearers and those it may be not sufficiently able for Church-government In this case of insufficiencie a Congregation may not independently by it selfe exercise jurisdiction and not in re propria saith Parker 3. He distinguisheth betwixt the case of right administration and the case of aberration whatsoever liberty a Congregation hath in the former case surely in the latter it must needs be subject and subordinate If particular Elderships doe rightly manage their owne matters of Church-government the greater Presbytery shall not need for a long time it may be for some yeares to intermeddle in any of their matters which wee know by experience in our owne Churches 4. Hee maketh a distinction betwixt the case of appellation and the case de nulla administratione mala praesumpta Though the particular Eldership hath proceeded aright though it consist of able and sufficient men and though it bee in re propria yet if one think himselfe wronged and so appeale then is it made obnoxious to a higher consistory for saith Parker as the Councill of Sardis ordaineth audience must not bee denyed to him who entreateth for it So saith Zepperus speaking of the same purpose cuivis integrum quoque sit ad superiores gradus provocare si in inferioris gradus sententia aut decreto aliquid
Canon or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In respect of heresie schisme obstinacie contempt and scandall Vindex not by any externall coactive power which is peculiar to the Magistrate but by spirituall censures The dogmaticke power of a Synod is not a power to make new Articles of faith nor new duties and parts of divine worship but a power to apply and interpret those Articles of faith and duties of worship which God hath set before us in his written Word and to declare the same to be inconsistent with emergent heresies and errours To this purpose it is that the Apostle calleth the Church the pillar and ground of truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may be expounded either in sensu forensi the Church is the publicke witnesse notifier and keeper of truth even as in Courts and places of judgement there are pillars to which the Edicts of Magistrates are affixed that people may have notice thereof or in sensu architectonico as the Church by her faith is built upon Christ or which is all one upon the doctrine and truth of Christ contained in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles and leaneth thereto so by her Ministery she upholdeth under-propeth and conserveth this same truth lest as the Prophet speaketh Truth fall in the streets perish among men Truth standeth fast in the Church and is kept firme while it is professed preached propugned and maintained against all contrary errour and heresie In the same sense saith the Apostle that unto the Jewish Church were committed the Oracles of God by them to be kept interpreted propagated c. By the Diatakticke power a Synod may institute restore or change according to the condition and exigence of the Church the externall circumstances in the worship of God and Ecclesiasticall discipline I meane those circumstances which are common both to civill and sacred Societies the conveniencie whereof is determinable by the light of Nature alwayes observing the generall rules of the Word which commandeth that all bee done to the glory of God that all bee done to edifying that all bee done in order and decencie that we give none offence that wee support the weake that we give no place to the enemies of the truth nor symbolize with Idolaters c. Now for avoiding disorder and disconformity in a Nation professing one Religion it is fit that Nationall Synods give certaine directions and rules even concerning these rites and circumstances not having therein an Arbitrary or Autocratorke power but being alwayes tied to follow the rules foresaid The Criticke power of a Synod is not a Lordly imperious dominiering over the flocke of Christ which is not to bee ruled with force and cruelty but it is the power of spirituall censures as excommunication deposition and the like most necessary for the repressing of heresie errour obstinacie in wickednesse and scandals otherwise incorrigible Without this power schismes and offences could not bee cured but should the more increase whileas liberty is left to heretickes schismatickes and obstinate persons without any censure to pester and disturb a whole Nation without any regard to the constitutions of a Nationall Synod But may one say if the Decrees of a Synod concerning matters of Faith or Worship may and ought to bee examined by the sure rule of the word of God and onely to be received when they doe agree therewith and if also the constitutions of a Synod in externall circumstances doe not binde except ex aquo bono and propter justas mandandi causas or as Divines speak in casu scandali contemptus and not for the meere will or authority of a Synod and if therefore all Christians are by the private judgement of Christian discretion following the light of Gods Word and Spirit to try and examine all decrees and constitutions of any Synod whatsoever to know whether they may lawfully receive the same as our Divines maintaine and prove against Papists If these things be so it may seeme contrary to Christian liberty and to the Doctrine of Protestant Writers that Synods should exercise the foresaid Criticke power or inflict any spirituall censures at least upon those who professe that after examination of the decrees or constitutions they cannot bee perswaded of the lawfulnesse of the same Ans. 1. Our Divines by those their tenents meane not to open a doore to disobedience and contempt of the ordinances of a Synod but onely to oppugne the Popish errour concerning the binding power of Ecclesiasticall lawes by the sole will and naked authority of the law-maker that Christian people ought not to seek any further reason or motive of obedience 2. A Synod must ever put a difference betwixt those who out of a reall scruple of conscience doe in a modest and peaceable way refuse obedience to their ordinances still using the meanes of their beter information those who contemptuously or factiously disobey the same labouring with all their might to strengthen themselves in their errour and to perswade others to be of their minde 3. This objection doth militate no lesse against Ecclesiasticall censures in a particular congregation then in a Nationall Synod And they who doe at all approve of Church censures to be inflicted upon the contemptuous and obstinate shall put in our mouthes an answer to objections of this kinde CHAP. V. The first Argument for the authority of Synods and the subordination of Presbyteries thereto taken from the light of nature HAving now described the power of particular Elderships which we call Sessions of Classicall Presbyteries and of Synods Provinciall and Nationall it remaineth to confirme by Arguments the subordination and subjection of the particular Elderships to the Classicall or common Presbytery of both to the Provinciall Synod and of all these to the Nationall Assembly So that every one may perceive what reason the Church of Scotland hath to give unto the higher Ecclesiasticall Courts authority over the lower I might insist long enough both in the Testimonies of Protestant Writers and in the examples of the reformed Churches abroad as also in the examples of all the ancient Churches all speaking for this authority of Synods But these I shall passe because I know Arguments from Scripture and reason are required and such we have to give First of all I argue from the very light law of nature That same light of nature which hath taught our Common-wealth beside the Magistrates and Councells of particular Burghs to constitute higher Courts for whole Shires Baliveries Stuartries Regalities and above all these the supreame Court of Parliament to governe the whole Nation hath also taught our Church to constitute Synods Provinciall and Nationall with power and authority above Presbyteries Wee are farre from their minde who would make Policy the Mistresse and Religion the Handmaid and would have the government of the Church conformed to the government of the State as the fittest paterne But this we say in all such
performance but leaveth the particular dayes of fasting and thankesgiving to be determined by the Church according to the rules of the Word In like manner the Scripture commendeth the renewing of the covenant of God in a Nation that hath broken it but leaveth the day and place for such an action to be determined by the Church according to the rules foresaid Now if the Church following the generall warrant and rules of the Word command to fast such a day to give thankes such a day to renew the covenant of God such a day these things are divine ordinances mixedly though not meerely and he who disobeyeth disobeyeth the commandement of God The like may be said of catechising and of celebrating the Lords Supper which are not things occasionall as the former but ordinary in the Church they are commended by the warrants of Scripture but the particular times and seasons not determined The like wee say of the order to be kept in baptisme and in excommunication which is not determined in the Word though the things themselves be The removing of scandals by putting wicked persons to publike shame and open confession of their faults in the Church hath certaine warrant from Scripture yet the degrees of that publike shame and punishment are left to be determined by the Church according to the quality of the scandall and the rules of the Word Now the Church appointeth some scandalous persons to be put to a greater shame some to a lesser some to â—ee oâ—e Sabbath in the place of publike repentance some three some nine some twenty five c. And if the offender refuse that degree of publike shame which the Church following the rules foresaid appointeth for him hee may be truely said to refuse the removing and taking away of the scandall which the Word of God injoyneth him and so to disobey not the Church only but God also Just so the Scripture having commended unto us the governing of the Church the making of Lawes the exercise of Jurisdiction the deciding of controversies by Consistories and Assemblies Ecclesiasticall having also shewed the necessity of the same their power their rule of proceeding and judging who should sit and voice in the same c. But leaving the particular kindes degrees times bounds and places of the same to be resolved upon by the Church according to the light of naturall reason and generall rules of the Word The Church for her part following the generall warrant and rules foresaid together with the light of nature hath determined and appointed Assemblies Provinciall and Nationall and to exercise respectively that power which the Word giveth to Assemblies in generall The case thus standing we may boldly maintaine that those particular kinds and degrees of Ecclesiasticall Assemblies are Gods owne ordinances mixedly though not meerely But what can bee the reason may some man say why the Scripture hath not it selfe determined these kinds of Assemblies particularly I answer three reasons may be given for it 1. because it was not necessary the generall rules of the word together with natures light which directeth Common-wealths in things of the same kind being sufficient to direct the Church therin 2. As sesons and times for the meeting of Assemblies so the just bounds thereof in so many different places of the world are things of that kinde which were not determinable in Scripture unlesse the world had beene filled with volumes thereof for Individua sunt Infinita 3. Because this constitution of Synods Provinciall and Nationall is not universall for all times and places for example there may be in a remote Island 10. or 12. Christian congregations which beside their particular Elderships have a common Presbytery but are not capable of Synods either Provinciall or Nationall Againe let there bee an Island containing forty or fifty Christian congregations there shall be therein beside Presbyteries one kinde of a Synod but not two kindes Besides the reformed congregations within a great Nation may happly be either so few or so dispersed and distant or so persecuted that they can neither have Provinciall nor Nationall Assemblies CHAP. VII The third Argument taken from the Iewish Church IN the third place we take an Argument from the example of the Jewish Church for as in their Common-wealth there was a subordination of civill Courts every City having its proper Court which did consist of seven Magistrates if we beleeve Iosephus the Thalmudicall tradition maketh two Courts to have beene in each City the lesser of the Triumvirat and the greater of twenty three Judges Beside these they had their supreame Consistory the civill Sanedrim which governed the whole Nation and had authority over the inferiour Courts So was there also a subordination of Ecclesiasticall Courts among them they had a Consistory in every Synagogue for their Synagogues were appointed not only for prayer and praising of God and for the reading and expounding of the Scriptures but also for publike correction of offences Acts 26.11 They had besides a supreame Ecclesiastical Court whereunto the whole nation and all the Synagogicall Consistories were subject This Court having decayed was restored by Ichoshaphat 2 Chron. 19.8 and it had the name of Sanedrim common to it with the supream civill Court. From this Court did the reformation of that Nationall Church proceed Nehem. 6.13 On the second day were gathered together the chiefe of the fathers of all the people the Priests and the Levits unto Ezra the Scribe even to understand the words of the Law And they found written in the Law c. Whether there was yet another Ecclesiasticall Court in the midle betwixt the Synagogue and the Sanedrim called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Presbytery Luke 22.66 Acts 22.5 and made up possibly out of the particular Synagogues within the Cities I leave it to learned men to judge howsoever it is plaine from Scripture that there was at least a twofold Ecclesiasticall Court among the Jewes the Synagogue and the Sanedrim the latter having authority above the former Sutlivius denyeth both these and so would have us believe that the Jewish Church had no Eccâ—esiasticall Court at all As for the Synagogues he saith they treated of things civill and inflicted civill punishments and a civill excommunication That they inflicted civill punishment he proveth from Mat. 10. and 23. and Luke 21. where Christ foretelleth that his Disciples should bee beaten in the Synagogues That their excomunication was civill he proveth by this reason that Christ and his Disciples when they were cast out of the Synagogues had notwithstanding a free entry into the Temple and accesse to the sacrifices Answ. This is a grosse mistake for 1. the civill Court was in the gate of the City not in the Synagogue 2. He who presided in the Synagogue was called the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue Acts 18.8.17 the rest who sate and voiced therein were called the Rulers of the Synagogue Acts 13.15 They who sate in the civill Court had no
the Elders did decreee ordaine and conclude these things to bee imposed upon the Churches of the Gentiles and not the Apostles only Now the Elders of the Church of Hierusalem had no authority to impose their decrees upon all the Churches of the Gentiles with whom they had nothing to doe as Mr. Robinson saith truely Since therefore these things were imposed upon the Churches of the Gentiles as the decrees ordained by the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem this doth necessarily import that there were in that meeting delegates and commissioners from the Churches of the Gentiles which did represent the same CHAP. IX The fifth Argument taken from Geometricall proportion AS is the proportion of 3. to 9. so is the proportioÌ„ of 9. to 27. of 21. to 81. c. This rule of Giometricall proportion affoordeth us a fifth Argument for the point in hand If we should grant the government of the Church to be popular then by what proportion one or two are subject to a whole congregation by the same proportion is that congregation subject to a provinciall or a nationall congregation I meane if all the congregations in a province or a nation were assembled into one collective body as all the males of the Jewes did assemble thrice in the yeare at Hierusalem and as in the daies of the Judges the whole congregation of the children of Israel was assembled together in Mizpeh as one man from Dan even to Beersheba foure hundred thousand men to try the cause of the Levite and to resolve what to doe there-anent which meeting of the Nation was ordered by Tribes the Tribes by families the families by persons in that case any one particular congregation behoved to be subject to the generall congregation by the same reason whereby one man is subject to the particular congregation whereof he is a member because the whole is greater then a part and the body more then a member Now the same rule holdeth in the representatives of Churches whether we compare them with the collectives or among themselves If wee compare the representatives with the collectives then as one congregation is governed by the particular Eldership representing the â—ame by the like proportion are 14. or 16. congregations governed by a Classicall Presbytery representing them all by the same proportion are all the congregations in a province subject to a Provinciall Synod by the same ought all the congregations in a nation to be subject to a nationall Assembly all of them being either mediatly or immediatly represented in the same for as Parker saith well many Churches are combined into one in the very same manner as many members are combined into one Church If we compare the representatives among themselves then by what proportion a particular Eldership representing only one congregation is lesse in power and authority then a Classicall Presbytery which representeth many congregations by the same proportion is a Classicall Presbytery lesse in power and authority then a Provinciall Synod and it lesse in authority then a Nationall Synod So that the authority of Presbyteries whether Parochiall or Classicall being once granted this shall by the rule of proportion inferre the authority of Synods I know that Synods are not ordinary Courts as Presbyteries are but this and other differences betwixt them I passe the argument holdeth for the point of authority that Synods when they are have authority over all the Churches in a Province or a nation even as Presbyteries have over the congregations within their bounds CHAP. X. The sixth Argument taken from necessity WEE have another reason to adde and it is borrowed from lawlesse necessity for without a subordination among Ecclesiasticall Courts and the authority of the higher above the inferiour it were utterly impossible to preserve unity or to make an end of controversie in a Nation A particular congregation might happily end questions and controversies betwixt the members thereof and so keepe unity within it selfe and not so neither if the one halfe of the congregation be against the other but how shall controversies betwixt severall congregations be determined if both of them bee independent how shall plurality of religions be avoided how shall an apostatizing congregation be amended It is answered 1. If a particular congregation neglect their duty or doe wrong to another the civill sword may proceed against them to make them doe their duty 2. A particular congregation ought in difficult cases to consult with her sister Churches for so much reason dictats that in difficult cases counsell should be taken of a greater number 3. Sister Churches when they see a particular congregation doing amisse out of that relation which they have to her being all in the same body under the same head may and ought to admonish her and in case of generall apostacy they may withdraw that communion from her which they hold with the true Churches of Christ. But these answers are not satisfactory The first of them agreeth not to all times for in times of persecution the Church hath not the helpe of the civill sword a persecuting Magistrate will bee glad to see either division or apostasie in a congregation but so it is that Christ hath povided a remedy both for all the evills and diseases of his Church and at all times The Church as was said before is a Republike and hath her lawes Courts and spirituall censures within her selfe whether there be a Christian Magistrate or not The second answer leaveth the rectifying of an erring congregation to the uncertainty of their owne discretion in seeking counsell from a greater number And moreover if this be a dictate of reason to aske counsell of a greater number when the counsell of a few cannot resolve us then reason being ever like it selfe will dictate so much to a congregation that they ought to submit to the authority of a greater number when their owne authority is not sufficient to end a controversie among them To the third answer wee say that every private Christian may and ought to withdraw himselfe from the fellowship and communion either of one man or of a whole congregation in the case of generall apostasie And shall an apostatizing congregation be suffered to runne to hell rather then any other remedy should bee used beside that commonly ineffectuall remedy which any private Christian may use God forbid What I have said of congregations I say also of Classicall Presbyteries How shall sentence be given betwixt two Presbyteries at varience How shall a divided Presbytery be re-united in it self How shall an Hereticall Presbytery be reclaimed How shall a negligent Presbytery be made to doe their duty How shall a despised Presbytery have their wounded authority healed againe In these and such like contingent cases what remedy can bee had beside the authority of Synods CHAP. XI Objections made against the authority of Synods answered THey who dislike the subordination of particular congregations unto higher Ecclesiasticall Courts object
matters of importance which are proper unto the same This the Prelacy did not regard 6. Presbyteries and Synods doe not which the Prelats did imperiously and by their sole arbitrement domineer over congregations for their power is directive only ministeriall and limited by the Lawes of God and Nature and the lawdable Ecclesiasticall Lawes received and acknowledged by the congregations themselves 7. Experience hath shewed us Presbyteriall and Synodicall government to bee not only compatible with but most conduceable for the supportment and comfort of congregations whereas Episcopall government draweth ever after it mâ—lam caâ—dâ—m and a generall grievance of the Churches Some other objections there are for obviating whereof I shall permit and explane a distinction which shall serve to answer them all We may consider a visible Church either metaphysically or politically It is one thing to consider men as living creatures endued with reason another thing to consider them as Magistrates masters fathers children servants c. So is it one thing to consider a visible Church as a society of men and women separated from the blinde world by divine vocation and professing together the Gospell of Jesus Christ. Another thing to consider it as a political body in which the power of Spirituall government and Jurisdiction is exercised some governing and some governed These are very different considerations for first a visible Church being taken entitatively or metaphysically her members doe ordinarily communicate together in those holy things which fall under the power of order which I may call sacra mistica but being taken politically her members communicate together in such holy things as fall within the compasse of the power of Jurisdiction which I may call sacra politica Secondly Infants under age being initiated in Baptisme are actually members of the Church in the former consideration but potentially only in the latter for they neither governe nor yet have the use of reason to bee subject and obedient to those that doe governe Thirdly one must necessarily bee a member of the Church metaphysically beâ—ore he can be a member of the Church politically but not contrariwise Fourthly many visible Churches have sometimes beene and may bee without Officers and so without Ecclesiasticall government and exercise of Jurisdiction for that time yet still retaining the Essence of true visible Churches whereas a Church which never yet had any Officers ordained therein of which kinde there have beene many at the first conversion of a Nation to the Gospell or which hath losed all her Officers by death or persecution is not for that time an Ecclesiasticall Republicke nor can bee such till she have Officers This if they had observed who have taken so great paines to prove that there hath beene and may bee a Church without Officers it should happily have made them thinke their labour lâ—st It might also have taught Henry Iacob to distinguish betweene a Church visible and a Church ministeriall or politicall and not to understand these three termes to be all one as he doth in his Lâ—tter bearing date the 4. of September 1611. pag. 9. Fiftly my being a member of any one visible Church metaphysically giveth me right and title to communicate with another visible Church where for the time I am in sacris misticis such as the word prayer c. But my being a member of any one visible Church politically doth not give me right and title to communicate with another visible Church where for the time I am in sacris politicis such as ordination deposition excommunication c. Hereunto doth Master Robinson assent in these words As a man once baptized is alwaies baptised so is he in all places and Churâ—hes where hee comes as a baptized person to enjoy the common benefits of his baptisme and to discharge the common duties which depend upon it But a Pastor is not a Pastor in every Church where hee comes upon occâ—sion neither can he require in any other Church saving that one over which the holy Ghost hath set him that obedience maintainance and other respects which is due from the officers to the people neither stands he charged with that ministery and service which is due to the people from the officers The like he would have said of an Elder or a Deacon Now this distinction shall serve to answer the obiections following Object Every Christian congregation is a compleat body Ecclesiasticall having all the parts and members and all Church officers which Christ hath instituted therefore every congrgation hath the full and absolute power of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction Answ. Every Christian congregation is a compleate Church or body of Christ metaphysically that is hath the compleate Essence of a true visible Church yet every such congregation is not a compleate Ecclesiasticall Republicke except in some certaine cases whereof wee have spoken Chap. 2. And further we answer that this objection is alledged to prove that 2 or 3 gathered together in the name of Christ have immediately under Christ the full power of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction but sure I am that two or three gathered together in the name of Christ are not a compleate Ecclesiasticall body having all the members and officers which Christ hath instituted for they themselves hold that in every Christian congregation by Christs institution there ought to be at least five Officers and when those five shall be had there must bee also a certaine number of Christian people to bee governed and served by them So that their Argument doth not conclude that which they propose to prove Object They who have received Christ have received with him power and right to enjoy him though all the world bee against it in all the meanes and ordinances by which hee doth communicate himselfe unto the Church But every company of faithfull people if they be but two or three have received Christ therefore every such company c. Answ. If by the receiving of Christ they meane the receiving of Christ on his throne or the receiving of him in his ordinance of Church government then wee deny their Assumption for every company of faithfull people is not a Church politically as wee have shewed already Indeed every company of faithfull people who have received Christ in this manner hath right and title to enjoy him in all his politicall ordinances yet not independently but by a certaine order and subordination But if by the receiving of Christ they meane receiving of him to salvation or receiving of him by his Word and Spirit wee grant that not onely every company of faithfull people but every particular Christian hath right and title to enjoy him in the mystical ordinances of the Word Prayer c. as often as the same can be had yea further hath right and title to the fruit and benefit of Ecclesiasticall jurisdicton the exercise whereof is committed by Christ to the officers of the Church Intuitu Ecclesiae tanquam finis But that every company of faithfull people
Iâ—dicum the Court of Judges and Rulers which is called The Congregation of the mighty Psal. 80.2 So that the true sense of the place is the secluding of those persons from bearing any office or rule in the Common-wealth of Israel whereby they might be members of those Courts which did represent Israel The same sense is given by Lyranus Cajetan Oleaster Tostatus and Lorinus And which is more to be thought of Ainsworth himselfe expoundeth it so and further sheweth that it cannot be meant of joyning to the faith and religion of Israel or entering into the Church in that respect because Exod. 12.48 49. Num. 15.14 15. All strangers were upon their circumcision admitted into the Congregation of Israel to offer sacrifices and by consequence to enter into the court of the Tabernacle which also appeareth from Levit. 22.18 Num 9.14 The point being now cleared from the holy Scriptures we shal the lesse need to trouble our selves in the search of prophane Authors yet Pasor findeth Demosthenes using the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro concione magnatum As for that common expression of Divines that the Elders are the Church representative wee desire not to wrangle about names so that the thing it selfe which is the power and authority of the Officers sitting and judging apart from the people be condescended upon Yet let us see upon what grounds the name of a representative Church is by this man so superciliously rejected First hee saith that no godly no nor reasonable man will affirme that this representation is to be extended to any other acts of religion than these which are exercised in the governing of the Church But quo warrantâ— shall a man be both ungodly and unreasonable for affirming that the Elders may and ought to represent the Church where they serve in preferring a petition to the King and the Parliament for a Reformation or in bearing witnesse of the desolate condition of the Parish through the want of a ministery or in giving counsel to a Sister Church though these bee not acts of governing the Church Well be it as he saith what great absurdity shall fellow then forsooth it appertains to the people primarily and originally under Christ to rule and govern the Church that is themselves But who saith he will so say of a government not personall but publique and instituted as the Churches is Surely they who think the power to be originally in the people might here easily reply that this is no more strange than to say that the power which is primarily and originally in the body of a Kingdome is exercised by the Parliament which is the representative therof But because many learned men deny the power of Church government to be originally in the people though others and those very learned too doe affirme it therefore to passe that I shall serve him with another answer For as we can defend the authority of Presbyteries and Synods without wrangling about the name of a representative Church so can we defend the name of a representative Church without debating the question whether the people have the power originally or not May he therefore bee pleased to take notice of other grounds and reasons for the name of a representative Church as namely First what the Elders with the knowledge and tacite consent of the Church doe approve or dislike that is supposed to be approved or disliked by the whole Church which importeth that the Church is in some sort represented by the Senate of Elders Secondly as wee say wee have seene a man when haply wee have seene nothing but his head or his face which maketh him knowne unto us whence it is that Painters represent men unto us oft-times onely from their shoulders upward so doe wee discern know a visible political Church when we see in the Senate as it were the head and face thereof the officers being as eyes eares nose mouth c. to the Church that is being the most noble and chiefe members whereby the body is governed Thirdly the Senat of Elders is said to represent the Church because of the affinity and likenesse betwixt it and the Senate which representeth a City or some inferior civil Corporation affinity I mean not every way but in this that the government is not in the hands of all but a few and that those few were chosen with the consent of the whole Corporation Fourthly and if for these reasons the Eldership of a particular Church may be called a representative Church there is much more reason for giving this name to a classicall Presbytery or to a Synod provinciall or nationall for these doe result out of many particular Churches being made up of their Commissioners His second reason he taketh from the nature of representations alleaging that if the Elders in their Consistory represent the Church then whatsoever they either decree or do agreeing to the Word of God that also the Church decreeth and doth though absent though ignorant both what the thing is and upon what grounds it is done by the Elders and this how consonant it is to Papists implicit faith he leaveth it to wise men to consider This argument is as much against the representations of Kings and States by their Ambassadours and Commissioners it is against the representation of Churches by the Consistory of Elders and so all the wisdome of Princes and States in their Embassages shall turne to implicit faith because according to this ground what the representing doth within the bounds of his Commission that the represented doth implicitè And now I shall leave to be considered by wise men these vast differences betwixt the Papists implicit faith and the case of our Churches governed by Elderships 1. The Church assenteth not to that which the Consistory of Elders decreeth or doth except it be agreeing to the Word of God as the Reasoner himselfe saith but there is no such limitation in the Papists implicit faith 2. The Consistory of Elders doth not presse any thing upon the Church imperiously or by naked wil and authority without any reason as the Church of Rome doth with those from whom she requireth implicit faith 3. The Papists know not what those things be which they beleeve by implicit faith so that such a faith is rightly called mera articulorum fidei ignorantia a meere ignorance of the articles of faith but the decrees of our Elderships whereunto our Churches do consent are made knowne unto them 4. Our Churches are by the judgement of Christian discretion to examine all things propounded unto them even the decrees of the Elders whereas Papists may not examine what the Church propoundeth or commandeth 5. Papists by their implicit faith beleeve whatsoever the Church beleeveth because they think the Church can not erre but our Churches conceive not only their particular Elderships but oecumenicall councels to be subject to error Come we now to his third generall reason whereby he laboureth to prove
in the stewards name but in his masters who only out of power did conferre it on him But now lest any should conceive of him and those of his side that they either exercise amongst themselves or would thrust upon others any popular or democraticall Church governement therefore he desireth the Reader to make estimate both of their judgement and practice in this point according to these three declarations First he saith they beleeve that the externall Church governement under Christ is plainely aristocraticall and to be administred by some choyce men although the state bee after a fort popular and democraticall In respect of the latter he saith it appertaines to the people freely to vote in elections judgements of the Church in respect of the former that the Elders ought to governe the people even in their voting in just liberty by propounding and ordering all things and after the voting of the Church solemnly executing either ordination or excommunication Behold how he runneth upon the rocke of popular governement even whiles he pretendeth to have his course another way God send us better pilots I remember I have read in sundry places of Bodin de repub that the state is oft times different from the governement But sure I am this anti-consistorian maketh not only the state but the governement of the Church to be democraticall that in the superlative degree for the governement is democraticall at least composed of a mixture of aristocracy and democracy which is the most that he dare say of the Church governement where the people have the liberty of electing their owne officers and rulers and where the Senat so farre observeth the people that they may not passe the finall act in any matter of importance without the knowledge and tacite consent o the people though the people doe not vote in the Senat nay though the Senat doe not vote in the hearing of the people Now this seemeth not enough to those with whom wee have now to doe They will have the people freely to vote in all judgements of the Church And what is that but the very exercise of jurisdiction by the people which is the democracy of Movellâ—s condemned by Parker himselfe who maketh the exercise of ecclesiasticall power proper to the Rulers of the Church though he placeth the power it selfe originally in the whole Church Let it further be observed what difference these men make betwixt the Elders and the people in the governement of the Church That which they make proper to the Elders is only the propounding and ordering of matters and the excuting of some solemne act in name of the Church This is no more then belongeth to the moderator or Praeses in any consistory But they will have the matter to bee determined according to the most voyces of the people And so the new forme of Church governement which is here laid before us is a mere democracy with many moderators which is the most monstrous governement that ever was heard of His second declaration is that the Elders may and ought at times to meet apart from the body of the Church for deliberation This if hee meane only of that which hee specifiâ—th the preparing of things so as publikâ—ly and before the people they may bee prosecuted with most conveniency It is no more then what many require in moderators of Synods to whom they think fit that some Assessors or Coadjutors be adjoyned for deliberating in private upon the most orderly and convenient prosecuting of purposes in publike which as it hindereth not the governement of Synods to be aristocraticall so neither doth the deliberation of the Elders in private hinder the governement now in question to be democraticall But if he meane generally that the Elders may deliberate apart upon everything whatsoever which is to be voyced by the people then I aske by what reason doth he seclude from the deliberations those who are to voice for to give being and force to an Ecclesiasticall decree by voycing is more than to deliberate upon it whence it is that Papists give to Presbyters a deliberative voice in Councels but not a decisive voice and we also permit any understanding godly man to propound a matter to a Synod or to reason upon it though none have power of suffrage but the Commissioners of Churches So that he had greater reason to seclude the people from the voyces than from the deliberations His third declaration comes last and that is that by the people whose right in voting they thus stand for they understand not women and children but only men and them growen and of discretion Before hee did object to us that neither in Scripture nor in Greeke Authors the name Church is used for the assembly of sole Governours and to this I suppose I did give a satisfactory answer But good Sir be pleased mutually to resolve us where you have read in Scripture or in Greek Authors the name Church setting aside all representatives of Churches and Assemblies of sole Governors used for men alone and them growen and of discretion secluding women and children for now I see your reserved Glosse upon those words Tell the Church Tell all the men in the Parish that are growne and of discretion you must not take so much upon you as to expound that Text by a Synecdoche which none that ever wrote upon it before your selves did imagine and yet challenge us for expounding it by another Synecdoche following Chrysostome Euthymius Faber Stapulensis and many late Interpreters who understand by Church in that place the Rulers of the Church which are the noblest part of the Church I shall shut up this point with the words of Hyperius who saith that we must not understand by the Church the whole multitude Sed potius delectos c. But rather certaine choice Elders noted for their learning and godlinesse in whose power the Chuâ—ch will have to bee the judgement in such like causes which is proved from that that Matth. 18 after it was said â—ell the Church it is added where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them And 2 Cor. 2. he saith Sufficient is this censure inflicted by many We have now done with the Elderships of particular Churches but there is another blow which I perceive is intended against classicall Presbyteries and Synods provincial and national for the due power by which my opposite would have the Church to be governed hee layeth before us in this Assertion that every particular visible Church hath from Christ absolute and intire power to exercise in and of her selfe every ordinance of God and so is an independent body not standing under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of it selfe And this he will prove by ten Arguments but I shall not need to multiply answers as hee doth arguments because many of them are coincident The first third fourth and sixth doe all hit
commandement whereby we stand obliged to follow the example both of the Jewish Church in the Old Testament and of the Apostolicall Churches in the New Testament in such things as they had not for any speciall reason which doth not concerne us is transgressed by the withdrawing of Congregations from subjection unto Synods Of which things I have said enough before It is now but a poore begging of that which is in question to object that the governement of Presbyteries and Synods hath no warrant from the Word of God Come we then to examine his other Arguments His second he composeth thus If Christ in Mat. 18.17 where he saith Tell the Church doth mean a particular Congregation then hath every particular Congregation an intire power in and of it selfe to exercise Eclesiasticall governement and all other Gods spirituall ordinances But the first is true Ergo for the proposition he citeth some Writers who do not speak of such a connexion as he had to prove The assumption he proveth thus That Church which Christ intendeth in Matth. 18. hath absolute power in and of it selfe to perform all Gods ordinances But Christ intendeth in Mat. 18. a particular Congregation Therefore every particular Congregation hath absolute power c. How bravely doth he conclude the point Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici We will not examine our examinators logick we know what he would say and we woulâ— have him to know againe that Christ in Mat. 18. meaneth indeed some sort of a particular Congregation but neither only nor independantly Nay he meaneth all the Consistories of the Church higher and lower respectively as Parker conceiveth whose words I have before set down and to this sense the threed of the text doth leade us for as in the preceding words there is a gradation from one to two or three more then to the Church so is there a gradation by the like order and reason in the Consistories of the Church Tostatus upon this place acknowledgeth that Diae Ecclesiae reacheth as far as to an oecumenicall Councell when particular Churches erre in their determinations or when the cause is common to all the Churches for example when the Pope is to be condemned His seventh argument followes in my order and it runneth after this manner Such offices and callings without which the Church of God is coÌ„pleat and perfect for government are superfluous and humane But the Church of God may be compleat perfect for government without Presbyteriall and Synodicall offices and callings Ergo. I answer by a distinction Such offices and callings without which the Church of God are according to the course of Gods ordinary providence or at all times and in all cases perfect and compleat for government are indeed superfluous and humane But that such offices and callings without which the Church by the absolute power of God or at some times in some cases is perfect compleat are superfluous humane we utterly deny Now for the point of Synods I shall produce no other witnesses then those which this Disputer here taketh to be for him Whittaker acknowledgeth of Councels that Secundum ordinariam providentiam necessaria sunt ad bonam ecclesiae gubernationem according to ordinary providence they are necessary for the well governing of the Church Parker acknowledgeth Synods to be sometime necessary in the Church and he giveth example of the Councell of Nice without which the evils of the Church in the daies of Constantine could not have bin remedied The ninth Argument remaineth which is this That government which meerly tendeth unto the taking away from particular Congregations their due power is unlawfull But the government of Presbyteries and Synods as they now are doth meerly tend unto the taking away from particular Congregations their due power Ergo. I did expect some strong proofe for the assumption of this argument but we must take it as it is He tels us out of Master Barlow that no man under the degree of a Prophet or an Apostle may prescribe Gods Church and children patternes Our Synods are further from prescribing patterns either of worship or Church government than himselfe is The patterne and whole manner of Church government is set down in the Scripture those circumstaÌ„ces excepted which are common to the Church with the Common-wealth and are therefore determinable by natures light Synods may not prescribe new patterns no more may particular Churches but Synods may in common causes and extraordinarily prescribe unto particular churches such things as particular churches may in particular causes and ordinarily prescribe to their owne members If he will beleeve Parker whom he thinks his owne the authority which particular Churches have severally is not lost but augmented when they are joyned together in Synods But we have before abundantly declared how Presbyteriall Synodical government doth not at all prejudge the rights of congregations As for that which here he addeth by way of supposition putting the case that Presbyteries Synods will not permit a congregation to reject some coÌ„victed hereticks nor to chuse any except unfit Ministers this is just as if one should object against Parliaments that as they are now they do meerly tend to the taking away of the right and liberty of the subject and then for proofe should put the case that Parliaments will protect and maintaine Monopolists Projectorers c. Now in this drove of arguments the drover hath set some like the weake of the flock to follow up behind The first two are blind and see not where they are going for it maketh nothing against us either that the Eldership of one congregation hath not authority over the Eldership of another congregation or that a minister should not undertake the care of more Churches then one His third that presbyteriall power is never mentioned in the Scripture is a begging of the thing in question is answered before yet I must put him again in mind of Parker who speaking of churches saith Legitur in Scripturis de conjunct a earuÌ„ auct oritate quando in Synodis congregantur We read in their Scriptures of their joynt authority when they are gathered together into Synods But there is a speech of Zuinglius against representative Churches which he may not omit Zuingâ—ius doth indeed justly aske of the antichristian prelats who had given them the name of a representative Church who had given them power to make Canons c. yet hee addeth de his duntaxat c. I speak of them only that are such others who put themselves under not above the Scriptures my writings shall nothing prejudge In the fourth place he objecteth that whosoever shall deny their assertion must hold two distinct formes of Church government to be lawfull one where particular congregations do in of themselves exercise all Gods ordinances the other where they stand under another ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves I answer it
is most lawfull for particular congregations in and of themselves to exercise all Gods ordinances according to the distinctions rules above mentioned but this is not repugnant to their standing under the authority of presbyteries Synods for which let us againe heare a tender friend of congregations Major quidem potestas est Synodi quam unius alicujus Ecclesiae primea parochialis But goe we along His first argument is that for this reason among others the learned say the Pope is Antichrist viz. because he will have men to appeale from their owne Churches unto him and to stand unto his sentence and decree and doe not the presbyteriall assemblies Synods take upon them an authority much like to it Soft my master Soft Canno lesse serve you then to match our Church governemeÌ„t with the papall usurpations 2. I shall beseech you to remember 1. The Pope is one and receiveth appellations monarchinally a Synod consisteth of many receiveth appellations aristocratically 2. The Pope receiveth appellations from other nations beyond Sea presbiteries and Synods not so 3. The Pope will have his senteÌ„ce received as infallible presbyteries synods acknowledge themselves subject to error 4. The Pope acknowledgeth neither the Elders nor the Elderships of congregations which Presbyteries Synods do 5. The Pope acknowledeth no power ecclesiasticall on earth except what is subject to him yea derived from him and who will say so of Presbyteries Synods 6. The Pope receiveth appellations in other causes then ecclesiasticall Presbyteries and Synods not so 7. Synods are made up of the Commissioners of Churches The Pope neither hath any coÌ„mission himselfe from the Churches nor will admit the Commissioners of Churches to sit in judgement with him 8. Synods when they receive appellations are tyed to certaine rules of proceeding and judging especially the Scripture The Pope maketh his power boundlesse and exalteth himselfe above the very Scripture There shall be no end except I stop in time And what need I to make so many differences betwixt light and darknesse A sixth argument we shall now have what more meet and reasonable saith he then that every mans case be there heard determined where the fault was coÌ„mitted If this rule hold theÌ„ the ParliameÌ„t or privy Councell ought to go to every remote county corner of the kingdome to judge of such faults there coÌ„mitted as are proper for theÌ„ to judg His 7.8.10.11 arguments must be gone with silence for they run upon the robbing of congregations of their right the exercising of ecclesiasticall government in all the apostolique Churches our accoring with Papists the Hierarchy All which objections have been before repelled it is somewhat strange that the disputâ—r doth so often repeate the same arguments to make up the greater number A pretty art indeed like that of the young logician who would needs prove that the foure egs upon the table were five because two three make five In this second clause of arguments there is only one behind and that is that by the titles given to all particular coÌ„gregations viz. a kingdome a family a body a Queen c. it appeareth that all ecclesiasticall auctority ought to be in every one of theÌ„ distinctly wholly entirely Where let the reader observe that he maketh the meaning of that place Mat. 3.2 the kingdome of God is at hand to be this a particular congregation is at hand also that he expoundeth Eph. 2.19 Ps. 45. of a particular congregation which are meant of the holy Catholike Church But say that every particular congregation is a kingdome a family a body a Queene how proveth he that these names doe agree to every congregation in respect of her externall policy or ecclesiasticall government Nay say they doe agree in this respect yet in a thousand examples it is to be seen that one and the same thing is both totum pars the whole the part in different respects Whereof we have also spoken in the former treatise He concludeth that by this time he doth suppose the reader perceiveth that the Scriptures are every way for them and against the Presbyteriall governement you shall doe well Sir to thinke better upon it you have it yet to prove Therefore goe to your second thoughts and examine with me your not unexaminable examination Farewell FINIS Bishop Hall his assertion of Episcopacie by Divine right â—ag 208 209.2â—1 Pag. 146. Pag. 11. Pag. 17.18 In 1 Tim. 5. De vitâ— Const. â— lib. 1. cap. 44. Vide actae Syno Dord Sess. 25. Psal. 80 14 15. â—er 50.5 Whittak contr 3. de concil quaest 1. Cant. 6.4 Psal. 64 3. Math. 22.21 Rom. 14 23. Phil. 1.9 â— Tim. 2.7 Catal. test verit lib. 2. col 98. Oâ—iand cent 1. p. 8. Loc. theol â— 6 n. 37. Synod Turon 2. Can. 3. Syn. Constant. 6. can 69. Of Episcop by divine right pag. 2.12 Act. i. 26 d. 21. ca. cleros Dâ— clerie lib. 1. cap. 1. Bâ—ll prae fat ante lib. de clerie Bell. lib. 2. de mon. cap. 1. In 2.2.4.88 â—â—t 4. De gub ecâ—l pag. 28. M. Elias Hasen mullerus Hist. ordin Jeâ— pag. 68. Lib. 4. dist 4. Eccles. l. â— c. 3. Meum tuum Matth. 20.26.27 1. Tim. 3.2.3.4.5.6.7 c. 6.11 Tit. 1.6.7.8 Lib. 1. Ep. 9. Iun. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 5. Mos. and Aaron ii 2. c. 2. Alsted Thesau Chro. pag. 265. Ferneius Theol. lib. 7. pag. 151.152 Marâ—yr loc com class 4. cap. 1. p. 745. Anno 58. n. 10. De divers grad minist Evang. cap. â— 1. p. 108. Ibid. p. 118. Ibid. p. 10â— 118 De repub Jud. lib. 1. c. 12. Bertram de Pol. Jud. cap. 16. saith that these Elders did continue among the ten Tribes even after the defection of Jeroboam Seniores erant qui in mores vitam piorum virorum c. Inquirebam reprehensionibus censur sque Ecclesiasticis animad â—ertebant Hoâ—um Seniorum reliquae Ecclesiae coetus actiones moderabâ—ntur Prophetae 〈◊〉 ut ad Prophetae dâ—mum al quando seniores convenirent 2 Reg. 6.32 In Jos. 20. quaest 3. Dâ— guber Eccles cap. â— p. 70.71 Praelect tom 1. p. 23. In 4. praecept col 741. Contr. 3. l. 2. c. 6. D. of Tract 17. â— 2. Div. 4. Ubi supra pag. 26. Loc. Theol. tom 6. p. 137. Num. 8 9.10 〈◊〉 of Ecclâ—s discip pag. 87. Exoâ— 12.3 verse â—1 2 Cor. 4.5 In illum locum Eccles. l. 2. c. 1. De Presbyt p. 87. â—oc com class 4. cap 1. p. 746. De gub Eccl. cap. 10. p. 204 Of the Church lib 5. cap. 26. Answer to the Admon p. 114.115 Temporis illius conditionoâ— de qu buslibet praefectis Paulum loqui oftendit quia tuncnulli erant pii Magistratus sed de Senioribus qui morum erant Censores saith Calvine upon Rom. 12.8 De Reg. prim p. 123. De diver grad minist Evang. c. 11. p. 115. De Presbyt p. 87.
AN ASSERTION OF The Government of the Church OF SCOTLAND IN The points of Ruling-Elders and of the Authority of Presbyteries and Synods With a Postscript in answer to a Treatise lately published against Presbyteriall Government Gesta Purgat Caecil felic Adhibete Conclericos Seniores plebis Ecclesiasticos viros inquirant diligenter que sint istae dissensiones August epist. 118. Quorum conciliorum est in Ecclesia saluberima authoritas Edinburgh Printed for Iames Bryson 1641. TO THE READER IT is high time for those who have been long praying for the peace of Hierusalem and with bleeding hearts have beheld the sorrowes of Sion now to bestirre themselves with an extraordinary diligence and to contribute their most serious and uncessant endeavours for the setling of these present commotions about Church affairs in such a manner that the sacred twins Truth and Peace may both cohabit under own roofe and that this great and good work of Reformation may not be blasted in the bird nor fade in the flourish but may be brought forward to that full maturity which shall afford a harvest of joy to us and to all the Churches of God One controversie there is about the government of the Church and it is of such consequence that were it well resolved upon and rightly agreed it should facilitate a right resolution in other matters which are in question Now because longum iter per praecepta breve per exempla the way is long by precepts short by platforms therefore I have carefully observed the policie and government of other reformed Churches And because the nearnesse of relation swayeth my affection at least half a thought more unto that which is Scotlands caeteris paribus then unto that which is more remote from us therfore I was most solicitous to see a delineation of the government of that famously reformed neighbor Church which when I had read read over again I did conclude with my self that if these two points at which most exception is taken I mean the office of ruling Elders and the authoritie of Presbyters and Synodes which also are things common to the other reformed Churches could be upon good grounds maintained there is no other thing of any moment to be objected against it And with these thoughts I was so tossed that I could not rest satisfied with the Quid wiâ—hout the Quare but did conceive as great languor and desire for a demonstration of that form of Church government as before I had for a declaration of the same Whereupon I have purchased to my self from Scotland this ensuing Treatise which having fully satisfied my owne minde in the asserting of those most controverted points I have resolved to communicate and publish the same unto others for the reasons following First for the satisfaction of such as do through ignorance or mistaking stumble at such a form of Ecclesiasticall government I do not much marvell to see those that aâ—e of a simple understanding so far conquered as to scruple the office of ruling Elders having heard the big words and lavish expressions of some opposites against the same yet a poor peece it is which one of them would usher in with a tinckling Epistle in which Projicit ampullas sesquipedalia verba He maketh offer to forfeit his life to justice and his reputation to shame if any living man can shew that ever there was a ruling Elder in the Christian world till Fâ—rell and Viret first created them I shall not desire to take him at his word for his life but if he be not able to give a satisfactory answer unto that which is here sayd both from Scripture and from antiquity for ruling Elders then hath he given sentence against his own reputation for ever And so much the more that having in that assertion of Episcopacie boldly averred that the name of the Elders of the Church in all antiquity comprehendeth none but Preachers and Divines and that therfore none but they may be called Seniores Ecclesiae though some others happily may have the title of Seniores populi because of their civill authority notwithstanding the reading of the observations of Iustellus and of both the Cassaubons hath now so farre changed his tone that in his late answer to â—mectymnuus he acknowledgeth that beside Pastors and Doctors and beside the Magistrates or Elders of the Cities there are to be found in antiquity Seniores Ecclesiastici Ecclesiasticall Elders also only he alleadgeth they were but as our Church-wardens or rather as our Vestry-men whereas indeed they were Judges in Ecclesiasticall controversies and in some sort instructors of the people as shall be made to appeare Meane while we do observe what trust is to be given to this bold Speaker who hath beene forcâ—d to yeeld what he had before with high swelling words denied Another Instance of the same kinde is to be noted in his Remonstrance when he speaketh of the prescript forms of prayer which the Jewish Church had ever from the dayes of Moses wherewith also Peter and Iohn when they went up into the Temple at the ninth hour of Prayer did joyn to make good his allegiance he addeth the forms whereof are yet extant and ready to be produced Yet this he handsomely eateth up in his defence where he gives us to understand that those set forms of prayer are indeed specified by Capellus a writer of our owne Age but that the book it selfe which contained these prayers is perished a thousand years ago Well he is now content to say that once those forms were extant and this forsooth he will prove from a certain Samaritan Chronicle in the custodie of his faithfull friend the Primate of Aâ—mach wherein he hath found a story which transporteth him as much as the invention of the demonstration did Archimedes when he cried 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have found it I have found it Yet credâ—t Iudaeus apella Non ego But this lyeth not now in my way Only till a full answer be ready I thought it not amisse to give some taste of the mans vaine arrogant humour whose best weapons are great words As for his last record which he fetcheth from Abrahamus Scultetus against ruling Elders all that and much more hath been and here shall be abundantly confuted Others there be who call in question the power and authority of Ecclesiasticall Presbyteries and of Synods against which also some few Pens have been put to paper and have passed a censure no lesse hard then unseasonable which me thinks might well have been spared unlesse there had been stronger and more convincing reasons for it These I shall beseech that with minds voyd of prejudice they take into consideration the second part of this Treatise written with no heat nor sharpnesse of words but with plainnesse and strength of reason And withall I shall expect that they will not think the worse of the Author for being ready to answer him that asketh
the conâ—esâ—ion of our opposites for ruling Elders THE office of Ruling Elders is not onely maintained by 〈◊〉 Cartâ—right Aâ—â—rsâ— Bucerâ—â— and others whom our opposites will call partiall Writers let him who pleaseth read the commentaries of Martyr 〈◊〉 Gualther Hemmingius Piscator Paraus upon Rom. 12.8 1 Cor. 12.28 Aretius on Act. 14.23 Zepper de Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 1. 12. Bullinger on 1 Tim. 5.17 Arculâ—rius on Act. 14.23 Catal Test verit col 103. Osâ—and cent 1 l. 4. c. 11. Chemnâ—t exam part 2. pâ—g 2â—8 Gerard. loâ— Theol. tom 6 pâ—g 363 â—64 Muscul. loc com de Eccles. c. 5 Bucan loc com â—oc 42. Suetanus de Discipl Eccles. part 4 c. 3. Polanus Synt. l. 7. c 11. Zanchius in 4 praecep col 727. Iunius animad in Bellâ—r cont 5. l 1. c 2 Danaeus de Polit. Christ. l. 6 p 452. Alsted Theol. cas pag. 518.520 Sopingâ—us ad bonam fidem Sibrandi pag. 253. c. The Professours of Leyden Synt. pur Theol. Disp. 42. and sundry others whose testimonies I omit for brevities cause it is enough to note the places The Author of the Assertion for true and Christian Church policie pag. 196.197 citeth for ruling Elders the testimony the Commissioners of King Edward the sixt authorised to compile a booke for the reformation of Lawes Ecclesiasticall among whom were the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Ely They say Let the Minister going apart with some of the Elders take counsell c. Voetâ—us citeth to the same purpose Marlorat Hyperius Fulke Whittaker Fenner Bunnius Willet Sadeel Lubbertus Trelcatius both the one and the other yea Socinus and the Remonstrants Besides we have for us the practise of al wel reformed Churches and the Confessions of the French the Belgicke and the Helveticke Churches to be seene in the harmony of Confessions But what will you say if the adversaries of ruling Elders be forced to say somewhat for them Whitgift confesseth not onely that our division of Elders into preaching Elders and ruling Elders hath learned patrons but also that the Christian Church when there was no Christian Magistrate had governing Seniors and elsewhere he saith I know that in the Primitive Church they had in every Church Seniors to whom the government of the Congregation was committed Saravia lendeth them his word likewise Quod à me c. Which is not disputed by mee in that meaning that the Belgicke Churches or any other which doe with edification use the service of these Elders should rashly change any thing before that which is better bee substitute Againe speaking of the government of ruling Elders he saith Quod ut c. Which as I judge profitable and good to bee constitute in a Christian Church and Common-wealth so I affirme no Church no Common-wealth to bee bound thereto by Divine Law except perhaps necessity compell or great utility allure and the edification of the Church require it Loe here the force of truth struggling with one contrary minded Hee judgeth the office of ruling Elders profitable and good yet not of divine right yet hâ—e â—cknowledgeth that necessity utility and the edification of the Church maketh us tyed to it even by divine right But if it be profitable and good why did he call in question the necessity at least the utility and the edification of it can one call in question the utility of that which is profitable he would have said the truth but it stucke in his teeth and could not come forth Saelâ—vius de concil lib. I cap. 8. saith that among the Jewes Seniores tribuum the Elders of the Tribes did sit with the Priests in judging controversies of the Law of God Hence hee argueth against Bellarmine that so it ought to bee in the Christian Church also because the priviledge of Christians is no lessâ— thâ—n the priviledge of the Jewes Câ—mero tells us that when the Apostle 1 Coâ— 6. reproveth the Corinthians for that when one of 〈◊〉 had â— matter against anothâ—â— they 〈…〉 the Saints to bee â—udges 〈…〉 noâ— by the 〈◊〉 the 〈…〉 mâ—ltitude sedeos qui in Ecclesia constituti craâ—t ut vacarent gubernationi Ecclesiae that is â—hose who were ordained in the Church to give themselves to the government of the Church My Lord Craigtanne finding the strength of that Argument that if beside the Ministers of the Word other grave and wise Christians may be present in the greatest Assemblies and Councels of the Church why not in Presbyteries also answereth that indeed it is not amisse that the wiser sorâ— among the people be joyned as helpers and assistants to the Pastors providing that this their auxiliary function be not obtruded as necessary This is somewhat for us but we say further if it be necessary in Oecumenicke Councells for no lesse doe the Arguments of our Divines in that question with the Papists conclude then is it necessary in Presbyteries also CHAP. XI Doctor Fields five Arguments against ruling 〈…〉 HIS fiâ—st Reason that shewed 〈◊〉 to thinkâ— there were 〈◊〉 any 〈…〉 Church is because Bishops Presbyters that preach and minister the Sacraments and Deacons howsoever they much degenerated in later times yet all still remained in all Christian Churches throughout the World both Greeke and Latine in their names and offices also in some sort But of these ruling Elders there are no foot-steps to bee found in any Christian Church in the World nor were not for many hundred yeares whereas there would have beene some remaines of these as well as the other had they ever had any institution from Christ or his Apostles as the other had To this wee answer 1. If the Christian Churches throughout the World had wanted ruling Elders longer then they did yet prescription can be no prejudice to the ordinance of God 2. After that the golden age of the Apostles was spent and gone exact diligence was not taken to have the Church provided with well qualified Ministers but many unfit men yea sundry heretickes entred into that sacred vocation whereby it came to passe that corruption and errour overflowed the Churches as both Eusebius proveth from Aegesippus and catalogus testium veritatis from Irenaus Might not this be the cause of changing the office-bearers and government of the Church 3. In the Roman yea in Prelaticall Churches there are scarce any foot-steps at all of the offices of preaching Presbyters and Deacons as they were instituted by the Apostles The Apostles ordained Presbyters to preach the Word to minister the Sacraments to governe the Church and to make use of the keyes But the Popish and Prelaticall Presbyters have not the power of the keyes nor the power of Church government for it is proper to their Prelates as for the other two they are common to their Deacons for they also doe preach and baptise The office of the Popish Priest standeth in two things to consecrate and offer up the body of Christ and to absolve
the faithfull from their sinnes See Conci Triden de sacr Ordin cap. 1. Hier. Savanarola Triumph cruc lib. 3. cap. 16. And the same two make up the proper office of the Priest by the order of the English Service Booke As touching Deacons they were ordained by the Apostles for collecting receiving keeping and distributing of Ecclesiasticall goods for maintaining of Ministers schooles Churches the sicke stranger and poore The Popish and Prelaticall Deacons have no such office but an office which the Apostles never appointed to them for they had no preaching nor baptising Deacons Philip preached and baptised not as a Deacon but as an Evangelist Acts 21.8 Besides at the time of his preaching and baptising hee could not have exercised the office of his Deaconship by reason of the persecution which scattered rich and poore and all Acts 8.1 that which Steven did Acts 7. was no more then every believer was bound to doe when he is called to give a testimony to the truth and to give a reason of his faith and practice 4. Others of the faithfull besides the Ministers of the Word have beene admitted unto Councells and Synods by many Christian Churches throughout the World as is well knowne and this is a manifest foot-step of the government of ruling Elders 5. Nay in the Church of England it selfe at this day there are foot-steps of ruling Elders else what meaneth the joyning of Lay-men with the Clergy in the high Commission to judge of matters Ecclesiasticall Sâ—ravia saith the Churchwardens which are in every Parish of England have some resemblance of ruling Elders whose change appointed by law he saith is to collect keepe and deburse the goods and revenues of the Church to preserve the fabricke of the Church and all things pertaining thereto sure and safe to keep account of baptismes mariages and burials to admonish delinquents other inordinate livers to delate to the Bishop or his substitutes such as are incorrigible scandalous being sworn thereto also to observe who are absent froÌ„ the praiers in the Church upon the Lords dayes upon the holy dayes to exact from them the penalty appointed by law and finally to see to quietnes decency in time of divine service Doctor Fields second reason is for that Paul 1 Tim. 3. shewing who should be Bishops and Ministers who Deacons yea who Widowes passeth immediatly from describing the qualitie of such as were to be Bishops and Ministers of the Word and Sacraments to the Deacons omitting these ruling Elders that are supposed to lye in the midst betweene them which he neither might nor would have omitted if there had beene any such To this the answer is easie 1. As we collect the actions and sufferings of Jesus Christ and the institution of the last supper not from any one of the Evangelists but from all of them compared together for that one toucheth what another omitteth so doe we judge of the office-bearers of the Church not from 2 Tim. 3. only but from the collation of that and other places of Scripture of that kind Ruling Elders are found in other places and in the fifth Chapter of that same Epistle though not in the third 2 Neither were there any absurdity to hold that the Apostle in that third Chapter comprehendeth all the ordinary office-bearers in the Church under these two Bishops and Deacons and that under the name of Bishops he comprehendeth both Pastors Doctors ruling Elders for as al these three are overseers so to them all agree the qualities of a Bishop here mentioned whereof there is only one which seemeth not to agree to the ruling Elder viz. that he should be apt to teach vers 2. Yet Beza maintaineth against Saravia that the ruling Elder teacheth as wel as the Pastor only the Pastor doth it publickly to the whole congregation the ruling Elder doth it privately as he findeth every one to have need And we have shewed before that as a private Christian is bound in charity to teach the ignorant so the ruling Elder is bound to doe it ex offâ—cio The third reason which Doctor Field bringeth against us is for that neither Scripture nor practice of the Church bounding the government of such governours nor giving any direction how farre they may goe in the same and where they must stay lest they meddle with that they have nothing to doe with men should bee left to a most dangerous uncertainety in an office of so great consequence Our answer to this is 1. Wee have shewed already the certaine bounds of the power and vocation of ruling Elders 2. It was not necessary that the Apostle should severally set downe Canons and directions first touching Pastors then Doctors lastly ruling Elders since they are all Elders and all members of the Eldership or Presbytery it was enough to deliver canons and directions common to them all especially since the duties of ruling Elders are the same which are the duties of Pastors only the Pastors power is cumulative to theirs and over reacheth the same in the publicke ministery of the Word and Sacraments and so doth Paul difference them 1 Tim. 5.17 His fourth reason is because we fetch the paterne of the government of ruling Elders from the Sanedrim of the Jewes the platforme whereof wee suppose Christ meant to bring into his Church when he said Tell the Church whereas saith he it is most cleere that the court was a civill court and had a power to banish to imprison yea and to take away life till by the Romans the Jewes were restrained Wee answer that Beza de Presbyteriâ— I. B. A. C. De polit civil Eccl. lib. 2. Also Zepperus Iunius Piscator Wolphius Godwin Bucerus Gerard And sundry others have rightly observed that the Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim among the Jewes was distinct from the civill yet both called by the name of Sanedrim Wee grant with Beza that sometimes civill causes were debated and determined in the Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim but this was done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he saith the fact which was meerely civill was judged in the â—ivill Sanedrim but when the civilâ— Judges could not agree de jure even in civill causes in that case resolution was given by the other Sanedrim as in like cases by the juris-consults among the Romans for the conservation and interpretation of the law did belong to the Leviticall Tribe Hence it is that we read 2 Chron. 19.8.11 Iehosaphat set in Ierusalem of the Levits and of the chiefe Priests and of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel some for the Lords matters among whom presided Amariah the chiefe Priest and some for the Kings matters among whom presided Zâ—badiah the Ruler of the house of Judah Saravia saith this place proveth not that there were two distinct consistories one for civill another for Ecclesiasticall things because saith he by the Kings matters are meant matters of peace and warre by the Lords
word onely others he permits onely to consent unto that which is done by them Saravia alloweth grave and learned men to sit with the Ministers of the word yet not as Iudges but as Counsellors and Assessors onely Tilen will not say that the Bishops and Pastors of the Church ought to call any into their Councill but that they may doe it when there is need Against whom and all who are of their mind we object 1. The example of Apostolicke Synods Matthias the Apostle after Gods owne designation of him by the lot which fell upon him was chosen by the voices not onely of the Apostles but the other Disciples who were met with them Act 1.26 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Simul suffragiis electus est as Arias Montanus turneth it For the proper and native signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Lorinus sheweth out of Gagveius is to choose by voices The Professors of Leyden have noted this consensus Ecclesiae per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the election of Matthias Cens. in Confess cap. 21. Jn the Councill of Hierusalem Act. 15. we find that beside the Apostles the Elders were present and voiced definitively for they by whom the Decree of the Synod was given forth and who sent chosen men to Antioch were the Apostles and Elders Gerard Loc. Theol. com 6. n. 28. and thâ— Profess of Leyden cens in conf c. 21. understand that the Elders spoken of v. 5. 6. were the ruling Elders of the Church of Hierusalem joyned with the Apostles who laboured in the word Other ProtestaÌ„t writers understand by the name of Elders there both preaching and ruling Elders The Brethrent hat is the whole Church heard the disputes and consented to the Decrees v. 21 22 23 Ruling Elders behoved to doe more then the whole Church that is voice definitively Lorinus the Jesuite saith that by the name of Elders there wee may understand not onely Priests but others besides them Viz. antiquiores anctoritate praecellentes discipulos Disciples of greatest age and note And this he saith is the reason why the vulgar Latine hath not retained in that place the Greeke word Presbyteri but readeth Seniores 2. Wee have for us the example of Ecclesiasticall Courts among the Iewes wherein the Iewish Elders had equall power of voicing with the Priests and for this we have heard before Saravia's plaine confession 3. The example of ancient Councils in the Christian Church Constantine in his Epistle which he wrote to the Churches concerning the Nicene Councill saith I my selfe as one of your number was present with them the Bishops which importeth that others of the Laity voiced there with the Bishops as well as he and hee as a chiefe one of their number Euagrius lib. 2. cap. 4. saith that the chiefe Senators sate with the Bishops in the Councill of Chalcedon And after he saith The Senators decreed as followeth The fourth Councill of Carthagâ— c. 27. speaking of the transportation of a Bishop or of any other Clergie man saith sane si id Ecclesiae vtilitas fiendum poposecrit decretâ— Pro eo clericorum laicorum Episcopis porrecto in praeseÌ„tia Synodi transferatur The Decrees of the Synod of France holden by Charlemainâ— about the yeare 743. are said to have beene made by the King the Bishops the Presbyters and Nobles Many such examples might we shew but the matter is so cleere that it needeth not 4. The Revieu of the Councill of Trent written by a Papist among other causes of the Nobility of that Councill maketh this one that Lay-men were not called nor admitted into it as was the forme of both the Apostolicke and other ancient Councils shewing also from sundry Histories and examples that both in France Spaine and England Lay-men vsed to voice and to judge of all matters that were handled in Councils alleaging further the examples of Popes themselves That Adrian did summon many Lay-men to the Lateran Councill as members thereof that in imitation of him Pope Leo did the like in another Councill at the Lateran under Otho the first and that Pope Nicholas in Epist. ad Michael Imperat. acknowledgeth the right of Lay-men to voice in Councils wherein matters of faith are treated of because faith is common to all The same writer sheweth also from the Histories that in the Councill of Constance were 24. Dukes 140 Earles divers Delegates from Cities and Corporations divers learned Lawyers and Burgesses of Universities 5. The Protestants of Germany did ever refuse to acknowledge any such Councill wherein none but Bishops and Ministers of the word did judge When the Councill of Trent was first spoken of in the Dyet at Norimberg Anno 1522. all the estates of Germany desired of Pope Adrian the 6. That admittance might be granted as well to Lay-men as to Clergie-men and that not onely as witnesses and spectators but to be judges there This they could not obtaine therefore they would not come to the Councill and published a booke which they entituled Causa cur Electores caeteri confessioni Augustanae addicti ad CoÌ„cilium Tridentinum non accedant Where they alleage this for one cause of their not comming to Trent because none had voice there but Cardinals Bishops Abbots Generals or superiors of orders wheras laickes also ought to have a decisive voice in Councils 6. If none but the Ministers of the word should sit and voice in a Synod then it could not bee a Church representative because the most part of the Church who are the hearerâ— and not the teachers of the word are not represented in it 7. A common cause ought to be concluded by common voices But that which is treated of in Councils is a common cause pertaining to many particular Churches Our Divines when they prove against Papists that the election of Ministers and the excommunication of obstinate sinners ought to be done by the suffrages of the whole Church they make use of this same argument That which concerneth all ought to be treated of and judged by all 8. Some of all estates in the common-wealth voice in Parliament therefore some of all sorts in the Church ought to voice in Councils and Synods for de paribus idem judicium A Nationall Synod is that same to the Church which A Parliament is to the Common-wealth 9. Those Elders whose right we plead are called by the Apostle rulers Rom. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 and Governours 1 Cor. 12.28 therefore needs must they voice and judge in those assemblies without which the Church cannot be ruled nor governed Jf this be denyed them they have no other function behind to make them Rulers or Governours of the Church Rome was ruled by the Senate not by the Censors and Athens was governed by the Arâ—opagus not by the inferiour Office-bearers who did only take heed how the Lawes were observed But let us now see what is objected against this power of Ruling Elders to voice
in a Congregation exercising Iurisdiction as well as in a Nationall at least in a Oecumenicall Synod where there will be as great a multitude and peradventure greater then there is in a well-bounded Congregation Wee reply it is not so much the multitude which should make disorder in the exercise of Jurisdiction by a whole Congregation though indeed in many Congregations the multitude alone would hinder order as the rudenesse of the vulgar sort who if they should all speake their judgement what a monstrous and unavoidable confusion should there be The members of Nationall and Oecumenicall Councils are supposed to be men of knowledge and discretion and so may be kept in good order much more easily then a rude multitude in the Congregation They who are of another judgement object to us First our Saviours precept Matth. 18.17 Where hee biddeth us not â—ell the Eldershish but tell the Church Ans. By the Church he meaneth the representative body of the Church even as that which was spoken to the Elders of Israel Exod. 12.21 was said to be spoken by all the Congregation of Israel Ib. verse 3. and he who was judged by the Elders was said to bee judged by the Congregation Ios. 20.6 More of this place we say elsewhere Next they object the example of excommunication by the whole Congregation of Corinth for the Apostle sheweth that it was the duty of the whole Congregation to cast out that incestuous man 1 Cor. 5.13.4.9.13 In like manner hee writeth to them all to receive him againe when he had repented 2 Cor. 2.6.8 9. Answer Whether the power of excommunication in actu primo seu quo ad esse did belong to the collective body of the Church of Corinth or not is a question controverted and to this day sub judice lis est yet even those who hold the affirmative part of the question doe notwithstanding say that i◠〈◊〉 secundo seu quo ad operari the power pertained onely to the 〈◊〉 body of that Church which 〈…〉 Pâ—esbytery which is also confirmed by 2. Cor. 2.6 where the Apostle speaking of the censure of that incestuous man saith not that it was inflicted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by all but by many Hee was judged and sentenced by those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is by the Pastors and Elders of Corinth howbeit the execution finall act of that high censure was to be with the consent and in the presence of the Congregation Thirdly it is objected that Matthias was chosen by the whole number of the Disciples Act. 1. and so were the Deacons chosen Act. 6. and Elders in every City were made per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Congregation signifying their suffrages by the lifting up or stretching forth of their hands Act. 14.23 Therefore Jurisdiction ought to be exercised by whole Congregations Answ. This Argument faileth two waies 1. Though ordination of Office-bearers in the Church be an act of Jurisdiction it doth not appeare that the election of them is an act of jurisdiction likewise Though the solemnizing of marriage be an act of authority yet the choice and desire of the parties is not an act of authority 2. Or if you will election of Ministers is one of the Rights and Priviledges of the Church yet no act of jurisdiction 3. And if election were an act of authority and jurisdiction yet the alleadged examples prove no more but that this act of jurisdiction is to be exercised by the whole body in Ecclesia constituenda non constituta It may bee so indeed in Churches at their first erection but being once erected and all necessary Office-bearers therein planted from thenceforth the election of Elders pertaineth to the Presbytery to the Pastor and Elders as Zepperus writeth though still with the consent of the Church Fourthly it is objected that what concerneth all ought to be done with the consent of all Answ. Wee hold the same but the consent of all is one thing the exercise of jurisdiction by all another thing Ainsworth in one of his Epistles to Paget condemneth the Elderships sitting and judging matters apart from the Congregation Paget answereth that though the Eldership sit apart to judge yet before any sentence be given for the cutting off of any offender or for any other thing which concerneth all matters are first propounded to the whole Church and their prayers and consent required And surely this forme of proceeding shineth forth to us in that Apostolicall Synod at Ierusalem for the Apostles and Elders met sate and voiced apart from the whole Church as Calvin noteth from Act. 15 6. and they alone judged and decreed Act. 16.4 In the meane while were matters made knowne to the whole Church and done with the consent of all Act. 15.22 If it be objected from verse 12 that the whole multituâ—e was present in the Synod I answer we may understand with Piscator the multitude there spokeÌ„ of to be the multitude of the Apostles Elders V. 6. or if we should understand by the multitude the whole Church this proveth onely that the whole Church heard the question disputed not that they were all present at the judging and determining of it If it be further objected that the Synodall Epistle came not onely from the Apostles and Elders but from the brethren that is the whole Church The answer is easie The Brethren are mentioned because it was done with their knowledge consent and applause To say no more wee would gladly bury this controversie about popular government in eternall silence and oblivion and to this end we are content it be packt up in the words which the Separatists themselves doubtlesse perpending the Reasons above-mentioned have set downe in the 14. Article of the Confession of their Faith published Anno 1616 for this they say Wee judge each proper Pastor may and ought to bee trusted by the Congregation with the managing of all points of their Ecclesiasticall affaires and Government so farre that he with his assistants doe execute and administer the same yet so that in matters of waight the whole Congregation doe first understand thereof before any thing be finished and the finall act bee done in the presence of the whole Congregation and also that they the said Congregation doe â—ot manifestly dissent therefrom We are heartily content that Congregations doe fully enjoy all the Christian liberty which here is pleaded for in their behalfe yea and much more also for the assistants spoken of in these words of the Confession are other Pastors and Colleagues if any there be in the same Congregation as will bee evident to any that readeth that Article But wee are content that the Assistants spoken of be understood to bee Ruling Elders Now if the Authors of that Confession thought the Christian liberty of a Congregation sufficiently preserved when the Pastor or Pastors thereof doe manage the weighty Ecclesiasticall affaires and government with the
desideret 5. Adde unto these a distinction betwixt a Congregation lying alone in an Iland Province or Nation and a Congregation bordering with sister Churches If either there be but one Congregation in a Kingdome or Province or if there be many farre distant one from another so that their Pastors and Elders cannot ordinarily meete together then may a particular Congregation doe many things by it selfe alone which it ought not to doe where there are adjacent neighbouring Congregations together with which it may and should have a common Presbytery 6. Let us put a difference betwixt the subordination of one Congregation to another or of ore Eldership to another and the subordination of any Congregation and of the Eldership thereof to a superior Presbytery or Synod made out of many Congregations as one provinciall Synod is not subject to another Provinciall Synod yet all the Provinciall Synods in the Nation are subjeâ—t 〈◊〉 the Nationall Synod so it is also with the ordinary consistories one particular Eldership is not subject to another yet all the particular Elderships within the bounds of the common Presbytery are subject to the same So that there is a vast difference betwixt this subordination which we maintaine and the subordination of all the Parishes in a Diocesse to the Praelate and his Cathedrall Where Douname doth object that all the Parishes of Geneva are Hierarchically subject to the Presbytery in the city Parker denieth this nisi quis c. vnlesse saith he peradveÌ„ture one may be subject to himselfe for the Parishes each for their owne part and that alihe are this same Presbytery And after Consistorium c. for the Consistory of the Cathedrall Church is an externall meeting divers distinct and separate from the rurall Churches which are no part thereof this cannot be said of the Presbytery of Geneva 7. Wee must distinguish betwixt a dependance absolute and in some respect a Congregation doth absolutely depend upon the holy Scriptures alone as the perfect rule of faith and manners of worship and of Church-government for we accurse the tyranny of Prelates who claimed to themselves an autocratoricke power over Congregations to whom they gave their naked will for a Law One of themselves told a whole Synod that they ought to esteeme that best which seemeth so to Superiors and that this is a sufficient ground to the conscience for obeying though the thing be inconvenient We say that Congregations ought indeed to be subject to Presbyteries and Synods yet not absolutely but in the Lord and in things lawfull and to this purpose the constitutions of Presbyteries and Synods are to bee examined by the judgement of Christian discretion for a Synod is Iudex Iudicandus and Regula regulata so that it ought not to be blindly obeyed whether the ordinance be convenient or inconvenient Last of all we are to distinguish betwixt the condition of the Primitive Churches before the division of Parishes and the state of our Churches now after such division At the first when the multitude of Christians in those great cities of Rome Corinth Ephesus c. was not divided into severall Parishes the common Presbytery in the city did suffice for the government of the whole and there was no need of a particular consistory of Elders for every assembly and Congregation of Christians within the city except perhaps to admonish rebuke exhort or to take notice of such things as were to be brought into the common Presbyterie But after that Parishes were divided and Christian Congregations planted in the rurall villages as well as in the cities from henceforth it was necessary that every Congregation should have at hand within it selfe a certaine Consistory for some acts of Church-government though still those of greater importance were reserved to the greater Presbyterie And thus have J out of desire to avoid unnecessary questions set downe my conceptions concerning the Elderships of particular Congregations and the power of the same If it be said that I seeme to deny the divine right of the same or that they have any warrant from the patterne of the Apostolike Churche I answer I acknowledge the conformity of the same with the patterne thus farre 1. It is to bee suposed that in some small cities especially the same not being wholly converted to the Christian faith there was but one Christian Congregation the Eldership whereof did manage matters of jurisdictioÌ„ proper thereto 2. Even in the great cities at the first there was but one Congregation of Christians and so but one particular Eldership 3. After that the Gospell had spread and Christians were multiplied in those great cities it is true they were all governed by a common Presbytery but that Presbytery was not remote but ready at hand among theÌ„selves Now in this we keepe our selves as closse to the patterne as the alteration of the Churches condition by the division of Parishes will suffer us that is to say we have a common Presbytery for governing the Congregations within a convenient circuit but withall our Congregations have ad manum among themselves an inferior Eldership for lesser acts of Government though in respect of the distance of the seate of the common Presbytery from sundry of our Parishes they can not have that ease and benefit of nearenesse which the Apostolique Churches had yet by the particular Elderships they have as great ease of this kinde as conveniently can be CHAP. III. Of greater Presbyteries which some call classes THe word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyterie we find thrice in the New Testament twice of the Iewish Presbytery at Hierusalem Luke 22.66 Act. 22.5 and once of the Christian Presbytery 1. Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee which 〈◊〉 given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Sutlivius and Douname have borrowed from Bellarmine two false glosses upon this place They say by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here we may understand either an assembly of Bishops or the Office of a Presbyter which was given to Timothy To these absurdities let one of their owne side answer Whereas saith D. Forbesse some have expounded the Presbytery in this place to be a company of Bishops unlesse by Bishops thou would understand simple Presbyters it is a violent interpretation and an insolent meaning And whereas others have vnderstood the degree it selfe of Eldership this can not stand for the degree hath not hands but hands are mens J find in Sutlivius a third glosse He saith that the word Presbyterie in this place signifieth the Ministers of the word non juris vinculo sed ut cunque collectos inter quos etiam Apostoli erant Ans. 1. If so then the occasionall meeting of Ministers be it in a journey or at a wedding or a buriall c. shall all be Presbyteries for then they are ut cunque collecti 2. The Apostles did put the Churches 〈◊〉 better order then to leave imposition of hands or
any thing of that kind to the uncertainty of an occasionall meeting 3 The Apostles were freely present in any Presbyterie where they were for the time because the oversight and care of all the Churches was layd upon them Pastors and Elders were necessarily present therein and did by vertue of their particular vocation meete together Presbyterially whether an Apostle were with them or not No other sense can the Text suffer but that by Presbyterie we should understand consessus Presbyterorum a meeting of Elders and so doe Camero and Forbesse themselves expound it Sutlivius objecteth to the contrary that the Apostle Paul did lay on hands upon Timothy which he proveth both from 2. Tim. 1. and because extraordinary gifts were given by that laying on of hands Ans. There is an expresse difference made betwixt Pauls laying on of his hands and the Presbyteries laying on of their haÌ„ds Of the former it is said that Timothy received the gift which was in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the laying on of Pauls hands but he received the gift 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the laying on of the hands of the Presbyterie as Didoclavius noteth But saith Sutlivius Timothy being an Evangelist as you hold how could hee be ordained by the Presbyterie Ans. 1. Though the Presbyterie did neither give him ordination to bee an Evangelist nor yet conferre by the laying on of their hands extraordinary gifts upon him yet did they lay on their hands as setting to the the Seale and Testimony and commending him to the grace of God even as certaine Prophets and Teachers layd hands on Paul and Barnabas and Ananias also before that time had laid his hands upon Paul 2. The Presbyterie might ordaine Timothy to be an Elder If so be he was ordained an Elder before he was ordained an Evangelist 3. If the testimony of the Presbyterie by the laying on of their hands together with the Apostles hands in the extraordinary mission of Timothy was required much more may it be put out of question that the Apostles committed to the Presbytâ—ry the full power of ordaining ordinary Ministers But it is further objected by Sutlivius that this could not be such a Presbyterie as is among us because ordination and imposition of hands pertaine to none but the Ministers of the word Ans. 1. The children of Israel laid their hands upon the Levites we would know his reason why he denyeth the like power to ruling Elders now especially since this imposition of hands is but a gesture of one praying and a morall signe declaring the person prayed for 2. Howsoever our practice whâ—ch is also approved by good Divines is to put a difference betwixt the act of ordination and the externall right thereof which is imposition of hands ascribing the former to the whole Presbytery both Pastors and Elders and reserving the latter to the Ministers of the word yet to bee done in the name of all Thus have we evinced the Apostles meaning when he speaketh of a Presbyterie and this Consistory we find to have continued in the Christian Church in the ages after the Apostles Jt is certaine that the ancient Bishops had no power to judge any cause without the presence advice and counsell of their Presbyters Conc. Carth. 4. can 23. Field Forbesse Saravia and Douname doe all acknowledge that it was so and so doth Bellarmine de Pont. Rom. l. 1. c. 8. Of this Presbytery speaketh Cyprian Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium c. Of the Presbytery speaketh the same Cyprian lib. 2. Ep. 8. lib. 4. Ep. 5. Ignatius ad Trall and Hierom in Esa. 3. Wee finde it also in conc Ancyr can 18 and in conc Carthag 4. can 35.40 Doctor Forbesse alledgeth that the word Presbytery for fifteen hundred yeares after Christ did signifie no other thing in the Church then a Diocesan Synod But herein if hee had understood himselfe he spake not so much against Presbyteries as against Prelats for a Diocesse of old was bounded within one City Tumque jampridem per omnes provincias per urbes singulas ordinati sint Episcopi c. saith Cyprian It was necessary to ordaine Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Chrysostome speaking of the primitive times yea in Country Villages also were Bishops who were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rurall Bishops whose Episcopall office though limited yet was allowed in the Councell of Ancyra can 13. and the Councell of Antioch can 8. 10. Sozomen recordeth that the Village Majuma which was sometime a suburbe of the City Gaza was not subject to the Bishop of Gaza but had its owne proper Bishop and that by the decree of a Synod in Palestina The Councell of Sardis can 6. and the Councell of Laodicea can 57. though they discharged the ordaining of Bishops in villages lest the name of a Bishop should grow contemptible did neverthelesse allow every City to have a Bishop of its owne What hath Doctor Forbesse now gained by maintaining that the bounds of a Presbyterie and of a Diocesse were all one They in the Netherlâ—nds sometime call their Presbyteries Diocaeses and many of our Presbyteries are greater then were Diocesses of old Wee conclude there was anciently a Presbytery in every City which did indeede choose one of their number to preside among them and to lay on hands in name of the rest and hee was called the Bishop wherein they did more trust the deceiveable goodnesse of their owne intentions then advert to the rule of the Word of God These things premitted I come now to that which is principally intended viz. by what warrant and quâ— jure the Classicall Presbyterie among us made up out of many neighbouring congregations should be the ordinary Court of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction at least in all matters of highest importance which doe concerne either all or any of those congregations For resolution hereof we must understand 1. That causes common to many congregations ought not to be judged by any one of them but by the greater Presbytery common to them all 2. It is to bee supposed that particular congregations at least the farre greatest part of them have not in their proper Elderships so many men of sufficient abilities as are requisite in judging and determining the cases of the examination of Ministers of ordination deposition excommunication and the like 3. When one appealeth from a particular Eldership out of perswasion that hee is wronged by the sentence thereof or when that Eldership finding its owne insufficiency for determining some difficult causes resolveth to referre the same into a higher Court reason would that there should be an ordinary Court of a Classicall Presbytery to receive such appellations or references 4. Congregations which lye neare together ought all as one to keep unity and conformity in Church policy and government neither ought one of them be permitted to doe an
the Lord and the names of the twelve Tribes upon the brest-plate this proveth not a Church representative but signes representative 5. The body of the Church is now as then necessarily absent from the Consistorial actions of debating and deciding matters of Church government and of Jurisdiction and so that which was called the foundation of a representative Church doth still remaine Now before I make an end I must answer yet other two objections which have beene lately made There is one who objecteth that the Assembly of the Apostles Acts 15. can bee no president nor patterne for succeeding ages First because the Apostles were inspired with the holy Ghost which wholly guided them in all matters of the Church so as in that their determination they say expressely It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burthen Now what Synod in any age after the Apostles could ever say that they were infallibly inspired and assisted by the holy Ghost Secondly that injunction of the holy Ghost and of the Apostles was but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that present time for the avoiding of offences betweene Jewes and Gentiles But the like we read not afterward in all the writings of the Apostles Ans. 1. I say with Whittaker Posse alia c. That other lawfull councells may in like manner affirme their Decrees to be the Decrees of the holy Ghost if they be like unto this councell and if they keepe the same rule which the Apostles did keep and follow in this councell for if they decree and determine nothing but from the Scriptures which was done in this councell and if they examine all questions according to the Scriptures and in all their Decrees follow the voyce of the Scripture then may they affirme that the holy Ghost hath so decreed 2. If the Doctrine or exhortation of a Pastor well grounded upon the Scriptures bee the Word of God then much more is the Decree of a Synod well grounded upon the Scriptures the Decree of the holy Ghost 3. That Assembly was not of the Apostles alone but of the Apostles and Elders neither did the Decrees proceed from the Apostles alone but from the Apostles and Elders Acts 16.4 and 21.25 and in the place which is now objected Acts 15.28 not the Apostles alone but the Elders with them say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us What the Elders did then the Elders may doe now for time hath not diminished their authority 4. Nay what the Apostles did in that Synod the Elders may doe in a Synod now for the Apostles then did nothing but in the ordinary and common way of disputing and debating comparing reason with reason and sentence with sentence and thereafter framing the Decree according to the light which they had by reasoning and by searching the Scriptures But which is most observable the sentence of the Apostle Peter in that Synod was very imperfect and defective for he only disswadeth from imposing the yoke of the ceremoniall law upon the Churches of the Gentiles but maketh no mention of any overture for avoiding the offence betwixt the Jewes and the converted Gentiles at that time which I may suppose he would have done if his light and judgement had carried him that farre In this the Apostle Iames supplieth the defect of Peters sentence and propoundeth an overture which pleased the whole councell and according to which the decree was given sorth This made Luther to say that Iames did change the sentence of Peter And all this it pleased God so to dispose that we might understand that Synod to bee indeed a president and paterne for ordinary Synods in succeding ages 5. Henry Iacob in his third argument for the Divine Institution of the Church saith It is absurd and impossible that the Text Matth. 18. was never understood for 1500 yeares after Christ. Sure this Text Act. 15. was never understood for that whole space if the Assembly there mentioned be not a president to succeeding ages 6. It maketh nothing against us that he saith the decree of the Apostles Elders was for that present time onely nay it maketh for us for in this also that Synod was a paterne to succeeding ages forasmuch as Synods now have no power to make a perpetuall restraint from the practice of any indifferent thing such as was then the eating of bloud and things strangled but onely during the case of scandall And moreover the decree of the Apostles and Elders in that Synod is also perpetuall in so farre as it is conceived against the pressing of circumcision as necessary to salvation One objection more I finde in another late Peece which striketh not at the authority alone but at the very reputation of Synods This Authour alledgeth that the ordinary government by Synods is a thing of great confusion by reason of the parity and equality the voyces being numbred not weighed Equidem saith a wise Father at vere c. To say the truth I am utterly determined never to come to any Councell of Bishops for I never yet saw good end of any Councell for Councels abate not ill things but rather increase them Answ. 1. If the parity and equality make a great confusion in the ordinary government by Synods it shall make no lesse but rather greater confusion in an extraordinary Synod so that there is no ground for his restriction to that which is ordinary 2. If the numbring of voyces and the parity of those that doe voyce make a confusion in Synods why not in Parliaments also and in other civill Courts 3. That testimony doth only strike at the Councels of Bishops and so maketh not against parity but against imparity in Councels And to say the truth wee have found in our owne experience that Prelaticall Synods have not abated but rather increased evils in the Church 4. The words of Nazianzen for he is the Father here meant of are not to be understood against Synods but against the abuse of Synods at that time And in this we must pardon him saith Whittaker that he shunned all Synods in those evill times of the Church when the Emperour Valens was opposite to the Catholicke faith and when the faction of heretickes did most prevaile in that case indeed Synods should have produced greater evils But we trust it shall be now seen that well constituted and free Synods of Pastors and Elders shall not increase but abate evill things FINIS A POST-SCRIPT In answer to a Treatise very lately published which is intituled The Presbyteriall Governement examined WHen the Printer had done all except two sheets of my former Treatise there came to my hands a peece against Presbyteriall Governement which promiseth much but performeth little Though my time be very short yet I trust to make an answer to it as full as it deserveth It hath a magisteriall and high sounding title undertaking the examination of Presbyteriall
that the consistorian course is contrary to the practise of the Apostolick Churches because the Apostle 1 Cor. 5. writeth to the whole Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous man And that by these words when you are câ—me together the whole Church is to be understood he proveth by three reasons the strength of them all we shall take together in one argument thus They among whom the fornicatour was who were puffed up when they should have sorrowed and out of the midst of whom he was to be put who had done that thing to whom it appertained to purge out the old leven and to whom the Apostle wrote not to be commingled with fornicators or covetous persons they were to be gathered together into one and to judge and excommunicate that incestuous person But they among whom the fornicator was c. were not the Elders alone but the whole Church Ergo c. And now what shall this disputer say if I cleave this his strong argument with a wedge of his own timber thus c. If they among whom the fornicator was who were puffed up when they should have sorrowed and out of the midst of whom c. were to judge and excommunicate that incestuous person then women were to judge and excommunicate him and not men only But the latter is absurd therefore so is the former My proposition he must either grant or else say that the incestuous man was not to be put out of the midst of women and that the Apostle did not forbid women to be commingled with fornicators My assumption is his own Pag. 24. where he tels us from 1 Cor. 14.34 35. 1 Tim. 2.12 that women are debarred from liberty or right of voting in publick ecclesiasticall matters Then let him see to the conclusion Another proofe of the same point he addeth from 2 Cor. 2. where he writeth to these same Corinthians to receive pardon and comfort the penitent which I might repell in the same manner But there is a word in that same Chapter which may cleare the thing Vers. 6. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment or censure which was inflicted of mâ—ny Which many if as he saith in the next page the Apostle had opposed to himselfe alone and not to all then he said but the halfe of that which he meant to say He would have the Corinthians to think it enough that the man had beene publickly censured by so many as were in their Presbyterie Now if he had beene censured by the whole Church it had been more fit and emphaticall to have said censured by all But there is another sence which well fitteth the place Heinsius observeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is one thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another thing the former noting those that exceed in number the latter those that are chiefe in dignity and that therefore the Apostle when he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaneth the rulers and Elders of that Church so that the reading shall be this Sufficient to such a man is this censure inflicted of the chieâ—e In the same sence Piâ—â—rtor taketh the words which also he doth illustrate from Mat. 12.41.42 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a greater then Ionah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a greater then Solomon To conclude this case the Apostle as in other Epistles so in this doth sometime point at common duties belonging to the whole Church sometime at the duties of officers That the whole Church of Corinth should have sorrowed for the incestuous man and that it was a common duty to them not to be commingled with fornicators and to have no fellowship with the unfruitfull workes of darknesse but rather to reprove them In like manner it concerned them all to comfort him being penitent But as for the judging and excommunicating of him that did belong only to the Presbytery of Corinth and so Calvin Piscator Paraeus and many others expound the Apostles words His digression to prove that the Apostle alone did not give forth sentence judiciary upon the offender is not against us but against the prelaticall party therefore I passe it What he alleageth from Act. 1. 6. 14. For the Churcheâ— right of suffrage in the election of Officers we doe most heartily assent unto it with this distinction that when the case is such as it was in the examples alleaged that is when visible politicall Churches are to be erected not having beene before then the right of suffrage in elections doth indeed belong to the whole body And though this way of election were ordinary it cannot prove that the people have the power of that authority in them to which they elect the officers no more then the Electors of the Emperour have in them power of the imperiall dignity saith Baynes But now it is not ordinary for when there is already a setled Ecclesiasticall republike or a Church with officers the officers for the time being ought by their suffrages to elect the officers that are wanting with the knowledge and consent of the Church Somewhat he demurreth upon Act. 15. for the vindication of which place I refer my reader to the second part of the former Treatise Chap. 1. 8. Neither shall I stay to examine by what Method either this discourse or the other about elections falleth into the proofe of his proposition concerning that part of the Elders office which standeth in the censuring of offenders He falleth at last into his owne channell concluding it to bee a thing most equall that the whole Church should clearely and undoubtedly take knowledge of the contumacy of the person that is to bee excommunicated of the crime for which and this we also say with him One word I desire to have cleared before wee proceed One of his grounds in his discourse about elections is that the Church officers as they are the servants of Christ Jesus so also her servants for Jesus sake 2. Cor. 4.5 The professors of Leyden say well that they are not properly the servants of the Church but of God and of Christ They are not Lords of the Church neither but Rulers Guides Bishops and Pastors of the Church yet not servants of the Church except objective that is the servants of God in the Church or for the Churches good If this bee his meaning it is well But I doubt he hath another meaning and that is that the Church doth give the power which is hers unto her officers as her servants to exercise it in her name If this bee the matter then let us marke with Baynes that the Church doth not virtually and out of power make an officer but shee doth it in Stewardlike manner ministring to the sole Lord and master of the house so that hee who is taken in doth not his office in her name but in his masters name as a Butler taken in by the Steward of the house doth not execute his office
upon the same string The first is thus If those Churches planted by the Apostolique institution had power fully in themselves immediatly from Christ to practise all his ordinances Then have all Churches the like power now But the first is true Ergo. The third thus Whatsoever was commanded by the seven Churches to be practised by each of them apart in and for themselves that no Church of God must now omit But Ecclesiasticall government was commanded to the seven Churches to bee practised by each of them c. The fourth thus If the Church of Corinth had power and authority within her selfe to exercise Ecclesiasticall Government then ought not particular Congregations now to stand under any other Ecclesiastical authority out of themselves But the first is true Ergo. The sixth thus If the Apostle gave commandement unto the Eldership of Ephesus for the whole administration of all ordinances in that Church then may the Eldership of every particular congregation administer among themselves all Gods ordinances But the first is true Ergo. Now for answer to these First I simply deny the connexion of the proposition of the fourth argument because it argueth à genere ad speciem affirmative from the exercising of ecclesiastical Government to the exercising of it independently Neither hath hee said any thing for proofe hereof Next the Reader will easily perceive that both in the first and sixth Argument his citations in proofe both of the propositions and assumptions have not so much as the least colour of pertinency and farre lesse of proofe In both these arguments when he would prove the proposition he speaketh to the assumptioÌ„ contrariwise But these things I delight not to insist upon only I shall give two Distinctions any one of which much more both of them shall make these arguments wholly improfitable unto him First I distinguish his propositions That power authority which the Church of Corinth the seven Churches of Asia and other Apostolicall Churches had to exercise Ecclesiastical government in and for themselves the like have all Churches now which are of the like frame and condition but the most part of particular Churches now are of a different frame and condition from the Apostolique Churches and so have not such fulnesse of power as they had Put the case that the Apostolick Churches were no greater then might and did ordinarily assemble together into one place for the worship of God yet since by reason of the troubleâ— of those times which suffered not the Christians to spread themselves abroad all the countrey over but confined them within Cities and safe places those Churches were not planted so thick and neare together as that they might have the conveniency of Synodical consociation hence it appeareth that they might do many things in and by themselves which particular Congregations now having the conveniency of consociation with neighbour Churches ought not to do in and by themselves But this I have said gratis having in my former Treatise at length declared that the Apostolick Churches at least the most and principall of them were greater then could assemble ordinarily in one place of worship and that they were served with sundry both Pastors and Elders that therefore our Parochiall Churches ought not to be in respect of the points in question compared with their Churches nor our Parochiall Presbyteries with their Presbyteries The second distinction which I have to propound is concerning the assumptions of the arguments now in hand The Apostolick Churches did indeed ordinarily exercise Ecclesiasticall government and all the ordinances of Christ in and for themselves yet so that when the occasion of a Synode did occurre for determining a question which was too hard for particular Churches and was also common to many Churches in that case they did submit themselves to the authority of he Synod Which hath also before beene made plaine from Act. 15. To practise all the ordinances of God in a Church is one thing and to practise them independantly so as nevâ—r to be subject to the authority of a Synod is another thing My antagonist doth after take it for granted saith that all learned men have granted that the Churches of the Apostolick constitution were independant bodies But whence are you Sir that would make your Reader beleeve there are no learned men in the Churches of Scotland France the low-countries and the other reformed Churches which have the governement of Presbyteries and Synods conceiving it to be most agreeable to the Apostolicall patterne Have you put out of the category of learned men all Protestant writers who in the controversies about Councels dispute against Papists from Acts 15.2 Why did you not among all your imeprtinent allegations cite some few of those learned men who grant the Apostolick Churches to have been independant bodies But we must heare what more you have to say Your first eight and tenne arguments are in like manner coincident The first you frame thus Such actions the Church may lawfully do wherein no law of God is broken But there is no law of God broken when particular Churches do in and among themselves exercise all Gods ordinances Ergo. The eight thus Whatsoever governement cannot be found commanded in the written Word oâ— God ought not to have any place in the Church of God But the Government of Presbyteries and Synods over many particular congregations cannot be found commanded c. The tenth thus It is a sinne against God to adde any thing to that forme and manner of ordering Churches which Christ hath set forth in the new Testament But to subject particular congregations under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves is to adde c. Now the word independantly must be added to the assumption of the first argument else it cannot conclude what he affirmes and we deny for there is no question but particular Churches may exercise in and among them selves all Gods ordinances in those cases and with those distinctions which I have spoken of before part 2. chap. 2. This being cleared I deny the assumption in all these three arguments I expected proofe for it but he hath given none except that it cannot for shame be denied I had thought it rather a shamefull thing for a writer to trouble his Reader with arguments which he cannot make good But what saith he to the professors of Leyden who hold the institution of Synods not to be humane but divine which they prove from Mat. 18. Act. 15. Nay what is more ordinary in Protestant writers then the applying of those words Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them unto Synods and Councels and hence they condemne the popish Councels in so much that Bellarmin Salmeron and other Jesuits have in this contradicted all our writers telling us as these men doe that our Saviour meaneth not of Councels in these words Moreover that