handled in a forinsecall court as well as buying and selling which are no forinsecall acts as excommunicating is Thus Mr. Calandrin sees 1. that it is very consistent that a thing or action be done in the forum externum and yet not be an act or action of that forum 2. that preaching need not to be an action of that forum for that it is performed outwardly as well as excommunication It may be for I have not now my Paraenesis by me I referred the preaching of the Gospell to the forum internum or the court of conscience which I did not in regard of the outward act but of the preaching to the heart and of the operation of outward preaching as believing loving trusting all which are performed in the court of conscience This serves for answer to what he saith next If the key of the word for all it hath externall acts may neverthelesse belong to the forum internum why may not the key of censure as well since both are alike in relation to the soul and the inward man The handling of the key of the word as it is outwardly pronounced is an act not of jurisdiction but of function performed in the forum externum but as it is a preaching to the heart it is an act performed in the forum internum or the court of conscience but the handling of the key of censure is an act of jurisdiction over the outward man however the inward man be affected and compelling to an outward obedience and therefore belongeth not to the forum internum in which such acts as preaching to the heart loving believing denying ones self are performed What he saith that both the key of the word and of censure have relation to the soul and the inward man proveth not that excommunication is not an externall act of an externall jurisdiction For an act of outward jurisdiction in the forum externum may produce a good effect in the forum internum even in the soul of a man such effect may excommunicationbring forth though it be an act of magistracy and outward jurisdiction so may the laying hold of a malefactour and the sentence of the magistrate pass't upon him be a soveraign remedy for the salvation of his soul and be neverthelesse an act of magistracy of the forum externum In short there being but two courts conceivable one externall the other internall this of the conscience the other of magistracy I know no medium between them two no more then betwixt command and counsell and betwixt the power of the word and the power of the sword CHAPTER XII Of the nature of calling to the ministery Ministers are not called by men but by God by a succession not of ordination but providence The plea for succession is Romanish Ministers are no successours in their ministery to the Iudaicall Priests but to the Prophets SInce no religion can stand without a church and meetings of Christians about Divine worship and no church without government and no government without governours which the Rever Assembly calls church-officers and no governours without a commanding power and a rule to govern others by it will be requisite to enquire into four things 1. the calling of the church-officers 2. the extent of their power and of the obedience due to them 3. whether all church-officers are invested with the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing as the Rever Assembly seemeth to say 4. by what rule and discipline they are to govern For the calling of ministers I have handled that subject at large in my Paraenesis I make the calling to be as much of divine authority as the reverend Ministers of London do in their jus Divinum of the ministery yea more holding that they have no call from men but from God immediatly that their mission is from Christ and the Apostles that all the acts of church-ministers people and magistrate about receiving a minister are not to send him but to acknowledge Gods call and mission and publickly to declare their willingnesse and readinesse to accept of his ministery among them for all these following acts are necessarily to be supposed before a man be acknowledged a Minister of the Gospell and set apart by God for the great work of saving souls 1. The acts of his internall calling or rather his disposition which are a strong desire and resolution to consecrate his life time and studies that he may be a minister of the Gospell and a persuasion that he is by God thereunto called 2. The acts which doe make up his externall calling and by which men acknowledge Gods call are 1. an examen by a competent number of grave pious and learned ministers of him that intends to take the ministery upon himself of his parts abilities learning doctrine also of his life and conversation which they must testifie publickly whereby it may appear to all that they hold him every way fit to labour in the word and doctrine 2. The election of a particular church requiring his pains amongst them and desiring him to be their ordinary pastor and teacher to administer unto them the ordinances of the word and sacraments This act though it hath much of humane right and seemeth to depend on mans will and choice yet in a right-constituted church and in an assembly of good men met in the name of Christ there is much of Gods call concurring with the choice made by men Thus Ezech. 33. at the beginning God declareth by his Prophet that whatever watchman the people should chuse he would repute that choice to be his act in that he would punish those that should slight the admonitions of the watchman and did not take them for Gods warnings and would take an account of the watchman for his failing in the care of mens souls Which place of Ezechiel doth much confirm what I have said chapt 2. of the nature of right where I shewed that things that are of Divine right may be said also to be of humane right and things that are of humane right to be also of Divine right This observation I have from my precious and learned friend Mr. Sadler and much might a man say upon it to shew that as in the administration of the church of the Jewes so in that of the Christians Divine and humane right government lawes injunctions commands go along together without needing to be parted into two coordinate distinct classes of jurisdiction the one ecclesiasticall distinct and independent from the other which they call civil One may also thereby see that much labour is lost in asserting the jus Divinum of the ministery as if it had nothing of humane right or as if a call from men were not also a Divine call For if magistrate and people should chuse themselves a watchman over their own souls to divide the word unto them why should not this act be reputed a Divine choice and a Divine installing in the call as well as the choice of the
themselves with a power and jurisdiction improperly so called leaving to the magistrate the opposite member of power properly so called which is a silent confession that they have none at all since they can yet find no name for it I have one division more of ecclesiasticall power brought by Amyraldus and some others quite different from the rest being not a dichotomie but a trichotomie not a division into two but three coordinate powers the one belonging to the magistrate the second to lay-elders and deputies of the church and the third appertaining to ministers These three ecclesiasticall powers he maketh to be conspicuous in all ecclesiasticall assemblies and synods where the magistrate hath his ecclesiasticall indirect extrinsecall power as they call it the ministers have their intrinâ—…call direct ecclesiasticall power and the lay-elders have a lesse intrinsecall direct ecclesiasticall power for it hath not found a name yet for it is say they neither of the nature of ecclesiasticall power belonging to the magistrate nor of that which is proper to ministers but a mungrell ecclesiasticall power in regard they cannot perform by their power those acts that belong either to magistracy or ministery For besides that they cannot preach and administer the Sacraments Amyraldus will not allow them any voice but consultative not deliberative and only in matters of discipline and ecclesiasticall policy and that power they say they have common with the magistrate who over and above hath his ecclesiasticall power which neither the ministers nor lay-elders have any thing to do with Lastly the ministers have their ecclesiasticall power distinct from the ecclesiasticall power of both The bare relating of these divisions of power and modifications of ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is sufficient to confute them so that there is little need of authority to witnesse their nullity and vanity Yet three grave and learned divines namely Martyr Musculus and Gualterus would have the name and the thing to be abolished Martyr loc com 13. class 4. § 9. sheweth the little need of multiplying powers whenas that of the magistrate is sufficient and that David Salomon Iosias being civil magistrates did think that religion belonged to their care and Constantinus Theodosius Iustinianus had no greater thought then to constitute the true church of God Musculus is yet more pregnant loc com de magistratibus what hinders I pray but that this may be ecclesiasticall which is done neither by the church it self nor in the name and by the power of the church but is done commanded and enjoyned by the magistrate within the church in the name and power of God and to procure the good of the church and represse the evils committed in the church A little lower he hath these expresse and golden words the way and nature of government cannot bear that in the same people there be two authentick powers two diverse legislations and dominations except it be by subordination as there is no place for two heads in one body Gualterus Homil. in 1 Cor. 5. is no lesse expresse They distinguish betwixt ecclesiasticall and politicall jurisdiction but this distinction is taken out of the shop of the papists for it is not to be had in the Scripture for it is plain that the same way must be observed in the New as in the old Testament And a little lower The same then must be observed in the new Testament and no need there is that the ministers of the word should have a peculiar senate taking upon them what belongeth to the magistrate they may be censors of manners such as are needfull in a greater commonwealth where ordinary magistrates cannot attend all businesses but these are created by the magistrates authority and ought to do all by his command and not ly a peculiar power of their own distinct from that of the magistrate Such passages and many more I alledge in my Paraenesis p. 16. and 17. No marvell if those that recede from the plainnesse of the Scripture have knit themselves such nets and windings of powers in which while they think to be safeâ— they lose themselves With the help of those distinctions and divisions of power M. Gillespie stretcheth and shortneth his ecclesiasticall power as a leathern point sometimes lengthening it so far as that the magistrate may take hold of it by one end and sometimes giving both ends and the middle into the hands of the ministers I will alledge one or two more places out of Mr. Gillespies book by which his art will appear in extending and contracting his ecclesiasticall power one while making the magistrates and ministers to share the power between them another while giving to either all or nothing Pag. 263. speaking of the extent of the ecclesiasticall power of the magistrate he is usefull saith he and helpfull to the Kingdom of Christ the mediatour magistracy being serviceable to purge the church of scandall to promote the course of the Gospell and the edification of one another But how not perfectly but protanto not every way but more suo not intrinsecally but extrinsecally not primarily but secondarily not directly but ex consequentâ— not sub formalitate scandali but sub formalitate criminis or not under the notion of scandall but of crime I alledge this not to confute it having elsewhere shewed the weaknesse and nullity of such divisions what a lame and impotent thing is eccleâ—asticall power that needeth so many woodden legs and crutches But I pray doth not the magistrate punish blasphemy as a scandall and a contagious offence communicative to others Pag. 264. The coercive part in compelling the obstinate and unruly to submit to the presbyteriall and synodicall sentence belongs to the magistrate not as if the magistrate had nothing to do but to be an executioner of the pleasure of church officers or as if he were by a blind and implicite faith to constrain all men to stand to their determination God forbid The magistrate must have his full liberty to judge of that which he is to compell men to do to judge of it not only judicio apprehensivo by understanding and apprehending aright what it is but judicio discretivo by the judgement of Christian prudence and discretion examining by the word of God the grounds reasons and warrants of the thing that he may in faith and not doubtingly adde his authority thereto in which judging he doth judicare not judicem agere that is he is judex suarum actionum he judgeth whether he ought to adde his civil authority to this or that which seemeth good to church-officers and doth not concur therewith except he be satisfied in his conscience Whoever examineth narrowly the extent of power which he yields to belong to the magistrate will soon discover that all the ecclesiasticall power is to be managed by the magistrate 1. He maketh all synodicall or presbyterian power to be of no force without a coercive power 2. that the magistrate must have his full liberty to judge of
prescribed how far some rites of Moses were dispensable We have then three expositions of the words of Christ whatsoever ye shall bind c. none of which make for a presbyterian excommunication but contrarily they destroy it for all these three expositions are sutable to the literall and mysticall meaning which is absolute and without condition Christ promising to bind and loose in heaven whatsoever shall be bound and loosed on earth whereas those that expound that place of binding and loosing of excommunication are forced to put a condition to the absolute words of Christ telling us that they must be understood clave non errante in case there is no errour in him that excommunicates And therefore Beza against Erastus and some others fearing the many inconveniences and absurdities that follow upon the literall sense that Gods binding and loosing in heaven should steer according to the binding and loosing on earth by excommunication and absolution expounds the words of Christ as if he had said whatsoever shall be bound and loosed in heaven shall also be bound and loosed on earth that is the minister excommunicating on earth doth but declare what God hath already done in heaven which is the opinion of some schoolmen namely of Dominicus à Soto lib. 4. dist 14. qu. 1. art 3. saying that the words ego te ligo I excommunicate thee are equivalent to these I declare that God hath already excommunicated thee But I think this exposition is cumbered with more absurdities then the vulgar 1. Who knoweth the mind of God 2. and whether he hath excommunicated from the inward or from the outward communion surely not from the inward for then excommunication should not be a soul-saving ordinance as the Rever Assembly tell us nor from the outward this being an act of man not of God except one say that the minister outwardly acted what in his secret counsell he hath decreed but still the difficulty will be how the minister is acquainted with Gods secret and not revealed will and if he be acquainted with it how can an outward action in which the pastor may erre be a consequent of an unerring sentence of God But however the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing is to be understood the new Testament speaketh of governments in the church and of ruling and rulers and it enjoyneth the faithfull to obey those that rule over them and St. Paul biddeth Timothy not to receive lightly an accusation against an elder So farre then the word of God alloweth a government distinct from that of the magistrate and endoweth the ministers of the Gospell with a power of ruling and governing But this power is neither of the nature of the magistrates power nor of that they call ecclesiasticall which we have proved to be wholly the same with the magistrates power This power of the ministers ruling and governing is something like that power that Princes and masters of heathen schools had over their disciples scholars and auditors as Plato Zeno Aristotle who had a great power over their minds but no jurisdiction over their bodies estates and outward liberties it is true they kept them in awe respect and obedience but it was a voluntary submission to their precepts like that of Alexander the great to the commands of the Physitians This being the ministeriall power in a shadow it is more expressely set down in the Scripture and no doubt that power is the noblest power and greatest power in the universe next to that of creating and redeeming the world a power that the Son of God had and managed in this world none have such warrant of authority as to be Ambassadours from Christ none have such an errand there is no tye of obedience like that to their commands But still this ministeriall power commands and authority and the obedience due to them are not of the nature of the power and obedience observed in churches or magistrates judicatories For 1. The magistrates and churches judicatories do not only enjoyn the commands of God but also their own but the ministers of the Gospells power is only to deliver what they have received of the Lord 1 Cor. 11. even Moses Deut. 4. v. 5. acknowledgeth that he taught nothing but what God enjoyned him 2. Accordingly a member of a church doth not obey the word of his Pastor but of God Col. 2. v. 22. Marc. 7. v. 7. 1 John 3. v. 24. chap. 5. v. 3. When the pastor hath no command of the Lord as 1 Cor. 7. v. 25. then he delivers his own judgement and counsell and that counsell a church-member hath no command to obey though he ought to have discretion and condescension enough to follow it if he conceiveth it tends to mutuall edification Yet in a church constituted there being need of a power of magistracy either delegated or assumed by a confederate discipline and a magistrate-like jurisdiction being set up in his congregation he ought as every church-member even when he apprehendeth no tye to obey the pastors command as Gods command to obey by an obedience either active or passive the commands of that magistrate which himself hath elected when by a joint consent they all agreed upon a form of discipline 3. Church-judicatories if they make any lawes decrees or resolve upon a censure to be inflicted upon a church-member they require obedience and submission without arguing or disputing the case or having the liberty either to yield to them or to decline them if they list But the true pastorall power commandeth only understanding free and wise men that are able to judge 1 Cor. 10 v. 15. like those of Beroea who so hearkened to the voice of St. Paul that ere they obeyed it they consulted the Scripture to know whether it were so as he taught them 4. The ecclesiasticall presbyteriall power like that of the magistrate requireth obedience to its lawes ordinances and decrees not because they are good just and equitable but because it so pleased the law-givers for a man excommunicated never so unjustly is to submit to the validity of the sentence not to the equity which as our brethren and Mr. Gillespie teach us is not in the breast of the party judged but of the judge But the true ministeriall power requireth no obedience to its commands but of such as are perswaded or convinced of the goodnesse truth and equity of the law and sentence The Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both to believe be perswaded to obey which intimateth that he truly performeth the pastorall commands who believeth in the name of the Lord Jesus for this is the main commandement of Christ as the next is that we should love one another Such commands are not obeyed by the motion of the body but by that of the heart and affections The power of magistracy commandeth the hand to give almes to the poor but the power of the minister commandeth to give them with a ready mind one
in severall acts of theirs as when they convert others which otherwise is the work of the publick ministery and when a brother forgiveth heartily a brother and beseecheth God to forgive him or a wronged party complaineth to God in secret of a notable injurie received openly for which he cannot have satisfaction by men And of this kind of binding and loosing by private men may be understood the words Matth. 18. v. 18. as Theophylactus Erastus and Gualterus expound them But this private men do not by any duty inherent in their outward calling and office but by a dispensation of God whose spirit bloweth where it listeth employing the ministery of a weak simple woman or artificer either to confound or convert the great and wise ones of the world sometimes binding and loosing without any intervention of private mens prayers and complaints but only at the sight of some great oppression sustained even when the party oppressed is taken away or of blood shed which as it doth cry to heaven so may it be said to bind in heaven Therefore ministers being by vertue of their office and calling to bind and to loose I do not understand how any other persons as lay-elders and members of presbyteries and synods should have an ordinary power to bind and to loose and have the keyes of heaven committed to them and yet not be entrusted with the word of reconciliation and with the preaching of the Gospell Hath the Lord Jesus Christ given a commission by halves so as that some church-officers shall have a power of binding and loosing for the Rever Assembly ascribeth to all church-officers indifferently that power who are not to have the power of preaching and of administring the sacraments I further acknowledge that the church hath had from the time of the Apostles helps of government of which Ambrose speaketh and such as the Jewish synagogues had but that they had one part of the power of the keyes which they will have to be the government had not the other part which is of preaching the Gospell and converting men to Christ I read no where neither in Scripture nor in antiquity for as the power of the keyes cannot be severed from the power of binding and loosing so neither of these two qualifications will admit a division as that lay-elders should have but a share in the handling of the keyes and ministers should have them entirely Whosoever readeth the outlandish divines all presbyterians will find that they ascribe no power of the keyes to other church-officers then ministers of the Gospell that what power other officers as lay-elders have is meerly by concession of the pastors and as Maresius saith by communication Loco 15. § 75. these be his words sic residet penes senatum ecclesiasticum omnis jurisdictio ecclesiastica ut illa proprie sit radicaliter in pastoribus in senioribus vero qui illis assident communicative So Capellus the sium parte priore dividing the church-officers thes 32. gives the whole power of the keyes and of excommunicating to the pastors not the rectors Pastores habent potestatem docendi arguendi increpandi si opus sit à sacris arcendi atque submovendi quod excommunicare dicitur So that they do but claw the other church-officers with the key of discipline which as Maresius speaketh is radically in the pastors and to that purpose speaketh a great Divine whom I alledge Paraenes p. 600. when lay-men sit in councills and there deliver their opinions as judges about articles of faith and the use of the keyes this is done more by the concession of pastors then by any right or ancient custome Here by the way it is observable that as the power of binding and loosing and the power of the keyes are convertible and equivalent terms in a proposition so one of them is not more divisible then the other Now sure it is there can be no such thing as a lesse measure of power of the keyes committed to lay-elders and a greater to ministers for this power of the keyes being a power of introducing men into the church either visible or invisible specially that power by which God opens the hearts of men by the preaching of the Gospell it cannot be conceived that it ought to be or is performed by halves as that the lay-elders should have one half of that power committed to them and that Jesus Christ had given them the keyes of heaven but not the main operation of the keyes as if one should give the keeping of his keyes to his steward but not the power to open the doors with them Since then it is not likely that the Lord Jesus Christ hath committed the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven by halves the like also must be thought of the power of binding loosing which are by all divines taken for one and the same It is the opinion both of the rever dissenting brethren and of the Rever Assembly in a book called reasons of the dissenting c. p. 6. and 58. that both keyes are given together and not one without the other though as the Rever Assembly saith one may be abler to exercise one then the other which sheweth that no church-officer can albeit abler to rule then to preach be endowed with a power of ruling without the power of preaching But the Rever Assembly saith both keyes are given together but neither to be exercised without a call and sometimes one may be called to exercise the one and not the other It is not possible for me to apprehend what weight this hath for since they acknowledge that no church-officer doth receive one key without the other it is not possible he can be called to the handling of one key only except they will say he is called to keep the other key idle hung by his side It being thus made evident that the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing are committed solely to the ministers of the Gospell who are entrusted with the word of reconciliation it is likewise of necessary consequence if there be any such thing as a power of excommunication and inflicting church-censures as a consequent of binding and loosing that this said power should appertain to the ministers of the Gospell only and that neither lay-elders deacons nor members of churches be enabled to excommunicate by any warrant of binding and loosing from Christ None of these things being as I hope deniable and the power of excommunication being thus restrained to the ministers of the Gospell alone if it be made good that excommunication is no law of Christ it will follow necessarily either that excommunication is not an act of the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing committed to the ministers of the Gospell or that their power is none of the power of the keyes but exorbitant transcending the limits set by Christ and bringing forth acts which are none of Christs CHAPTER XV. That God hath not given to the
this old form saith he hath remained to the having even in our dayes a medley of clergy and laity in our courts of Parliament But I foresee that some of the presbyterian brethren will take me at advantage for saying that ministers may vote in synods and there being invested with judiciall authority make canons lawes and constitutions which bind churches to obedience for if they may have that judiciall power in Parliaments which doth oblige all men and societies and so churches to obedience why may not they have the same right power in synods I hope the rever brethren will not so require me for my pains in being their advocate retorting my plea made in their behalf against my self But I willingly grant that the ministers of the Gospell have alike power of sitting and voting in synods and in supreme courts of the magistrate but how viz. if they be called to it by the magistrate and so their acts whether they sit in synods or Parliaments are a production of the magistrates jurisdiction delegated to them and as such they oblige all men societies and churches Besides as I said ministers sitting in Parliaments and synods do discourse and debate matters touching doctrine church-discipline as ministers of the Gospell but they reduce what they discoursed of into lawes and stamp their authority and sanction upon it as men invested with judiciall authority from the magistrate just as I said of physitians who vote in Parliaments not as such but as judges of the land Against the ministers sitting and voting in Parliament it may be objected that thereby they would be kept off from the main care they are to attend which is over souls and from the preaching of the Gospell I answer 1. that their particular calling which is to be ministers of the Gospell ought not to keep them off from a moderate taking care and looking over things that are of lesse concernment as that of familie land estate suits in law much lesse to mind the generall good of the nation in which religion and peace are mainly concerned 2. There being two branches of the power of the magistrate one of legislation the other of jurisdiction this latter power is exercised by judges Mayors Sheriffs Sergeants and the like This power as men that have otherwise a constant profession which taketh them wholly up as physitians souldiers marineâ—s and the like cannot well manage so neither ministers of the Gospell but for the power of legislation the managing of which doth not take a man up so much there is no doubt but that as a physitian may take it upon him so also may a minister For the making of a law is like the making of a coach which being made in few dayes will be many years adriving by the coach-man before there be need of a new one so in a well-constituted state a good law which requireth but a little time to make it will continue many hundred years A minister may be well dispensed with for a little intermission of his ordinary calling to contribute his counsell to the making a law which may be of very good use a long time though there be no need he should busie himself further like a coach-driver to see by a power 〈◊〉 jurisdiction the law to take right course and be well obeyed I believe if in the first Parliament of Queen Elizabeth that drove away popery and settled the Protestant religion many of the godly ministers that suffered persecution in Queen Maries days had been sitting and voting in Parliament the then-reformation would have been much more compleat 3. Some ministers may be found whose parts lye lesse for preaching and more for government and who have wise politick heads why may not such be fit members in Parliament 4. As there is no reason to deprive a man of his right because he cannot alwayes attend to make use of it so must not a minister be devested of his right to sit in Parliament because it may be he cannot alwayes attend it A physitian would be loth because of his great practise to be made incapable to sit in Parliament so would a Divine however much taken up with the work of his ministery The premisses considered I conceive that the Rever Assembly doth part with its own right when they say in the last section of the third chapter that synods and councells are to conclude nothing but what is ecclesiasticall and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs unlesse by way of humble petition in cases extraordinary or by way of advice for satisfaction of consciences if they be thereunto required by the civil magistrate By which as they seem to keep off magistrates and lay-men from sitting and voting in synods so they bar themselves from sitting and voting in Parliament But if such assemblies as were the great Sanedrim the synagogues of the Jewes the conventions that I have mentioned for 7. or 8. hundred years in Christian states the politick ecclesiasticall Senates among the Helvetians and that which was settled in the first reformation by the Prince Palatine of the Rhene if I say such assemblies in which there is a mixture of men and causes are lawfull as indeed it were very fit there should be no assemblies of publick concernment but of this nature why may not in these assemblies lay-men conclude in ecclesiasticall matters and ministers in civil If they may not or it must be with distinction and caution how shall the conscience of a man sitting in those assemblies if he be a lay-man be resolved when he may intermeddle while ecclesiasticall matters are debated and likewise if civil things be in agitation how far a minister sitting in the same company may interpose vote must when civil affairs are handled the ecclesiasticall persons first be required to vote or must they petition to have that liberty It may be they mean that when the assemblie is upon ecclesiasticall affairs that then the laity should likewise petition the clergy for a liberty of voting and intermeddling But suppose a member of this assembly be both a States-man and an elder of a church and therefore an ecclesiasticall man must he change his name and personage as the nature of the matter handled requireth professing not to interpose in such a businesse in the capacity of a church-officer but as a member of the Commonwealth And how shall the conscience of a man be resolved what is an ecclesiasticall affair what a civil that he may not doubt when he may vote and intermeddle when he must sit mute and silent or go out of the assembly For the casuists have not yet determined what is ecclesiasticall what civil for some of them make the discipline of the church of humane constitution and therefore to be ordered directed and commanded by the same power that giveth sanction to all humane lawes And if it be put to the question when how often in what place synods are to be convened what time they must
that there was no true proper church but a particular church that therefore a presbyterian nationall church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery is not properly said to be a church I am of opinion that the Roman church upon that account is very improperly called a church but most improperly a tâ—ue church for if it hardly deserveth the name of a church how can it be called a true one at least morally though it may be metaphysically it being a consociation of erroneous and hereticall churches for if every privaâ—e church within the Roman communion is so disfigured that I do not think it deserveth the name of a church how improperly then is a systern made up of those particular churches stiled a church And so I conceive that the question about the truenesse of the Romish church which hath so puzzled men may be easily resolved I have but one passage more of Amyraldus to alledge which a man could hardly believe to be the language of a professed enemy to the cause of the brethren For if they should state their own opinion of the power and independency of churches they cannot use more significant words then those of Amyraldus who in his disputation de concil author thes 28. saith that private churches ought to retain their full right liâ—erty and power untoucht specially in matters of great concernment as points of faith not submitting slavishly their own judgements to synods but expecting that synods should define and decree nothing till they have had the advice and approbation of particular churches This is the passage in Latin Alibi diximus pulcherrimum saluberrimum esse earum ecclesiarum institutum quae concillorum decreta ad res magni momentâ— qualia sunt dogmata fidet pertinentia rata esse noluerint nisi prius consultis synodis ecclesiis particularâ—bus quarum quaeque symbolam suam ad veritatis cluc'dationem conferat Salmasius followeth the steps of Amyraldus or rather Amyraldus of him for Amyraldus wrote last He is very large in his apparatus ad libros de primatu and I should be tedious to the reader to set down here all that he hath handsomely stated about the nature of a church I will only quote two pages which are 265. and 266. The substance of his discourse is comprehended under these 4 or 5 heads 1. That all churches by right are equall in power and dignity and are independent 2. That the consociation under the heathen Emperours was voluntary and by consent 3. That under Christian Emperours a consociation was introduced by humane right so that what was at first by free and mutuall consent came afterwards under the Christian Emperours to be of humane institution and constitution 4. That the unity of churches consisted not in an united collection of private churches but in an agreement in faith and doctrine for such an union there is betwixt the Helvetian Belgick and French churches who agreeing in the same faith and doctrine do notwithstanding differ in discipline so that these churches may be called independent each on the other yet they keep an union and communion among themselves No other communion and independency do the reverend dissenting brethren admit and practise either among themselves or with the presbyterian churches both at home and abroad 5. The fifth head is that a consociation of many particular churches joyned with the same band of discipline and under the direction counsell advice not the command or judiciall power of any synod or presbytery doth much conduce to the keeping the unity of faith the band of charity and the communion of saints In the same place and many others throughout his apparatus he saith that the communication betwixt particular churches was voluntary and by way of counsell every church reserving to themselves full right and power as to those acts of their discipline and the acts of binding and loosing so that every church had power to take cognizance of any fact and crime committed in their body to censure and excommunicate them or reconcile them again without any appeal to other churches or synods except it were to beg their friendly intercession for so they were wont to consult and entreat Bishops and namely him of Rome to review the sentence repairing to him as to an umpire not a judge to disannull or evacuate the judgement which makes the Romanists take those applications to the Bishop of ROme as an acknowledgement of supremacy over all the churches To these authorities Iwill adde that of learned and moderate Spanhemius who did not use invectives as others but arguments and reasons as good as he could yet in my opinion the good man mistaketh much in his Epistle to David Buchanan not so much through ignorance of the right as of the fact yet in the 55. page he hath these words which are much to the advantage of the brethren A particular church hath no power at all over another but they are all collateral and of equall right and authority Let us now hear other advocates of the brethren before the word independency came to be given to Protestants in the world The first is learned Amesius in his first book of the marrow of Divinity chapt â—0 where after he hath in the 17 18 19 20. and 26 sections spoken of the parity and equality of particular churches in right and power in the 27. section he tells us what consociation of particular churches may be admitted these be his words Particular churches may yea ought to have a mutuall confederation and consociation amongst them in classes and synods that by a common consent they may be helpfull one to another with as much commodity as may be chiefly in things of greater concernment but this combination doth not constitute a new frame of church neither ought it in any sort to take away that liberty and power which Christ hath left to his churches since this form is only usefull by way of direction John Mestrezat a very learned orthodox Divine lately deceased minister of Paris goeth upon the same grounds with Amesius in his book of the church written in French and his testimony is most considerable because being a French-man he could not know or foresee as Amesius perchance might any such plea in England about right or power of churches aggregated It would be too long here to set down his own words at large For those that understand French they may see specially the 1 chap. of the 3. book where he saith that all power to do any church acts is placed in the particular church that all church-priviledges and promises were made and granted unto and in consideration of a particular church assembled in one place As for aggregation and consociation of churches he holds it not to be grounded upon any pattern or command from Scripture or even from a judiciall power given by Christ to classes synods presbyteries over particular churches but meerly assumed prudentially for mutuall preservation
7. It is very compauble that in one government there should be many â—anks and sorts of men contributing thâ—ir caâ—e towards it so that all these cares be not coordinate but subordinate and every rank of men take care in its proper place and with subordination to some principall power that must have the chief care of it This the Papists as they hold so they practise for they make the magistrate but subservient to the care that the Pope is to take in governing the church yielding to his judgement and commands and executing his decrees and buls without controul But the presbyterians that are not yet agreed how to levell the duties of the ministers and of the magistrate about taking care of the government of the church have cast us into an endlesse unceâ—tainty which of them is to have the greatest â—hiefest care For whereas Rivetus saith that the magistates chief and first care is the administration of sacred things and the government of the church and his second care the government of the Common-wealth Walaus Apollonius Mr. Gillespie and a hundred more will tell us that that care doth mainly and first belong to ministers and next to them that magistrates have an auxiliary ecclesiasticall power by which they are to ayd the ministers in the government of the church So that if each party conceiveth that the care of the church doth not belong chiefly to the other but that he is to look to it as he thinks fitting and not to trust the main care with any one but himself I fear we shall need a third party to take care that these two may care but for one thing 8. Those words of Jesus Christ I will give thee the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind c. and against that church which they say is the Romish church the gates of Hell shall not prevail seem literally to confer a very great power yea to give an infallibility the power of remitting and retaining sins and of granting indulgences being not repugnant to the non-erring power But the giving this great power of the keyes of Heaven and of binding and loosing expressed in very high and emphaticall terms cannot be applyable to a presbyterian church against which the gares of hell shall not prevail nor can it stand with the little modulus of power of a presbytery which yet hath found no legs to walk on they not resolving us yet whether the pastor or the people or both must excommunicate that the sentence of excommunication may be valid nor how farre it reacheth 9. Particularly that saying of the Papists that there cannot be a greater argument that their judgements are infallible then this that God ratifieth them in Heaven is much according to the literall arguing of the Scripture saying that whatsoever shall be bound c. that is as they interpret it whatsoever shall be decreed by them and passed on earth shall afterwards be ratified and approved in Heaven For were their judgements fallible then God would not have tyed himself by his promise to approve of all the erroneous judgements of men which they say cannot be said without blasphemy But the fallibility of the judgements of presbyterian judicatories is repugnant to the letter of the Scripture which promiseth to ratify all the judgements that are passed by men on earth 10. So for the power of the Pope in absolving and loosing men from their oaths and promises and fidelity due to their soveraign it doth very well agree with the letter of the Scripture whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven for here is a power given without any modification But that of presbyterian jâ—dicatory not challenging such a power and yet grounding their power upon the same Scripture must so much the more recede from the Scripture and therefore they need a place of Scripture as pregnant for their power as the Romanists have for theirs 11. Lastly the jurisdiction held by the Papists is a true valid jurisdiction for it is coercive and extendeth to the body estate liberty and good name the Pope and Bishops have their prisons but the presbyterian is a name without a thing for they are loth to call it coercive it must be then perswasive I wish they would hold there suspend their excommunication of any person till he be perswaded so to be which I think he will never be or till they can inform him that excommunication is an ordinance of Jesus Christ as well as the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments as they tell us in the 63. page of their answer to the reasons of the dissenting brethren which neither do I think they ever will be able to doe 12. But though the ecclesiasticall presbyterian power as it is held to be independent and not subordinate to the magistrate is lesse consonant to Scripture and reason then the papall ecclesiasticall power yet I must say thus much for the brethren of the presbytery that their excommunication as they hold it from a power coordinate and independent from the magistrate is more consistent with reason then that excommunication held by the learned and rever Dr. Hammond agreeth with his subordinating the ecclesiasticall episcopall power to the magistrate as supreme governour of the church under Christ for according to the Doctors opinion one cannot conceive of the power of excommunicating but as the power of the magistrate and of excommunication but as a law of the magistrate which yet I believe he will not grant For were he willing to grant thus much then besides that he and I should not differ he would get reason and Scripture more on his side then 〈…〉 ur brethren of the presbytery or the Papâ—…s have Now that some remaining within the communion of Rome have acknowledged as much as we concerning the nullity of a double jurisdiction the power of the magistrate in sacred things and the nature of the Kingdom of God I could prove by many of them truth breaking forth through the darknesse of popery whereas Mr. Rutherfurd and Gillespie were blind in so clear day of revealed truth I have already alâ—edged Claude Fauchet John du Tiller who tâ—ll us that there was no such thing as a double jurisdiction for many hundred years after Christ and with them agreeth the authour of the Review of the Councill of Trent whâ—… the 6. book chap. 5. saith that the 〈…〉 Fâ—ance hold their jurisdiction not from the Pope but from the King of France We have also alledged Tosâ—atus upon the 16. of Nauhew asserting that among the Jewes there was no distinction of jurisdiction Hotomannus a famous Lawyer and a Papist in his book of the Liberties hath these words It is certain that ecclesiasticks as ecclesiasticks have neither fisck nor territorie nor any jurisdiction but only liberty to declare what is fitting to be observed without receiving or execut on of their opinion But I will insist
Which indeed overthroweth all kind of excommunication for if the validity of an outward act dependeth upon the inward grace the validity of the act will be uncertain till dooms-day to those that know not whether he that hath pronounced the sentence of excommunication is endowed with the holy Ghost or no. Perkins goeth along with Calvin upon the third of the Revelation making all excommunication void which is not pronounced by one that hath the spirit For saith he to the society only of the regenerate and faithfull is it said Whatsoever ye shall bind c. 9. But were it so that every pastor excommunicating had received the holy Ghost yet the validity of all excommunication could not be thence inferred since even a man endowed with the holy Ghost except he hath received a spirit of divination may be ill informed and erre ignorantly ignorantia facti aut juris 10. Those that by binding and loosing in Heaven understand only approving of the sentence past on earth have no stronger plea for excommunication except all sentences of excommunication be the product of an infallible judgement for God is so far from approving of an unjust sentence that his will is that it should be disannulled 11. But how can it consist with reason that God at once should ratify approve and dislike a sentence pronounced on earth for they will have him to ratify in Heaven an unjust sentence passed on earth because they say his will is that the party should stand to the sentence though unjust and not intrude to the Sacrament without he be legally absolved and yet the while they say that God doth not ratify or approve of an unjust excommunication because unjust so that at once the same sentence will be valid and invalid valid because legally passed yet invalid because unjust 12. Those that by binding and loosing understand pardoning and retaining sins though they speak truth making the place Matth. 18. v. 18. parallel to that of John 20. v. 22. whatsoever sins c. yet they say nothing for excommunication which is neither pardoning nor retaining of sins It is not pardoning for then excommunication must be counted a blessing neither can it be retaining of sins for since as they say the end of excommunication is that the soul may be saved retaining of sins or rather of pardon cannot be a means to that end 13. Since excommunication is a putting out of the communion I would fain know whither that outing is from the communion of a private church or from the communion of the catholick visible church or else from the communion of the Saints which is spoken of in the Creed for I know but of these three communions If it be only a putting out of the communion of a private church then a man excommunicated in one congregation or parish is not excommunicated in the neighbour church If it be a putting out of the catholick visible church then a man excommunicated in London shall be likewise excommunicated in any part of the world And if the vertue of excommunication extendeth all over the world as indeed so it must be since it reacheth to heaven then any church or pastors of that communion whatsoever may excommunicate any one within that communion and a presbytery in Scotland may excommunicate a man in Switzerland and therefore it must not seem strange that the Pope doth excommunicate Emperours and Kings since they are of his communion 14. Excommunication cannot be a putting out of the communion of Saints and of the invisible church of which none is outed but by his falling from grace 15. Neither can excommunication be a putting out of a presbyterian church nor out of such an hierarchie as was lately in England which are but meer politick systems of many particular societies either under the magistrate of the land or under a power of magistracy assumed by common consent as is the body of the reformed churches in France for then such an excommunication were rather like a banishment or deprivement of liberty then a spirituall censure which are no more bounded and circumscribed by the limits of the magistrate then remission or retention of sins or the vertue of baptisme are 16. Neither can it be proved that those words whatsoever ye shall bind c. are to be understood of exclusion rather from the Eucharist then from the assembly or from either and that there is greater danger of corrupting good manners in receiving the Eucharist with a dissolute man then in conversing with him when as quite contrary to eat with carnall and deboist persons is a more contagious commerce then to partake of the Eucharist with them 17. Neither can they infer out of that Text whatsoever c. or any other whether a church a synod a presbytery whether one minister or two may excommunicate But if the power of excommunicating be included within the power of the keyes and of binding loosing which we have made good to belong only to the dispensers of the word and not to church-members or to lay-elders it will necessarily follow that one single pastor set over four or five thousand communicants must have power to excommunicate alone without the assistance of other ministers for every single minister having received entirely the povver of the keyes and of binding and loosing must needs also have received ability to do vvhatsoever is included vvithin that povver 18. It is to be noted that Christ doth not speak of binding and loosing of men but of things for he doth not say whomsoever but whatsoever and therefore our adversaries the Papists extend the povver of excommunication further then the presbyterians do for they excommunicate not only men but any other living creatures as Mice vvhereof Thuanus hath a notable example CHAPTER XXX That excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity That the corrupting of the doctrine of the Eucharist made way for excommunication I Should next shew that excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity but this I have handled at large in my Paraenesis St. Paul saith that in his time the mystery of iniquity began to work Satan was then very busy to infuse bad principles which first put forth themselves in the affectation of primacy and in the corruption of the doctrine of the Eucharist The laity had no hand in it for as Ministers have alwayes been the principall chanels to conveigh knowledge and grace when assisted by the spirit of God so when God gave them over to the guidance of their own spirits they have been still the only agents and instruments to bring in tyranny and heresy into the church The corruption then beginning at the head amongst the leaders of flocks their main care hath been to set up themselves not only over the inheritance of the Lord but also over their own fellow-labourers and collegues for the attaining of which and to seem great in the eyes of all men they
Of the Right of CHURCHES And of The Magistrates power over them Wherein is further made out 1. The nullity and vanity of ecclesiasticall power of excommunicating deposing and making lawes independent from the power of Magistracy 2. The absurdity of the distinctions of power and lawes into ecclesiasticall and civil spirituall and temporall 3. That these distinctions have introduced the mystery of iniquity into the world and alwayes disunited the minds and affections of Christians and brethren 4. That those reformers who have stood for a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate have unawares strenghthened the mystery of iniquity By LEWIS du MOULIN Professour of History in the Vniversity of Oxford Hieronym in cap. 9. Ierem. Nec Parentum nec Majorum error sequendus est sed authoritas Scripturarum Dei docentis Imperium LONDON Printed by R. D. and are to be sold by Sa Thomson at the white Horse in St. Paul's Church-yard 1658. To the high COURT Of the PARLIAMENT Of England Scotland and Ireland Right Honourable I Offer unto your Honours the first and greatest task though the meanest work that hath been yet undertaken which is to make the right and power of private Churches consistent and sociable with the Magistrates power over them so to sever by Divine right the sacred function of Ministery from that of Magistracy as to make both their jurisdictions but one and derive it from the soveraign power of the State and this from the Lord Iesus Christ who hath given unto the Magistrate soveraign power and authority for a soveraign end even to set up and promote the interest of his Kingdom It is one of the most dangerous heresies that ever the wicked one did sow among his tares that the Magistrate though Christian and godly doth not intend ex natura rei and in regard of his particular vocation the glory of Iesus Christ as Mediatour and King of his Church and that the end of Magistracy is not godliness and honesty but peace and quietnesse For these be the words of Mr. Gillespie in his Aarons Rod pag. 187. and 188. much like those pag. 253. where he saith that in a well-constituted Church the Magistrate ought not to receive complaints exhibited against a sentence of an Ecclesiasticall Court by the party censured which language I humbly conceive to be rank Popery for this heresy if I may call it so because it is the main engine to subvert the doctrine hath been and is still the greatest dividing principle that the world hath ever had it disunites mens minds and affections it divides most absurdly jurisdictions into spirituall temporall lawes into ecclesiasticall and civil it builds up a magistracy within the dominions of magistrates independent from them These erroneous tenets I maintain in this Book to have set up Popery and to be the grand mystery of iniquity and not their broaching of a hundred heresies which were but consequences and products of that great mystery and which are very compatible consistent with the main drift designe of that mystery even to set up a jurisdiction a government on earth distinct from that of the Magistrate whereas the reformation from Popery which England of all nations hath been most blessed with is altogether inconsistent with the retaining of that spring-head of the mystery of Iniquity by which powers jurisdictions are divided and you the Magistrates are removed and discharged from your principall duty of magistracy which is not so much to procure out ward temporall peace as eternal happiness to make Acts of Parliament Statutes Lawes Courts Armies Navies Taxes Excise Custome punishment of evil doers subservient to that end Which duty I humbly conceive to be so much the more incumbent on you by how much greater the power is that God hath put into your hands This being an undeniable truth that where God hath given more power authority and opportunity to do good there also he hath laid more obligation and duty For I dare confidently affirm that all the godly martyrs and ministers that ever were in England put together were they so many Bradfords Latimers Greenhams had not so much obligation laid upon them to promote the interest of Iesus Christ in setting up his ordinances as one single woman Queen Elizabeth had upon her So then right Honourable I have two main tasks upon my hands One to root out that dividing principle and remain of Popery amongst us and to prove that there is no other ecclesiasticall jurisdiction but that which the spirit of God in the word by the preaching of the Gospell hath over the consciences of men when it convinceth and perswadeth them and brings every thought affection captive unto the obedience of the crosse of Christ The other task is to make your power and duty of magistracy in matters of religion sociable with the right libertie yea independency of churches For the magistrates are to set up pure ordinances Ministery Schools of learning to call Synods and invite all men to join with them in promoting the interest of Iesus Christ but they are not to constrain any mans freedom liberty choice drawing him to Church perforce and urging him to embrace rather this Ordinance then that For as they cannot command grace so they cannot punish any man for want of grace or for an errour in judgement yet they may punish for an errour in practise if it be a breach of the law of the land they ought also to restrain men from spreading blasphemies and heresies laying that tye upon them which the Theodosian Code l. omnis de haeret imposeth ut sibi tantum nocitura sentiant aliis obfutura non pandant to keep those hurtfull tenets to themselves not to vent them abroad to the infecting of others All these notions positions I am confident I can make out so plain that they shall be obvious to any ordinary understanding straining neither Scripture nor reason nor casting the mist of grammaticall and scholasticall learning to keep men off from seeing their way discerning the truth nor loading the margent with quotations which draw the minde beside the context May it please you to pardon this bold address and uncouth dresse and language of a stranger and yet no longer a stranger being by your bounty naturalized and made an English-man who in affection and zeal to promote the religion peace and wealth of these three Nations under the protection of his Highnesse and to that end to bestow his labour studies yea his life will not shew himself inferiour to any Native I shall dye with much comfort if in my life-time I can see some fruit of my labours as I doubt not but I shall conjecturing it by the effects that my other labours in this kind have already wrought upon mens minds beyond seas possessed before with prejudices both against this subject and the godly party of this Nation If your Honours apprehend this to be a truth
I humbly conceive that Gods work which is also your work in settling religion is half done to your hands For all jurisdiction now streaming from one jurisdiction even from that of the Soveraign Magistrate that religion cannot chuse but be well settled which retaining soundnesse in doctrine and holinesse in life is harboured under such a church-government as hath no clashing with that of the Magistrate Such as I humbly conceive may be established by setting up Overseers and Bishops over Ministers and Churches with whom if the right of private Churches can but stand be kept inviolable as no doubt but it may no government can be imagined more preserving conformity in doctrine and discipline besides banishing all jurisdiction which steps between magistracy the inward jurisdiction of the spirit of God in the word over mens minds hearts and thereby making all the church-judicatory power more naturally flowing from and depending upon the Magistrate and easing him by this compendious way of inspection by a few good mens eyes who may have a particular oversight of the affairs of the Church And thus by such a tempered government the four parties namely the Episcopall the Erastian the brethren of the Presbytery and of the Congregationall way will have a ground for reconciliation obtain with some condescension what every one of them desireth The Lord make you his instruments to make up all breaches among brethren and to bring to passe what hitherto hath been rather desired then effected 〈◊〉 settling the reformed Protestant religion in the purest way of reformation and commending your modell and labours therein to other Churches abroad that as the English Nation for purity of doctrine power of godliness hospitality and bowels of mercy toward strangers the persecuted members of Christ hath hitherto gone beyond all the world so you may be instruments to preserve those blessed priviledges by further promoting the interest of Iesus Christ particularly by clearing and removing the mistakes and misunderstandings from many of our brethren beyond the seas who by the suggestions and false informations of some enemies to the people of God in this Island or of friends to Popery superstition and formality are as ready to misapprehend the wayes of God amongst us as these are to slaunder them and to join with them in giving credit that with the English hierarchy and liturgy all religion and fear of God is banished out of this Nation where there is neither Episcopall nor Presbyteriall ordination no uniformity of discipline yea no discipline at all no catechizing enjoined or performed no Creed no Decalogue no Lords prayer rehearsed in Churches nor any Scripture publickly read to the people nor the Sacrament of the Eucharist constantly administred thus cloathing what truth there may be in all these with the cloak of rash and uncharitable construction as others do cloth it with the cloak of malice and lying I doubt not but that by your piety and wisdom as you will stop the mouth of slaunder so you will give no occasion to the Reformed and Godly to conceive amiss of your godly proceedings A TABLE Of the CONTENTS Chap. I. OF the nature of power authority That there are but two ways to bring men to yield obedience either by a coactive power or by perswading them by advice and counsell That there is no medium betwixt command and counsell which sheweth that Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is a name without a thing not being exercised by either of them The division of power and of the subordination and coordination of powers Many errours and mistakes are discovered about subordination and coordination of powers That the power called Ecclesiasticall doth signifie nothing and such as it is is subordinate to that of the Magistrate Fol. 1 Chap. II. Of the nature and division of right divine and humane In vain do they call things of divine positive right which are acted by a naturall right such are many church acts Things that are of divine right may be said to be of humane right and on the contrary those things that are of humane right may be said to be of divine right which is an argument that by right power cannot be divided betwixt clergy and laity 25 Chap. III. The nature matter form and author of law The canons and sentences of Church-judicatories have no force of law except they receive it from the sanction of the magistrate The defects in the division of laws into Divine and humane into morall ceremoniall and politick and into Ecclesiasticall and civil 34 Chap. IV. Of the nature of judgement what judgement every private man hath what the magistrate and what ministers synods and church-judicatories They have no definitive judgement as Mr. Rutherfurd asserts but the magistrate hath the greatest share in definitive judgements which is proved by some passages of Mr. Rutherfurd and of Pareus and Rivetus Who is the judge of controversies 44 Chap. V. An examination of the 30. chapter of the confession of faith made by the Rever Assembly of Divines That in their Assembly they assumed no jurisdiction nor had any delegâ—…d to them from the magistrate and therefore were not to attribute it to their brethren That the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is the same with the magistrates jurisdiction Mr. Gillespies reasons examined 53 Chap. VI. Whether Iesus Christ hath appointed a jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall as King and head of his Church Of the nature of the Kingdom of God In what sense the magistrate is head of the Church 65 Chap. VII The strength of Mr. Gillespies reasons to disprove that the magistrate is not chief governour of the church under Christ examined 76 Chap. VIII Mr. Gillespies manifest contradictions in stating the magistrates power in matters of Religion 83 Chap. IX The concessions of Mr. Gillespie which come to nothing by the multitude of his evasions and distinctions The vanity and nullity of his and other mens divisions and distinctions of power Martyr Musculus Gualterus alledged against the naming of a power ecclesiasticall when it is in truth the magistrates power The positions of Maccovius about the power of the magistrate in sacred things not hitherto answered by any 91 Chap. X. Whether the Lord Iesus Christ hath appointed as the Rever Assembly saith officers in government distinct from the magistrate The strength of the place 2 Chron. 19. by them alledged examined That the elders in that place are not church-officers An answer to Mr. Gillespies arguments endeavouring to prove that Iosaphat appointed two courts one ecclesiasticall another civil 108 Chap. XI A case propounded by Mr. Cesar Calandrin which he conceiveth to assert a double jurisdiction examined Of the two courts one of magistracy or externall the other of conscience or internall That ecclesiasticall jurisdiction must belong to one of them or to none 119 Chap. XII Of the nature of calling to the ministery Ministers are not called by men but by God by a succession not of ordination but providence The plea
for succession is Romanish Ministers are no successours in their ministery to the Iudaicall Priests but to the Prophets 133 Chap. XIII The nature of the ministers power and of that of binding and loosing the power of the keyes Amyraldus and Mr. Lightfoots judicious exposition of the power of binding and loosing The power of governing and ruling is not the ecclesiasticall contended for Mr. Gillespies arguments answered 142 Chap. XIV That the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing are not committed to all church-officers but to the ministers of the Gospell only 155 Chap. XV. That God hath not given to the church-officers of the Gospell a certain platform of government and that it is arbitrary and of humane institution and therefore not to be administred by a power distinct from the humane 161 Chap. XVI The 31. chapter of the confession made by the Rever Assembly examined The use of synods Two things are humbly represented first that for a re-union of jurisdictions over all persons and in all causes a convocation made up of ministers only be re-established during the sitting of Parliament the second is that ministers may be put into the same capacity as all other ranks of free-born people to sit and vote in Parliaments Of the power of synods and that of the magistrate in calling of them The synod of the Apostles was extraordinary not exemplary The exception of the brethren of Scotland against the 2. article of the 31. chapter of the confession examined The uses and abuses of synods that they are not the way to compose differences in matters of religion if their canons are beyond counsells and advices 166 Chap. XVII That the Iewish Church-officers had not a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate Mr. Gillespies distinction that they were not materially but formally distinct examined The argument of Amyraldus that though they had a distinct jurisdiction yet the example of the church of the Iewes is no pattern to the Christian church discussed and proved to be of no validity 192 Chap. XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word Church in holy writ The meaning of the word Church Matth. 18. v. 17. 206 Chap. XIX That a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place about the worship of God is the only true visible church mentioned in Scripture That that church considered as an assembly of Christians bringeth forth other kinds of acts then it doth considered as a society of men by which the nature and extent of the power of a private church is made clear and evident 213 Chap. XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in New-England 222 Chap. XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ 234 Chap. XXII That the greatest opposers of the dissenting brethren namely Salmasius Amyraldus and others have laid down the same grounds for the right and power of particular churches and so confuted rather their own fancies then invalidated the tenets of the brethren The question whether Rome be a true church briefly resolved That Amesius and Iohn Mestrezat late minister of Paris in their writings have held the power of private churches to be independent from any church-judicatory 242 Chap. XXIII The consistency of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power in ordering publick worship proved by the example of the Iewes that they had through all the land particular convocations synagogues or churches called also colledges or schools where the Prophets and sons of the Prophets taught especially on the sabbath-day that they were independent from any church-judicatory How synagogues were altered from their first institution and that being converted into Christian churches they retained the same right power and way of government 251 Chap. XXIV That the Christian churches under heathens were governed by a confederate discipline or a power of magistracy as the synagogues were appointing men which Ambrose calls elders to decide such matters as otherwise were to come under the magistrates cognizance This practise is grounded upon 1 Cor. 6. v. 1 2 c. and confirmed by Origen Iustin Martyr Ambrose and Mr. Lightfoot That the power of these elders continued still under Christian Emperours with some alteration they erecting in lieu of them Episcopall courts That all church-power was the Emperours power That the very heathen magistrates knew no other but that all power was annexed to them 267 Chap. XXV That ecclesiasticall jurisdiction as it is held by the Romish church better agreeth with reason and the letter of the Scripture then that of the presbyterian brethren That some Romanists have ascribed more power to the magistrate in sacred things then the presbyterian brethren 287 Chap. XXVI The description of excommunication in terms received by most of our opposites though otherwise variously defined by them That for four thousand years no such excommunication was in use either among the heathens or the Iewes An answer to some objections That the legall uncleannesse was no type of the morall That the Priests judging of the leprosy is no plea for excommunication nor for ecclesiasticall jurisdiction 298 Chap. XXVII That neither in the time of Ezra such an excommunication began That the casting out of the synagogue did not answer that excommunication That there is no ground for it nor practise of it in the new Testament 307 Chap. XXVIII That the whole context Matth. 18. v. 15 16 17 and 18. maketh nothing for excommunication neither Iudas non-admission if granted to the Eucharist nor the delivering of the incestuous person to Satan nor yet the self-examination required 1 Cor. 11. 316 Chap. XXIX That excommunication is contrary to common sense and reason 326 Chap. XXX That excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity That the corrupting of the doctrine of the Eucharist made way for excommunication 337 Chap. XXXI The History of excommunication from the first reformation from Popery how it was received in Geneva but not settled without disputes and clashings betwixt the consistory and the magistrate 342 Chap. XXXII A continuation of the History of excommunication in France the Low-Countreys Scotland the Palatinate How it came to pass that amongst reformed states the Scottish ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ascended to such a height What plea the reformed churches in France have for excommunication That it is more justifiable among them then in churches under an orthodox magistrate 353 Chap. XXXIII The judgement of some
Divines yet living both of the argument in hand and of the writings of the Author Of some mens strong prejudices against and harsh censures of him 369 The PREFACE I Intend here by way of Preface to give a brief account how I came to write of this subject Having a little before the beginning of the long Parliament in the year 1639. written a piece in Latin against the corrupted party of the English Hierarchy who made as near approaches as they could towards Popery and being a little while after engaged in that quarrell it so fell out that this corrupt party being soon foiled by the great torrent of opposition they met withall their opposers themselves who were very numerous did soon divide into parts and factions dissenting from one another particularly about church-way and discipline which afforded me new matter to study on which I did being indifferently affected towards the four kinds of opinions held in the reverend assembly of Divines viz. of Episcopacy moderated Presbytery Independency and Erastianisme and for many years together not giving my approbation more to one of them then to the rest before such time as I should be well resolved in the controversy I pittyed for a long time the preposterous endeavours of each party tending to make the rent wider while they sought rather the victory then the truth brother became eager against brother branding each other with schisme and heresy their principles so far dividing them asunder that partners in the same martyrdome and who had lost their ears together were soon together by the ears and Mr. Edwards by name in shewing rather his spleen then his zeal and Dr. Bastwick who stiled himself the Captain of the presbyterian army did but powre oyle upon the fire of dissention in stead of quenching it as likewise did our brethren the Scots when they wound up their string of ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to such an height that it was ready to break and ranked the Erastians in the list of abominable hereticks pointing therein particularly at poor and mild Mr. Coleman walking almost alone in a melancholy posture and who would not give rayling for rayling but mildly intreated all the brethren that dissented from him specially the presbyterians to give a satisfactory answer to the queries of the Parliament touching a jurisdiction and government of the church distinct from that of the magistrate and to shew in Scripture a place parallel to Matth. 18. v. 17. where by the word Church is meant either the ministers or a presbyterian consistory besides to find out in Scripture the name and thing of excommunication or that it is as well though not as much a soul-saving ordinance as preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments as the reverend presbyterian ministers would fain have perswaded him in their reasons against the dissenting brethren p. 63. At length being well satisfied that truth seldome lyes on the multitudes side as I did much pitty Mr. Coleman so did I fall to study him and thought it but reasonable ere I should join with the generall clamour against him to hear what he could say for himself And indeed his still voice did more work upon me then all the thundring voices of his opposites So then being convinced by him about eight years since I put forth in print a tract in English the drift whereof was only to assert the power of the magistrate in matters of religion which subject being but an answer to a letter I handled cursorily and superficially And while I was upon that work I was much in charity as I expresse in some passages of that tract with the churches of the congregationall-way no lesse cried out upon then Mr. Coleman both here and beyond seas specially in France where namely at Charenton near Paris a nationall synod condemned them by an authentick act yet then I had no such thought as to conceive or imagine that the power and right of private churches or congregations could agree well with the power of the magistrate in matters of religion But soon after the publishing of this English tract my uncle Dr. Andrew Rivet whose memory is very precious to me and to all the Churches of God sent me a Latin manuscript made by a Divine in France wherein he endeavoured the confuting of my English book and besides did much taxe me for favouring the congregationall way so much spoken-against amongst the reformed churches in France and expressely condemned by a nationall synod of theirs About the same time came Amyraldus forth in print as full of bitternesse and invectives against them as Mr. Edwards in his Gangrena Both which books I mean Amyraldus and that which Dr. Rivet sent me were the cause occasion and subject of writing my Paraenesis in Latin In writing of which I was insensibly carried to conceive and propound wayes of accommodation betwixt the brethren of the congregationall way and the assertors of that measure of power in sacred things allotted to the magistrate by Musculus Bullinger Gualterus and Erastus nothing doubting but that by these propositions of reconciliation and accommodation I have given with a very little yielding on both sides the true way and notion of settling in such a nation as this where the soveraign magistrate is orthodox might be made out and the Christian reformed religion worship established with more peace truth and holinesse of life then they were ever hitherto since the times of the Apostles These notions suting more to the purpose and interest of the English climat nation ought to have been then rather put in English then Latin but that I mistrusted my own abilities to appear in publick in any other tongue then Latin or French and that I had a great mind first to disabuse other nations particularly my own countreymen who were possessed with strange prejudices against the godly party of this nation as well presbyterians as others by the false suggestions and informations of Amyraldus so far that some have expressed to me by letters how much they bewailed the lamentable condition of England where all religion and fear of God was well-near quite extinct where there was no church-discipline no excommunication no synods no ordination no lay-elders no Lords prayer or ten commandements rehersed and no Sacrament of the Lords supper administred Now this present tract coming after the other and being otherwise digested and framed and those controversies that concern England being chiefly handled therein and all brought within a narrower compasse I do not despair but that my present designe will be excused though I come short of giving satisfaction to all parties I honour equally the persons learning and piety of those that I assent to and dissent from no lesse respecting the memory of Mr. Gillespie an eminent man for wit piety learning and soundnesse of faith but very erroneous in what he stiffely maintaineth in his Aarons Rod then that of Mr. Coleman or of any of Gods Ministers now with the
Lord neither do I â—…sse honour the churches of Scotland then those of France I would fain make all churches and brethren friends without prejudice to the truth which I conceive I can retain inviolable by that temperament I have followed which giveth unto the magistrate his due and to private churches their right which denyeth not the presbyterians a discipline but only groundeth it upon a firmer and steadier foundation then they have hitherto done themselves The Lord reveal these truths which are very much subservient to saving truths to all sorts of people that so the minds of the people of God may be more settled and united to retain the foundation that is in Christ Iesus not by constraint and by an externall coercive jurisdiction but with a ready mind and that others who are otherwise led captive by their errors and ignorance in doctrine but much more swayed by this mystery of iniquity or ecclesiasticall jurisdiction may now by the discovery of this truth get freedom and by it the knowledge of saving truths hid from them because of their bondage Thus the truth of that saying of the Lord Iesus will be more manifest If ye know the truth ye shall be free indeed Did but those of the Romish communion understand that all Papall Episcopall Presbyteriall and Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which is not subordinate to the power of magistracy is repugnant to Scripture and reason they would soon by the knowledge of this one truth recover their liberty and with it the opportunity of having saving truths taught them lying no longer in shackles for fear of men which though imaginarie ones have kept them in as much captivity as if they had been really of iron For the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and excommunication the product of it put forth and exercised over magistrates and people by inconsiderable men for coercive power have hitherto been like to a child leading about an Elephant with a thred who if he knew his own strength would lead the strongest man that is with a single hair In short all ecclesiasticall jurisdiction without a power of magistracy is like the feathers of an arrow which can never hit nor have a direct motion but with the wood to which it is adjoyned The feathers alone may be made to fly at one but never to hurt or make any impression I will conclude this Preface with the words of Antonius de Dominis lib. 5. de rep cap. 2. who says that all ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is ineffectuall without a power of magistracy Nihil sine potestate laica obtinebimus neminem ecclesiastica potestate possumus extrudere abripere expellere If this which is the substance and the whole drift of my book can be made out to me not to be Scripture and reason I will not obstinatly maintain either this or any other errour but acknowledge it both to God and man as I ought continually all those of my life which as I hope God will forgive me so till I be otherwise taught I crave no pardon either of God or man for holding this which to some is an errour but to me and I hope in Gods good time it shall be so to others as clear a truth as that two and two are four ERRATA Pag. 121. l. 16. read to whom I give thanks Pag. 242. l. 11. dele common Pag. 215. l. 2. read Cornelius Nepos saith Pag. 292. l. 27. read next to the magistrates who have Pag. 311. l. 14. for was read is Pag. 355. l. 2. read supra quam Of the Right of CHVRCHES And of The Magistrates power over them CHAPTER I. OF the nature of power and authority That there are but two wayes to bring men to yield obedience either by a coactive power or by perswading them by advice counsell That there is no medium betwixt command and counsell which sheweth that Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is a name without a thing not being exercised by either of them The division of power and of the subordination and coordination of powers Many errours and mistakes are discovered about subordination and coordination of powers That the power called Ecclesiasticall doth signifie nothing and such as it is is subordinate to that of the Magistrate THe nature of power right command obedience function law judgement are so twisted together and linked that it is not possible to treat of one alone for as the perfection of power is command so power is exercised with lawes by those that have right to it and a function in the state obedience is a yielding to power command lawes counsells and advices The word Potestas power denotes three things Person Right and Office Often it is taken for the person or persons that are the soveraign Magistrate it is also opposite to jus or right thus Tacitus in the third Book of his annals saith that right is weakned when power comes in In a large sense it is defined A faculty to bring any thing to passe either by right or by wrong or thus A faculty in the agent to move it self towards the patient either necessarily or at the will of the agent necessarily in a naturall body but arbitrarily in an intelligence either Divine or Angelicall and humane Authority as it hath relation to man is a faculty in the agent to move it self at the will of the patient for power is exercised over men against their will but authority is over those that willingly yield and are perswaded and convinced yet sometimes power and authority are promiscuously used But philosophers humanists and statists usually ascribe authority to men and writings that put no coercion or force to mens actions thus they attribute great authority to the placita and responsa of wise and prudent men whose judgements dictates and definitions who ever giveth no credit 〈◊〉 is taxed of foolishnesse not of rebellion or disobedience and so to men commendable for their age wisedome prudence and experience as the Heathens did to their Plato Socrates Aristoteles Zeno Princes of Schools who captivated the minds not the bodies of their hearers 'T is in that sense Cicero in his first Book of Offices in the very beginning speaks of the great authority that Cratippus and Athens had though neither of them had power either of legislation or of jurisdiction and in his Epistles he often mentioneth those that were in great favour and authority with Caesar and Pompey although they had no power of jurisdiction over them Albeit Grammarians should put no difference betwixt power authority yet nature custome and the practise of all nations yea the holy Scripture distinguisheth power of jurisdiction and command which imposeth penalties upon the transgressours from that authority which enforceth not the outward man but only worketh upon the soul perswadeth and begetteth belief respect and reverence Power of jurisdiction is alwayes attended with command and followed with obedience either active or passive to the command of the power but authority being for the most part attended with some of
footing since it is not a mere advice nor as they will have it a mere product of coercive power which the very Papists at least those that newly came from amongst them namely Antonius de Dominis conceived to be necessarily joyned with all Ecclesiasticall sentences else that they were mere declarations of the mind These be his words lib. 5. de rep ca. 1. Nos potius Episcopi Min stri declaramus esse excludendum quam actu corporali excludimus we Bishops and Ministers do rather declare that one is deserving to be excluded then we exclude him bodily one being an act of command the other of advice Thus in the 2. chapter he saith that no church can excommunicate without magistracy Nihil sine potestate laica obtinebimus neminem Ecclesiastica potestate possumus extrudere abripere expellere These two jurisdictions the one of advice and counsell the other of magistracy neither of them being like the presbyteriall jurisdiction challenged may be instanced in all kinds of societies families meetings religious or civill whereas our presbyterian brethren cannot so much as produce one single act exercised in a consistory or synod which is not an effect of magistracy or of counsell and advice and is not either compelling the outward man or perswading the inward Thus a father of a family to bring his son to walk in the wayes of God must go about it either by perswasion or by compulsion hale him perforce to church hoping that God may there work upon his heart Thus a private church by the jurisdiction of the keyes and power of perswasion may win a brother but by the other jurisdiction will expell him and put him out of the congregation One thing very considerable and which overthroweth all jurisdiction which steps between the jurisdâ—ctâ—on of magistracy and that of the word which in foro externo in the court of man is counsell and adv ce but in fâ—ro interno in the couâ—t of conscience is command strict injunction with threatning that thing considerable I say is that it is of the nature of the division of power exercised in all societies as of most of the things delivered either in nature philosophy or Scripture that naturally it brancheth into two by which dichotomy most truâ—hs aâ—e discovered Thus naturall philosophy divideâ—h â—…ance into first and second the whole world into heaven and earth sensitive creatures into man and beast rationall and irraâ—…nall thus the Scripture divides Angels into good and bad men into elect and reprobates the Testament into new and old the people of God into Iewes and gentiles the whole man into flesh and spirit new man and old things enjoyed into spirituall and temporall Gods Kingdome into earthly and heavenly And thus to come to our purpose there be two powers one internall the other externall two swords the sword of the word or spirit in the ministery and the sword of magistracy two courts one outward called forum externum governing the outward man and imposing lawes on him the other forum internum governing the conscience perswading and convincing it So for judgement and obedience judgement is either a commanding or counselling advising and may be called judgement of approbation obedience is either to commands or counsells He were here a cunning Oedâ—pus who could find room for Ecclesiasticall court judgement and law or find a medium at least of participation betwixt those two jurisdictions the one coercive or of magistracy the other perswasive and exercised by perswasion such is that which is exercised in the word to which as St. Peter speaketh man yieldeth not by constraint but willingly and with a ready mind Even all actions where art mans wisedome industrie nature and Gods blessing and grace do concur do evidently shew the necessity of this dichotomy and the nullity of what is imagined to be interposed betwixt the power of magistracy and the power of ministery betwixt the power of compulsion and the power of perswasion For example the acts of magistracy are like the acts of a plough-man who hath a command over his ground to plough it dung it then harrow it and scatter his seed but the acts of ministery or rather the acts of God in the ministery by working upon the heart convincing and making the man to follow willingly Gods call are like the other acts which are not so much in the power of the plough-man as in Gods sending the rain upon his ploughed and sown land blessing or frustrating all his past labours This being the nature of power next is to be considered how it is divided and how powers are subordinate or coordinate I could never conceive that power can be branched but into two viz. externall and internall The internall power is either divine or of art the divine power is either naturall or of the word which is either ordinary or extraordinary Ordinary is upon these that are either convinced or hardned the extraordinary is either of prophecy or of miracles that of prophecy is either under the old or the new Testament The externall power is either private or publick Private power is that freedome in every private man or society to act things and in things wherein the publick is little or nothing concerned and no way disturbed which power doth much belong to private churches as we shall see in another place The publick externall power is either soveraign or subordinate and delegated The soveraign is either of legislation or of jurisdiction The subordinate is a power delegated by the soveraign to cities provinces families societies of whatsoever kind as churches schools colledges halls universities corporations so that there is no externall power commanding obedience under some penalty making lawes and compelling the outward man wherewith masters husbands fathers halls corporations societies churches are invested but is derived from the soveraign externall power which we call power of magistracy Here is no more room for ecclesiasticall power then for maritall paternall despoticall as neither for medicall if you will and so for pharmaceuticall military rurall and the like all which are a like subordinate to the soveraign externall power called the power of magistracy for I do conceive that church-power or jurisdiction are as improperly called ecclesiasticall as if the jurisdiction wherewith a colledge of physitians might be invested were called medicall or physicall since a minister a physitian a merchant as such are not invested with jurisdiction which cannot be said of a justice of peace of a constable or of a sergeant who as such are invested with a power and jurisdiction and sure the power of a sergeant might lesse improperly be called sergeantall then that of a church-man ecclesiasticall The coordinate powers when neither of them is subordinate to the other are the power of the word in the ministery and the power of magistracy the one being Gods spirits jurisdiction over the hearts and affâ—ctâ—ons of men the other the magistrates jurisdiction compelling men to an outward act of
magistrate thus the decalogue is as well a law of the magistrate as of God Yea I maintain that a command or law of God hath no force of law in the court of man or in any presbytery synod or assembly whatsoever binding to active or passive obedience except it hath the stamp of magistracy and be published anew by the soveraign magistrate and that no man can be punished legally for robbing and stealing yea not for killing much lesse can he be excommunicated except there be a law of man against robbers and murtherers and that some magistracy impowereth churches or synods to passe a sentence of excommunication 5. This also hath been a great mistake which made many deny a subordination of ecclesiasticall to civil because those that embrace the true religion and live under those that hate them or persecute them endeavour as to have a communion independent from the magistrate so also a jurisdiction 6. Another errour in making the church jurisdiction not subordinate but wholly independent from the magistrate is this assertion easily descending into the minds of those that affect rule and jurisdiction viz. that the end of magistracy is outward peace and quietnesse only and purchasing all means to the attaining of the preservation of temporall life wealth and prosperity having nothing to do with promoting the eternall good and happinesse of the soul But this errour is not only refuted by the very heathens but also by the most learned orthodox Divines both English and others Pareus on the 13. to the Romans dubio 5. saith the end of the magistrate is not only the civil good but also the spirituall good of the subjects that religion may flourish in the church according to the word of God and so Junius Meditat. on the 122. Psalm tom 1. col 721. saith that the magistrate is to procure by divine and humane right the good of the spirituall Kingdom of Christ But Antonius de Dominis lib. 5. de republica ecclesiastica cap. 5. § 1. is very prolix and nervous to prove that he that is invested from God with a power to purchase naturall felicity is also invested with a power to promote the spirituall 7. It is also a great errour to make a coordination of powers seated in the same persons For if it could be imagined that one part of the people were the Church and the other part the Commonwealth they might be also imagined independent one from another thus a society of merchants and a colledge of scholars may be well imagined to be corporations so independent one from the other that none of the society of merchants are part of the colledge and none of the colledge are part of the society But granting that the same persons are members of the society of merchants and of the colledge of scholars the command law discipline of those two corporations as long as they admit the same members must have either a perpetuall conflict and clashing or the command of one corporation must be subordinate to the command of the other or else if they be both coordinate they must also be both equally subordinate to a power set over them both This is the case between the Church and the Commonwealth Granting that the same persons are members of the Commonwealth and of the Church it is not possible to make these two jurisdictions coordinate and yet subsist together in peace love and amity and without one disturbs the other they must joyntly agree to have one power over them or the law injunction and commands of one must be subordinate to the lawes of the other 8. The grandest inconvenience in this coordination of powers and jurisdictions is that the same persons being members of societies under both these powers and submitting to the commands of both shall be in continuall perplexity which to obey if both do not command one thing There is such a communion in mens actions causes relations functions callings commands duties jurisdictions freedoms liberties among those that live under one soveraign power and within the precincts of one jurisdiction that it is impossible that any outward action can be performed in whatever relation a man be considered as husband master father pastor lawyer physitian merchant at home or in church in a synod or in a city or hall except they all are modified ruled and directed by one supreme jurisdiction otherwise the saying of Tacitus would prove true ubi plures imperant nemo obsequitur where there be many coordinate powers there is none found to obey When a magistrate doth command a subject to attend him in the wars this command doth exempt him from the commands and injunctions that may be made to him as he is a son member of a consistory or of a synod or of some other corporation therefore when the King of Scotland in the year 1582. commanded the magistrate of Edenburgh to entertain and feast a French Ambassadour on a set day and the presbytery of Edenburgh to crosse this command had enjoyned a fast upon the same day since both commands could not be obeyed at once by the magistrate of Edenburgh either the magistrates commands must be subordinate to those of the presbytery or the commands of the presbytery must be subordinate to those of the magistrate or else the different commands of both must be subordinate to a third power above both presbytery and magistrate I have brought in my Paraenesis a cloud of witnesses Martyr Musculus Gualterus Iunius Pareus Cassander Hooker Antonius de Dominis proving the necessity that the power called ecclesiasticall should be subordinate to that of the magistrate I will only alledge Musculus in whom we shall see the sense of all the rest loc com de magistratibus The way and nature of government cannot bear that in the same people there be two authentick powers two diverse legislations and dominations except it be by subordination as there is no place for two heads upon one body Learned Dr. Hammond who is neither for Geneva presbytery nor of Erastus opinion nor yet of Musculus Bullingerus Gualterus who made little account of excommunication yet he holds that ecclesiasticall power is subject to the civil magistrate who in all causes over all persons is acknowledged supreme under Christ These be his words in his tract of the power of the keyes p. 87. though by them he overthroweth all power in ministers and Bishops of excommunicating independently from the magistrate which yet he strives to assert against Erastus Mr. Rutherford and Mr. Gillespie think that if it were granted that the magistrate is Christs viceregent it would subvert wholly the grounds upon which ecclesiasticall presbyterian power is built I question whether this concession of Dr. Hammond that the magistrate is the governour of the Church under Christ would not equally unsettle his episcopall excommunication I should in this chapter as I intended at first shew the vanity and nullity of the multitude of divisions and subdivisions of ecclesiasticall
power which like wooden legs to a lame man must be more in number and worse for substance and unfitter to walk upon then good legs of flesh and bones to another for whereas this must have but two the other must have as good as four and yet very bad ones According to our principles these two only things well considered and retained namely the power of the word in the ministery and the externall power of magistracy will clear and decide the whole controversy and assert the right of churches and the power of magistracy in them and over them whereas all the limbs of the ecclesiasticall power which are more in number then the pillars of Salisbury church are not capable to prop up the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction independent from that of the magistrate But it would be now too long and tedious a task having handled that subject very largely in the second chapter of my Paraenesis and hoping to speak further of the same when I meet with M. Gillespie who being a great schoolman hath devised a number of cases and boxes to lodge his ecclesiasticall power in CHAPTER II. Of the nature and division of right divine and humane In vain do they call things of divine positive right which are acted by a naturall right such are many church acts Things that are of divine right may be said to be of humane right and on the contrary those things that are of humane right may be said to be of divine right which is an argument that by right power cannot be divided betwixt clergie and laity RIght in Latine jus differs from law as rule from justice for law is the rule it self but right is the justice of the rule Sometimes it signifieth that vertue called in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equity which abates of the rigour of the law But right in generall that comprehendeth all rights is that which is due to every one by either equity that is by the law of nature and of nations or by an instituted law Sometimes right is so stiled by those that will call it so because they have the better sword thus Ariovistus answered Caesar that right of war was that the victor should give law to the vanquished By naturall right we understand that which is consonant to right reason Commonly right is divided into private and publick Private right is the same with personall right which is had either independently from masters parents husbands those that have it are called sui juris or dependently upon masters and parents The publick right is either naturall as when St. Paul saith that the Gentils do naturally the things of the law or instituted and is called positive right having a positive rule which is given either by God or by men God giveth it 1. to certain persons as to Abraham Isaac Iacob Moses c. 2. to a certain people as to Israel 3. to all men either for a time as the law of not eating bloud or for ever as the Sacraments and the preaching of the Gospell It is not possible to give an exact division of right Many things that are of naturall right are also of divine and instituted right so many divine precepts as is the decalogue are of humane institution but custome hath prevailed that these precepts should be of positive right that have no footstep in nature as is the observation of a seventh day the forbidding of eating the tree of death and life We say things to be of naturall right in which we are rather born then brought up and which are naturally imprinted in us as is the law defined by Tullius 1. leg law is a soveraign way imbred in nature commanding things to be done and forbidding things contrary By that law we know many things instituted and delivered in Scripture as that obedience is due by children to parents by servants to masters by wives to husbands that theft murder is to be avoided and to come nearer to our purpose that there is one God that he must be worshipped that he cannot be worshipped except it be in meetings and assemblies in one place that in those assemblies all must be done in order that the whole assembly if it be numerous must be governed by some choice men chosen out of the whole body and deputed from them likewise the law of nature and of nations teacheth us that what is agreed on by the major part of those deputies must stand for a law that that law must be obeyed under penalties albeit if we be ruled by the positive law of God we are not so much to follow the number of suffrages and votes in carrying of a law as the soundnesse and goodnesse of the law This also is a law of nature practised even by all nations that soveraign command about sacred things yea the chief sacerdotall function belongeth to the soveraign power of which law a part hath been abrogated by the revealed law of the Scripture which did so sever the sacerdotall function from the regall that the regall still kept the soveraign jurisdiction about sacred things This is also a law of nature and nations that every assembly and convention of men should have power to chuse admit and exclude members of their own society and to perform all acts conducing to their subsistence Those rights of nature God by a superiour dictate or command in the Scripture hath not abrogated for grace doth not take away but perfects nature So that no member of a society is to recede from its naturall right liberty and priviledge except by a positive law of God or man he is restrained and commanded otherwise Those rights of the naturall law being well understood it will easily be stated by what right or power naturall civil politicall I had almost said ecclesiasticall despoticall paternall maritall not only every society family but also each member acteth for the greatest mistake about ecclesiasticall power is that many acts of ministers and people are said to be of ecclesiasticall ministeriall divine positive right which indeed are acts grounded upon the law of nature and nations and are derived from a liberty and common prudence that every rationall and free man maketh use of in ordering all kinds of societies fraternities corporations whereof he is a member without needing to flie to a power taking its right and name as if it were of another classis nature and kind and independent from any other For as a man being at once master of a great family fellow of a colledge of physitians a citizen and member both of the Commonwealth and of the Parliâ—ment besides of a church is not said to act by so many kinds of rights and powers as his stations are in the Commonwealth as if in his colledge he acted by a medicall or academicall power in city or hall by a civicall power in a church by an ecclesiasticall or church power all being supposed to be alike coordinate and not being subordinate to the supreme power so
naturall power right liberty and prudence in ordering all kinds of affairs societies and families are no otherwise distinct in kind or species then a yard that measured cloth differs from that which measured searge as a yard is alike appliable to silk and thred and the same hammer will knock in an iron naile and a wooden pin so the same power and prudence governeth the church and a colledge It is also observable that a man being at once a member of a family hall city Parliament church doth not act alwaies according to the quality of his relation function and place publick or private not acting as a physitian father or husband but as a judge and not as a church-member but as a free member of a society Thus a member of a colledge of physitians joyneth in consultation with his brethren in a case of physick as a physitian but in making lawes regulating the practise of physick and the apothecaries entrenching upon the physitians he doth not act as a physitian but as a judge and as a person invested with judiciall power from the state The same physitian in a Parliament upon the matter and question of physick and of physitians to be regulated may speak pertinently of his art as a physitian but doth not vote give his consent to the making of a law about physick as a physitian but as a judge of the land Likewise to be sure by what right pastors and people act in the church the acts and actions of a pastor or church-member are to be considered either as acts of pastors and of church-members or as they are acts of rulers and members of a society The act of a pastor as pastor is to discharge all ministeriall function commanded in the revealed word and not declared by any dictate of nature In those acts I see no right of jurisdiction but over the inward man when by the power of the word the sinner is brought to the obedience of the crosse of Christ The acts of church-members as such are either in relation to the pastor or of one member to another In relation to the pastor the acts are to submit to the minister ruling them and dispensing unto them the word They may have that liberty to try his doctrine and to do as they of Beroea who searched the Scriptures to know whether it was so as St. Paul preached unto them this is also an act of every faithfull member of the church not to assent to any doctrine because it hath been assented unto by the major part of suffrages but in things that concern order and discipline to yield to the constitutions agreed on by the major part of the assembly so that by them the bond of charity and the truth of the doctrine be not violated and perverted The acts of church-members relating one to another are to bear one anothers burthens to forgive and edifie one another to preferre another before himself The acts of pastors and church-members as they are endowed with a power common to all other societies are 1. to do all things orderly 2. to make a discipline sutable to time and place since there is not in the Scripture a positive precept concerning the same 3. to oblige every member to the lawes of the discipline voted by the major part of the members 4. to admit and expell the members which by the major part are thought fit so to be Many other acts are performed by the same members not as church-members as to appeal to a superiour tribunall as magistracy or synod in case of wrong sustained for they do not oppose a just defence to wrong by any other right then a member of any society should do Thus an assembly of Christians meeting in a church way being persecuted or assaulted in their temple by rude and wicked men doth not oppose a just defence by weapons or otherwise as church-members but as men invested with naturall power against an unjust violence In short ministers and people have many actâ—ngs within the sphear of Christian duties which are not proper to them as Christians and members of churches being like in that to a physitian who doth not build as a physitian or to a counsellor of State carrying a letter to a friend who acts then the part of a letter-bearer thus a father hath a power over his son by a naturall paternall right but he doth instruct him in a Gospell way by a paternall Christian right and duty grounded upon a positive precept of the Scripture thus Queen Mary of England established a religion by a naturall right power and duty annexed to all soveraignty to order sacred things with a soveraign authority but Queen Elizabeth did overthrow the false worship and did set up Protestant religion not only by the same right that Queen Mary had but also by a positive right as principall church-member as Ezechiah Iosiah c. appointed by God to be heads and nursing fathers and mothers of the churches The same things lawes and constitutions that are of divine right are also of humane right and likewise the things that are of humane right in a good sense may be said to be of divine right Things are said to be of divine or humane right either because the matter of right is concerning Gods worship or humane policie or because God or man is the author of them Thus the lawes of the Iewes regulating their Commonwealth are said both to be of divine and humane right divine because God is the authour of them humane because they order all affairs about mine and thine right and wrong and betwixt man and man Likewise many things have been instituted with great wisedome by magistrates and councils which may well be said to be both of divine and humane right Divine because they further the purity of worship and power of godlinesse humane because they were instituted by men and may suffer alteration and reformation So things that are every way of divine right both for the matter and institution as the eating of the passeover and the observation of the Sabbath may be said to be of humane right because commanded and enjoyned by humane authority The very calling of synods which they say is of divine institution both for their institution which is Apostolick and for the matter that is handled in them none but a papist did yet deny to be the Emperours and magistrates right Thus fasting prayer publick humiliation though duties to be performed by divine right and precept are also of humane right as commanded and ordered by the magistrate in a publick way Thus it was the good Kings of Iuda's right and none can blame them for it to command fasting and prayers Lastly things that are every way of humane right and made by man and have for their object the regulating of humane affairs as are the lawes concerning conduit-pipes buildings forests chases c. may conveniently be said to be of divine right because by divine right they
the minister of the Gospell yet he may command in his own name the law of God which the minister of the Gospell may not It is the opinion of the gravest Divines that ministers have no power of legislation which being granted it is not possible they should have a power of jurisdiction for it was never heard that he that hath no power of or capacity to legislation can have any to jurisdiction for every member of Parliament is supposed to be capable of exercising jurisdiction but were he disinabled to have a power of legislation by that he should loose all capacity to bear any office of jurisdiction Camero is very expresse in his tract de Ecclesia p. 369. where having shewed that there be two things which are the matter of law 1. faith and good manners 2. things that pertain to order and discipline he addes in neither kind the church hath power to make lawes having said a little before that what proceedeth from the church ought rather to be called admonitions and exhortations then lawes Musculus is no lesse expresse in his common places p. 6â—1 We do confidently assert that all that power by which authentick lawes are made binding the subjects to obey whether they be called civil or eccle siasticall do not belong to the church that is to the multitude of the faithfull and subjects nor to the church-minister but properly to the sole magistrate to whom is given a mere command merum imperium over the subjects 3. This sheweth the invalidity of all canons decrees and sentences of church-judicatories which except they be known to be equitable true and just are not to be obeyed since the validity of an ecclesiasticall law is not like that of the magistrates which be it never so unjust hath the force of a law but sure none of our presbyterian brethren will maintain that all judgements and sentences of church-judicatories are infallible and therefore it belongeth to every man censured by such a judicatorie to be well informed of the justice truth and equity of the censure before he obeyeth it yea before it hath the force or name of a censure For it fares with the sentences of ministers as with the counsels of physitians which must convince the party of the necessity of vielding to this or that remedy their commands must have alwayes some reason annexed why they must be obeyed but the law of the magistrate needs none and permits none to interpret it but obey it according to the letter Lawes are variously divided into Divine and humane ecclesiasticall and civil morall ceremoniall and politick Some call those divine which are made by God and those humane which are made by men others call them divine lawes which rule the conscience and those humane laws which govern the outward man But none of these divisions are without their defects for humane lawes govern and oblige the conscience as the Apostle tells us Ro. 13. and albeit all humane lawes are not divine yet all divine lawes are so far humane as the magistrate giveth a sanction to them and imposeth an obligation in the court of man to obey them Likewise the division of lawes into morall policick and ceremoniall hath its defects for I conceive that the morall law is the ground and basis of the ceremoniall and politick and a rule by which God is to be worshipped State cities families fathers husbands children servants must be governed So that the ceremoniall law is but the morall law applied to the use of divine worship and the politick or civil law is but the morall law applyable to the practise and conversation of life at home and abroad The holy Scripture putteth no such distinction 1. God was alike the author of them all 2. God only and Moses his deputy on earth did give a sanction and stamp of obligation to them all 3. The matter indeed was diverse and so are the military lawes distinct from the matrimoniall and testamentary and yet are they all comprehended under the civil law because the civil magistrate giveth force of law to them alike upon that account why may not the morall and ceremoniall law be called civil 4. Because when the Scripture speaketh of the perfection of the law of God of those that walk in the lawes of God that the law of Moses was read every Sabbath that many dayes passed without law the whole body of the lawes given by Moses is understood without any such partition 5. Because the same persons judged every causes and matter punishable by the law there being as Mr. Gillespie faineth no such thing as a judicatory ecclesiasticall for ecclesiasticall causes a civil bench where the judges decided civil or politick causes for so we should need a third bench of judges medling with morall matters and causes Yet Mr. Gillespie p. 14. grants that the Jewes had no other civil law but Gods own law and besides that the Levites judged not only in the businesse of the Lord but also in the businesse of the King 1 Chron. 2. v. 30. 32. And so falls down the division of lawes into ecclesiasticall and civil for 1. They differ not in kind otherwise then a man from an animall this being the genus the other the species 2. All lawes devised by men whatever subject and matter they are about are civil politick and lawes of that power that giveth them force and vigour of lawes such are all the constitutions about discipline of the church which in vain they call ecclesiasticall 3. If a law were to be called ecclesiasticall because it handleth lawes for the government of the church we should need as many kinds of lawes as there be societies in the world and we should have one peculiar classis for lawes to govern schools and Universities another to govern societies of merchants a third for societies of drapers I do not deny but that a law may be as properly called ecclesiasticall as a law is called nauticall military testamentary matrimoniall either because they are about matters of churches armies wills husbands wives or because they were invented for the benefit of churches souldiers married people and the like but in vain do they think to call a law ecclesiasticall because not only it is of church-matters but also because it must be made by ecclesiasticall men and receive form and sanction from them and because all causes matters which they call ecclesiasticall must be judged by ecclesiasticall men For 1. As ecclesiasticall power if there be any such thing must be subordinate to the civil as we have proved before so ecclesiasticall lawes to the civil lawes 2. Ministers having no power of legislation nor of jurisdiction therefore lawes to govern Christians in churches need not to take their name from church minister or ministery but from the magistrate who is the maker latour and giver of them and binds men to a submission to them under penalty Musculus in the above-quoted place disproveth at large this
probatum est to them all controversie will be ended and the power in the hands of church-officers will be no longer distinct from that of the magistrate and all presbyterian jurisdiction of excommunicating deposing and making lawes authoritatively will be taken away So that if we give credit to Mr. Rutherfurd all acts sentences and excommunications pronounced by synods and presbyteries are no further valide then as they are conceived by the magistrates and private men agreeable with the word The other passage of Mr. Rutherfurd doth no lesse pull down the definitive judgement of ministers and by it all presbyterian jurisdiction p. 577. As the church is to approve and command the just sentence of the civill judge in punishing ill doers but only conditionally so far as it is just so is the magistrate obliged to follow ratifie and with his civil sanction confirm the sound constitutions of the church but conditionally not absolutely and blindly but only so far as they agree with the word of God Studying brevity I am loth to load the reader with authorities out of most eminent divines Zanchius Martyr Iunius Pareus Camero Rivetus and others all jointly proving 1. that all the judgements and sentences of synods church-judicatories presbyteries are mere counsels advices and no lawes obliging to obedience or to assent except they receive the ultimate sanction from the magistrate 2. that the magistrate ought not to take the ministers or synods judgement barely because it comes from them but follow his own judgement I will alledge but one or two out of Pareus and one out of Rivetus That of Pareus is on the 13. Rom. All faithfull even private men ought to judge of faith and of religion not only with an apprehensive judgement that by it they may understand the true religion but also with a judgement of discretion that they may distinguish the true from the false hold to one and reject the other much more ought the Christian magistrate to judge of the religion not only apprehensively and discretively but also definitively Here we have a definitive judgement proper to magistrates as well as to ministers and church-judicatories In the same place A Prince ought to defend the true religion suppresse the false banish blasphemies and heresies he ought then to know of all these singly and by his office judge of them for if he were only to draw the sword at the beck of the priests without knowledge and judgement and without making any question whether the judgements of the pastors are right or no what would he be but a sergeant and an executioner as the Iewes made of Pilate saving to him If he had not been a malefactour we would not have delivered him to thee Rivet on the decalogue hath these words We joyn those two together that the magistrate should not only act by others prejudice but also by his own judgement not that he should trust so much to his but also let ministers of the Gospell have their parts not relying on his fancy but being counselled by the pastors of churches calling synods and there hearing godly and learned men discoursing out of the word of God of controversies of religion and of articles of faith then what he hath himself approved of to be the truth let him embrace it and spread it There he maketh no more of synods then a Prince of his state-counsellors or a sick man of his physitians whose judgements they take for counsells and advices and not for definitive sentences And so speaketh Maresius Coll. Theol. loc 16. thes 77. Ministers of churches do not so much represent judges in a senat as prudent doctors and learned gathered to give counsell and their result is like the advice of physitians about the health of the body By what I have said of judgement and alledged out of Mr. Rutherfurd that question so much debated betwixt the Romanists and the Protestants who is the judge of controversies in matters of faith is easily decided for doubtlesse the ministers of the Gospell have by their education function and ministeriall duty that publick judgement to declare either in churches or synods what by the judgement of discretion they conceive to be the mind and the ordinance of Christ but this judgement inforceth and obligeth no man to assent to it except they also by their private judgement of discretion apprehend it to be such So ought neither magistrates nor the power of magistracy seated in churches to command or enjoyn it as a law to be obeyed or a doctrine to be believed except apprehended by the judgement of discretion to be the mind or an ordinance of Christ Ministers in divinity physitians in physick each professour of art in his art not only because they are more versed in that thing they professe but also ex officio have a judgement that carrieth and giveth more authority but it being fallible and therefore subject to the revisall of others whether magistrates or subjects and not attended with command obliging to obedience either active or passive it is only authentick to them that are perswaded and convinced to yield to it CHAPTER V. An examination of the 30. chapter of the confession of faith made by the Rever Assembly of Divines That in their Assembly they assumed no jurisdiction nor had any delegated to them from the magistrate and therefore were not to attribute it to their brethren That the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is the same with the magistrates jurisdiction Mr. Gillespies reasons examined THe reverend Assembly of Divines in the 30. and 31. chapters of their Confession of Faith are strong assertors of a double jurisdiction Before I come to examine what they say and their proofs alledged in the margent I would be well understood that I do not quarrell against the spirituall jurisdiction over the inward man in the ministery when a minister doth command from Christ and the people yields obedience being once inlightened and convinced all is done on both parts willingly and not by constraint the weapons of that jurisdiction are not carnall and yet very mighty not by putting away by excommunication but by pulling down the strong holds of sin and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ 2. Cor. 10. v. 4. 5. The Lord Iesus Christ say they sect 1. as King and head of his Church hath therein appointed a government in the hands of Church-officers distinct from the civil magistrate It may be the Rev. Assembly do only intend to adjudge jurisdiction to other church-assemblies and synods and none to themselves for these reasons 1. They were bound by their charter by which they were called not to exercise any jurisdiction and authority ecclesiasticall whatsoever or any other power for these be the words of the ordinance and besides are en joyned not to assume any authority but to advise and give counsell upon such things as shall be propounded to them and to deliver their opinions and advices 2. And the same they did
by their practise for they assumed no jurisdiction but having perfected the Confession of Faith the Catechisme platform of government they presented them to the Parliament under the name of humble advice for they were not to determine any thing authoritatively albeit they pretend no lesse was due unto them as they speak in the 31. chapter sect 3. that ministers in synods may determine authoritatively matters of religion 3. But both the power which was delegated to the Assembly and the exercise of that power during their sitting at Westminster being a lively representation of the extent of power which all councels synods under an orthodox magistrate ever enjoyed or ought to have I wonder much they would ascribe judiciall authority to ministers in synods which they themselves had not never look't for were not to have and which they never saw practised before in any assemblies convocated by the magistrate 4. Had the Lord Jesus Christ instituted a jurisdiction distinct and independent from the magistrate they were to disclaim that ordinance which delegated a power which was none of their own but was derived immediatly from Christ not by the intervention and the chanell of the magistrate unto themselves as ministers of Christ and if any ordinance before their sitting was to be expected it was not to be directed to the ministers but to the people who were to be enjoyned to suffer the ministers to exercise that jurisdiction which they authoritatively challenge from Jesus Christ 5. Had the jurisdiction of the Assembly been acknowledged the magistrate as our brethren the Scots speak should have submitted to all resolutions of the Assembly being no longer humble advices but canons decrees and lawes made authoritatively by the Governours of churches under Iesus Christ But what sense can be given to these words when they say there is a government distinct from the magistrate Is it such a distinction as is betwixt subordinates or betwixt coordinates If the magistrates power and the presbyterian power are coordinates each must needs be independent one from the other which how inconsistent it is under one magistrate we have discussed in another place If these powers be subordinate it must be one of these three wayes 1. in coercive power 2. in judgement or judiciall determinations that are to passe for lawes obliging all sorts of people to obedience either active or passive 3. in the affinity of power in nature and definition which necessarily imports subordination betwixt them 1. For matter of coercive power the ecclesiasticall having none they must be beholden to another power which indeed makes it to be power all externall power and jurisdiction being but childrens play ens rationis a bubble a name without a thing without a power of coercion 2. For judgement if ecclesiasticall men cannot execute their power without the magistrate the question will be whether he shall execute their injunctions as a judge and interpreter or as a sergeant and executioner not interpreting the commands of the court but fulfilling them with a blind obedience and judgement for there is no medium betwixt these two If as a judge then he ought to judge of the judgements of ministers ere he doth command them to be observed and so in a manner all determinations of ministers will be but counsels and advices seeing before they have force of law and of rule they must receive the ultimate judgement and approbation from the magistrate 3. Subordination of powers implieth affinity of definition and nature betwixt the subordinates as Surgerie being subordinate to Medicine proveth the affinity betwixt Medicine and Surgery Yea if subordinate jurisdictions stand in pari gradu and in equall distance from the power they are subordinate unto it argueth an identity of jurisdictions among them as if the jurisdiction of a colledge of physitians and of a corporation of merchants be both subordinate to one magistrate it is manifest that the jurisdiction of that colledge and of that corporation are but one as springing from one head of jurisdiction thus if the jurisdictions of a church and of a corporation are of equall distance in subordination from one spring-head of jurisdiction no doubt the jurisdiction of that church and of that corporation are but one jurisdiction Now that the nature of the jurisdiction of pastors churches and synods is the same with that of magistracy needeth not to be coordinate with it it is evident by many proofs 1. There is the same use of judgement prudence and discretion as by the same yard one may measure cloth silk and thred so may the same wise politicall head and the same prudence and discretion govern a state a church and a family Dionysius the tyrant used to say he did employ the same art in governing his school at Corinth and his Kingdom of Sicily 2. There is the same nature of law in both jurisdictions for the nature of the law consisteth not in its being just equall and honest but in its being published by him or them that are invested with magistracy The better men that is not the wiser and the most rationall but the richer and the most potent give law to the rest The philosophers permit us to weigh and interpret their lawes but the magistrate enjoyneth blind obedience to his Seneca saith that the magistrates law doth not dispute but commandeth and Tullie in his thâ—…d book de natura Deorum saith I am to receive from thee O philosopher satisfaction from reason but I am to yield to the lawes that our ancestours have delivered us though they give no reason In like manner all presbyterian synods namely the generall assembly of Scotland do not give so much leave to inferiour ecclesiasticall judicatories or private persons to examine their decrees by a judgement of discretion as those of Beroea took to themselves when they examined St. Pauls doctrine and searched the Scripture to know whether it was so as he preached for their ecclesiasticall constitutions have force of law only because they have the sanction of an ecclesiasticall assembly and are not to be disputed by any inferiour judicatory whereas the nature of an ecclesiasticall law should be quite different from the civil viz. that it should not be the product of a jurisdiction compelling or requiring to assent or obey except the inward man be perswaded and convinced It may be our presbyterian brethren will say that for example excommunication hath no further validity of sentence then as it is just and done deservedly which indeed proves the nullity of all excommunications for all being done in the name of Christ all must needs be just and valid and every one excommunicating in the name of Christ should excommunicate infallibly and his excommunication should be an effect of an unerring judgement which till it be known to be infallible a man may justly question the validity of his excommunication 3. In this also there is a great affinity and agreement betwixt the jurisdiction they call ecclesiasticall
and the civil and therefore no need to make two of one that ecclesiasticall presbyterian jurisdiction is bounded by the same limits as is the civill jurisdiction which is against the nature of all other jurisdictions different from the magistrates power though subordinate to it as is the maritall and paternall powers none doubting but a father in England hath a power over his son in France and that a wife is subject to her husband however distant from him Now it is granted by all that the jurisdiction of churches combined and that of synods never went beyond the magistrates jurisdiction that the churches of Persia Aethiopia and India were not tyed to observe the deciees of the first councill of Nice nor the reformed churches of France those of the synod of Dordrecht neither the church of Barwick to submit to the orders of the generall assembly of Scotland and yet some do not stick to maintain that a man excommunicated in Scotland is also bound by the same sentence in France or Holland because if we may believe them it is reasonable that the sphear of activity within which excommunication acteth should as much spread down wards as upwards and that since a man bound by excommunication at Edenburgh is also tyed in heaven good reason he should be bound and fast in any part of the earth 4. This also which all churches classes and synods assume makes their jurisdiction wholly concurring in nature and property with the jurisdiction of the magistrate which is that as in all civil and politicall assemblies the major and the stronger part in votes not in reasons doth carry it so decrees and canons because the major part have voted them to be such are therefore receivable by inferiour ecclesiasticall judicatories as they call them whereas since they pretend that ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is of a quite different nature from that of the magistrate it were most convenient that it should not be like it in this main particular but that private men or churches should adhere to truth not to multitude not numbring the votes but weighing the reasons And indeed this was well considered by the Parliament in their ordinance for calling of the assembly for though they took upon themselves that power of legislation jurisdiction whose votes are not weighed but numbred and which cannot be otherwise exercised in this world yet they very prudently conceived that such a jurisdiction could not be assumed by churchmen as such in matters of religion for they never intended that whatsoever should be transacted or defined by the major part of the ministers of the Assembly should be received for a canon and an ecclesiasticall law that should stand in force since they expressely enjoyn in the rules which they prescribed to the assembly 1. that their decisions and definitions should be presented to the Parliament not under the name of law made to them but of humble advice 2. that no regard should be had to the number of the persons dissenting or assenting but that each party should subscribe their names to their opinion 5. Another argument to prove that the ecclesiasticall and the magistrates power are not coordinate but that the ecclesiasticall is subordinate to that of the magistrate and that they both are of the same nature is that both of them magistrate and ministers challenge not only the duty of messengers from God in delivering to the people the lawes of God but also as judges exercise power about making new lawes which do oblige to obedience for conscience sake for the assemblies presbyteries of Scotland do not only presse obedience to the lawes expressely set down in Scripture but also to their canons decrees and constitutions 6. Another argument to prove the identity of the powers ecclesiasticall and civil is that both are conversant about lawes and constitutions that are made by men such are most of the canons and constitutions of synods and ecclesiasticall assemblies which are no more expresse Scripture then the Instinian Code and therefore it is altogether needlesse to constitute two coordinate humane legislative powers 7. But suppose that all the decrees canons constitutions of presbyteries and church-assemblies were word of God and divine precepts this very thing that they are divine constitutions and that one jurisdiction or other must be conceived enjoyning by a sanction and commanding obedience to them argueth that ecclesiasticall and civil jurisdiction are but one For what can the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction do more then to give a sanction to the lawes of God which thing the magistrate is to do If he must give a sanction to the decalogue why not to all other precepts which are equally of divine institution 8. It is absurd to put under the Gospell a difference betwixt the jurisdiction or law of Christ and the law of God the universall Monarch as Mr. Gillespie speaketh p. 261. for there is no precept of the decalogue there is nothing good holy honest and of good report but is the law of Jesus Christ and therefore since the magistrate cannot be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a minister of God as St. Paul calls him but he must be a minister of Jesus Christ and that he cannot be keeper of the decalogue and of the law of God under Moses administration but he must be also the keeper of the law of Christ what need to constitute two coordinate judiciall powers each of them being pari gradu subordinate to Jesus Christ Lastly if the Kingdom of Jesus Christ is not of this world and that this Kingdom as our brethren tell us is the presbyterian government then this Kingdom must have a jurisdiction and lawes quite different from the Kingdom and jurisdiction of this world which yet doth not prove true by the parallels we have made of both jurisdictions Mr. Gillespie a member of that Assembly pag. 85. endeavoureth to shew what a wide difference there is betwixt these two jurisdictions in their nature causes objects adjuncts but I might upon the same grounds maintain the like wide difference betwixt martiall navall testamentall paternall maritall and civil power all differing and yet subordinate to that of the magistrate I might also attribute to each society its peculiar power placing in a colledge of physicians a medicall power subordinate to God the God of bodies health and outward safety as the civil is subordinate to the God of the Universe and the ecclesiasticall to Christ For if the God of nations hath instituted the civil power and the God of saints the ecclesiasticall as Mr. Gillespie speaketh what hinders but that the God of nature hath instituted the medicall power And if morall good be the object of the civil power and spirituall good of the spirituall power why may not bodily health be the object of the medicall power CHAPTER VI. Whether Iesus Christ hath appointed a jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall as King and head of his Church Of the nature of the Kingdom of God In what sense the magistrate is
head of the Church WE proceed to examine what the Rever Assembly say that Jesus Christ hath instituted this ecclesiasticall â—…sdiction as King and head of his Church Mr. Gillespie one of their body and therefore the best interpreter of their meaning saith in his 2. book chap. 5. that Jesus Christ hath two Kingdoms 1. a generall as he is the eternall Son of God the head of all principalities powers raigning over all creatures 2. a particular Kingdom as he is mediatour raigning over the church only by which church he understandeth a visible church of saints combined in such a body as is the church of Scotland enjoying the ordinances and the discipline of Christ And of this Kingdom he understandeth Matth. 16. v. 28. There be some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom So doth Beza against Erastus who with Mr. Gillespie out of those words of Christ my Kingdom is not of this world concludeth two things 1. that the ecclesiasticall government is distinct from the civill or that of the magistrate 2. that that Kingdom is an aggregation of many churches under one presbytery In the 6. chap. of the same book he is very prolix to prove that Jesus Christ as mediatour and head of the Church hath not appointed the magistrate to be his viceregent in the government of the church in the second acception I confesse that the holy Scripture mentioneth two Kingdoms but that both these be visible ones I deny flatly particularly that Jesus Christ is called King and head of the church in reference to the visible congregations of Christians or that by the body of Christ is meant the visible assembly of those that make outward profession of the Christian religion Let us then consider in this Kingdom of Jesus Christ as mediatour the nature of the King and head of his scepter sword power weapons keyes fullnesse that so we may see if all these qualifications yea if any one of these are proper to any visible church particular and nationall Both Rivet and Reynolds in their comments upon the 110. Psalme make this Kingdom wholly spirituall not of this world much lesse seen in this world though known to be in this world It is that Kingdom which is many times mentioned in the Gospell but never once taken for a visible government of men professing outwardly the name of Christ but for the Kingdom of grace and that government which Christ hath over those whom he ruleth by his spirit of adoption The keyes of this Kingdom are the door of utterance in the ministery whereby men have entrance these keyes keep out from coming in those that are without doors but never put out any that are once in and therefore most absurd it is to ground the power of excommunication upon the power of the keyes committed by Jesus Christ to the Apostles if the Kingdom of which Christ speaketh is the Kingdom of heaven or of grace will they say that an excommunicated person is put oâ— of the Kingdom of grace The scepter and sword of this Kingdom is the word of God The weapons are not carnall nor are they used to the putting a man out by excommunication but to the pulling down the strong holds of sin not by tying a man with church-censures but bringing into captivity his imaginations to the obedience of Christ This truth broke through the darknesse of popery and was acknowledged by those that were oppressed by the Popes tyrannie so in the year 1080. the advocate of the Emperour confut 9. saith that the preaching of Gregory the 7. was new since the church had no other sword then that of the spirit which was the word of God This language was acknowledged by the canonists to be in the mouths of the Popes adversaries who yet kept within the communion of Rome never dreaming of a Wicleff or a Luther as can inter 33. quest 3. Ecclesia non habet gladium nisi spiritualem qui non occidit sed vivisificat The law of this Kingdom is not the discipline or censure of the church but the law both of the Gospell and of faith called also the law of the spirit For by the power of that Kingdom described by the holy Ghost in the new Testament and mentioned in 50. places is not in any of them understood the ecclesiasticall power or any such thing as the power of ministers presbyteries synods to make decrees canons to determine authoritatively to suspend excommunicate and absolve but alwayes is meant that power that translateth from darknesse to light and from the power of satan unto God by which we are made sons of God Ioh. 1. v. 12. by which we are enlightened Act. 26. v. 18. and raised unto newnesse of life The fullnesse of that Kingdom is the saving gifts and graces given to the members The head of this Kingdom is Jesus Christ our King Priest and Prophet ruling by his spirit his subjects which are his members offering satisfying and interceding only for them teaching none savingly but them There is no governour or viceregent of this church but the spirit of God working in the heart by the word preached or read and guiding into all truth Though God hath no visible governours of this Kingdom yet he hath externally many subservient instruments and ministers for the advancing of that Kingdom as magistrates by their jurisdiction pastors by their function all godly people by their generall calling and dutie their persecutions afflictions maladies and particularly the ministers of the Gospell are main agents in Gods hands for the building up of that Kingdom What they know they do is the least part of their ministery they themselves being ignorant what and how they work by it in mens hearts Gods chief minister is Christ in the word the power is the efficacious working of the word the keyes are the openings of the heart to the word or rather the openings of the word to the heart and the receiving of the person into the heavenly fellowship This power is not placed in the ministers but the word which though it is delivered by them not only in a way of beseeching and exhorting but also of commanding yet that jurisdiction is only effectuall on those that of unwilling are rendred willing so that it is rather the jurisdiction of the word then of the minister for the ministers operation in the ministery is like to that of the artists in their chymicall operations where they are rather spectators then actors admovendo agentia passivis for nature and fire are the main agents They are like an husbandman in a vintage who maketh not the wine but ordereth it powring it from one vessel to another This being the nature of the Kingdom and church of God of which Christ is the head and King it remaineth to enquire who is the viceregent of God in governing the visible congregations of Christians meeting about the worship of God Properly
the magistrate is not head of the church more then of other societies for as the callings of a physitian merchant smith sea-man so of a Christian as Christian and church-member are not subordinate to magistracy but only under the notion of and as they are members of families societies corporations and commonwealths in all which magistracy is virtually and eminently resident in regard that no society of men can be imagined to be governed either without a power delegate from the magistrate or without assuming magistracy within it self In that sense the magistrate may be said for these three or four reasons to be head of a visible nationall church 1. Because the matter manner and extent of the power exercised by that church being wholly the same with that of the magistrate it is needlesse to make of one power two and therefore the magistrate being the supreme governour in the managing of that power exercised alike in all kinds of societies within his dominion he may very properly be the supreme governour as well of churches as of all other societies 2. The magistrate may be said to be head of the visible church because there is no man of what place function calling dignity so ever he be that in an externall visible way can so much promote the interest of Jesus Christ and the building up of his Kingdom as the supreme magistrate not so much considered as Christian but as magistrate and by vertue of his magistracy None doth doubt but that one single woman namely Queen Elizabeth being a magistrate did contribute more for establishing and spreading the Gospell of Christ in England then all the godly ministers put together in the dayes of Queen Mary Let but one single magistrate countenance religion this will avail more then thousands of Greenhams or Bradfords under a magistrate of a contrary religion Sure where God hath given more ability and power to do good he also hath placed there more right duty to promote that good I think there was more stresse of duty laid upon Queen Elizabeth to advance Christs Kingdom in England then on 100. Bradfords Latimers and Ridleys in Queen Maries dayes A 3. ground may be added why the sovereign magistrate may be called the head of the church and which is much pressed by Reynolds Martyr Musculus Bullingerus Gualterus Zanchius Pareus is because all the decisions of ministers about matters of faith or discipline are but mere counsels advices and directions not binding externally that is actively or passively any church society or corporation except they receive a sanction from the magistrate and besides that these sanctions are not to be made by him caeco judicio with a blind judgement standing to their determination without examination and doing as much as those of Beroea who ere they believed St. Paul searched the Scriptures to know whether it was so as he preached As no obedience is to be rendred by any person society or corporation without they duly weigh in their judgement of discretion whether the command be just or no so a command is not to be made by the person whose duty and part it is to command untill he first understandeth and apprehendeth by his judgement of discretion the thing to be a good and a fitting rule of obedience So that since presbyteries and â—ynods cannot enforce obligation of obedience to their declarations and decisions without the injunction and command of the magistrate since also he is not to enjoin or command any thing repugnant to his own judgement it doth consequently follow that good reason it is that he who last is to judge and command any thing propounded and debated in whatever assembly of men should be stiled the sovereign judge head ruler and governour of those things that are solely in his own power Fourthly he may be said to be head of the church because of three main duties which are annexed to his office of magistracy which comprehend what is requisite for life godlinesse and happinesse The 1. is provisio mediorum conducentium ad finem optimum provision of the means conducing to the best end 2. remotio impedientium the removing of hinderances 3. actualis directio in illum finem an actuall direction ordering things to that end These 3. conditions Javellus a Romish Bishop layes down to assert the soveraign power of the magistrate in judging providing ordering and removing in order to obtaining the best end which he saith is the main felicity of man Lastly he may be well called head of the church that receiveth appeals from all church-judicatories and disannuls or ratifies their judgements and sentences But Mr. Rutherfurd denieth those acts to be appeals being not in eadem serie from a lower ecclesiasticall court to a superiour ecclesiasticall court and saith that from an ecclesiasticall court to a civil as to the magistrate there is no appeal but a removall by a declinator a complaint a refuge But we having proved that synods presbyteries c. have no jurisdiction but what they have from the magistrate therefore all appeals from a church-judicatorie to the magistrate are but from an inseriour court of the magistrate to a superiour of the same magistrate Rivet on the decalogue had not learned such squibs of distinctions betwixt appeals and refuges complaints and declinators for by any means he would have men to appeal to the magistrate from church-sentences Ministers as ministers are the subjects of the soveraign magistrate and why may it not be lawfull for subjects to appeal from the judgements of subjects to the supreme magistrate and why may it not be lawfull to the supreme magistrate to review the judgements of his subjects to ratifie them if they be good and abolish them if they be bad For call those removals what you will so that the thing be still the same for he that from an unjust sentence of a church-judicatorie hath his recourse to the magistrate both declines the sentence of that court appeals to a higher court and makes his complaint to him that can redresse him help him and disannull the first sentence I confesse if a man be condemned in England he may have his refuge to some neighbour Prince but this Prince can but protect him from the execution of the sentence against him but cannot disannull the sentence against him nor restore him in statu quo prius Such are the examples of Chrysostomus Flavianus and Athanasius which are to no purpose for they repaired to the Bishop of Rome desiring indeed to be judged by him but they did not look upon him as their superiour that could relieve them and quash the sentence against them they repaired to him only as to a mediatour and intercessour Authorities should now make good what I have proved to be consonant to reason such as might be brought out of the best reformers as Martyr Reynolds Pareus Chamier who make no other supreme visible governour of the church then the soveraign magistrate but I will
not trouble the reader with many quotations Yet to shew that this is no new doctrine I might produce some famous Romish authors who thought no lesse in the darkest times of ignorance for so Claude Fauchet hath left written a famous Historian and a Papist in his book of the liberties of the Gallicane church who out of Gregorie of Tours and the practise of his time proveth that the Kings of France were reputed heads of the church a title which many 100. years after was much found fault with in the Kings of England by the Romanists yea by some reformers He concludes his discourse thus which sheweth that the Bishops of that time did hold the King assisted by his counsell of State to be under God head on earth of the church in his Kingdom and not the Pope whom if they had looked on as the head they would have sent unto him the conclusion of the councill of Orleans and not to King Clovis So speaketh the author of the Review of the councill of Trent lib. 6. cap. 5. The ecclesiasticks in France do not hold their ecclesiastick jurisdiction from the Pope but from the King though the Iesuits teach otherwise CHAPTER VII The strength of Mr. Gillespies reasons to disprove that the magistrate is not chief governour of the church under Christ examined ALl that I have said doth sufficiently overthrow what Mr. Gillespie alledgeth for a double jurisdiction and against the magistrates being the chief governour of the church under Christ To make good that in a hundred places he doth much under value the magistrates power in sacred things namely p. 187. that the magistrate though Christian and godly doth not exnatura rei and in regard of his particular vocation intend the glory of Iesus Christ as mediator and King of the church In the next page The glory of Iesus Christ as mediatour and King of the church is not the end of magistracy And in the same page he saith that the end of magistracy is not godlinesse honesty but peace and quietnesse Pag. 235. he saith the magistrate is not to rule in the name of Christ Pag. 250. he saith the magistrate of England is not a member of the church as a magistrate but as a Christian In the 294. page the civil magistrate is Gods viceregent not Christs and ibid. If the magistrate be supreme head and governour of the church under Christ then the ministers of the church are the magistrates ministers as well as Christs and must act in the magistrates name and as subordinate to him and the magistrate shall be Christs minister and act in Christs name By all this he declareth his opinion more then he proveth it But to elude whatever strength this carries I further adde that God maketh use of two main instruments to promote and advance the Kingdom of Christ as mediatour 1. The first is the sacred function wholly set a part by God to preach the glad tidings of God reconciled to the world which function was first laid on Christ and then on the Apostles and the ministers of the Gospell who are embassadors and messengers of from Christ In this function there is no jurisdiction annexed but what the spirit in the word hath upon mens hearts for their conviction and conversion In the exercise of this function there is no law made by him that bears it but the law of the spirit no censure inflicted but on such as either willingly and not by constraint undergo it and chose whether they will or no or when it pleaseth God in judgement to afflict the despisers of Gods ministers ordinances This function I grant is not exercised in the magistrates name but Christs nor is it subordinate to him 2. The second thing servient if I may so speak and subservient to the promoting of the Kingdom of Christ is the magistrate and magistracy in as much as which I said before it cannot be that ministers and people assemble synods be called an outward government settled lawes published good men rewarded bad men punished heresies and hereticks rejected ministers maintained union preserved except ministers people synods be invested with a power of magistrate and magistracy These two as I suppose being undeniably true all Mr. Gillespies assertions above-mentioned will be found built upon the sand The magistrate having not the sacred function on him is no minister nor ambassadour of and from Christ neither doth the inward operative jurisdiction annexed to the sacred function arise from magistracy ex natura rei In that regard the minister preaching the Gospell and exercising his pastorall function is not the magistrates minister but Christs But as magistracy is the second necessary instrument which God employeth to promote the Kingdom of his Son in the world and for as much as it cannot be so much as imagined that magistracy is inherent in all pastors and assemblies of churches and synods no doubt but the ministers in that consideration may be called the magistrates ministers as both in the same respect are Christs ministers If Christs Kingdom cannot be nor ever was promoted without magistracy actually present and acting then the magistrate is a main minister of Christ in those acts Reverend and learned Mr. Lightfoot in his Harmony of the New Testament upon the 1 Cor. 5. clearly evinceth that church-officers cannot be so much as conceived to govern the churches without magistracy either assumed or delegated for having told us that every synagogue of the Jewes had magistracy within their own body judging betwixt party and party in matters of money Health damage yea inflicting corporall punishments he addeth all things well considered it may not be so monstrons as it seems to some to say it might very well be so in those times of Christian congregations for since as it might be shewed Christ and his Apostles in platforming the modell of Christian churches in those times did keep very close to the platform of synagogues and since the Romans in those times made no difference betwixt Iewes Iudaizing and Iewes that were turned Christians for as yet there was no persecution raised against Christianity why might not Christian congregations have and exercise their double function of ministry and magistracy in them as well as the Iewish synagogues and if that much controverted place 1 Tim. 5. 17. should be interpreted according to such a rule it were neither irrationall nor improbable Here by the way one may see that in synagogues there were severall functions but one Imperium and jurisdiction which was that of magistracy 2. that the churches of Christians were modelled according to Iewish synagogues 3. that every church had both ministery and magistracy By this likewise down goeth what he saith that the magistrate though Christian and godly doth not in regard of his particular vocation intend the glory of Jesus Christ as mediatour and King of the church The main end as well as duty of magistracy is the care of religion and so of
Christian religion his aime is and ought to be not so much peace and quietnesse as godlinesse and honesty Must a magistrate hide his power which is his talent in a napkin were not Adam Abraham Isaac and Jacob by their paternall magistraticall power tyed to promote Gods true worship It is very strange doctrine when he saith p. 189. that the end of an ecclesiasticall sentence as delivering to Satan is that men may learn not to blaspheme but the end of the magistrate in punishing blasphemers is only that justice may be done according to law and that peace and good order may be maintained A rank papist could hardly speak more crudely Ought not this to be the end of the magistrate in punishing transgressours if it be not by death that they may change their lives and be better then they were Were not reformation of life the end for which a blasphemer is punished but only peace and quietnesse the magistrate might as well let him go unpunished if he can but obtain his end which as Mr. Gillespie saith is peace and quietnesse which hath been often obtained when no blasphemers were punished It is observed that in Augustus time there was for 12. years through all the Roman Empire peace and quietnesse though the life of all his subjects were a perpetuall blasphemy against God But I pray how can Christs church be ruled by magistracy except it be in the name of Christ promote the interest of Jesus Christ and ayme at the glory of Jesus Christ When he saith that the magiâ—…rate of England is not a member of the church as a magistrate but as a Christian and that he governs not as a Christian but as a magistrate I confesse I understand not why I may not say as well that a pastor is not a member of a church as pastor but as a Christian for there be in the church as well Balaams and false teachers as persecuting magistrates Why may I not say that a father is not to teach the fear of the Lord to his son as a father but as a Christian for the magistrate is not to rule and order affairs of the church as a Christian but as a magistrate otherwise a Christian without the office of magistracy might do the like How can the duty about the exercise of a power be divided from the power it self as that a magistrate should be by his duty of magistracy keeper of both tables and yet should have no power given from God for the keeping of these tables But which is most al surd how can the keeping of the two tables under the Gospell be separate from the keeping of the doctrine and discipline of the Gospell as that the magistrate should be keeper of one and the pastors of the other If the magistrate under the old Testament was keeper not only of the decalogue but also of the covenant of grace by which the people of Israel was distinguished from the rest of the world what hinders but he should be under the Gospells administration a keeper both of the law and Gospell except Mr. Gillespie say that the priests were keepers of the law whereof David speaketh in the 19 Psalme and the magistrate keeper of the two tables given in mount Sinai As for the magistrates being a member of the church and therefore no head or governour of the church I believe he is as much lyable to submit and stoup his will to the commands of Christ in the ministery as the lowest in the congregation he must acknowledge his minister the better man as honoured with the highest function that ever was and which the Son of God our Lord Jesus Christ took upon him But were all the ministers of the Gospell as many Jesus Christs I would yield unto them all alike jurisdiction over the wills and minds of men but deny them an externall coercive judiciall power over their bodies estates liberties c. CHAPTER VIII Mr. Gillespies manifest contradictions in stating the magistrates power in matters of Religion BUt I will plainly shew that in this matter Mr. Gillespie doth manifestly contradict himself and stands on no sure ground for what he hath taken from the magistrate in some places in others he restoreth to him In some he grants as much to the magistrate as if he had been another Erastus in others he gives him nothing at all and makes ecclesiasticall and civil jurisdiction to be res disparatae or things as much different as wisedome and a candlestick being of severall classes and predicaments so that one hath nothing to meddle with the other Thus pag. 253. these be his words We deny that in a well-constituted church it is agreeable to the will of Christ for the magistrate either to receive appeals properly so called from the sentence of an ecclesiasticall court or to receive complaints exhibited against that sentence by that party censured so as by his authority upon such a complaint to nullify or make void the ecclesiasticall censure This indeed is imperium in imperio a jurisdiction within a jurisdiction and independent from it Mr. Gillespie would not have a man to appeal from the presbytery or synod or make complaints to the magistrate nor a magistrate to receive the complaints but he is contented that the magistrate should act the part of an executioner in compelling the party censured to submit to the church-censure which indeed is a most ungodly and tyrannicall proceeding like that of Pope Julius the 2. who would have King Lewis the 12. to execute the sentence against the Waldenses by destroying them by the sword and burning their cities without taking any cognizance of the fact And since all church-censures do signify just nothing without a power of magistracy giving its sanction for effectuating the sentence of the church here if we believe Mr. Gillespie the pastor is like the intellect and the magistrate the will this following with a blind obedience the dictates of that But who shall judge when the church is well constituted that then the magistrate may not receive complaints and appeals and may not sometimes wrong proceedings und unjust sentences passe in a well-constituted church so long as a church never so pure is not infallible and on the contrary may not an unsettled church be very just in their censures why then should it be more agreeable to the will of Christ to receive appeals from a just sentence in an unsettled church then from an unjust one when the church is well-constituted But when was ever such a well-constituted church unerring in their judgement as all appeals from their judgement to another should be unlawfull was or is that church well-constituted that either ever clashed with magistracy or was divided in it self as now it is Now we shall find Mr. Gillespie playing two other parts under the one he ascribeth to the magistrate as much as ever they challenged under the other vizard he chalks a middle way of magistrates power in sacred things
in which he seems to give something to the magistrate but in truth gives nothing however he is sure to raise a dust of distinctions that neither satisfy one nor the other Pag. 259. he alledgeth the 25. article of the confession of the church of Scotland which saith that to Kings Princes rulers and magistrates chiefly and most principally the conservation and the purgation of religion pertaineth so that not only they are appointed for civil policy but also for maintenance of the true religion and for suppressing idolatry and all superstition what soever He who never had heard of a double jurisdiction ecclesiasticall and civil or of a power of excommunicating deposing making lawes and determining so authoritatively about matters of faith and discipline that the magistrate is not to revise their judgements or receive complaints from church-judicatories he who never I say had heard of these positions would never deduct them by any consequence out of the words of the confession of Scotland quoted by Mr. Gillespie for quite contrary they unite all power into one make the magistrate sole governour of churches nationall provinciall and consistoriall and sole judge of heresies canous decrees and church-censures and besides overturn all Mr. Gillespies ground upon which he thinks to have laid very fast the fabrick of his ecclesiasticall jurisdiction independent from the magistrate and lastly reinvest the magistrate with the right and power which Mr. Gillespie hath taken from him when every where he denieth these three things 1. that the magistrate as magistrate intends the glory of Jesus Christ no otherwise then a sea-man or a picture-drawer as such see p. 187. 2. that he is to rule in the name of Christ p. 235. 3. that a magistrate as such is subservient to Christ as mediatour But let us examine by parts the force of the words of the confession of Scotland and how they agree with Mr. Gillespies usuall determinations 1. That article of the confession ascribeth to the magistrate at least an equall jurisdiction over ecclesiasticall persons and things which he hath over civil for they say he is appointed not only for civil policy but also for maintenance of the true religion so that equally he is charged by God to extirpate heresies reform the church and to purge the Commonwealth from seditions abuses crimes c. 2. Yea the article puts a great deal more stresse of duty upon the magistrate to govern the church and maintain and reform the true religion then to rule the Commonwealth besides making the end and ayme of magistrates and magistracy not so much peace and quietnesse as honesty and godlinesse and not so much the glory of his dominions as that of Jesus Christ 3. But how can it be that as the article saith the magistrate should be appointed by God chiefly and principally for maintaining the true religion for purging it from heresies schisme idolatry c. and yet the while he should not rule in the name of Christ nor should be subservient to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ as mediatour as Mr. Gâ—llespie speaketh Can the Lord Iesus appoint officers whose office and place is chiefly and principally to promote the interest of Iesus Christ and yet those officers shall not intend that which chiefly they are to intend and are appointed for namely the glory of Iesus Christ and the advancement of his Kingdom How can the article stand with what he saith p. 187. that magistrates as such do not intend the glory of Iesus Christ otherwise then a sea-man a printer a merchant So that by what he saith the magistrates act towards the promoting and advancing Christs Kingdom hath no more congruity then the act of a physitian building a house which he doth not build as a physitian but as an architect and builder Thus Mr. Gillespie maketh not a magistrate or magistracy but his Christian profession subservient to the interest of Iesus Christ 4. But how can the magistrates principall duty be to purge religion extirpate idolatry and heresy with a power only depending on God except his judgement in discerning what is true religion and what idolatry be as absolute and independent on any judicatory as his power and duty is It God hath placed in the same person or persons both a duty and a power to reforme and purge religion sure he hath not denyed him the main condition required to the discharge of that duty and the exercise of that power and that condition is the duty of a judge whose judgement of a law or sentence whether right or wrong goeth alwayes along with his judicall power so that the magistrate must judge with a judgement of discretion and approbation of the truth the goodnesse equity of any matter propounded to 〈◊〉 by presbyteries and synods before it be law 〈◊〉 decree or judiciall sentence obliging externally men to obedience This language of the article of the confession of Scotland falls sometimes from Mr. Gillespies pen as pag. 187. It lyes upon the magistrate to advance that high and eminent vocation of his that Christ may be glorified as King of the church and p. 191. he saith magistrates are appointed not only for civil policy but for the conservation and purgation of religion But Mr. Gillespie may be well excused if he let fall such passages from his pen pulling down with one hand what he hath set up with the other for Beza a great advocate of ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and by whom it hath taken a great rise will sometimes thus forget himself namely in an epistle of his it is the 83. to a namelesse friend beating down at one blow his ecclesiasticall jurisdiction independent from the magistrate The words are Docet nos igitur Dei verbum c. The word of God teacheth us that it is the duty of magistrates to be even the chief guardians of ecclesiasticall order Therefore their charge is to look and provide that a presbytery rightly constituted according to the word of God do act all things lawfully and when need is to interpose their authority that things well judged and constituted be performed that the ring leaders of disorders be restrained and punished according to their deserts So likewise it is the office of the presbyterie to implore the ayd of the magistrate when needfull and obey him when he rightly admonisheth Certain it is the magistrate is made here sole judge to pronounce when the presbyterie is well constituted and its judgements are right and to interpose his authority as he seeth cause And at the end of the epistle officium magistratus vel hoc praecipuum est ut qui Domino ministrant legitime vocentur rite officio suo fungantur It is even the chief duty of the magistrate that those that minister to the Lord be lawfully called and perform well their office Thus the magistrate is made judge of the lawfullnesse of the call and when ministers discharge their places aright Sure he that hath the power to judge
magistrate invested with the same power Since then the magistrate takes no more upon himself then such an externall jurisdiction as ministers might well assume by the delegation or concession of the magistrate why should Mr. Gillespie hence inferre that this power in magistrates maketh not them supreme judges and governors whenas the same jurisdiction laid upon ministers neither maketh them supreme judges and governors in ecclesiasticall causes No hurt then to the magistrate by this inference only that it seemeth to acknowledge that some do hold the magistrate to be supreme judge and governour in ecclesiasticall causes giving him a prerogative which belongeth only to Jesus Christ I believe none of his opposites spoke in that crude manner Magistrates are not unerring judges they fail many times in their judgement both declarative and of discretion so do the ministers and therefore there is no supreme visible judge and governour in ecclesiasticalls to whose decisions determinations and commands a conscience is obliged to yield further then it is inlightened or convinced for there being a tribunall in every ones conscience usuall appeals are made to it from the magistrate yea from the sentences of synods and presbyteries This is the prerogative of Jesus Christ by a soveraign judgement and determination to resolve the intellect incline the will and convince the conscience The magistrate is not made by any of Mr. Gillespies opposites as far as I know otherwise supreme head or governour in ecclesiasticall causes then Martyr Zanchius Pareus c. make him head of the church He further saith that what he stated about the power of the magistrate in ecclesiasticall things doth not invest him with the subordinate ministeriall forinsecall judgement in ecclesiasticall things or causes I think if Scotus were living he would hardly understand what is the meaning of ministeriall forinsecall directive judgement for the word ministeriall is no way forinsecall for the stile of forinsecall maketh the minister sit in a court of judicature as the judges at Westminister Hall giving sentence which both parties must stand to except they can appeal or expect a redresse in a superiour court Again the word directive agreeth no better with forinsecall then the Papall title of servant of servants with God on earth and the spouse of Christ for whereas the word forinsecall giveth no leave to the plaintiff or defendant to interpret the judgement of the court to his own sense or apprehension on the contrary the word dâ—rective doth it and giveth those that attend the word and hearken to the directions of the minister a priviledge like that which St. Paul yieldeth to the people of Beroea who having heard St. Paul would be well satisfied ere they gave credit to him for they searched the Scriptures to know whether it was so as St. Paul would have them to do or as he said unto them and gave them directions CHAPTER X. Whether the Lord Iesus Christ hath appointed as the Rever Assembly saith officers in government distinct from the magistrate The strength of the place 2 Chron. 19. by them alledged examined That the elders in that place are not church-officers An answer to Mr. Gillespies arguments endeavouring to prove that Iosaphat appointed two courts one ecclesiasticall another civil IT remaineth in the examen of the first section of the 30. chapter of the confession we should speak a word of the church-officers in whose hands the Rever Assembly saith a government was appointed distinct from the civil magistrate God indeed hath appointed in the church officers distinct from the magistrate as he hath appointed in the law the magistracy of Moses to be distinct from the Priesthood of Aaron and the Priests and Levites to have a distinct function from that of the rulers elders captains judges c. But God never appointed the jurisdiction of Aaron and of the Priests and Levites to be distinct from that of Moses and of the supreme magistrate nor ever meant with the diversity of offices and officers to introduce a diversity and distinction of jurisdictions For were the jurisdiction exercised by church-officers of so distinct a nature from the magistrates jurisdiction as the paternall jurisdiction is distinct from the maritall and both from that of the magistrate one could not thence infer that they are not all three subordinate to one superiour jurisdiction Coordinate jurisdictions as of fathers husbands masters of families Majors of towns are all subordinate to one supreme jurisdiction But to prove that church-officers are not appointed by God in a government distinct from that of the magistrate but in subordination to it the reverend Assembly make use of one place of Scripture in their humble advice for government which though they quote in the behalf of a double jurisdiction yet it doth totally overthrow it their words are As there were in the Iewes Church elders of the people joyned with the priests and Levites in the government of the church as appeareth in 2 Chronic. 19. v. 8 9 10. c. so Christ who hath instituted a government and governours ecclesiasticall in the church hath furnished some in his church besides the ministers of the word with gifts for government and with commission to execute the same when called thereunto who are to joyn with the ministers in the government of the church Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Cor. 12. v. 28. which officers reformed churches commonly call Elders One party or other is mightily mistaken and do wrest the Scripture against the sense of the holy Ghost so clearly manifested in the literall meaning I wish with all my heart that as the reverend Divines and Mr. Gillespie propound to the Christian church that of the Jewes for an example of jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate so they would take no other umpire and judge to make good that double jurisdiction then this text they have chosen for I am confident they will find their condemnation in it no place in the Scripture more evidently asserting the confusion of jurisdictions amongst the Jewes then this Me thinks the presbyterians anti-presbyterians both drawing this text to their advantage are like Salmasius and the ministers of Leyden about the question of wearing long or short hair the ministers making use of the same text 1 Cor. 11. against long hair that Salmasius doth against short But the whole context from the 8 verse to the end of the chapter is wholly for us 1. The text saith verse 8. that Iosaphat appointed for the judgement of the Lord and for controversies Levites Priests and chiefs of the families of Israel here then you have first no distinction of judicatories but rather of the heads either of families or so called for their wisedome from all the 12. tribes of Israel to one Iudicatory or Sanedrim as the Rabbins the best interpreters think 2. In setting them over affairs there is no distinction mentioned as that the Priests Levites should manage the ecclesiasticall the heads of families the civil
and no superinduction of character power duty gift or licence being conferred by the ordaining ministers so neither is there any thing taken away by any act of theirs of deposition or exauctoration only every one withdraweth his feather protection and countenance the magistrate withdraweth his licence the ministers say they will not hereafter hold him a fellow and partner in the work of the Gospell with them the people declare their dislike of the man and professe they will make use no further of his ministery which act is no more an act of jurisdiction then the refusing to take physick is an act of jurisdiction over the physitian CHAPTER XIII The nature of the ministers power and of that of binding and loosing the power of the keyes Amyraldus and Mr. Lightfoots judicious exposition of the power of binding and loosing The power of governing and ruling is not the ecclesiasticall contended for Mr. Gillespies arguments answered NExt we are to consider the nature and extent of the power of the ministers of the Gospell wholly the same with that the Prophets under the old Testament had a power not forcing the body but enlightening the understanding and convincing the heart ruling the affections and bringing them captive to the obedience of the crosse A power which the new Testament mentions in a hundred places either in the same words or in equivalent terms and yet never so much as once understandeth by it a presbyterian synodicall or ecclesiasticall power of deposing excommunicating and of making lawes and canons authoritatively but alwayes meaneth the vertue and efficacy of the spirit of God in the word and ministery called the power of God Rom. 1. v. 16. 1 Cor. 1. v. 14. and chap. 2. v. 5. and chap. 4. v. 19 20. Ephes 3. v. 20. 1 Pet. 1. v. 5. A power by excellency called POWER 1 Cor. 2. 4. by which we are the sons of God Joh. 1. v. 12 13. which no man can withstand Act. 6. v. 10. by which the eyes are enlightened and men turned from darknesse to light Act. 26. v. 18. pricking burning and affecting the heart with sorrow hope joy Act. 2. v. 7. Luc. 24. v. 32. diving into the secrets of the heart Hebr. 4. v. 16. where we have a description of the powerfull effects of the words except by the word we are to understand the word incarnate before whom all things created are said to be naked It is a power which is called the power of the resurrection Philipp 3. v. 10. also the power and demonstration of the spirit 1 Cor. 2. v. 4. a power of the wisdome and salvation of God and opposed to the power of Sathan and darknesse Act. 26. 18. Col. 1. v. 13. a power described in magnificent terms and mightily emphaticall 2 Corinth 10. v. 6. c. This is the power called otherwise the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing by which the slaves to sin and Satan are loosed and the despisers of the word by resisting the holy Ghost become more hard and bound I know of no other power of binding and loosing no other keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to the church-officers though properly speaking the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and the power of binding and loosing are not committed to ministers as the word is but as the spirit is in the word so that it is not the ministers but the word that bears the keyes the opening of the heart with those keyes as it is only the work of the spirit so is it known only to the spirit of God in the heart of man convinced and converted and not to the minister himself who only apprehendeth his office of being the word-bearer but is not sensible of its efficacy and workings Amyraldus thes 10. de 5. falso dictis sacramentis saith that the power of binding and loosing did only belong to the Apostles and that that power consisted in three particulars 1. that being led by an unerring spirit whatsoever in revealing the mystery of the Gospell they preached and approved for sound doctrine was to be received with like credit as if it had been delivered by Christ himself and whatever they said was amiss or false was likewise to be taken as if it had been pronounced so in Heaven this saith he is according to the Hebrew Idiome to bind and to loose 2. in inflicting corporall punishments and vexation by Satan upon those that dishonoured Christianity 3. in freeing those that were delivered to Satan upon their repentance and forgiving their sins He is yet much more expresse and diffuse upon this subject but I study brevity which makes me I do not here insert his own words in Latin but however he saith enough to undermine the foundation upon which the presbyterians build their excommunication which hitherto being mainly supported by that power of binding and loosing and the two chief stayes namely this place of Matth. 18. of binding and loosing and that of the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5. failing there now remaineth but a poor single crutch to draw along excommunication cut out of these words tell it unto the church Mr. Lightfoot an exceeding learned and reverend Divine giveth a very probable exposition of the power of loosing and binding in his Harmony Matth. 16. which doubtlesse doth carry in it more solidity and weight then the vulgar explication given by the Reverend Assembly and others of the power of censuring excommunicating and absolving He saith that the power of binding and loosing was given only to the Apostles as far as some part of Moses law was to stand in practise and some to be laid aside some things under the law prohibited were now to be permitted and some things permitted to be now prohibited so that in these words whatsoever c. Christ promiseth to the Apostles such an assistance of his spirit and giveth them such a power that what they allowed to stand in practise should stand and what to fall should fall in short what they bound on earth should be bound in heaven And that exposition is the more receivable because the Greek text speaks not of binding or loosing persons but things saying not whomsoever you shall bind but whatsoever things ye shall bind c. that is whatsoever things ye shall dispense with or oblige unto He also on the 1 Cor. 5. parallels this place of binding and loosing to Joh. 20. v. 22. whose sins yea retain they are retained c. and saith that that power was a peculiar gift to the Apostles when Christ breathed on them by which they spoke strange tongues healed diseases killed and made alive delivered up to Satan and bestowed the holy Ghost or the power to work the same miracles Which exposition strengtheneth the precedent which is but a branch and an effect of that miraculous power conferred on the Apostles For by the same power of miracles or of binding and loosing whereby they delivered to Satan and healed diseases they also
church-officers of the Gospell a certain platform of government and that it is arbitrary and of humane institution and therefore not to be administred by a power distinct from the humane THe fourth and the last thing to enquire into in this 30. chapter of the Confession of the Rever Assembly is the rule and modell that church-officers are to govern by which were it granted to be expressely set down in the Scripture would be no stronger an argument for a government placed in church-officers distinct from the magistrate under the new Testament then it was under the old when there was a very exact form of church-government and yet no way distinct from that of the magistrate Which makes me much wonder that in that church loaden with such an infinite multitude of rites ceremonies constitutions lawes whereof the Christian church is wholly freed there was no distinction of government and jurisdiction from that of the magistrate and yet that there should be such a distinction of jurisdiction in the Christian church which hath no modell nor scheme of discipline as the Jewish church had but such as in prudence is assumed by the joint consent of pastor and people That there was no platform of government given to church-officers by Jesus Christ or the Apostles may be proved by a cloud of witnesses I will content my self with a few Camero in his book of the church p. 369. saith that the Christian church hath no need of certain lawes seeing it is made up of men of ripe years not of children under pedagogy and a little lower non est ecclesia certis circumstantiis alligata the church is not tyed to certain circumstances The like saith his scholar and great admirer Amyraldus namely in his Synopsis Salmuriensis cap. 30. of the ecclesiasticall power § 4 5 6. So speaketh Capellus in his Thes Theol. parte priore de potestate regimine ecclesiae thes 40. where we have these words in tantum valet ecclesia constitutio definitio quantum est ratione subnixa The constitution and definition of the church is so far valid as it is grounded upon reason therefore not upon the Scripture Much more large and as expresse he is in the third part of Thes Salmurienses de vario ecclesiae regimine thes 16. and 17. So is Mestrezat no lesse expresse in his book of the church lib. 3. cap. 12. God hath defined nothing in the externall order and polity about the worship of God but only hath prescribed that all things should be done decently and orderly But were there any platform of government judicious and learned Mr. Lightfoot the most able and unpartiall judge in this matter will tell us Harmon on the 1 Cor. 5. that it was according to that of the Jewish synagogues which yet was assumed by a voluntary and prudentiall choice not upon any speciall command from Christ or his Apostles Which notion of his which was also mine before we could or had conferred one anothers notes doth lead us into many considerations 1. It doth decide the argument of the precedent chapter proving that the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing is committed not to all church-officers indifferently but to the ministers of the Gospell only For if it be reasonable as the Rever Assembly saith in their humble advice to the Parliament and as we have examined before that the Christian church should have their elders as well as that of the Iews it is alike reasonable as Mr. Lightfoot saith that the nature and extent of both jurisdictions and powers should be the same and that if the elders among the Jewes did not act in synagogues as men invested with the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing but with the power of magistracy the like should be conceived of the elders of the new Testament That the elders of the church of the Jewes had power of magistracy it is evident by their acts as fining imprisoning casting out whipping and the like and in that the elders of the new Testament are most unlike those of the old and therefore the Jewish elders could be no president to the Christian elders not de facto because these never exercise that power nor de jure for the Rever Assembly will acknowledge that the elders of the old Testament had a right to those acts of magistracy which they performed in their synagogues but will deny that now the Christian elders have such a right although for my part I know no inconvenience to assert that the elders in both times had alike right to all mentioned acts of magistracy though for some reasons it is not found so expedient under the Gospell by the presbyterian churches 2. We may well conceive that if the act of putting out of the church was an act of magistracy under the old Testament there is no reason it should be now otherwise 3. That likewise if the church of the Jewes never knew nor exercised in their synagogues a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate neither now are the Christian synagogues or churches to know or exercise such a distinct power 4. But strange it is that since God giving such very exact lawes as he did to the church of the Jewes yet he gave not to that church a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate it should now be quite otherwise and that God that gave no expresse lawes discipline or rule for the government of the Christian church yet should invest them with a power distinct from that of the magistrate 5. It seems altogether incongruous that that power and jurisdiction as is the ecclesiasticall which mainly is conversant about lawes constitutions and rules which are instituted and ratified by men and do not oblige either actively or passively but as they are commanded by men I say it is altogether unreasonable that such a jurisdiction should not be placed in the magistrate he being the fountain and spring from whom all humane jurisdictions lawes and constitutions do flow And it is so much the more absurd and unreasonable that constitutions decrees canons discipline meerly of humane institution should be ordered and commanded by a power and jurisdiction meerly Divine and distinct from that of the magistrate when as all constitutions lawes and ordinances given to the Jewes and all being of Divine institution were notwithstanding ordered and commanded by the magistrate not by the keepers of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction distinct from the civil CHAPTER XVI The 31. chapter of the confession made by the Rever Assembly examined The use of synods Two things are humbly represented first that for a re-union of jurisdictions over all persons and in all causes a convocation made up of ministers only be re-established during the sitting of Parliament the second is that ministers may be put into the same capacity as all other ranks of free-born people to sit and vote in Parliaments Of the power of synods and that of the magistrate in calling of
them The synod of the Apostles was extraordinary not exemplary The exception of the brethren of Scotland against the 2. article of the 31. chapter of the confession examined The uses abuses of synods that they are not the way to compose differences in matters of religion if their canons are beyond counsells and advices HAving examined what plea the Rever Assembly can have in the 30. chapter of their confession for a government distinct from that of the magistrate the 31. chapter which is of synods and councells is more superficially to be handled for what we have said before of the jurisdiction of churches plainly sheweth that the jurisdiction of synods is no otherwise distinct from that of the magistrate for since synods must be made up of church-officers it is not possible they should impart to synods what they have not in churches and that those that have not a jurisdiction in churches distinct from that of the magistrate should delegate to themselves a power which they never had I admit willingly the necessity of synods as the first section doth synods being necessary whether magistrates be orthodox or not 1. for preserving and restoring truth 2. for uniting churches in one judgement 3. for keeping an externall communion of Saints And it were to be wished as the magistrate of England hath set up again the Lords house so they would re-establish a house of convocation or an assembly of ministers meeting at the same time that the Parliament sits treating such questions in matters of religion as should be propounded to them by the Parliament or they themselves should petition the Parliament to be handled not being invested with more judiciall power then a company of merchants or sea-men called by the Parliament to give their advice about trade and navigation in which convocation the major part of votes should not be so much regarded by the Parliament as the weight of their opinions and reasons and therefore as it was in the last assembly where 20. did not prevail against one dissenting brother so this convocation should return to the Parliament not the result of the whole assembly because carried by the major part of the members but the names of parties assenting and dissenting This convocation I humbly conceive ought to be made up only of ministers of the Gospell that have wholly set apart themselves for the work of the ministery and study of Divinity For as the supreme magistrate usually calls men of that calling and profession about which he is to make lawes as being the most fit to give counsell in the thing they are called for so doubtlesse none are so fit to be advised with in matters concerning religion as those that are most learned and versed in it for I hold them not only the fitter members in an assembly convened to treat of matters concerning religion but also not unfit yea as fit as any other men to sit and vote in Parliaments For this opinion of a double jurisdiction ecclesiasticall and civil that lay-men must be judges in civil courts and ministers in ecclesiasticall assemblies as it hath barred lay-men from sitting at least from voting in synods and councels so hath it removed clergy-men from sitting and being judges in civil courts and Parliaments which opinion hath out-gone the Papists in some things for though they do not permit lay-men to have votes yea hardly to sit in synods yet do the popish magistrates admit ecclesiasticall men in their courts and judicatories thus lately Bishops in England sate in Parliament I confesse that Popes to advance the building of their empire within the empires of magistrates Kings and Emperours would be sure to have an oare in every boat yea more for though they have members of their own in civil courts yet they permit no members of civil courts to sit and vote in synods and councels But some Protestant magistrates in reforming popery as they have not so much relinquisht and parted with their own right as popish magistrates to loose their right in calling and voting in synods so have they more wronged the clergy debarring them from sitting and voting in their courts which I humbly conceive to be a losse to the magistrate and a wrong and injury done to the ministers and thereupon I propound these considerations 1. Debarting of the ministers from sitting and voting in Parliament hath occasioned and confirmed mens minds specially of ministers in that opinion that there is such a thing in Scripture and reason as a government in the hands of church-officers distinct from that of the magistrate and that there is a double jurisdiction two judicatories one civil whereof the magistrates and laity are members and judges and another ecclesiasticall in which ministers only must sit and vote for ministers think it but reasonable that since they are kept off by the laity from being members in Parliament and in all civil judicatories so likewise the magistrate and the laity should not be admitted to sit and vote in synods whereas it being certain that there is no ground in Scripture or reason for a double jurisdiction a government distinct from that of the magistrate and all judiciall proceedings in whatsoever court assembly Parliament synods presbyteries being acts of the magistrates jurisdiction the minister now considered as as member of a Christian common-wealth ought to enjoy the same priviledge as the other members of it All which make me conceive that it was more heat then reason that made so many write against the Bishops voting in Parliament besides it was no good work to divide jurisdictions which by the ministers sitting and voting in Parliament like other ranks of men were re-united 2. There being in a Parliament men of all sorts and ranks gentlemen lawyers physitians apothecaries merchants and they all having an equall interest to maintain religion lands liberty lawes wife and children of their own it is altogether unreasonable that ministers that are alike concerned in all these and are as well members of the Commonwealth as the best of them should notwithstanding as it were be culled out from having that priviledge that others of their fellow-citizens enjoy 3. It is known that men do not sit and vote in Parliament as merchants physitians silk-men or drapers and that if there be new lawes to make or old to alter suppose about some manufacture as cloth-working a member of Parliament being professour of that craft which is in agitation is the most able to discourse upon that subject and to state how the thing may be regulated and this he doth as a professour of the craft about which the law is to be made but when the thing debated is to be carried by vote receive the stamp of law of publick authority then I say none of the members give their votes as professours of the art and science which they exercise in the Commonwealth and which is debated in Parliament no not if a member were a chief justice of England
sit what matter they must handle may not the lay-man then interpose as in a businesse of his classis may not also ecclesiasticall persons do the like Besides 100. constitutions may be found of such a mixt nature that it is not yet resolved what classis they pertain unto whether ecclesiasticall or civil such are the lawes about wills marriages tithes tenths usury collections for the poor appointing of dayes for fasting or thanksgiving lawes for pious uses and the like Will this expedient serve to resolve the conscience viz. if such an assembly of mixt persons and causes be named neither a councell or synod nor a civil judicatory but an assembly or some other name participating of the nature of both as if names could alter the nature of the thing and satisfy the conscience In short I believe the reverend assembly both wrong themselves and no way satisfy mens minds and consciences in not stating what is ecclesiasticall what is not and how far this or that man may meddle in ecclesiasticall and civil matters what name is to be given to this or that assembly I am crowded with matter that were worth deciding about synods which argument I handled largely in the 22. and 23. chapters of my Paraenesis The power of synods is decisive directive and declarative they decide by way of discussion and disputation they direct by way of counsell and they declare their opinions as expert and well known and read in the thing that is in question Coercive and judiciall power they have none but what is delegated from the magistrate or from private churches so that though the authority of a synod is greater then that of a private church yet the power of that church is greater then that of a synod If there be an union of churches as there ought to be even under an orthodox magistrate all canons and decrees are no otherwise binding as laws then as they have the stamp of magistracy upon them Supremi magistratus approbatio est supremum arrestum ut loquuntur saith Festus Hommius disp 18. thes 4 and disp 17. thes 3. the approbation of the magistrate is the supreme decree And not only reformers but also some Romanists namely the authour of the Review of the councill of Trent a learned book and which the learned Dr. Langbane thought his pains worthy in his youth to turn into English Lib. 3. cap. 13. the Emperour as is commonly known the Monarch of churches is president to the synodall sentences gives them force composeth ecclesiasticall orders giveth law life and policy to those that serve at the altar Is it credible that a Romanist should be of a more sincere judgement in this matter then a reformed Christian such as Mr. Gillespie Those that are for a judiciall power of synods over churches do alledge the synod of the Apostles which being infallible is no example to us no more then the miracles of Christ and the Apostles argue that ordinary ministers must work miracles When private churches can be sure that a synod in these dayes is led by such a spirit of infallibility they may yield to it without disputing yet not without examining as did those of Beroea who tryed the Sermon of St. Paul whether it was agreeable to other scriptures and were there now a synod made up of 40. or 50. men like Peter and Paul a church should reverence their orders but yet that synod should have no coercive jurisdiction over the church but such as overcometh the inward man by perswasion and leadeth him as it were captive to the obedience of truth And in case men and churches were not perswaded or did delay obedience and submission I say that such an Apostolicall synod could bring neither churches nor men to an outward conformity to their sentences lawes and decrees without a power delâ—…ated from the magistrate or some magistracy seated in churches Let us come to the second section As magistrates may lawfully call a synod of ministers and other fit persons to consult and advise with about matters of religion so if magistrates be open enemies to the church the ministers of Christ of themselves by vertue of their office or they with other fit persons upon delegation from their churches may meet together in such assemblies There is nothing in this section but I will willingly grant 1. They yield that magistrates may call synods 2. that a synod is an assembly of men convocated by the magistrate 3. who are to advise the magistrate about ordering matters of religion and discipline 4. under an orthodox magistrate as synods receive their jurisdiction from the magistrate so private churches under them ought to receive their orders and constitutions as lawes of the magistrate but under an heterodox magistrate synods receive their authority from private churches so that canons and decrees of synods are so far valid as they are approved or ratified by private churches that have conferred the power they being then in lieu of the magistrate The generall assembly of Scotland perceiving that this article doth much weaken ecclesiasticall power under an orthodox magistrate hath thought fit in their generall assembly at Edenburgh Aug. 27. sess 23. to put a glosse or comment upon it saying that the assembly understandeth some part of the second article of the thirty first chapter only of Kirks not settled or constituted in point of government and that although in such Kirks a synod of ministers and other fit persons may be called by the magistrates authority and nomination without any other call to consult and advise with about matters of religion and although likewise the ministers of Christ without delegation from their churches may of themselves and by vertue of their office meet together synodically in such Kirks not yet constituted yet neither of these ought to be done in Kirks constituted and settled So they will have the second article to be understood of churches not constituted or settled in which case they say the magistrate may call synods else they say it doth not belong to him but to the ministers who then ought to assemble of themselves without any commission from the magistrate which is expressely against the literall meaning of the second article which as all others of the confession is of things that are to be received believed and practised at all times and which they count of Divine right and for which therefore they alledge places of Scripture namely Isa 49. v. 23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers a place which in my opinion maketh little to the purpose no more then the place out of 1. Tim. 2. v. 2. where we are bidden to pray for Kings doth to prove the power of magistrates in calling of synods Neither doth that place 2 Chronic. 19. v. 9. c. avail much but only that magistrates may call and constitute assemblies in generall for there is no speech there of any ecclesiasticall assemblies for they were not yet thought on at that time The 29.
and 30. chapters of 2 Chronic. for the magistrates power of calling synods is of the same stamp It is true chap. 29. v. 4. Ezechiah gathered Priests Levites together but it was to make an exhoâ—tation to them not that they should congregate into a synod invested with judiciall authority I think that none ever yet dream'd of it that synods in the old Testament could be proved out of that place The last place Prov. 11. v. 14. speaketh of counsellors in the multitude of which there is safety but not a word there of calling of them nor that those who were called were Priests and Levites but rather any other One would almost think that they had a mind to weaken a good cause and make invalid the power of the magistrate by alledging places that make nothing for it but however they will have them to passe for valid proofs that magistrates by divine right are to call synods But to the matter I am quite of another mind then our brethren the Scots are and I desire to be judged by any other then by them whether there be any spark of reason or truth in their saying Is it not more like that in a well-constituted church things must run their wonted channel that the power of calling synods belongeth to the magistrate but the church being in a troubled condition then that ministers yea any good man should contribute his helping hand toward the reforming of the church whether by way of synods or otherwise without expecting orders from the magistrate In turbata ecclesia omnis homo miles est Christianus minister But who sees not but the drift of our brothers the Scots is to constitute a jurisdiction independent from that of the magistrate The third section or article of the 31. chapt of the confession needeth a comment to make it agree with the second it belongeth to synods and councels ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience to set down rules and directions for better ordering of the publick worship of God and government of his church to receive complaints in cases of mal-administration and authoritatively to determine the same which decrees and determinations if consonant to the word of God are to be received with reverence and submission not only for their agreement with the word but also for the power whereby they are made as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in his word First they do not define what synods are here meant whether convocated by the magistrate or by private churches or even convocated by the ministers themselves If by the magistrate how can a company of men called to advise him make constitutions valid except they be first submitted to the judgement and approbation of him by whose authority they were assembled The like judgement may we make of the decrees of syâ—ods convocated by the common consent of private churches If the ministers assemble of their own accord were they so many Apostles they must have some magistracy to give vigour of law obliging to obedience either actively or passively else their canons would have no jurisdiction but over them they could overcome by perswasion The fourth article or section is all synods or councels since the Apostles time whether generall or particular may erre and many have erred therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practise but to be used as an help in both A synod is no rule but to him that is willing to make it a rule All the synods power and authority is only so much as either the magistrates will is or a conscience inlightened or convinced is perswaded to yield unto I know no middle way to create authority There is a rare saying of Festus Hommius disp 18. thes 2. de concil authoritate the foundation of all synodicall authority is an agreement with the divine truth and ordinance whereof we must be first evidently and clearly made certain before the synod get any authority with us So that synods are of authority when men and churches are clearly convinced of the equity reasonablenesse and truth of their decisions I am not of the opinion of Gregory Nazianzen and Bazil who condemned all synods generally for I believe they are of very good use and necessarily to be had so that the members be not invested with any judiciall power independent from the magistrate or from particular churches whose decisions be counsells and advices given to them both not lawes otherwise I think little or no good is to be expected from them and that they are not a way to decide controversies 1. Judges in an assembly never so upright must be indifferent to persons and causes but so cannot ministers be in a synod for a synod made up of orthodox Divines is no competent judge of Arminians Therefore it is no marvell if the councell of Trent did condemn the Lutherans in the first Session before they ever heard them or that a late synod at Charenton prepossessed against independent churches in England did as it were anathematize them though none of the members of that synod being 80. in number had hardly seen the face or writings of any of them 2. It seemeth to be against all courses and proceedings of courts either of law or chancery that both plaintiffs and defendants should sit as judges in one judicatory to determine their own cause 3. If there be but one party either the defendent or plaintiff sitting voting no doubt but he will cast his adversary out of the court therefore there being no other then Protestants sitting and voting in the synod of Dordrecht the Arminians could not chuse but loose their cause besides that it is no lesse unreasonable that one party should submit to the judgement of his adverse party 4. It seemeth neither just nor reasonable that churches and men should submit to the major part of the members stating and concluding of any matter of religion rather then to the weight of the reasons of the minor part dissenting Should in synods alwaies the major number of votes carry it in a generall councill made up of Papists Lutherans Calvinists no doubt but that party that is most numerous though it carrieth it but by one vote would give religion and faith to all the rest therefore the late long Parliament did wisely decline to adhere rather to the major part of the members in the assembly who had voted for a presbyterian government reserving to themselves the liberty to weigh the reasons of both not to number the persons Hence we may gather how unreasonable it is in matters of faith and religion that that which is not the act of all should be reputed as done by all when as it may fall out that the major part hath out-voted the minor but by one suffrage for usually all collections syntagmes of confessions of faith canons and decrees go currant and are published to the world as if all the members had consented to them with a
nemine contradicente Thus the late confession of faith and directory go for currant to be the opinion of the assembly because they were the act of the major part of them albeit many godly and learned men among them had no hand in framing the 30. 31. chapters of the confession In affairs concerning temporall life it may be born with when what hath been voted by the major part of the counsell or Senat goeth for the act of all and this was one of the state-precepts that Philip the II. gave to Margerite Governess of the low-Countrves by the report of Strada 5. In all great differences betwixt nation nation army and army party and party the judges that are appointed to reconcile them must propound conditions by which parties in extremes should come to some accommodation and moderation each side if need be complying and parting with some of his right to prevent a continuance of strife But such a composition cannot be expected in or by a synod for making up differences in religion since each side apprehendeth his opinion to be the truth and would think it a great sin to baulk any part of it or admit an accommodation CHAPTER XVII That the Iewish Church-officers had not a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate Mr. Gillespies distinction that they were not materially but formally distinct examined The argument of Amyraldus that though they had a distinct jurisdiction yet the example of the church of the Iewes is no pattern to the Christian church discussed and proved to be of no validity THis subject touching the identity or diversity of jurisdiction ecclesiasticall and civil among the Jewes well understood will decide the whole controversie which Mr. Gillespie well apprehendeth and therefore perceiving the strength of this plea that good reason it is that the ecclesiasticall power should be distinct or not distinct in the church of the Jewes as well as in that of the Christians since the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing of censuring excommunicating and making lawes authoritatively be the same in both churches and therefore that it cannot be supposed without great inconvenience that the jurisdictions were indistinct amongst the Jewes but distinct amongst the Christians this I say being considered by him makes him withall endeavour to lay hold on that opinion that maketh jurisdictions distinct in the Commonwealth of Israel for this supposition he takes to be the ground-work of the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction But I will not enter far into this matter having in the examen of the 30. chapter of the confession of the Rever Assembly taken off the main objection from Amariah and Zebadiah for I cannot think but Mr. Gillespie hath embraced this opinion for conveniency and more because it is subservient to the fabrick of his book then that it hath any great probability 1. because most of the learned Papists and others even his fellow-presbyters are of another judgement who if they had had never so little shew or likelinesse for a double jurisdiction among the Jewes specially the Papists and with them Amyraldus and others no doubt they would have made as much of this advantage to further their cause as Mr. Gillespie thinketh to prevail with it for himself 2. because Mr. Gillespie when he hath done what he can to assert a double jurisdiction in the church of the Jewes reaps very little benefit by it for he pulls down by his large concessions with one hand what he hath striven to set up with the other For the first it were an endlesse labour to produce the names of the authors that are for Erastus opinion in this particular and for one Constantinus l'Empereur which he pretends to be on his side twenty may be brought of a contrary opinion Not long since discoursing with Manasseh Ben Israel at the house of my noble friend Mr. Sadler about this same subject he told me he could not conceive how this opinion that there was a double jurisdiction among the Jewes was taken up by the Christians and that he held it altogether absurd against Scripture and reason Nothing can be added to what Grotius Selden and Cunaeus have written on this subject Amyraldus in his Theses de spiritu servitutis thes 28. saith that religion and policy were so straightly conjoyned among the Jewes that one being overthrown the other could not stand but must needs fall too and in his book of the government of the church p. 46. he saith the same man did judge Israel as a soveraign magistrate and was also over matters of religion Lud. Capellus parte 3. de ministerii verbi necessitate thes 18 19 c. doth not only conspire with Amyraldus but outgo him in asserting that the 70. judges or elders though lay-men and not of the tribe of Levi were not only to compose controversies and suits in law but also to instruct the people about the worship of God and to teach them the fear of the Lord so far that from the time of Ezra to Jesus Christ any in the synagogues which were known to be gifted might teach read and expound the Scripture which he proves by the example of Jesus Christ Luc. 4. 17. who though unknown was admitted to expound the Scripture and of St. Paul Act. 13. 15. My rever Father is of the same mind namely in the 19. chapter de Monarchia temporali where he saith that neither the Levites nor the chief Priests made use of any other law then that which was common and that they had no ecclesiasticall judges distinct from the civil Iudicious R. Hooker is very expresse for us in his 8. book of ecclesiasticall polity p. 144. Our state is according to the pattern of Gods own ancient elect people which people was not part of them the Commonwealth and part of them the Church of God but the self-same people whole and entire were both under one chief governour on whose supream authority they did all depend I have alledged elsewhere Mr. Lightfoot wholly concurring with Richard Hooker Mr. Herbert Thorndike a judicious writer and much versed in the antiquities of the Jewes is wholly for an identity of jurisdiction among the Jewes In 8. chapter he saith that when Moses was dead a President was chosen over and beside the seventy whom they called the Nasi to be in his stead from age to age as R. Moses writeth Which refuteth what some say that the President of the Sanedrim was alwayes a Priest and sheweth that the chief ruler of the Commonwealth was ruler over persons and causes of all kinds without any distinction of civil and ecclesiasticall In the 9. chapter we have these words The Sanedrim consisted of the chief of that people as well as of the Priests and Levites because the chief causes of that Commonwealth as well as of religion passed through their hands Tostatus a great Papist and writer upon Matth. 16. v. 19. will tell us the opinion of his party In the old Testament a
distinction of jurisdiction was not necessary because it was one people one nation and one temple whereto all the Iewes did gather together and therefore since they could conveniently be governed the unity of jurisdiction standing there ought not to have been a distinction yea it was very convenient that there should be an identity of jurisdiction that it might be believed that it was the same God to whom they all ministred There was the same reason for the temple for it was his will that there should be one place in which they should offer sacrifice unto him lest if that had been done in many places they might have thought there had been many gods Stapleton de Prin. doctrin 197. acknowledgeth the same indentity of jurisdiction among the Jewes I come to the second viz. to Mr. Gillespies concessions which are as large as I can wish that the church state were the same materially that the same man was both high Priest and chief judge of the nation that elders of synagogues did exercise coercive jurisdiction that the Jewish Senat after the thirtieth year of Christ was ecclesiasticall and yet was over all persons and causes except capitall and that there was not then any other senat extant but that before the thirtieth year the same senat having the judgement of capitall causes was civil All these being granted I see not what further can be required in the behalf of unity of jurisdiction since 1. the same men that were members of the ecclesiasticall senat were also members of the civil senat 2. that the synagogues were invested with magistracy since the elders had a coercive power so that in the very synagogues there is by his confession a coalition of powers and jurisd ctions 3. making but one senate both before and after the 30. year which judged of all causes and matters and over all persons the civil before the 30. of Christ judging of ecclesiasticall causes and the ecclesiasticall after the 30. judging of civil But I could never understand why he calls the senate after the 30. year of Christ meerly ecclesiasticall because it did not judge of capitall causes though it had cognizance and judgement of all other matters Can the judging or not judging of capitall and criminall causes alter the constitution and name of an assembly or court so as that when it judgeth of capitall causes it must be called civil otherwise it must be called ecclesiasticall Now because there is some obscurity in that concession of his that the church and state were the same materially we will hear what his countrey-men say to that in a late book printed anno 1657. called A true representation of the present divisions of the church of Scotland that we may the better weigh his recantation or rather modification when he saith that though they were the same materially yet they were distinct formally the words are pag. 18. The church of God being restrained to that one people of Israel their church and commonwealth were materially the same by divine constitution so that none could be members of the commonwealth but such as were also members of the church and so professours of the true religion as now under the Gospell it may be otherwise Now let us hear Mr. Gillespie pag. 6. They were formally distinct in respect of distinct lawes the ceremoniall was given to them in reference to their church state the judiciall was given to them in reference to their civil state But if they were distinct in regard of the judiciall and ceremoniall lawes why may they not be united in regard of the morall law For Mr. Gillespie passeth over the morall law and leaves it uncertain who is to be the keeper and guardian of it and whether it was given in reference to their church state or in reference to their civil state or whether a third power jurisdiction or state must not be constituted that is neither civil state nor church state to which the morall law hath reference for sure there was some union of jurisdictions in the protection and defence of the morall law which was as it were the bottom and the basis upon which the ceremoniall and judiciall were grounded and is of far more large extent then the ceremoniall and judiciall put together and from which in so many difficulties that are incident for the clearing of ceremoniall rites and judiciall sentences there must be continuall appeals to the keepers of the morall law which being at least equally in the custody of the magistrate and church-officers and both parties having a joint interest in the morall law as to see all men and businesses governed and squared thereby they also to that end must conjoin their power and jurisdiction For indeed the morall law is no more different from the politick then from the law given to families fathers masters husbands only the politick law is the practise of the morall or is the morall law applicable to cities families c. In like manner the ceremoniall law is but the morall law applyed in the practise of religious service for the morall law saith God only is to be worshipped the ceremoniall saith where how when by whom So that as all lawes are streams from the morall law so must all jurisdiction be from one fountain of magistracy It seems that Calvin had the same thought when in his harmony of the Pentateuch he reduceth all lawes under one classis But to examine a little nearer his distinction of materiall and formall I do not understand what he meaneth by formall in opposition to materiall for the jurisdictions that are one materially must be also one formally Let us suppose two coordinate supreme senates as Mr. Gillespie would have them among the Jewes one civil and another ecclesiasticall and that as he would have it the same men were members of one and the other I say if they do not differ materially neither do they differ formally so long as no law order or constitution civil or ecclesiasticall can have any force without the joint consent of both and except both senates put their seals of confirmation to what either of them hath decreed For example the appointing a day of publick humiliation by the ecclesiasticall senate must be also an act of the same men sitting in a civil senate who if they will have the injunction to stand must make orders subservient to it that there be no markets nor courts that day kept otherwise those that keep markets or courts upon such a day by vertue of former warrants from the civil senate will not know how far they are to obey the injunction of the ecclesiasticall senate without a dispensation from the civil senate This double jurisdiction is in effect but one for the same men appointing a day of humiliation in an ecclesiasticall senate to be kept forbid also in a civil senate all markets and courts to be kept and though one part of the injunction was made in one senate and the
other part in the other senate which is very impertinent and a needlesse multiplication of businesses yet those two jurisdictions must at length be resolved into an integrall one as when Protectour Lords and Commons that make up one Parliament must unanimously agree that all the votes and orders shall end in the same law and act I confesse there can hardly be clashing of powers judgements votes betwixt these two supreme senates such as Mr. Gillespie supposeth so long as the same men are members of both senates but withall I should count it a needlesse and senselesse multiplication of senates and that in vain the same matter and cause were to be decided by two coordinate senates when as one senate would serve the turn for however at length the two senates as they meet in the same persons so must they in the same accord and agreement which is all one as if it were but one jurisdiction Again it is observable that diversity of things and persons to which lawes and constitutions have relation doth not constitute a diversity of power and jurisdiction specially when the same men are to make the same lawes and constitutions for as the same men making lawes about navigation and the militia cannot be said to act from two powers and jurisdictions they are invested with so neither if the same men do make lawes as for example about Gods worship and the militia Briefly I believe Sir Thomas More in all his Utopia cannot parallel such a piece of constitution of state made up of two jurisdictions both coordinate subordinate each to the other materially the same not formally where of the same men are members A happy state indeed in which there can be no clashing except the same man be opposite to himself or that the members of the ecclesiasticall senate forget to day what they decreed yesterday when they met in a civil senate But since these two senates are materially the same men what need we give them severall names and formes for some accidentall circumstances of time and place either because they do not sit in the same place or that they are upon severall businesses must the same members of Parliament sitting to day upon religion be called an ecclesiasticall senate acting by an ecclesiasticall power and to morrow sitting to order the militia of the state it may be in another place be called a civil or military senate acting by a civil or military power But most of those that are for ecclesiasticall presbyterian jurisdiction finding no probability in the opinion of Mr. Gillespie viz. that among the Jewes there was a jurisdiction in the hands of church-officers distinct from that of the magistrate go another way and admit willingly an identity of jurisdiction but withall say that from the coalition of jurisdictions amongst the Jewes it cannot be inferred that the same ought to be under the Gospell that that church in its pedagogy is no pattern to the church in its maturity thus speaketh Amyraldus in his book of the government of the church chap. 3. p. 91. Whoever commits these two powers into the hands of the same persons he not only brings back the church into its infancy as if it were still under the pedagogy of the law but also casts it into that confusion from which the condition of those times did deliver it A man upon better grounds may invert this paralogisme and make use of this reasoning of Amyraldus to prove the quite contrary to what he drives at and so imitate smiths who with the same tool pull out drive in a nayl for had the Jewes had a government of the church distinct from that of the Commonwealth I would thence inferre there is no further need among Christians of such a division but rather of a coalition of powers that the Jewes being rude and weak in knowledge under a burdensome administration loaden with ceremonies and legall rites where the sixth part of the people was either judge elder leader Priest Prophet Levite or officer in the Leviticall service had need to have many keepers guardians tutours many helps of government so the governours might be very well parted into ecclesiasticall and civil and so the whole government might be shared betwixt the two supreme powers the keepers of each having wherewithall to employ themselves but the Christian church being wholly freed from the burdensome administration of lawes and officers and having no platform of government neither hath it need of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction when there is no ecclesiasticall law or constitution Thus were I of Mr. Gillespies opinion that among the Jewes the government of the church was distinct from that of the Commonwealth I would speak in the language and words of Amyraldus and infer that for the same reason that the Jewes had a double jurisdiction the Christians may be very well without it But the opinion of Amyraldus that there was no distinction of jurisdiction among the Jewes rendereth his inference for a double jurisdiction under the Gospell much more groundlesse weak and absurd for if under a burdensome administration when they had need of many pedagogues and schoolmasters yet they were governed without distinct government of church and state much lesse do the Christians need such a distinct government seeing they are freed from the necessity of having so many schoolmasters guides watch-men and masters to govern them and teach them so many rudiments and unriddle them all the ceremonies besides that sure God never gives distinct governours but also he giveth a distinct law and discipline to be a rule to govern by which yet God never did Though I am so far of the opinion of Amyraldus that the government of the church was not distinct from that of the state yet I am not of his mind in this to think that identity of government would bring a confusion in Christian states for I count that identity so needfull and necessary whether the state be never so much or never so little burdened by men lawes constitutions and businesses to dispatch that in a state loaden with lawes and businesses as the Commonwealth of the Jewes was two jurisdictions coordinate would have brought an horrible confusion and multiplication of suits and businesses and in a state lesse incumbered with lawes and businesses that double jurisdiction would still bring more work then need be if there was but one jurisdiction The argument of Mr. Gillespie to prove that there were two coordinate jurisdictions among the Jewes because of the wide division and distinction of offices amongst them neither the King being to take upon him the Priesthood nor the Priest the Kingdom as it makes nothing for him so doth it rather plead for an identity of jurisdiction under the new Testament for if when the functions were so distinct that the King could not offer incense and be Priest nor the Priest King yet there was no distinction of jurisdictions much lesse is that distinction needfull under the new
Testament when nothing hinders but that Kings may be ministers and ministers Kings CHAPTER XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word church in holy writ The meaning of the word church Math. 18. v. 17. IN treating of the church I conceive a world of writers both Papists and Protestants might have spared themselves much labour about the nature power truenesse fallibility antiquity succession of it if both parties had not walked in the dark and if they had agreed upon some few and very easie common principles consonant to holy Scripture and reason How many volumes on our side are written to state how far the Romish church is a true church to vindicate us from schisme to prove that we have a right succession of churches power and ministry that the English church is a true Catholick church that the reformed in France have likewise a right to that title One party yields more then needs must and fearing to want for themselves a right of church-succession and Baptisme they will acknowledge the Romish church to be a true church and yet with such metaphysicall reservations and modifications that from a metaphysicall goodnesse they insensibly descend to a morall making of a magistrates power an ecclesiast call of a cadaver and carkasse a living body of an aggregation of churches under one presbytery of the same extent with the jurisdiction of the magistrate the only true church of Christ This made the late English hierarchy conceive that their best course was to approach as near as they could to the Romish yea to be one church with them that otherwise they could not make their power calling and succession good nor clear themselves from the guilt of schisme So that as all parties have been equally mistaken in their grounds so have they hardly understood one another raising doubts where there were none some by that weakning their own cause and strengthening that of their adversaries who took all concessions for truths putting their opposites to very great straights For not knowing well how to deny the church of Rome to be a true church and that salvation is to be had in it and not being able to shew an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles time as the Romanists can do nor vindicate themselves from schisme each party is very eager to call his neighbour schismatick rending the seamlesse coat of Jesus Christ that name being liberally bestowed by the Romanists upon the Protestants and by some of these upon those that adhere to the dissenting brethren each of them Papists and Presbyterians challenging that seamlesse coat of Christ even right of church and ecclesiasticall power and therefore for fear of schism rendings they will be sure to cast lots upon it that they may have it whole and entire Whereas had both been well informed of the nature of church and of schisme and that suceession is a needlesse plea neither availing the Romanists a whit nor prejudicing any way the reformers Baronius Bellarmin Stapleton as well as Whitaker Chamier and the like might have saved the world so much labour in reading them the first in putting the reformers upon the task of proving themselves a true church and the latter in taking off the aspersion of schismaticks for then no doubt all the hard task had been on the Romanists side who being not able to make invalid our grounds about the nature of the church the power of the church the calling of pastors their succession and of schisme had been wholly put upon vindicating themselves and not weakning our title for it had been to little purpose so long as we had retained the same grounds which do put us into a firm and unmoveable possession About the nature of schisme Dr. Owen whose grounds which is very strange though we never conferred our notes together are those that I stand upon in treating of the nature of the church hath so well resolved the world that it is but in vain for any one either to write after him or against him And having in my Paraenesis handled the nature of the church intending here only an extract of it I will say only so much of it as will make way to what I mainly intend to prove viz. that the parity and independency of churches each from the other in power of exercising all church acts best agreeth not only with Scripture antiquity and the opinion of Zuinglius Musculus Bullingerus and Erastus but also with the sense of the seven dissenting brethren sitting twelve years agone in Westminster together with the other members of the assembly of Divines yea that many forrain divines and other learned men Salmasius for one no way intending to favour the cause we have in hand have been strong patrons of it in severall of their writings and treating of the right of churches and of the power of the magistrate over them have laid the same foundations as we I find in holy writ specially in the new Testament that the word Church is taken properly three wayes I. for the mysticall body of Jesus Christ the elect justifyed and redeemed whereof the Gospell is full thus Hebr. 12. v. 23. and Ephes 5. v. 26 27. c. II. for the universality of men through the world outwardly called by the preaching of the word yielding an externall obedience to the Gospell and professing visibly Christianity of this mention is made 1 Tim. 3. v. 15. and 2 Tim. 2. v. 20. III. for a particular visible congregation with one accord meeting in one place for the worship of God according to his institution which is spoken of Rom. 16. v. 4. Gal. 1. v. 2. 1 Cor. 16. v. 1. 2 Cor. 8. v. 1. 1 Thess 2. v. 14. Act. 9. v. 31. Act. 15. v. 41. 1 Cor. 16. v. 19. yea such a church as is confined within a private family as Rom. 16. v. 5. St. Hierome upon the 1. of the Galatians takes the word church properly either for a particular church or for that church called the Body of Christ which hath neither spot nor wrinkle dupliciter ecclesia potest dici ea quae non habet maculam rugam vere est Christi corpus ea quae in Christi nomine congregatur relating to the words of Christ Matth. 18. v. 19. where two or three c. which cannot be understood of a nationall church There be two places in the new Testament where the word church is taken otherwise namely Act. 19. v. 41. for a concourse of people Matth. 18. v. 17. a place so much controverted and which when we speak of excommunication requireth we should insist upon it It sufficeth here to say that if by it were meant an ecclesiasticall assembly of pastors and elders some other parallel to it might be found in the old or new Testament I am sure as there is none in the new so neither in the old
where the words kahal or gnedah are taken sometimes for the whole congregation as Deuter. 31. v. 30. where Moses pronounced a canticle in the hearing of the whole church or congregation and yet the 28. verse sheweth that by the whole congregation the magistrates and elders are meant thus Levit. 4. v. 13 14 15 and 21. where if the people had trespassed ignorantly the church that is the assembly of magistrates and elders are commanded to offer atonement for the sin and Deut. 23. v. 1. the eunuch the bastard the Moabite and the Ammonite are barred from the congregation or the church that is from publick employment for a converted Moabite was not forbidden from the Jewish church Sometimes for a senat of judges and magistrates called Synedrium as Proverb 26. v. 26. and so it is interpreted by the LXX and there you have a plain exposition of the word church Matth. 18. for the like cause of wrong and injury is spoken of in both places and the like judicatory so Ecclesiasticus 23. v. 24. the adulteresse is convented before the church that is before the judicatory of judges and elders Which places manifestly declare that Christ meant such a judicatory amongst the Jewes whereof the words heathen and publican make further proof and that Jesus Christ spoke of the same kind of judicatory and men as ordinarily were found when he spoke the words but it is evident that neither in Christs time nor ever since his time the word church was taken for an assembly or senat of ecclesiasticalls or an assembly of pastors So that was there any such sentence of excommunication or censure inflicted by the church upon the party that did the wrong this judgement or sentence must needs be pronounced by such a Synedrium or senat of judges and elders endowed with judiciall authority as the word church was usually taken for among the Jews But suppose the word church was not used by Christ in that sense our brethren should shew us that Jesus Christ did speak it in a Scripture sense and as it was taken in the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles namely as they would have it for an assembly of Christian church-officers invested with judiciall authority Here one controverted place of Scripture must be expounded by another and while there is very great likelyhood that Jesus Christ meant a senat ordinarily sitting amongst the Jewes to decide controversies of wrong betwixt brother and brother and which was not made up of officers distinct from the magistrate or men delegated by him if they will weaken our plea and exposition which is very rationall and naturall and make it as probable and likely that he spoke of a company of church-officers distinct from the magistrate they must look out some parallel place either in the old or new Testament where the word church is so understood which I am confident they will never find But to yield as much as I can though I find no where in the old Testament the words kahal and gnedah church signifying such an assembly of church-officers yet I find 1 Sam. 19. v. 20. the word lahakath mentioned where it is spoken of a company of Prophets which word our brethren might as well interpret a church but neither would this serve their turn for in that place of Samuel quoted those prophets were not sitting in a senat church or colledge nor were they about any church act but were travelling in the high-way and however our Lord Jesus Christ had no reference to such a church or assembly of prophets who as prophets were never endowed with a judiciall power Samuel indeed was over them as an Arch-prophet but as such he had no jurisdiction in Israel but as a Prince and Judge of the people CHAPTER XIX That a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place about the worship of God is the only true visible church mentioned in Scripture That that church considered as an assembly of Christians bringeth forth other kinds of acts then it doth considered as a society of men by which the nature and extent of the power of a private church is made clear and evident HAving mentioned the acceptions of the word Church in the new Testament there being not any visible assembly either according to the first or second acception it remaineth that a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place with one accord about the worship of God enjoying the same ordinances hath the true denomination of a church This church presbyterian particular church or congregationall is the true adequate subject of all church-right discipline and power which it enjoyes partly by a divine positive right as it is a congregation of Christians partly by a divine naturall civil politick right as it is a society of men endowed with wisedome prudence and liberty to govern themselves by such lawes as they find most convenient for their subsistence The first is a divine positive right for however men are so or otherwise commanded by some externall power yet the pastor is to look for a flock and people and the people for a pastor and both are to meet in as convenient a place and competent a number as they can to enjoy the ordinances of Christ by hearing the word praying and partaking of the Sacraments by a warrant and command from Christ By the same right warrant and command the pastor or pastors of the church are to perform all the pastorall acts as to preach to those that will hear not by constraint but willingly to command in the name of Christ to exhort to dehort to beseech men to be reconciled to God to lay out Christ in the promises of the Gospell to denounce the judgements of God to the impenitent and unbelievers to admit to the Eucharist all baptized persons and visibly professing Christianity who are not ignorant or publick infamous offenders ' or profane refusing none by any judiciall act of theirs denouncing sentence of excommunication or any other censure but by their generall duty as Christians by which they are bound not to have communion with such unfruitfull workers of darknesse Otherwise they are to impose nothing no injunction no censure or punishment but on such as without constraint and willingly undergo it and are contented so to do The other acts of a pastor out of the congregation are to offer himself sent or unsent to visit and comfort the sick the prisoner the widow the fatherlesse to see all persons and families that are of his flock to be the same at home as at church of the same Gospell-conversation and that all ranks be filled with the knowledge of the Lord to respect no mans degree or person in delivering his message from Christ saying even as John Baptist to Herod it is not for thee to keep thy brothers wife briefly to do the office of a faithfull minister in season and out of season The acts of the people in a society of church-members are double some do
constitutions that are made about them are acts of the major part of the members are valid not because they are lawes of Christ and approved to every ones conscience but because like lawes and orders of other societies they do oblige as such and as consented unto in the making of them by the major part of the members though it may be the minor part were in the right for as the acts of a magistrate commanding things directly commanded by God are the magistrates acts so those acts performed in a particular church though commanded expressely by God in as much as they require externall obedience either actively or passively are acts of that magistracy set up in that church I find in a result of a synod in New-England printed at the end of the book of Mr. Cotton of the Covenant of Grace some conclusions wholly consonant to what I now write in this chapter of the two kinds of acts that are performed in every particular church the one done by them as church-members the other being an effect of magistracy set up in every particular church considered not as a church but as a society The first kind of acts is proper to those church-members who by any power of magistacy are not put upon stronger engagements of oredience then if there had never been any The second is exercised by magistracy either in the church or out of the church against the obstinate and unruly and such as need to be compelled I find the synod speak much to that purpose namely p. 40. the collectour saith from them that for remedying disorders and taking away or preventing grosse errors there must be a power of restraint and coercion used and in regard that every particular church is to be as well considered in the quality of a civil society as a society of church-members CHAPTER XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in New-England WHen at first I undertook to write of this subject I had no other designe but to assert the nullity of a double externall jurisdiction and to prove that there being no such thing neither in Scripture nor reason as an ecclesiasticall power all jurisdiction that was not united under and appertained not to the magistrate was not a power of coercion was no jurisdiction Neither was I then lesse dissenting from the church-way and power retained by the rever brethren of the congregation then from the presbyterian brethren and the rather because I saw both parties carried with as much eagernesse of opposition against Erastus and Mr. Coleman as they were among themselves besides not fancying to my self otherwise but that all jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall and assumed by whatsoever society of men either single or made up by the aggregation of many societies which was not subordinate to the magistrates power was alike against reason and Scripture But being not able to study my main matter intended without enquiring into the nature of the power that both parties assumed to themselves I found that the tenets of the brethren of the congregationall way could very well accord with mine and which was not yet by any considered that the right of particular churches as the dissenting brethren hold might very well consist with that measure of power that Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Gualterus Grotius Mr. Selden Mr. Coleman allowed to the magistrate in matters of religion and over churches and that independency of private churches I mean independency from presbyterian classicall and synodicall judicatories doth no way hinder their right and liberty nor their dependency on the magistrate nor cutteth short the magistrate of the soveraign power he ought to have overall societies and persons and in all causes and matters Lastly I found that this way of reconciliation was most agreeable with Scripture reason the practise of the Jewes and of the primitive church of Christians besides was confessed so by many learned men who though seemingly otherwise affected and carried by more heat then knowledge of what was passed or held in this Island have notwithstanding in their tracts about the power of churches and discipline laid the same grounds that the dissenting brethren have delivered I need not be very long in proving by reason that this reconciliation betwixt the advocates of the magistrates power in matters of religion and those that plead for the right of churches is already made to our hands by what I have already handled I adde further these following considerations 1. Since every private church hath within it self a power of magistracy and that all magistracy in whatever society it be seated is subordinate to the magistrate of those societies it doth consequently follow that that magistracy wherewith every private church is invested is also subordinate to the magistrate for as I have demonstrated since no society of church-members no more then of citizens merchants physicians and the like can be imagined without lawes discipline and power of restraint and coercion so neither can it be imagined that such a power is not dependent on the magistrate for if a member of a society be obstinate and refractory and will not be ruled but by coercion and compulsion it be more then church-members as such can do to reduce him by exhortation and good advice then church-members must act also by a power of magistracy either assumed or delegated however it be that power of magistracy is subordinate to the soveraign magistrate 2. It is a maxime in Scripture Philosophie and common reason that theorems or propositions that are true asunder are no way contradictory one to another Now these two following propositions are of an undeniable truth viz. The magistrate is a soveraign governour over all persons and societies and in all matters and causes whether they pertain to religion or no and this Every particular church hath a right and power to govern it self without any dependence either on other churches or church-judicatories Each of these propositions being considered as true asunder must also be very consistent and no way clashing one with the other 3. That the right of churches may well stand with the power of the magistrate may appear by example of many societies as families corporations halls whose intrinsecall power of magistracy agreeth exceeding well with that of the magistrate over them for none doubteth but every father of a family hath a power to govern his children houshold and servants as he listeth being in his own as it were house a magistrate and a Priest yet none hitherto questioned but that paternall and oeconomicall powers are subordinate to the power of the magistrate for even the civil law and so
many constitutions about regulating the power of fathers masters and husbands and yet allowing them their authority at home are an argument that their fatherly power is consistent with their subordination to the magistrate 4. There be as I shewed above two kinds of acts to be performed in a church one as they are church-members the other as they are a society that for their government must assume some part of jurisdiction of the same nature with the magistrates power In the managing of the acts of the first kind there is no subordination of the church to the magistrate but only in the second for preaching hearing the word of God administring the sacraments walking holily submitting one to another are no acts of power subordinate to the magistrate and under that consideration I will grant the right of churches not to depend on the magistrate but as these acts in a church-way cannot be exercised without a power of magistracy assumed in this regard a church may be said to be subordinate to the fountain of magistracy For it is with these two kinds of acts in subordination to God and the magistrate as with the body and the soul For none doubts but the faculty and gifts of reasoning apprehending truth loving God and our neighbour believing in Christ are no acts subordinate to the power of the magistrate but as reasoning faith love must be supposed resident in the body of man and that the man in doing acts subordinate to the magistrates power as going ordering commanding and obeying doth carry along his reason faith and love in like manner as it is not possible to consider a man performing the acts of reason faith and love and not being the while subordinate to the power of the magistrate so a church even performing those acts of church-members as such in as much as the second kind of acts that are subordinate to the magistrate must be joyned with the first cannot be considered without it be subordinate to the magistrate 5. If the power of churches were not subordinate to the magistrate many inconveniences would follow 1. That some churches gathered by the magistrate and his acts of appointing time place and stipends should not be subordinate to him 2. Or if he should gather none and besides appoint no publick worship to take place in all parts of his dominions but leave that wholly to the will of those that congregate of their own accord this I say would in a very short time breed irreligion or heathenisme in most places and most tanks of men for then it must be conceived that not one of 20. would congregate of themselves that the 19. parts not being called upon nor any way invited by publick ordinances set up in all places of mens abode atheisme or neglect of all religion would soon ensue in most parts And a persecuting magistrate as in the primitive church were ten times rather to be wished then one carelesse and neglecting to set up ordinances for by one of these two wayes either by persecution or by countenancing and commanding the worship of God the magistrate causeth religion to flourish by doing neither one nor the other he takes the way to abolish it as Julian the apostate was about to do if God had not the sooner cut him off 6. But suppose it be granted on all sides that the magistrate is bound to do what King Edward did or Queen Elizabeth to banish popery to set up protestantisme and an orthodox ministery in all parishes throughout England which acts cannot be performed by a few particular churches with all their church power sure it must be also granted that all those acts of a magistrate in ordering affairs of religion are in his disposall and depending on him 7. Since then the magistrate must have the ordering of those affairs of religion which he himself hath constituted if he should not likewise be the supreme governour of those churches which he hath not erected but were gathered by the members of churches of their own accord there could not but a great confusion arise in mens minds as well as in the state it being no small businesse to distinguish the power of the churches that are subordinate to the magistrate and the power of those churches that are not From reason I descend to the authority of the rever brethren both in old and new England dissenting from the presbyterians In old England the reverend pious Jeremie Burroughs will be in stead of all the rest of his brethren for in the eleventh chapter of his Irenicum he professeth to deliver not only his own judgement but also that of his brethren with whom he had occasion to converse Whoever shall peruse his book throughout specially the fifth chapter will find that he attributeth as much power to the magistrate over churches as any of the opposites to the presbyterian brethren Which power of the magistrate while he asserteth he never conceives it should overthrow his other positions namely in the seventh chapter concerning the right and power of churches or that his stating the right liberty and power of churches could not consist with the power of the magistrate over them Now he is very expresse in the said chapter for the power of the magistrate in sacred things Pag. 21. he saith that magistrates in their magistracy are specially to ayme at the promoting of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ the mediatour and there and throughout that long chapter you have these conclusions 1. That the church and Commonwealth of Israel were mixed in one that there is no reason it should be now otherwise 2. That the power of the magistrate is alike in the times of the old and new Testament and were it so that nothing were set down of it in the new Testament that it is enough it is a law not only granted to the Israelites but also of the light given to the very heathens whose power of magistracy was to govern religion as well as other things 3. That it is most unreasonable that a magistrate turning either from the heathenish or Jewish religion should enjoy lesse power in matters of religion then he had when he was a Jew or heathen An infidel magistrate saith he converted to Christian religion is thereby better inabled to perform the duty of his place then before but he had the same authority before 4. He holds that the magistrate hath a soveraign judgement of his commands though unskilfull in the things commanded A magistrate that is not skilfull in physick or in navigation yet he may judge physitians and mariners if they wrong others in their way 5. He asserts largely the power of the magistrate in matters of religion by the example of the Kings of Judah and Israel yea of the Kings of Niniveh and of Artaxerxes interposing his power in matters of religion for which Ezra blesseth God whosoever will not do the law of thy God and the law of the King let judgement be executed upon
him Here one may see as the law of God and the law of the King may stand together so the power of the magistrate may very well consist with the power right and liberty of a private church And the like he doth by many passages of Scripture which he urgeth namely Isa 49. v. 23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers c. and Esa 60. 10. Revel 21. v. 24. the Kings of the earth shall bring their honour to the church and Rom. 13. 4. and 1 Pet. 2. 13. He addes since the Scripture speaks thus generally for thy good for the punishment of evil-doers and the praise of them that do well we must not distinguish where the Scripture doth not Now let us go to New-England where none will deny but a power and right of churches is maintained sutably to the sense of the dissenting brethren in old England and yet they ascribe no lesse to the magistrate in matters of religion then Mr. Burroughs Witnesse the result of a synod at Cambridge in new England published an 1646. They say magistrates must and may command matters of religion that are commanded in the Word and forbid things therein forbidden by the Word meaning the whole Word both in the new and old Testament In short they hold for substance what I said before of the two kinds of acts performed in every private church one looking immediately at the externall act of the body and the duties and sins which appear in the carriage of the outward man and this they say the magistrate looketh at and commandeth or forbiddeth in church and out of church see pag. 15. and therefore they say pag. 40. every church considered as a civil society needeth a coercive power They say further that this power is needfull in churches to curb the obstinate and restrain the spreading of errours Pag. 49. they invalid the example of Uzziah often alledged by the Romanists and the presbyterians though Mr. Gillespie as I remember never maketh use of it in his great book and say that this act of Azariah thrusting out Uzziah was an act of coercion and so of magistracy and a civil act which priests and Levites were allowed to do and which they made subservient to that command of God that none should burn incense but the sons of Aaron For I believe any officer under the soveraign magistrate might do the like in case this later should go about to violate a command of such a high nature for being an under-magistrate and invested with power of coercion he obeyeth the greater master and maketh use of his power to hinder a notable breach of Gods expresse command Having thus made good that there is a fair correspondency and concurrence of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power over them I do not see but my principles and those of the dissenting brethren are very agreeable consonant in the main It may be a few of them will call that power in every particular church ecclesiasticall which I call a power of magistracy and they will call excommunication an act of the ecclesiasticall power which I conceive to be rather an effect of the power of magistracy settled in every particular church But the difference is not great since we both make that church-church-power call it what you will a power of jurisdiction and coercion which must needs be subordinace to the power of the magistrate since both are of the same kind and upon that account excommunication is a law of the power of coercion so of magistracy In short whereas some of them will say of all church-censures that they are the product of a positive divine power I say they are the result of a naturall civil power subservient to the divine power in the exercise of the first kind of acts of church-members as such sure Mr. Burroughs and the result of the synod in New-England come very near if not altogether to my sense For Mr. Burroughs pag. 27. maketh but two powers residing in a private church one of admonishing perswading desiring seeking to convince the other a power restraining This latter power I call a power of magistracy because by the first power men are not outwardly restrained nor rought to outward conformity and accordingly excommunication must needs be a product of that restraining power So that the difference is not at all reall but nominall I find in Musculus in his common-places concerning magistrates the same power of magistracy in churches The passage hath been alledged above there he saith that that power exercised in churches is notecclesiasticall but the power of the magistrate CHAPTER XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ. VVE are brought insensibly to know the nature of a Christian church instituted by Christ which as I said is a particular visible one meeting in one place to celebrate the same ordinances whereof mention is made 1 Cor. 11. v. 18. and chap. 14. v. 23. and Act. 13. v. 42. and 44. In this church the Lord Jesus Christ hath properly instituted the ministry for Christ hath not instituted a catholick visible church much lesse a nationall church under one presbytery but this appellation of church is like the word man which denotes a nature common to many singulars and yet is properly said of John or Peter For as many fountains are not a fountain and many schools are not a school and many families are not a family so many private churches are not properly a church We shall find below Amyraldus saying most truly and very pertinently to our argument that the appellation of church doth not properly belong either to the catholick visible church or to a nationall church such as are the English French Helvetian churches which are rather a knot or collection of churches then a church That such a church made up of many private churches under one presbytery is not of the institution of Christ nor ex necessitate praecepti but of the free pleasure of each private church who without any violation of the command of Christ may either remain single or aggregate it self to other churches under such a presbytery may be proved by severall arguments 1. I begin with the testimony of the Rev. Assembly in their humble advice who lay no greater stresse of necessity upon it then that it is lawfull and agreeable to the word of God that such a thing be 2. If the Lord Jesus Christ had instituted such a presbyterian church it were fit it should be told us what is a competent number of churches requisite to be under a presbytery whether only three or four or more it may be two thousand If so many why may not a hundred thousand churches be under one presbytery If so many why not all private orthodox churches that are dispersed through the world If a presbytery may be over all the catholick
visible church since this presbytery must have a president and overseer why may not this overseer be called Bishop if Bishop why not Pope who in reference to his cardinall-consistory is the same as this Arch-president is related to his presbytery both being over the whole catholick church 3. The Lord Jesus Christ hath stated what number may constitute a private church for where two or three are gathered in his name he hath promised to be in the midst of them and whatever number of men shall meet in one place with one accord in a church-way to hear the word it may be denominated a church and have warrant from Christ to be so called But our brethren cannot shew us that all the private churches of Scotland under one presbytery can be called properly a church being rather a politicall and prudentiall consociation and could they shew us that such an aggregation is of the institution of Christ how can they disprove but that all the private churches in the world may be likewise by the institution of Christ under one presbytery 4. It being then equally the institution of Christ that 100000. yea all the churches of the world as well as four or five thousand for so many may be in Scotland should be under one presbytery were such a presbytery not over all the churches of the world but only over all the churches of France Scotland and Holland and invested with judiciall power from Christ to make lawes authoritatively to excommunicate to exauctorate and inflict censures without any appeal then this would be such an Imperium in imperto a jurisdiction within the jurisdiction of others as our brethren the Scots have raised within the dominion and jurisdiction of the magist rate of Scotland Such a presbytery no doubt might excommunicate as well one of the States of the United Provinces as once the presbytery of Scotland did the Marquesse of Huntley who 8. years after viz. in the year 1616. was released from that excommunication by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury in England for which I believe he had as good warrant from Jesus Christ as the presbytery of Scotland had when they excommunicated him and so both might by the like warrant excommunicate or absolve any man sentenced in the church of the Abyssins And therefore it cannot be thought so monstrous a thing in the Pope and his Conclave to excommunicate the Emperour of Germany and the King of France as they often have done it being certain that a presbytery in Scotland hath no greater jurisdiction over one of the subjects of the magistrate of Scotland then the Pope hath over the King of the Romans 5. A thing very considerable it is that the holy Scripture as it often by the word church understandeth a particular church so sometimes as 1 Corinth 11. v. 22. it meaneth the place where a particular church is assembled but the Scripture as it never means by the word church the place that containeth a nationall presbyterian church so neither the nationall church it self 6. It is no lesse considerable that a true visible church is not circumscribed by the jurisdiction of the magistrate except that church be also the Commonwealth and that he that is head of the church be also head of the Commonwealth as it was with the people of Israel for members of a particular church need not be dwellers in the same jurisdiction it being ordinary beyond seas for particular churches to be made up of members dwelling in severall dominions in the confines of Geneva Savoy Burgundie France 7. But is there any command or institution of Christ that no more churches or so many churches as are within one magistrates jurisdiction should be united under one presbytery and that that presbytery power of the keyes and of binding and loosing should be bounded by the limits of the magistrates territory If their power doth extend as far as heaven no doubt it cannot be bounded by the limits of any earthly Prince 8. This aggregation of many private churches under one presbytery is either voluntary or commanded by God If commanded let our brethren bring us any passage of Scripture prescribing a certain measure of judiciary power of the presbytery over private churches If it be free and voluntary and every private church may without violation of divine prescript either associate or not associate then those churches cannot be blamed if they forbear to associate under one presbytery and in case they should associate if they be their own carvers and do not enstive their liberty to a power that is not of their own tempering and moulding It is true a woman hath no tye to marry no more then a private church to associate she hath that liberty either to subject her self to the power of a husband or remain single but she cannot either before or after she is married put what condition she pleaseth to the power of a husband It is not so with private churches who have no set rule of obedience due to the power of an ecclesiasticall judicatory 8. That this power of presbytery over many particular churches is a power of magistracy either assumed by common consent or delegated from the civil magistrate may be proved in that under the heathen Emperours it was a power of consent every particular church reserving to it self such a measure of power as they thought fit and that it was so we shall see God willing when we come to the history of the nature of the power that the Christian churches had under the heathen Emperours But under Christian Emperours no church-judicatory ever had any power but by commission from the magistrate as we shall likewise shew afterwards And the diversity of rites and customes of churches as in fasting keeping Easter using divers formes of liturgies forbidding of appeals from Africa to Rome though all these churches were under the magistrates jurisdiction doth shew that as the supreme magistrate permitted many countreys to enjoy their customs municipall lawes so did he the like for rites and ceremonies which every church took up as they liked best Which is an argument that there was not such a power as an ecclesiasticall presbytery binding all private churches to their constitutions and that every church was independent there being amongst them no other consociation but only that which consisted in a communion of the same faith and doctrine 9. As the intensivenesse of the power of a nationall church hath ever been and ought to be still so much as private churches were willing to yield for they alwayes reserved to themselves a full church-church-power taking the decrees and constitutions of other churches rather as examples and friendly advises so the extensivenesse of that power hath been alwayes limited by the bounds of the magistrate so that each church was more or lesse independent as the magistrate over them had a larger or narrower territory If so many Kings as Moses Josua did subdue should turn Christians so many independent
churches would there be even 33. for so many were overcome but should all these 33. Kings be subdued these 33. Churches would cease to be independent on each other and in stead of 33. churches depending each on their magistrate one nationall church should be moulded of the same extent of power as the magistrate that ruleth over them CHAPTER XXII That the greatest opposers of the dissenting brethren namely Salmasius Amyraldus and others have laid down the same grounds for the right and power of particular churches and so confuted rather their own fancies then invalidated the tenets of the brethren The question whether Rome be a true church briefly resolved That Amesius and Iohn Mestrezat late minister of Paris in their writings have held the power of private churches to be independent from any church-judicatory THe spirits of men are now a little more calm and not so eager either at home or abroad and the quarrell not so fierce with the independents as it bath been these 15. years I having my self been a poor instrument to disabuse some of my country-men who partly by their misunderstanding paitly by the false reports and ill will of the common enemy to all goodness good men were possessed of very harsh opinions and conceits of them passed a strange censure upon them as enemies to all order and discipline and men of dangerous and pernicious tenets to all humane societies The very children amongst them did question whether they were shaped like other men Amyraldus made a great book of Invectives against them and turned them into Sodomites franticks and enemies of all order and discipline Salmasiâ—s and Maiesius were no lesse bitter against them A nationall synod net at Charenton where Amyraldus had a standing but no vote condemned them But as this synod condemned them as the councill of Trent did the Lutherans before they heard them so did all these authouâ—s I have named fall upon them without mercy before they had any particular knowledge of them or any certain information of their supposed pernicious manners Yet for all that those very men that wrote so much against them as they refuted rather their own fancies then any thing those they call independents believed so they did handle this matter of the nature and power of the church and that of the magistrate over it much to the advantage of those that they made as black as they could namely Amyraldus in declaring both his own sense and that of the ancient church next to the Apostles hath laid the same ground-work for the parity and independency of churches as the reverend brethren dissenting from the assembly of Divines have done He alledgeth Vignier a French authour writing above 70. years agone highly valued as the truest historiographer that ever put pen to paper by the most learned and pious Prelat Dr. Usher in his ecclesiasticall history relating the opinion of Irenaeus Eusebius and Nicephorus concerning the state of the government of the church soon after the Apostles The form of the government in this age was almost democraticall for every church had equall power to teach the word of God to administer the sacraments to absolve and excommunicate hereticks and those that led a d'ssolute life to elect to call and to ordain ministers to depose them when occasion required to erect schools to call synods to ask the opinion of others upon doubts and controver sies I find the centuriators of Magdeburg cent â— cap 7. to have these or equivalent words with little difference but that they wrote in Latin and Vignier in French Here then we may see our brethrens sense 1. that every particular church is independent free to govern it self and to exercise all church acts not rejecting a consociation with other churches but such as equals have among themselves 2. for the power of synods they acknowledge none nor judiciall authority only a liberty to admonish advise and counsell In the 8. chapter he hath a long passage whereof the drift is 1. that particular churches are no lesse free asunder then provinces and towns before they join in a confederation 2. that all aggregation and consociation is as free for churches as for free towns or cities 3. that a particular church for example that of Saumur considered as not united by any voluntary confederacy to other churches oweth the same duty of respect to the orders and constitutions of the churches of Leyden Heydelberg and Basil as to to those of Paris or Rouen 4. that the power of synods over churches is of the same humane and civil right with the power of a judiciall senatover cities and towns Pag. 144. he hath these words The Church and the Commonwealth have some things that seem common and they may be almost alâ—ke managed both by ecclesiast call assemblâ—es and by the powâ—r of the magistrate How doth this agree with what we have heard him say that it were an horrible confusion for the church and state to be governed by the same men Pag. 198. and 199. he speaketh of the authority of synods in the language of our brethren It is true that the meer authority of councils ought not to move us to receive a point of religion the knowledge of the truth of the thing ought to be the chief motive and ground But we have him very expresly teaching his scholars and auditors at Saumur that the appellation of a true visible church doth properly belong to a particular church I shall cite his words Disp de ecclesiae nomine definitione thes 28. in English I know that a communion and as it were a confederation of many the like societies which are associated either by the same use of tongue or the same form of Commonwealth or else by the same government and discipline is called a particular church thus we speak of the French English and German churches as of particular churches to distinguish them from that universall society of Christians which comprehends all nations that bear the name of Christians but as we said before the word church is not proper to the society of all Christians as it is to the particular assemblies of Christians so that consequently we say that the word church is not to be said in the like manner of a consociation of many particular churches Let then that communion which is between the churches of France be said to be a church and that the church is a confederation of many churches for if taken according to the use of the holy Scripture St. Paul calleth the severall particular churches which were in Achaia not by the name of the church of Achaia or the Achaian church but of the churches of Achaia A passage very considerable which force of turth hath drawn from the mouth of the greatest enemy to the brethren for their greatest advocate could not say more in justification of what they have alwayes urged about the nature of the church but could never be heard till of late viz.
against the common enemy and for keeping communion as of saints so of churches that those church judicatories were set up not for conscience sake or in obedience to any prescript of Christ but for orders sake as the reverend man wrote to me but a few weeks before he died CHAPTER XXIII The consistency of the right and power of private churches with the magâ—strates power in ordering publick worship proved by the example of the Iewes that they had through all the land particular convocations synagogues or churches called also colledges or schools where the Prophets sons of the Prophets taught especially on the sabbath-day that they were independent from any church-judicatory How synagogues were altered from their first institution and that being converted into Christian churches they retained the same right power and way of government THe most convincing proof for the consistency of the right and power of particular churches with the magistrates power in ordering settling and commanding the publick Divine worship of the Nation is the example of the Commonwealth of the Jewes wherein we are informed of three main things which taken into consideration will clear all doubts about the right and power of particular churches and the magistrates jurisdiction in matters of religion and publick worship 1. That in the Commonwealth of Israel at their first institution there were particular churches throughout all the land near every families dwelling-place called synagogues 2. That these churches were independent both from any of their own of the Priests or Levites judicatories 3. That the while the magistrates power and jurisdiction remained whose entire and undivided over all persons and in all causes and matters particularly in ordering settling and commanding the publick nationall worship of God For the first that such churches were instituted in the land of Canaan we have a very expresse proof Leviticus 23. v. 1 2 and 3. Speak unto the children of Israel c. six dayes shall work be done but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest an holy convocation ye shall do no work therein it is the sabbath of the Lord in all your habitations 1. We have here a convocation and an holy one every sabbath 2. near every families dwelling place at that distance which is called in the Gospell a sabbath-days journey and to travell a sabbath-days journey was equivalent to go as far as the house of convocation which was esteemed a fulfilling of the command Exod. 16. v. 29. abide every man in his place let no man go out of his place on the seventh day For he that went no further then the place of convocation or meeting to attend on the ordinances where they use to tarry from morning to evening obeyed that command let no man go out of his place on the seventh day For how could they keep a sabbath-day holy without an holy convocation and how could that be frequented and they not stir from their own place except by not going out of his place be meant not going any whither but to the place of convocation For they could not keep the sabbath without a holy convocation kept near every ones dwelling Now that this convocation cannot be meant of nationall and festivall meetings is evident for those were appointed but thrice in the year and far from every ones dwelling-place and after the building of the Temple they were celebrated either before the Tabernacle or in the fore-court of the Temple Now had they been bound to repair to Jerusalem every sabbath-day it would have been against the command not to stir from their own places on that day These convocations or synagogues were particular churches assembled in a temple or house called also schools or colledges where Prophets and their sons or scholars dwelt and taught daily but on the sabbath-day they had a more solemn meeting of all those that dwelt near for prayer expounding of the law exhortations conferences the main action being performed by the Rabbies yet the disciples were not silent but sate at their feet asking questions and hearing their answers and resolutions sometimes a new comer in might interpose as we see in the example of Jesus Christ Luke the fourth who being unknown had the priviledge to expound the Scripture and to ask questions and give answers so had St. Paul as we read in the Acts of the Apostles chap. 13 v 15. But to speak more particularly of the place the teachers and the matter and form of worship in those places of meeting or synagogues I say first one may trace the place in the old and new Testament In the 26. Psalm David saith he will blesse the Lord in the congregations and Psal 68. v. 26. blesse ye God in the congregation which doubtlesse ought to be understood of those convocations in temples which are called synagogues Psal 74. v. 8. they have burnt up all the synagogues of God in the land Which texts make it good that such places for an holy convocation were erected through all the land Calvin upon the place saith that the people met in syngogues every sabbath-day to read and expound the Prophets and call upon God by prayer The 29. Psalme v. 9. doth not obscurely mention them for the Psalmist relates that while the works of God sounded by haile rain and thunder the faithfull not only under a shelter of stones and timber but of Gods gracious providence and protection did attend the service of God Of this House and Temple David also speaketh Psal 87. v. 2. The Lord loveth the gates of Sion more then all the dwellings or tents of Iacob The sense of which words paraphrastically I think to be this although God graced with his blessing and presence those convocations which at first were kept under tents in the wildernesse yet he is much more taken with that glorious manifestation of his between the cherubins whereby God setteth out the Lord Jesus Christ Also Salomon Ecclesiastes 5. v. 1. and 2. speaketh of these houses or meetings when he warneth men to be more ready to hear then to speak in the house of God intimating that there was a freedome for the faithfull in those convocations and synagogues more then one to speak and besides that there were no other sacrifices performed in them but those of preaching praying and thanksgiving This house of convocation was also a place to train up disciples called the sons of the Prophets which were indifferently of all tribes and therefore by the way the ministers of the Gospell that do not succeed the Priests and Levites but those Prophets who had neither ordination nor jurisdiction cannot pretend other call or power then such as these sons of the Prophets had So then these house or places for convocation were also colledges and schools and therefore Philo in the life of Moses calleth them both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 houses of prayer and of learning of which you have mention 2 Kings 6. v. 1. where
crime to appeal or repair about any matter to Jerusalem or attend at those solemn meetings enjoyned by the law of Moses three times in the year and every seventh year and therefore to keep themselves free from idolatry they frequented as much as they could those places of convocation as appeareth by a notable example 2 Kings 4. v. 22. For when the Sunamitish woman desired an asse to ride on to Elisha her husband told her wherefore will you go to him to day it is neither new moon nor sabbath The greatest part of these houses of convocation for some of them did not much alter from their first institution but remained schools and nothing else in processe of time did not properly degenerate but changed their nature and lasted longer thus then in their first institution and that begun from the time that they were led into captivity and so continued under the Babylonians Persians Grecians and then the Romans for whereas at first they needed no other discipline then the law of their nation which received vigour strength and protection from their own magistrate who was a friend and protectour of their law religion and liberty when afterwards they lived under those that were no good friends to their lawes and religion and yet were suffered to enjoy them both being dispersed they were fain to alter the frame of their assemblies and convocations and make of them so many little Commonwealths endowed with judiciall authority yet retaining still some prime face of a church or convocation and besides more mixture of ranks of men for not only Prophets were governours and members but also Priests Levites and elders of the people and all matters were handled as in a court of magistracy and yet reading and expounding of the law was not forgot as we see Act. 13. v. 27. and ch 15. v. 21. Nor was it grown out of use for scholars or young Prophets to sit at the feet of the Rabbins and receive instructions as St. Paul at the feet of Gamaliel Act. 22. v. 3. and Marie at the feet of the Lord Jesus or for the young Prophets to ask questions of the old as 1 Cor. 14. v. 29. And as the form and matter handled did alter so also the Prophets and teachers did change their names and were called Doctours Rabbies Lawyers Masters Scribes and Wise among the Jews And such were the synagogues in the time of Christ which Mr. Gillespie is not certain whether he ought to call churches or civil courts yet he is rather of opinion that before the 30. year of Christ when they had power to judge of capitall matters they were rather civil courts then churches but after the 30. year of Christ this judgement of causes for life and death being taken from them then they were to be called churches or ecclesiasticall assemblies Which is a very frivolous exception as ever was devised and sheweth the weaknesse of his cause For is a court more or lesse civil because it hath or hath not the judgement of capitall causes By that reason most courts in England should be ecclesiasticall as the court of Exchequer court Baron and court Let. But the nature of those convocations synagogues or particular churches of the Jews having been for many hundred years since they were carried first into captivity such that they were invested not only with a faculty to perform duties and acts of worship to God but also with a power of magistracy when a great many of them from synagogues of the Jewes were after turned into churches of Christians they retained the same constitution and qualification in performing church-duties and exercising power of magistracy which sometimes was assumed by the consent of the members sometimes delegated by the Emperours For as the Jewes began to be the first professours of Christian religion so the first churches were synagogues of the Jewes converted to Christian religion but yet before the conversion of an entire synagogue those that were Christians concealed themselves for fear of the rest and yet did not depart but when they were persecuted or thrust out of the synagogue So that some synagogues for some Christians that were among them were called churches as we may see if we compare Gal. 1. v. 13. with Act. 22. v. 19 for in one place St. Paul saith that he persecuted in every synagogue those that professed the name of Christ in the other that he did persecute the church And Act. 18. v. 19. it is like that either the greatest part or the whole synagogue was a Christian church though it retained still the name of a synagogue And no doubt at Antioch the whole synagogue professed Christ since they durst openly take the name of Christians But the words of Christ Iohn 16. v. 2. they shall put you out of the synagogue shew that syâ—agogues of the Iewes should become Christian churches and that those that professed the name of Christ or at least believed in him secretly for fear of the Iewes were not to depart that by their means the whole synagogue might be wonne and therefore the Lord Iesus Christ takes this expulsion for an injury done to them in the foregoing verse These things have I spoken to you that ye be not offended Had not the Lord Iesus a mind to make of these synagogues churches he would have bidden those that were Christians amongst them to flee from them and go from them as he biddes his people flee out of Babylon And indeed we do not read that Crispus chief ruler of the synagogue and other believing Iewes did forsake the synagogue or that when the whole synagogue was converted it did presently loose the name of a synagogue but kept it as we see Iames 2. v. 2. If there come into the synagogue and Hebr. 10. v. 22. The very heathens did not put a distinction for a good while betwixt Iewes Christians for Suetonius saith that Claudins did restrain the Iewes who by the impulsion of Christ did raise tumults So that in expelling the Iews the Christians were comprehended for it is said Act. 18. v. 2. that Aquila and Priscilla though Christians were commanded to depart from Rome And as the Christians suffered as Iewes so what priviledges they enjoyed it was a grant unto the Iewes and as in the 9. of Claudius the Iewes and with them the Christians were banished so in the first year of his Empire the same liberty that was granted unto the Iews did also belong to the Christians So then the synagogues were the first origine and platform of Christian churches and after those synagogues the gentils converted did modell their churches retaining the same power of magistracy as the synagogues had as Mr. Lightfoot doth very well observe yea in their way of teaching following the Prophets in their synagogues which were also schools of learning as namely when they spoke by turns and the younger Prophets submitted to the judgements of the elder 1 Cor. 14. v. 29 30 c.
Therefore since the churches of the Christians were but synagogues changing somewhat the doctrine but not at all the discipline we must conceive of all churches and their acts of power as of synagogues and of church-excommunication as of Jewish excommunication or putting out of the synagogue that of Christians being no more a law or ordinance of Christ then that of the Iews was a law and ordinance of Moses for neither of them was For it never came to be in use among the Iewes till they took it up upon the want of their own judges and magistrates by consent and by a confederate discipline in â—eâ— of magistracy The Christians imitatours of the Iewes and who had the law and the covenants yea the Lord Iesus Christ from them did also take up excommunication upon the same grounds as they did Bullingerus in an Epistle to Dathenus an 1531. tells us it was thought so by Zwinglius the Apostles lived under a heathenish magistrate who yet did not punish wicked actions but that the church might inflâ—ct some kind of penalty they took up admonâ—tion and exclusion because they could not make use of the sword which was not committed to them and this was the cause of bringing in excommunication Now that the Christian magistrate may punish wicked deeds there is no further need of excommunication CHAPTER XXIV That the Christian churches under heathens were governed by a confederate discipline or a power of magistracy as the synagogues were appointing men which Ambrose calls elders to decide such matters as otherwise were to come under the magistrates cognizance This practise is grounded upon 1 Cor. 6. v. 1 2 c. and confirmed by Origen Iustin Martyr Ambrose and Mr. Lightfoot That the power of these elders continued still under Christian Emperours with some alteration they erecting in lieu of them Episcopall courts That all church-power was the Emperours power That the very heathen magistrates knew no other but that all power was annexed to them HAving hitherto made good that there is no such thing as a government in the hands of church-officeâ—s distinct from that of the magistâ—…e and proved the nullity of that distinction 〈…〉 â—…call civil jurisdiction by reason Scripture and the example of the Iewes it followeth we should prove that since the time that the 〈◊〉 church began whether under the hâ—… the â—or under Christian â—mperours it was not governed by a jurisdiction distinct from that of magiâ—…acy and that neither â—he hâ—…hen noâ— the Christian Emperours ever knew any 〈…〉 as an ecclesiasticall power not sub 〈…〉 to the magistrates power yea that the 〈…〉 did but in words challenge a power 〈…〉 from that of the magistrate and that 〈…〉 they made but one of two and acknowledged that it could not be so much as 〈◊〉 they should be exercised asunder and 〈…〉 reason that the learned of thâ—m as 〈◊〉 and others maintain that one of them 〈…〉 subordinate to the other erâ—ing onâ—… 〈◊〉 that they subordinate â—…e civil to the 〈…〉 〈…〉 then being converted into 〈…〉 churches and also turned over to 〈…〉 same jurisdiction of confederate 〈…〉 power of magistracy assumed by 〈…〉 the members of each synagogue yet 〈…〉 â—ewish synagogues had been alwayes 〈…〉 â—ccuted and had enjoyed their confeâ—… dâ—…cipline for the most part by edicts from 〈…〉 magistrate under which they lived that was the reason that they bad a greater measure of freedom to exâ—… their confedâ—… are â—…cipline and acts of coercive a◠〈…〉 dicall â—…wer over all persons of their own body and religion and in all causes except in causes capitall and the medling with any thing whereby to free themselves from paying taxes 〈◊〉 But the Christian churches though moâ—…ed after the pattern of the Iewish synagegues being continually either under perseâ—…oâ—… or in rear of it could not put forth those acts of coercive â—…risdiction unlesse it were a putting â—ut of the congregation which thing may be done without much noise but inflicting bâ—dly or pâ—cuâ—iaâ—y punishment could not â—e wâ—…l made use of without discovering too much and laying themselves open to persecution Besides that the members of Christian churches being not members of the same notion and therefore led by the only interest of and love to religion a coercâ—…e jurisdiction was nothing so necessary nor was it any thing so frequent to put out of churches as out of synagogues so that the differences between church members being rather differences in their judgements then any want of chariâ—… that magistracy assunted at first by the syâ—agogues when afterwards it was devolved to the Christian churches looked rather like an aâ—…trators judgement and counsell Yet still by that modified magistracy they decided and composed not only matters of faith but also all differences in matter of wrong either in goods mony or good name between brother and brother setting over besides the most eminent that laboured in the word and doctrine some of lesse eminency among them to decide differences and controversies of another nature And no doubt but St. Paul points at this practise 1 Cor. 6. vers 1 2 3 4 5 6. and 7. a notable place which yet was never pressed to the utmost meaning For 1. St. Paul there enjoyneth the Corinthians rather then to go to law to appoint some men besides those that labour in the word to decide all matters that one man might have against another 2. He giveth the same measure of power in settling matters of religion or faith and in composing differences that are usually judged in the magistrates court for learned Diodati by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 matter or businesse saith we must understand civil businesse and the Dutch Annotations say that this matter is worldly businesse So that St. Paul makes the church-power no more ecclesiasticall then civil for the same confederate discipline gave power to ministers to preach and administer the sacraments as did to chosen men of their body to compose friendly by their wisdome and authority such differences as are usually the matter of all courts of magistracy 3. The words of the Apostle Do ye not know that the saâ—nts shall judge the world I conceive to be equivalent to these Seeing ye do now live under a heathen and persecuting magistrate and yet there arise such contentions and debates amongst you as are judged for the most part in secular courts with the breach of charity and losse of time and mony specially the judges being no friends to your persons and religion your best way is to have them taken up friendly by Christian arbitrators of your own churches untill God at length after you have long suffered be pleased to set over you a Christian magistrate to whom you may repair when such differences arise amongst you It is observable that the holy Apostle when he saith is it so that there is not a wise man amongst you c. and set them to judge who are least esteemed speaketh ironically implying that were there no
wise men amongst you such as you must appoint yet the matter they are set over is not so knotty and hard but that men the least esteemed amongst you so that they were honest men might well understand and decide it Reverend Mr. Lightfoot upon the closure of the fifth chapter and the beginning of the sixth of the first to the Corinthians is of opinion that this is the meaning of that place these be his words Afterwards to take the Corinthians off from going to infidel judges he requireth them to decide the matter themselves till the time come that the saints shall judge the world that is till the time come that there shall be a Christian magistracy Origen upon the 21. of Exodus Homil. 11. makes it clear that this is the meaning of the Apostle by telling us the practise of churches in his time Principes populi presbyteri plebis debent omni hora populum judicarc semper sine intermissione sedere in judicio dirimere lites reconciliare dissidentes in gratiam recordare discordes The heads and elders of the people ought every hour to judge the people alwayes and without intermission to sit in judgement decide controversies reconcile those that have differences and make those friends that are at variance Here is magistracy assumed by church-members when by their consent elders and wise men are appointed to take up such differences in a friendly way and such controversies betwixt brother brother as otherwise were to be adjudged before secular judges I should ask here our presbyterian brethren by what power ecclesiasticall or civil were from metters decided and judged in Origens time and in case by that assumed power of magâ—…acy any one had been either put by from the communion or put out of the assembly what needed he to have recourse to the ecclesiasticall power when the other power was sufficient to have doâ—… it yea when the ecclesiasticall power could never do it without a power of magistracy These be the words of Anton. de Dominis lib. 5. cap. 2. without a lay-power we can doe nothing we cannot by our ecclesiasticall power put out take off and expell The same Origen in his 1. book against Celsus speaketh of that magistracy assumed by consent and mutuall agreement called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There be some appointed to enquire into the manners and wayes of their living who frequent churches that so they may keep those off from coming into their assembly that stain their lives by foul and unworthy actions and admit with all readiness those that are otherwise and make them daily better Though by their power of magistracy assumed by consent they might put out any one that was already a church-member yet it seemeth it was not the settled practise in Origens time but only as to admit good men so not to receive into their society those that they did not know to be such No excommunication was then in use with him for as the admitting a good man into church-fellowship is no absolution so the not receiving a bad man into the church is no excommunication This is confirmed by Justin Martyr in his 2. Apologie where he saith No man else is permitted to receive that aliment called with us the Eucharist but he that believes our doctrine is true and hath been washed by the washing for remission of sins For there Justin speaketh not of church-members only he saith that heathens and unbaptised men are not to partake of the Sacrament of the Eucharist or to have any part in those mysteries Of the custome of excluding church-members I confesse we read in Tertullian and Cyprian answerable to the Niddui and Cherem of the Jewes Tertullian in the 2. chapter of his Apologetick speaketh of the like confederate discipline or power of magistracy taken up by consent and in the 39. chapter he maketh an enumeration of all the parts of that discipline I should now have done with Origen intending next to alledge Ambrose confirming what Origen saith concerning the practise of the church agreeable to the counsell and command of St. Paul only I will take notice farther from Origen of the face of the church in his time and of the power assumed then by the Christians Celsus a great Philosopher and enemy to the Christians did accuse them that they had a discipline quite different from the lawes of the Romans that they kept private conventicles and there had a particular secret covenant law and discipline no lesse repugnant to the lawes of the Emperour then if they had been in open rebellion And indeed even among the Grecians these private meetings were sometimes forbidden although the state were nothing concerned in them they being to no other end but to perform some religious service For Cornelius Nepos that Alcibiades was condemned to dye for performing some religious worship it may be sacrifice at his own house Origen answereth by alledging an example very fit to our purpose and applyable to the nature of the power that Christians and private churches do exercise under a persecuting magistrate He bringeth an example of a stranger living among the Scythians who must either conform himself to the ungodly lawes of that nation or be a law unto himself This same stranger saith Origen cannot be said to violate the lawes of the Scythians if he doth not worship Statues but doth privately worship the true God and in a right manner and if he be a law unto himself This is the case about the nature of the power exercised by churches and an answer to that so much urged objection that the Christian churches have been long without a magistrate therefore governed by a power distinct from that of the magistrate For 1. Origen implyeth that if the lawes of the Scythians had been good and tolerable that then this stranger had been obliged to obey them 2. The lawes of the magistrate being ungodly this stranger living in his dominion must do his best that he his family and adherents be a law and a magistrate unto themselves and perform by a dictate of conscience what the magistrate was to enjoin and command Here none will say that this stranger living among the Scythians governeth himself by a power distinct from that of the magistrate for so Philosophers and Mathematicians who were often forbidden in Rome and banished yet lurking in corners and having private conventicles might likewise be said to be governed by a power Philosophicall Mathematicall distinct from that of the magistrate and a sonne to whom God hath given the grace not to hearken to a bad father must not be said to govern himself by a power distinct from the paternall for indeed such a son is a father to himself The like may we say of private churches under a persecuting magistrate who are fain to settle a magistracy by consent of all the members of the churches as the synagogues were faign to be used when they lived under a magistrate that was
not of their own nation and religion then they performed by a confederate discipline what the magistrate was to enjoin and command them The confession of Basilartic 6. hath a notable saying speaking of the duty of magistrates to propagate the Gospell as they are magistrates This duty was enjoyned a magistrate of the gentils how much more ought it to be commended to the Christian magistrate being the Vicar of God If then the heathen magistrate fails of his duty in not propagating the Gospell those that live under him and are better minded ought to supply the part of the magistrate in that particular and yet in doing of that they do but perform their own duty and businesse like as a master leading his horse down the hill his man being out of the way doeth both his own businesse and that of his man and both employeth his own strength in guiding an unruly horse and supplieth that of his man or which expresseth more lively the thing in hand as the Duke of Somerset in training up Prince Edward in the true religion did both do his own duty and that of Henry the 8. his father who being wanting to his duty in shewing his power authority to have his son brought up in the true Protestant religion Somerset Cranmer and others were not to be wanting to theirs and yet were not to act by a power distinct from the power of the King for if so then when ever a power is exercised rightly and yet against an unlawfull command of a superiour we had need to give a new name to that power and there would be as many kinds of power as duties to be performed Having done with Origen I come to Ambrose whom I was to alledge upon the 1. of Timothy relating to the places of St. Paul and Origen and to the power of magistracy assumed by churches There he teacheth the custom both of the synagogues of Christian churches of having elders that composed in stead of the magistrate controversies arising amongst church-members saying that first synagogues and afterwards churches had elders without whose advice there was nothing done in the church and wondreth that in his time which was about the year 370 such men were out of use which he thinks came by the negligence or rather pride of some Doctors who thought it was beneath them to be esteemed the lesse in the church as S. Paul saith of them while they are to decide controversies not as judges invested with a coercive power but only as arbitrators and umpires But the true cause why these elders ceased which he wisheth had been still continued he mentioneth not but the true cause is when the magistrate that was for above 300. years heathenish became Christian these arbitrators and elders ceased in great part at least they were more out of churches then in churches and in stead of them the Emperours created judges which yet retained much of the nature of those whereof Origen and Ambrose speak and which were invested as most of the Lawyers affirm as Cujacius for one with them my Rev. Father in his book de Monarchia temporal and in his Hyperaspistes lib. 3. cap. 15. not with a coercive jurisdiction but as they term it audience hence comes the Bishops and Deanes and Chapters Audit However such arbitrators sate in a court and were chosen by the Christian Emperours and were not members as before ever since St. Pauls time chosen by the members of that church where the contention did arise betwixt brother and brother and at that time it was not thought a violation of the command of St. Paul if a wronged brother had gone to secular judges because they were not infidels but Christians faithfull and saints as the Apostle termeth them 1 Cor. 6. 2. therefore it was free for any lay-man or other either to repair to the Audit of the Bishop or to the secular judge Which custome Ambrose doth not like so well as when Jewes and Christians were obliged by the law of their discipline to have controversies decided by their own elders Certain it is that these elders though they were not as Ambrose wisht they had been in his time arbitrators in those churches whereof they were members kept that office a long time under Christian Emperours but with more authority and dignity because they were countenanced by the Emperours their masters We have them mentioned pretty late even in Theodosius Honorius and Arcadius time for in one law they enjoin that ordinary judges should decide the contentions between Jewes and Gentils not their own elders or arbitrators Thereupon it is worth considering that that title which in the Theodosian Code is de Episcopali audientia in the Justinian Code is de Episcopali judicio a main proof that these judgements in episcopall courts had much still of the nature of those references in churches under the heathen Emperours These episcopall courts were set up by the Emperours to favour the clergy that they might be judged in prima instantia by their own judges for if either party had not stood to the sentence of that court they might appeal to the secular court The words of the 28. Canon of the councell of Chalcedon are very expresse If a clerk hath a matter against a clerk let him not leave his Bishop and appeal to secular judgement but let the cause first be judged by his own Bishop Now this episcopall court being in substance the same power with that of the elders mentioned by Ambrose which were first in synagogues and then in Christian churches under the heathen Emperours one may plainly see how weak and sandy the grounds are upon which ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing in the hands of church-officers is built which government say they is the government of Christ and is to be managed by those church-officers by a warrant from Christ the mediatour For Constantine erecting an episcopall court and empowering the judges of the court to decide causes and controversies did not intend to give them a commission of binding and loosing or to put into their hands the keyes of Heaven so delegating a power which was none of his to give but only granted what was in his own power namely that some magistrates under him should set all things in order in the church and among the clergy Besides he intended to set up that magistracy which was through the necessity of the times assumed first by synagogues then by Christian churches under persecution for sure Constantine did not place the power of the keyes of binding and loosing in the exercise of that power managed either by the elders which Ambrose mentioneth or by the episcopall court erected by himself Neither Constantine nor any of his successours did ever conceive that churches were to be governed by any other power then their own as all other societies of men were In this episcopall court any cause between man and man
clergy-man or not was decided capitall only excepted For matters of faith I confesse there be many Emperours sanctions forbidding secular courts to meddle with them but this doth not argue that the clergy had any power more then declarative not sancitive For 1. This very sanction that secular courts should not meddle with matters of faith was a law of the Emperour and the episcopall courts or synods could not challenge any power therein but by a commission from the Emperour 2. The Emperours did not conceive themselves obliged to receive lawes concerning faith from the Bishops or that coming from them they had a stamp of authority through all the Emperours dominions except they were approved of and ratified by them 3. The Emperours did not think themselves much obliged to receive lawes of doctrine and faith from the Bishops in regard that most of the lawes and constitutio is concerning the fundamentall points of faith were composed reduced and inserted into the Code without so much as taking counsell or advice of the Bishops though we never read that they ever complained thereof Only a late famous Lawyer and a Papist in his book de Iustinianei seculi moribus cap. 2. maketh a great complaint thereof which is a strong argument that the magistrate did not then acknowledge any ecclesiasticall power seated in the clergy 4. And the power that the Emperours challenged to belong solely to them to call synods to chuse members to review their acts to approve ratifie disannull or give them the vigour and strength of lawes obliging all churches and men to obedience either active or passive is an argument that what ever combined churches under the heathen Emperours did in calling of synods making lawes and decrees and requiring from all churches and church-members obedience to them the Emperours did not conceive otherwise of those acts of theirs but as of acts of magistracy taken up by consent for want of a Christian magistrate and which was to last no longer then till the time that God should send a Christian magistrate For had not these been the thoughts both of the Emperours and the Bishops at that time how came it that Constantine the Great the other Christian Emperours that came after him did not rather wish the Bishops clergy to call synods upon their own authority as they were wont to do and how came it that Oâ—ius Spiridion Paphnutius did not disswade Constantine from taking upon him to call synods telling him that it was more then did belong to him and speak in the language of Mr. Gillespie that ministers by virtue of their office are to call and assemble synods that it is altogether unreasonable that they should be abridged of what they had enjoyed for 300. years and now loose a main branch of their ecclesiasticall power that hitherto it was not so much as thought on that magistracy which is not a thing essentiall to the church should so far entrench upon the government of Christ wherewith the ministers are solely entrusted But these notions came not into the minds either of the Emperours or of Osius Eustatius Paphnutius and others nor of Hierom who questioned the validity of a synod that was not convocated by the Emperour These good men did not quarrell either at the convocation of synods or at the making or giving of lawes to churches by the sole authority of the Emperours 5. A further proof that neither the Emperours nor the Kings after the Roman Empire was broken in pieces conceived that Bishops and clergy-men had any judiciall power distinct from theirs is that for many 100. years in most parts of the Roman Empire as it then was Emperours and Kings kept state-assemblies where both clergy and laity sate and voted without any such distinction of power ecclesiasticall and civil I should here shew as I promised in the beginning of the chapter that the very heathens never knew any such distinction of power for although the law of nature and nations taught them that there must be a sacred function distinct from others yet they never knew nor understood that the jurisdiction of that function was distinct from that of the others for many thousand years neither the people of God nor the heathens knew any such distinction Aristotle in the third of his politicks ch 10. speaking of heroick Kings the Kings saith he were judges and moderators in all divine matters So was the Roman Senat both before and after it was governed by Emperours for it was wont to consecrate Emperours and the name of Pontifex Maximus of which they were so jealous was taken by the Emperours even till Gratians time In short they alwayes conceived that a common magistracy and soveraign power was made up of these two main ingredients viz. ceremonies about religion and humane lawes both put in trust with the soveraign magistrate One thing I cannot but observe that the very heathens by the light of nature have gone here beyond Mr. Gillespie For to confirm a common errour that the church jurisdiction is wholly independent from the magistrate and that the end of magistracy is only the protection of temporall life having nothing to do with promoting the eternall good of the soul to confirm I say this errour he teacheth us that magistracy is not subservient to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ the Mediatour ex natura rei But this errour is refuted by the very heathen namely Aristotle in his 3. book of Politicks ch 16. where he saith that the scope of politicks is not simply to live but to live well I should ask Mr. Gillespie when a magistrate turneth from heathenism to Christianity whether his first duty is not to seek the Kingdom of Heaven both for himself and all that are under his charge There is also a notable passage of Pareus among his Miscellanea Catechetica artic 11. aphoris 18. where he lamenteth that heathens should surpasse Christians in this particular in attributing more to the magistrate for ordering matters of religion and that they in this point should be more orthodox these be his words Ac sane dolendum est rectius in hoc capite sensisse olim ethnicos qui unanimi consensu regi suo demandarunt curam religionâ—s cultus Deorum idque persuasi tam jure naturae quam gentium As pregnant a proof that the same persons amongst the heathens had the managing of religious as well as civil affairs is that of Cicero in his Oration pro domo sua ad Pontifices the words are these Praeclare à majoribus nostris constitutum est quod vos eosdem religionibus Deorum immortalium summae reipublicae praeesse voluerunt ut amplissimi clarissimi cives rempublicam bene gerendo religiosissimi religiones sapienter interpretando rempublicam conservarent It was excellently well ordained by our ancestours that the same persons should be put in care with matters of religion and the supreme government of state that so whilst the most
noble and renowned citizens should see to the right ordering of the Common-wealth and the most religious to the right interpreting of religious matters the frame of the Commonwealth might be preserved and secured But I will not enter farther into this large subject handled by others CHAPTER XXV That ecclesiasticall jurisdiction as it is held by the Romish church better agreeth with reason and the letter of the Scripture then that of the presbyterian brethren That some Romanists have ascribed more power to the magistrate in sacred things then the presbyterian brethren THat ecclesiasticall power of deposing excommunicating and making lawes authoritatively as it is assumed by the Pope and the Romish clergy is not only more consonant to reason and the literall sense of the Scripture but also very agreeable with their corrupt principles in doctrine and practise whereas quite contrary the ecclesiasticall power with all its appurtenances as it is assumed and held by the presbyterians is altogether dissonant from the holinesse of their life and doctrine and is more repugnant to reason the letter of the Scripture 1. Neither the papists nor the presbyterians have any expresse place of Scripture for a double jurisdiction except they both make use of that of St. Luc. 22. v. 38. alledged by Bonifacius the 8. behold here are two swords 2. Though the Popes speak big of their jurisdiction as distinct from the magiâ—…trates jurisdiction yet de facto they make of two but one in that they subordinate the temporall jurisdiction to the spirituall conceiving it altogether inconvenient to constitute two coordinate powers since one must be supreme and the supreme must include the inferiour and that the end of the temporall being subordinate to the end of the spirituall those that have the managing of the temporall jurisdiction must likewise be subordinate and subject to the spirituall jurisdiction These are the arguments of Bonifacius and Bellarmin and upon these grounds all states and magistrates being but ministers of God in managing the temporall power must be obedient to all acts and sentences of the spirituall jurisdiction which the ministers of God in the Gospell are entrusted with so that the magistrates power being subordinate to the ecclesiasticall all appeals from civil judicatories must be valid and so all sentences of excommunications of what persons soever But the same ecclesiasticall power as it is challenged by the presbyterians to be coordinate to the power of the magistrate rendreth all acts of excommunication altogether unreasonable and unwarrantable For it is but reasonable that a man should submit to a power that is either subordinate to another or that hath no supreme or collateral but it would trouble one to be sentenced by a power that is neither soveraign nor subordinate as is the ecclesiasticall Neither is it lesse unreasonable that the same man subject both to the ecclesiasticall and the civil power being condemned by one of the powers cannot so much as seek for remedy in the court of that power that ought to give him defence and protection The Pope well foresaw he could not depose a King except the power of the King were subordinate to that of the Pope But Zanchius and some others though they do not make the temporall power subordinate to the spirituall yet they hold that Kings and magistrates are no lesse subject to the censure of excommunication then the meanest member of a church 3. The denosing of a King or other magistrate is a result 〈…〉 flowing from excommunication for if by excommunication a man is made a member of Satan whose addresse conversation company is to be avoided by all good men it comes much to one pass either to depose him or to put him into such a condition in which he hath but the name of a King which is done by excommunication And therefore Emanuel Sa well expresseth the sense of the Romanists and with it the true consequence of excommunication which indeed if there be such a thing must be as he defines it aphoris verbo excommunicationis An excommunicated person is suspended from his office and benefice and cannot judge accuse or witnesse § 27. But that excommunication held by presbyterians by which Kings excommunicated may still retain their authority and power as before is altogether inconsistent with reason Can a man delivered to Satan make lawes obliging for conscience sake Can a soveraign put to shame and confusion yea execration by a sentence of excommunication be trusted by his subjects or can a subject excommunicated and rejected by such a solemn act as unworthy to have any communion with Christians be entrusted by his soveraign with the managing of the great affairs of state by which union communion is maintained among all ranks of people 4. Excommunication is very agreeable with the headship of the Pope under Christ in the government of the Catholick church for he doth but expell a man out of the pale that bounds his jurisdiction But a minister or a presbytery excommunicating either a King or any other man cannot say that their excommunication extendeth as far as the bounds of their jurisdiction since they have not yet defined how far it extendeth surely not so far as and no further then the jurisdiction of the magistrate under which they live for the ecclesiasticall and spirituall jurisdiction is not limited by mens bounds for it is like the place of the Angels one may say they are here but one cannot say that they are not there If it reacheth all over the world then a presbytery of Scotland may as well excommunicate a man in Germany as in Scotland 5. The Papists arguments namely Bellarmin's and others are very urging that supposing there be but one true church and body of Christ and that that church and body is the Româ—sh church there cannot be a Common-wealth within another Commonwealth and a jurisdiction within another jurisdiction except one be subordinate to the other and one depend on the other therefore that either the spirituall power must depend on the temporall or the temporall on the spirituall for fear of a continuall clashing and conflict But our brethren not allowing the necessity of dependance of one jurisdiction on the other do unavoidably run upon many rocks of inconveniences which the papists prudently avoid such as is an endlesse crossing and thwarting of contrary laws commands and orders one of the other while men do not know which to obey first as I have largely shewed in the 15. chapter of my Paraenesis 6. Besides it doth very well stand to reason what the Romanists would have that one body of a church should have one governour and one government which is that of Christ but so doth it not that the presbyterian government should be the government of Christ and yet not be received by all the members of the church of Christ as they cannot deny but that there are many churches which yet do not hold presbytery to be the government of Christ
only upon two or three considerable places out of the said Review of the Councill of Trent that one would think had been spoken by Frastus or Mr. Coleman In the 3. book cap. 11. he hath these words If the Prence be learned and capable what reason â—s there to exclude him from presidency It were indeed more beseeming and becoming his dignity to let the Bishops aâ—spâ—te yea one of them to manage and order the action or such as he himself will chuse resâ—…ving to himself the presidency yea the determination the confirmation and execution after he hath viewed and understood all the importance and consequence is too great when it concerneth salvation a Prince hath no lesse interest then a Prlest Here we have a Paput granting that the magistrate is not only to preside in synods but also to have the last determination and judgement of all-debates In the 7. book ch 6. he ascribeth a function but no jurisdiction to the clergy and pastors and he hath this passage worthy to be written in golden letters for it doth disannull and make void all consistoriall classicall and synodicall canons sentences and definitions which are no acts of the magistrate Kings ought not to meddle with the administration of the Sacraments nor with the business of ceremonies or preaching or other ecclesiasticall ministeriall acts but for appointing of the order of ceremonies purging out of abuses extirpation of schism and heresies church-policy and the like they may they ought and they have alwayes done it either by putting their own hands to the work or by commanding of it or else by appointing and constituting lawes statutes and ordinances The authour did here only forget to tell us by what power the magistrate must do this Is it by a politicall or ecclesiasticall power direct or indirect intrinsecall or extrinsecall None but Mr. Gillespie could tell us Sure he that takes all and doeth all by his own power and authority needs no co-partners in the managing of his power but delegates and substitutes in the exercise of it CHAPTER XXVI The description of excommunication in terms received by most of our opposites though otherwise variously defined by them That for four thousand years no such excommunication was in use either among the heathens or the Iewes An answer to some objections That the legall uncleannesse was no type of the morall That the Priests judging of the leprosy is no plea for excommunication nor for ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ALthough I made this subject the greatest part of my Latin book yet I had much more to say then I did write purposing one time or other to discover that excommunication hath been the principall and main tool in the hands of the man of sin to build up the Roman Hierarchie or that dominion which the Pope hath procured himself in all states and Empires round about him which is the very mystery of iniquity spoken of by S. Paul To avoid prolixity therefore intending here sut an extract I will strive to contract my self give but a breviary in few chapters of what I designe if God gives me life in another tongue I must first state what my opposites mean by excommunication that by the description they make of it I may with lesse difficulty make good that it is repugnant to reason Scripture and the practise of all nations heathens Iewes yea of many Christians in all ages for except they give it me themselves it is as impossible for me to delineate it as to give the true definition of purgatory or of limbus patrum for all parties are not yet agreed what the exclusion is from and by whom and what men are excommunicable For some hold that excommunication at least the lesse is from the Eucharist as the greater is from the assembly of Christians others not only from the externall communion but also from the internall Some hold that only Bishops yea that one only Bishop may excommunicate as Ambrose did Theodâ—sius some think that pâ—esâ—yters and ministers may do it and of these some say that one may do it others say there must be three at least Caâ—vin and some others hold excommunication is vâ—…dâ— except it be the act of a whose pâ—…vâ—…church Many are of opinion thaâ— thâ— pâ—…b tâ—…y without the concurrence of the people may excourmunicate As for the subject or object oâ—â—xcommunication some think that Kings and maâ—…rates as well as any other 〈◊〉 châ—members may â—e exâ—ommunicated otheâ—s eâ—eâ—…t them Those that make three communions according to the three severall acceptions of Church in Scripture say that excommunication is only an exclusion or a putting out of the communion which is amongst members of a 〈◊〉 church others that it is an â—xclusion â—…t of the communion of the whole Catholick 〈◊〉 â—huâ—ch whereby they warrant thâ— power of the Pope in excommâ—n cating Emperours and Kings who since they are members of the Cathâ—…k church may be put out of the communion by the pallor within that communion But some hold that the vertue of excommunication â—xâ—…s no further thâ—n the jurisdiction of the maâ—…ate where the excommunication is pronounced There being such diversity of opinions amongst our opposites about the true notion of excommunication it is not possible for any of them to give a good account and description of excommunication to satisfy all much â—…sse can I do it yet must I give some description of it allowable as I conceive â—y most of them It is a judiciall act or sentence of excluding scandâ—lous persons and offenders from some church-priviledges by church-men or church-members invested with a power of jurisdiction distinct from the power of the magistrate which sentence ought not to be reviowed or voided but either by the same power that first gave the sentence or by a superiour judicatory in eadâ—m serie as they call it of the same kind and nature if any is to be had This description I trow will go near to be received by all the patrons of excommunication even by those that make excommunication no lesse a saving ordinance then the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments as the â—ever Divines have defined and determined in their assembly at Westminster Now of this excommunication I â—hall here give this short account 1. That for four thousand years no such excommunication was in use either among the heathens or the Jewes 2. That at that time when some think it had a beginning even when the Jewes were carried into captivity it did not begin 3. That there is no ground for such an excommunication communication nor practise in the new Testastament 4. That soon after Christ and the Apostles time excommunication begun and was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity 5. Excommunication being retained by the reformers did occasionally strengthen the mystery of iniquity For the first it is easy to shew that there was no such excommunication among the heathens as we have described It is
every society though never so much kept under and in awe can viz. expell any member of their society without giving an account of what they do herein to the magistrate And upon that account might the Corinthians very well expell the incestuous person which act should I hold to have been of the same nature with casting out of the synagogue I see not how any of my opposites could alledge any thing to the contrary But I believe the Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles had no need to have recourse to that power of magistracy like that of the synagogues assumed by confederation of discipline For 1. In the first preaching of the Gospell there was lesse need of discipline because the number of pastors was greater then of church-members the great work of the ministery being laid upon every man and women converted were to strive to convert others 2. The Apostles and the disciples as Timothy Titus and others who were looked upon as secundary Apostles being conceived to be led by an infallible spirit the people in all controversies arising needed not go far to be resolved or take much time in discussing of them by overseers or elders set a part for that purpose 3. The gift of miracles striking a terrour supplied the place of a discipline therefore Bucer on the 16. of Matth. giveth us this reason why no externall power and jurisdiction was used in the time of Christ which serves also for the time of the Apostles these be his words No commonwealth can be governed without inflicting punishment upon the wicked What was wanting to the church in externall power the Lord Iesus did supply it by a miraculous and singular power and by speciall weapons and a sword called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 12. v. 10. But that extraordinary way of striking terrour into new converts by the power of miracles ceasing Christians being grown numerous and confirmed in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus it was now convenient they should settle churches which they did following the example of the Jewes under a magistrate of a contrary religion for indeed at first Christian assemblies were but synagogues turned into churches so that they needed not to look out for other manner of power and discipline then that which was exercised by the Jewish synagogues Were it granted that excommunication is to be proved by those words Matth. 18. tell it unto the church or by the example of the incestuous person put out of the church of Corinth or by the eleventh chapter of the same Epistle yet this act of exclusion could not be made good not to be such an act of magistracy assumed by confederate discipline as was the casting out of the synagogue Beza in his preface to his book against Erastus alledgeth the opinion of Musculus and Bullinger to be the same with what we now speak of that the first Christians wanting the power of magistracy to restrain them that walked disorderly and wickedly assumed such a power of magistracy to themselves and devised excommunication and that if there had been a power of magistracy in Corinth to punish the incestuous person there had then been no need either of excommunication or of delivering the man to Satan And so far we allow excommunication as it is an act of magistracy assumed by a confederate discipline by the first Christians in imitation of the Jewes for want of a Christian magistrate and not upon any commission granted to the ministers of the Gospell independently from the magistrate or grounded upon the power of the keyes of binding loosing for it were a lesse matter to discard and keep off the magistrate from concurring in acts of exclusion if for the placing it in the ministers the Scripture were not so grossely abused and made to speak what it never intended and that which hath as much strength for upholding the Romish hierarchie as the presbyterian ecclesiasticall jurisdiction Before therefore we come to speak how excommunication from a law of the confederate discipline became to be the main engine to advance the mystery of iniquity we will examine all the places of the new Testament usually alledged by the advocates of the presbyterian jurisdiction to prove that excommunication is a law of Christ and a church-ordinance as well as the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments which are a like committed to the ministers of the Gospell only CHAPTER XXVIII That the whole context Matth. 18. v. 15 16 17 and 18. maketh nothing for excommunication neither Iudas non-admission if granted to the Eucharist nor the delivering of the incestuous person to Satan nor yet the self-examination required 1 Cor. 11. THe first place is taken from the context in Matthew 18. v. 15 16 17 18. a place clear enough had it not been handled by men of prejudiced judgements I wil not loose so much paper time as Mr. Rutherfurd Gillespie have done to make it difficult nor throw so much dust in the eyes of the readers nor repeat all I have said upon this subject in another book I will chiefly restrain my self to Calvins authority to evince that the whole context maketh nothing at all for such an excommunication as is a judiciall act pronounced independently from the Christian magistrate by the ministers of the Gospell 1. Calvin in the fourth book of his institutions chap. 12. § 3. and more expressely in an Epistle to the Neocomenses saith that the offence Matth. 18 15. If thy brother c. ought to be understood of private offences and known only to the party offending and offended These be his words We understand the words of Christ of concealed offences as the words sound therefore if thy brother hath trespassed against thee and it be known to thy self only and there be no witnesse Christ commandeth that thou shouldst repair to him privately And a little lower here it is not meant that hidden sins should be brought to light thereby to shame our brother So that this offence not breaking forth into an open scandall it is not like that the wronged party would have taken a way to put his brother to an open shame or that the Lord Jesus Christ had wished him so to do but rather to make first one or two privy to it and then some more trusty secret friends it may be a colledge of three called a church amongst the Jewes appointed to reconcile disterences between brother and brother which were like the Morum Censores censors of manners or it may be such as are mentioned 1 Cor. chap. 6. who were like the elders spoken of by Ambrose which were not invested with any authority to constrain censure or punish the offender for the words in the 17. verse let him be to thee shew both that the offence was private that the offended party was not to take any other course but only to have no further converse with him For if he offender had been excommunicated by a
publick judgement he had been a publican and a heathen not only to the offended party but to all others But Jesus Christ seemeth to a private offence and a private way of proceeding to give a private counsell how the party wronged ought to behave himself to wards the offender Learned Mr. Lightfoot thinketh that in all the context there is nothing intended either of Jewish or Christian excommunication that there was no judiciall sentence pronounced nor constraint put upon the offending party but only shame and that not publick but only within the walls of the synagogue or of the school As if a man would not provide for his family after a first and second admonition he was put to shame in the synagogue by these or like words Such a one is cruell and will not nourish his children 2. This makes way to know both what power that church in the Text had and what is meant by it Calvin upon the place hath some remarkable concessions much to our purpose 1. That Jesus Christ alluded to the custom of the Jewes and had respect to the form of discipline among them 2. That the power of excommunication belonged to the elders of the people who represented the church Which concessions are convincing arguments to prove 1. that Iesus Christ by the word Church did not mean an assembly of men whose power was distinct from that of the magistrate since no such thing as was called Church Kahal Gnedah in the old Testament was ever taken for an assembly of churchmen invested with jurisdiction and distinct from those of the Commonwealth 2. Since the elders of the Iewes were no more elders of the church then of the Commonwealth and that they had the sole power of excommunicating it followeth that the act of excommunicating was not more an act of church then of state and therefore if Christ speaking of the Christian excommunication alluded and had a regard to the custome of the Iewes that likewise their excommunication must be like that of the Iewes and be as well an act of magistracy as an act of the church Which is confirmed by what he faith upon the 18. verse speaking of the government of the church where he makes two kinds of elders in the Christian church answerable to two kinds of elders in the Iewish church Now as these were not invested with a power called ecclesiasticall distinct from the civil so may we conclude of the elders in the Christian church These be his words Legitimam Ecclesiae gubernationem presbyteris injunctam fulsse non tantum verbi ministris sed qui ex plebe morum censores illis adjunctierant But above all he is expresse upon the 17. verse where he saith that the Lord Iesus Christ in modelling the churches discipline sendeth them to the institution under the law admonuit in ecclesia sua tenendum esse ordinem qui pridem sub lege sancta institutus fuerat If we all stand to Calvin the quarrell is ended and the church Matth. 18. will prove such a church as was in Moses Ioshua and Davids time by which is never meant a congregation of Priests or church-elders distinct from the commonwealths elders So then we see even according to Calvin if Iesus Christ spoke in the context of a church Christian as I do not believe he did it must be a church of the same nature with the Iewish in which excommunication being an act of magistracy so must it also be in the Christian church But I do not believe that in this whole context there is any thing meant either of the Iewes or Christians excommunication or of such a church as our opposites would have to be understood by the word church viz. an ecclesiasticall senat or presbytery being certain that neither in the old nor in the new Testament the word church in Greek or Hebrew is taken in that sense Is it likely that Iesus Christ would mention a church that was never recorded in all the old Testament and whereof neither the Evangelists nor the Apostles speak Doubtlesse Christ speaketh here of such a church or assembly of men who were as Calvin saith Morum Censores censors of manners much used among the Iewes and Romans not invested with any judiciall power but yet of such authority and gravity that whoever did reject their wholesome advice and counsell was as much discredited as if he had suffered corporall punishment It may be those censors of manners were rectors and teachers of schools men who for their gravity and learning were highly esteemed among the people and such a school some say Christ and his Apostles made up much like those schools of the Prophets in use in Samuels time in which the scholars or young Prophets did sit at the feet of the Rabbies as Mary at the feet of Iesus who for that was called Rabbi-However those words if he neglect to hear the church do argue that the church spoken of in this context was not invested with a power of censuring the offender as Bilson and Sutliffe do judiciously conclude from the words For thus speaketh Dr. Sutliffe in his 9. chapter de presbyterio Christ speaketh of a church that had no power to constrain and which one might despise without insurring punishment for if it had had power to constrain in vain had he added if he will not hear the church for the church would have constrained him In short these words tell it unto the church are made like regula Lesbia a nose of wax by Papists Episcopall men and presbyterians it is to them a wood which if a thousand men go into none will fail to shape himself a stick a mallet or a hammer Bellarmin will tell us that tell it unto the church signifieth tell it unto the Romish church or tell it the Pope Mr. Gillespie will expound it tell it unto the presbytery Dr. Hammond tell it to the Bishops called by Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will not urge much the words let him be to thee an heat hen or a publican which if they do not make void excommunication I am sure they do not help it much seeing that neither a publican nor a heathen were the object or subject of excommunication I conceive that the true pataphrase of these words may be this and that this was the meaning of the Lord Jesus If the offender refusech all honest wayes to right thee then prosecute him in the court of the magistrate where heathens and publicans have their own judges deal with thy brother as if he were and as thou wouldst do with an heathen or a publican for since thou must now repute thy brother as to thee as an heathen or a publican and since thou wouldst not scruple to implead an heathen or a publican so neither must thou scruple to sue thy brother For sure neither Jesus Christ in this place nor St. Paul in the 1 Cor. ch 6. forbiddeth Saints to go to law against an heathen before an heathen
magistrate Since then an irreconcilable brother ought to be esteemed as an heathen is it any whit against Christian charity for the party offended to sue him before an heathen magistrate This exposition is very naturall having nothing strained but most like to be the sense of Jesus Christ As for the 18. verse concerning binding and loosing we have examined what strength can be in it for excommunication not discussing whether it may not be as well applyed as Chrysostome Austin Theophy lact thought to every private man as to the operation of the word in the ministry or whether this verse hath any coherence with the precedent discourse of Christ Neither will I enter into the controversy whether Iudas was partaker of the Eucharist for it is not much materiall to know it all agreeing he was not removed by any excommunication or casting out and that he did eat of the passeover which eating was equivalent to that of the Lords Supper Now lest more heads of objection of this Hydra of excommunication should arise if all should not be cut off we must examine what strength the example of the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5. hath for excommunication But this extract being already too much lengthened and the drift of it all along being to prove that the casting out of any member of a church being the same with the putting out of the synagogue is no act of ministry or of church members as such but an act of magistracy I need not to speak of it at all besides that these 3. or 4. observations will take off all hold for excommunication 1. It is granted by Calvin Beza Walaeus Apollonius Mr. Rutherfurd and Mr. Gillespie that St. Paul mentioneth but one censure inflicted upon the incestuous person viz. excommunication and that the delivering of him to Satan was the casting him out of the congregation 2. Now it being evident that this delivering to Satan was no excommunication but a judgement quite of another nature it is likewise equally evident that the putting away of the incestuous person being the same with delivering him to Satan was no excommunication 3. This casting out of the incestuous person makes nothing for that excommunication which is only a putting a man by from partaking of the Eucharist for though examples may be brought out of the Scriptures of men cast out or kept from the temple or synagogues yet there is no one example nor any reason for it that a man admitted to enter either into the temple or the synagogue should not be partaker of the same mystery or ordinances celebrated with the rest 4. Calvin thinks that St. Paul by these words put away the wicked from among you did not point particularly at the incestuous person but rather at the devil or the wicked one indefinitely as the plotter and contriver of all evil which St. Paul saith was put away from them by that delivery of the incestuous person to Satan 5. Wendelinus in his common places of excommunication saith that the putting away of the incestuous person from among the Cormthians was not only an exclusion from godly converse as praying hearing and receiving the â—ucharist with him but also from civil commerce in eating trading and talking with him Which exposition is the most naturall I know and proveth that this putting away was no act of ecclesiasticall power distinct from the civil for alwayes every court punisheth according to its kind a court of Exchequer doth not summon men for causes that are of the cognizance of a court-Martiall so neither should an ecclesiasticall court impose penalties that are to be inflicted by a civil court such as is the depriving of a man of civil liberty 6. Learned Mr. Lightfoot saith that all the power of the church of Corinth in delivering the incestuous person to Satan was by the strength of Paul's spirit that went along with them so that the people of Corinth acting by no power of their own no church ought to do as that church then did except they be sure of the assistance of the same spirit Next in order followeth the necessity of self-examination 1 Cor. 11. made an argument to prove that ministers must examine every communicant and judge of mens worthinesse For Beza Walaeus Mr. Rutherfurd and Mr. Gillespie thus argue If it be the duty of every man to examine himself much more is it the duty of a minister to examine him Never was an argument more inconsequent and lesse concludent by which the Papists may as well prove auricular confession If men must confesse their sins to God much more must ministers require every man to confesse their sins to them For quite on the contrary from this Text these or the like inferences should be drawn If all men must examine themselves much more ought ministers to examine themselves or this If every church-member ought to examine himself then ought the ministers to exhort them to that self-examination or this If every church-member ought to prepare himself for the word and Sacraments then ministers are not to prepare them otherwise then by shewing them and giving them directions for their due preparation leaving every one to do the work himself CHAPTER XXIX That excommunication is contrary to common sexse and reason THere being no Scripture for excommunication in the next place we shall see that there is no reason for it I do not deny but that a private church as well as any other society by vertue of a power of magistracy seated in them may expell a member out of their society but that this is done in obedience to a pâ—sitive command of Christ by a jurisdiction independent from the magistrate and by warrant from those words whatsoever ye shall bind on carth c. I conceive to be absurd impertinent a yoke laid upon Christians necks which is none of Christs as if whomsoever pastors do bind or excommunicate on earth Christ also doth bind or excommunicate in Heaven and whomsoever they absolve or loose on earth Christ also doth absolve and loose in Heaven 1. Since the words Matth. 16. and 18. be the very same words it is absurd to understand them in the 16. chapter absolutely but in the 18. conditionally Now they would have the words Matth. 16. whatsoever ye shall bind c. spoken to Peter to be without condition and absolute that God should approve of and ratify whatever opening loosing and binding should ensue upon Peters preaching and converting of souls for Calvin Pareus and most Divines will not have in that place any thing understood of church-censures but only of the operation of the word by the preaching of Peter But though it were granted that in the 18. chapter Christ spake of church censures by excommunication what reason is there why they should not be understood as absolute and without condition in one chapter as well as in the other For in the 18. chapter they put a condition to the absolute words of Christ saying that
turned the Eucharist into an idoll and this into a sacrifice hoping that these mysteries taking once Gods place the pastors would be soon respected with a veneration beyond and above that which is due to magistrates having with the dignity of their function a speciall priviledge and power to distribute those mysteries particularly the Eucharist to such as they should count worthy from whence came excommunication But before excommunication could come to be the standard of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate the corruption of the Eucharist must precede which was a work of many hundred years 1. The Fathers though they had no intention of contributing to the working of the mystery of iniquity have occasionally given a rise to it for either because they lived among the Jewes and heathens or because they newly came from amongst those who thought there could be no religion without sacrifices and altars condescending to the capacity weaknesse both of Jewes and Gentils they borrowed many rites and ceremonies from them yea their very discipline they called the Eucharist by the name of sacrifice and gave the name of altar to the communion-table to the bread the name of the body of Jesus Christ and to the wine the name of his blood All which made way for Transubstantiation which hath taken so deep root that the very reformers amongst the rest Luther thought it too great a leap to recede too far from Transubstantiation but stuck in the mid-way and kept to Consubstantiation yea the best of ours though they took away both Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation and have allowed no reall presence of Christ but in the believer yet to the dislike of some of their brethren they have retained the very out-side phrases which clothed Transubstantiation borrowed from the 6. chapter of St. John of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking of his blood and feeding on the substance of his body which expressions Bullinger wholly disalloweth as he openly professeth in an Epistle to Beza and finds fault that in a synod at Rochell where Beza was president in the year 1571. a canon was made which condemned all such as would not grant that the faithfull in the Eucharist were fed with the substance of the body of Christ all which we are beholden for to the Fathers Tertullian lib. de oratione cap. 6. saith that the body of Christ is in the bread Ambrose upon the 17. of St. Luke besides the body that suffered saith that there is also a body whereof it is said my flesh is meat indeed The Fathers usually make three bodies of Christ a body naturall mysticall and Sacramentall yea Justin Martyr and Hilary make a mysticall union of the divinity of Christ with the bread in the Sacrament 2. Next came the crying up of the vertue of the Eucharist near upon to as great an height as that of baptisme Thus St. Austin the best of the Fathers thought the Eucharist was needfull to children for their salvation which when they had made more mysterious then ever the holy Ghost intended they devised severall degrees of penance 1. of hearers or catechumeni 2. then of competents 3. of penitents and lastly of faithfull men and Christians thus making themselves judges and arbiters of ranks and places that men ought to hold in the church all which brought along with them excommunication which from a law of confederate discipline answerable to that practised among the Jewes grew to such ripenesse as to passe for a law of Christ for a spirituall sword an arrow to be kept in the quiver of the church and to be shot at the will and pleasure of the ministers This is the weapon that hath proved so effectuall in the hands of the Pope that with it and by it he hath built up his mystery of iniquity and founded an empire within the empire of Emperours Kings and States By the same weapon the great church-judicatory in Scotland keepeth all inferiour judicatories and churches in awe and subjection for were this taken away from them or were the people well informed of the fond and panick dread they have of it then they would upon more rationall grounds be subject to order and discipline But whatever height the power of excommunication arose to it could never yet be had but one of these two things ever attended the possession of it for either the Pope had it by a power of magistracy of his own by which he kept all magistrates in awe or it was alwayes disputed and controlled by the magistrate of the place where the Popes agents did endeavour to exercise their jurisdiction This may be proved by the practise of all states within the communion of Rome specially of France where the Popes Bulls of excommunication have been often disannulled and evacuated by acts of Parliament and inferiour judicatories yea by synods convocated by the King I will produce but one example which I have read in an old French Historie of the life of Lewis the ninth written by Ionville above 400. years agone cap. 82. where when a Prelat did desire of the King the help of the secular power for making his excommunications good the King answered that with all his heart he would do it but that first â—t was fit he should be acquainted with the validity of the excommunication Which evinceth 1. that all excommunications are null without a power of magistracy to put them in execution 2. that in the darkest time of ignorance and Popery magistrates could disannull and make void the Popes censures and that they did not conceive themselves obliged to hold his censures valid with a blind judgement and obedience but were to judge of them and so either to confirm them or abrogate them for so did the Emperours before the Popes grew up to their height from Constantine the great to Justinian and did regulate order and disannull or make void excommunications CHAPTER XXXI The History of excommunication from the first reformation from Popery how it was received in Geneva but not settled without disputes and clashings betwixt the consistory and the magistrate THus the abuse of the doctrine of the Eucharist went hand in hand with the use of excommunication untill that in Luthers fuller reformation the first was reformed the other not taken away but by some of the reformers retained upon the same grounds of Scripture that the Romish was though not in that height yet not with moderation which in vain is lookt for in an action that in its very use and practise is altogether unlawfull as excommunicat on is But neverthelesse excommunication aâ—ongst other practises of the Romish church was also abrogated by Luther and all thoughts of it weâ—e quite cast off as of a yoak and relick of Popery for above 20. years after Luther first preached against the Pope and it was near to miscarrying at its first new birth for in the year 1538. he having sounded the minds of his hearers how it might
be introduced there was a great clamour and complaining amongst them as if Luther had a mind to lay again upon their shoulders that yoak which they had shaken off from their necks Some few years after having again propounded that his intent was not to put excommunication into the hands of the ministers alone but to make it an act of the jurisdiction of the whole church some seemed to consent to it but most being against it we do not read that either it was settled at all or that it was done quietly in his life time We read indeed that Luther did commend it to other churches and even at the conference or reconciliation that was made betwixt Luther Bucer and Capito he did much urge how necessary the use of excommunication might be and that Bucer declining to deliver his opinion concerning the same lest he should crosse Luther and thereby retard the main work that they were met about did only say 1. that many cities in lieu of excommunication had strict lawes to punish those that were unruly and wicked 2. that he professeth in the name of his collegues of the churches of Switzerland that they did not intend to give the Eucharist to those whom they should know to be wicked and to live in impenitency Bucer in that did but deliver the sense and practise of the Helvetian churches who at their first reformation received excommunication no otherwise then as a law of the magistrate and not either as an ecclesiasticall censure or an exclusion from the Lords Supper For so sayes Gualterus in his Homilies upon the 1 Cor. 5. The lawes of our city punish by excommunication those that are negligent in hearing of the word or in coming to the Lords Supper and those besides that by their wicked lives offend the church such they expell from their tribes lest they should keep company with others Let other towns do what they please since one discipline will not fit every place we do not envy them their felicity who receive any benefit by the use of their excommunication or rather exclusion from the Lords Supper As in the first reformation at Zurich they had not a presbyterian excommunication so neither had they a presbytery or ecclesiasticall senat distinct in jurisdiction from that of the magistrate For the same Gualterus upon the first Epistle to the Corinthians ch 12. v. 28. speaking of governments which he saith are those whereof St. Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 6. v. 12. hath these words At this day there is no need of such governours being under a magistrate let none therefore overturn the order instituted by God and trample under their feet the authority of Princes and magistrates by instituting a new senat that assumeth power empire over them But I must tarry a little longer in Germany and see what the attempt of Luther for introducing excommunication did produce after his death Matthaeus Flaccius Illyricus did yet with more eagernesse endeavour to establish excommunication and for that was perpetually at discord with Melanchthon who did not so much dislike the retaining of the Romish excommunication as the introducing of a new one for Melanchthon was such a lover of peace that he would willingly have endured the Romish Bishops should have kept their jurisdiction still so that they had parted with other abuses and practises I could make a volume if I should rehearse all the journeys and removes that Illyricus made from place to place urging every where the necessity of receiving excommunication and for that very reason was he alwayes expell'd either by the Prince or the magistrate of the place who lookt upon Illyricus as a man aiming at setting himself up under a specious pretence of setting up the government of Christ and one who continually jingled the keyes not of Gods but of his own Kingdom which he endeavoured to set up wheresoever he set footing At length partly by his much clamouring being a very eloquent and learned man and the workings of his emissaries partly for the respect that most men bore to the memory of Luther who first went about the same business there was a kind of excommunication received in many Lutheran churches agreeable as they thought to the mind of Luther as he propounded it to them and as he speaketh in his comment upon Joel ch 4. where he maketh two sorts of excommunication the one internall when God excludeth men from the assembly of the faithfull the other externall and politick like an act of magistracy placed in the whole body of the church and not in the ministers and from that excommunication they do not forbid appeals neither do they ground it upon the words of Christ whatsoever ye shall bind c. as Chemnitius and Gerhardus the best expositors of Luthers mind tell us But excommunication had not the same entertainment in Switzerland where Zwinglius begun the reformation almost as soon as Luther did in high Germany For Bullinger in an Epistle to Dathenus relates that in a conference that Zwinglius had with an Anabaptist in the year 1531. this was his opinion concerning excommunication That because churches under a heathen magistrate had no coercive power to punish wickednesse they in lieu of it took up excommunication but once having a Christian magistrate who punisheth and restraineth vices and enormities the use of excommunication ceaseth In the same Epistle Bullinger saith a church may be true that wanteth this excommunication again we maintain that there ought to be a discipline in the church but it is enough if it be administred by the magistrate Beza acknowledgeth that this was also the opinion of Musculus as we have alledged before when he saith that St. Paul would not have delivered the incestuous person to Satan if the magistrate at that time had been a Christian and a favourer of churches Gualterus as we have said but now was of the same mind with his father in law Bullinger for which Mr. Rutherfurd and Gillespie are very angry So then excommunication finding no good entertainment in Switzerland is carried to Geneva by the great man Calvin whom God permitted to be deceived in that particular lest the reformed world should have taken him for infallible There excommunication grew into a great tree that spread its branches far near into France England Scotland the Palatinat and the low-Countreys but before it could shoot out it had many rubbs and oppositions For some years before Calvin was settled in Geneva the reformation had been happily begun by Farell and Viret and yet no excommunication was thought on or practised At the first proposall he made of it many of the town flocked to the Syndics and the other magistrates as he confesseth in an Epistle to Myconius beseeching them not to part with the power and sword which God had committed to them lest it should cause seditions and indeed they proved true Prophets as we shall see by and by Beza in the life of Calvin in the year
1â—41 relates what troubles and ado there was to bring it in that many alledged the examples of the neighbour-churches meaning Zurich Bern c. among which excommunication was not in use some saying that bâ—…t the Popish tyranny was recalled But all these difficulties saith Beza Calvin surmounted yet he did not censure other churches as unchristian that had not proceeded so far nor those pastors who did not conceive their flocks needed to be restrained by such a bit or bridle And indeed Calvin himself though very eager to bring in excommunication insomuch that sometimes he calls it the yoke of Christ the discipline of Christ professeth to be ready to endure either death or banishment rather then to suffer that the towns senat should take upon them the right of excommunicating as he saith in an Epistle to Viret yet he cannot but speak very respectfully of his neighbour ministers who acknowledged no such necessity upon excommunication as that it should be accounted amongst the ordinances of Christ These be his words in an Epistle to the pastors of Zurich in the year 1553. All men are not of the same opinion concerning excommunication neither am I ignorant that there be many godly and learned men who think not excommunication necessary under Christian Princes I should not care much to erre in that point of excommunication with Bullinger and Musculus upon condition that I were as godly and learned as they But however the opinions of the neighbour churches and ministers about excommunication stood Calvins great authority prevailed to set up excommunication In an Epistle to a person not named pag. 409. and 410. in folio he declareth at large which way he went about it and there he hath these words which carry as much authority as if his will had been a sufficient rule for Geneva and so for other churches to be governed by Volui ut aequum est spiritualem potestatem à civili judicio distingui ita in usum rediit excommunicatio It was my will that as it is fitting the spirituall power should be distinguished from the civil judgement and so excommunication came again to be in use But however his will was he was never able to make good his ecclesiasticall or spirituall jurisdiction distinct and independent from that of the magistrate 1. Because the same spirituall senat was made and constituted by the senat of the town as Calvin acknowledgeth in an Epistle to Bullinger in the year 1553. and therefore it was subordinate to the jurisdiction of the civil magistrate not only in its first making but also all the time after just as when Constantine the great instituted for a Episcopalia Bishops courts he looked upon them as depending on his jurisdiction not only in their first constitution but also in their duration in the reviewing and ratifying their lawes and sentences or disannulling them 2. It is true Beza saith in the life of Calvin an 1541. that at the first constitution of that ecclesiasticall senat and its lawes by the magistrate and the people there was a soveraign law made that no sort of men ministers magistrates or people should hereafter presume and attempt to disannull what therein was established by the law-makers of Geneva This indeed would have been a very foolish absurd law like that of Clodius whereof Cicero speaketh that could not be repealed or abrogated either by the senat or people for when ever the law is abrogated that clause also that the law cannot be abrogated is likewise abrogated Who would think that either the magistrate and people of Geneva should so enslave themselves and tye their hands as not to be able to repeal review or reforme lawes formerly made by them or that they should believe their lawes were composed and given by them with such an unerring judgement that they needed no further recognition 3. This jurisdiction called by Calvin ecclesiasticall could not be exercised and managed without a coercive restraining power or a power of magistracy either seated in the ministers and consistory or delegated from the magistrate For among the lawes of discipline of Geneva this is one If any one in contempt of the ecclesiasticall sentence or judgement is so bold as to attempt to come to the Sacrament let him be repelled and driven back by the minister Here then there is a power of magistracy or a coercive power assumed by the ministers without which he confesseth that all ecclesiasticall censures are null and of no effect So in an Epistle to Viret an 1547. speaking of a woman within the consistory who declined the presbyteriall court and judgement and besides did tire them out with her too much prating she saith he would have overwhelmed us with her thundering language if she had not been put out by force I ask here by what power was this woman thrust out was it ecclesiasticall and spirituall and a power of binding and loosing or a civil coercive power and of the two keyes they say they have which of them was taken in hand and by which end of the key was the woman driven out 4. But the nullity of that spirituall jurisdiction is evidently demonstrated by the perpetuall conflict and clashing in Calvins time betwixt the sentences and judgements of the consistory of Geneva and those of the magistrate whereof I have given many examples out the life and Epistles of Calvin Among others of one Bartolier who being excommunicated by the consistory did appeal from that sentence to the magistrate who once did confirm the judgement of the consistory and another time did evacuate and disannull it Whereupon there being a great contest betwixt the magistrate and the consistory to whom the judgement and right of excommunicating did belong Calvin with much earnestnesse obtained that ere any thing were concluded the opinion of four cities of the Switzers should be desired Bullinger maketh mention only of one city namely Zurich in an Epistle of the Senat of Geneva to that of Zurich wherein among other quere's this was one Whether there is no other way to excommunicate a man but by the consistory In that Epistle Bullinger though very fearfull to offend Calvin yet manifestly sheweth his dislike of the whole businesse and exhorteth him to moderation and mildnesse Whatever was the issue of the contest we do not read that the magistrate of Geneva did ever repeal this decree of the court that the last judgement about excommunication falls under the cognizance of the Senat of Geneva CHAPTER XXXII A continuation of the History of excommunication in France the Low-Countreys Scotland the Palatinate How it came to pass thaâ— amongst reformed states the Scottish ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ascended to such a height What plea the reformed churches in France have for excommunication That it is more justifiable among them then in churches under an orthodox magistrate THe reformed churches of France took their pattern of discipline and therewithall excommunication rather from Geneva then from the Protestant
Cantons for being to live under a cross magistrate they could not exercise their discipline as a law commanded by the magistrate nor execute their censures of excommunication as acts of the magistrate and therefore the reformed churches of France have upon much better grounds retained excommunication then the churches of Geneva who living under a magistrate that was himself part of the church were not necessitated to divide jurisdictions since the same men who were members of churches were also members of the city and magistracy and since the discipline yea excommunication was a law of the magistrate there was little need to divide powers and jurisdictions which when they should have done all they could must needs stream from the same spring-head But in France they could not be so happy and therefore since they could not have a jurisdiction immediatly derived from their â—agistrate it was requisite they should take up one â—y muâ—uall consent and by a confederate discipline For when the magistrate as it was among the Jewes in their captivity is no countenancer of the true religion nor a keeper of the two tables nor a nursing father of the churches that live under him they musâ— if they can obtain his leave be a magistrate and a law unto themselves and set up a kind of magistracy by mutuall consent not only in their private churches but also in their consistories and synods by which religion and piety may be asserted and errours in lise and doctrine be restrained So that when a private church excludeth a man either out of its communion or assembly this it doth by no other power then a magistrate a town a coâ—poration or a hall should act by in banishing or expelling a member of their own body I confesse few of the ministers in France will acknowledge that their discipline is taken up upon such grounds but rather that it is according to the pattern in the mount and the discipline of Christ as if it were a spirituall censure and a sword committed only to the ministers by a Scripture warrant and from the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing But I much wonder that wise men having a good foundation upon which they may firmly ground their discipline should rather chuse to build it upon the sand and upon the sea shore where it may be soon washt away What man possessing an inheritance by a good title would renounce that and rather feign a false will and testament and upon that ground his title which proving invalid will put him by the inheritance he had a good title to Yet this they do who will acknowledge no discipline but from Christ and will not put a man out of their assemblies but by a power derived to them from Christ But it being proved to their faces 1. that Jesus Christ never chalked out any form of discipline but left it to the prudence and discretion of Christian magistrates pastors and people who in generall are commanded to see that all things be done orderly 2. that excommunication is no otherwise a law of Christ then is the act of putting away a hurtfull member from any society these two things I say being made out to them to be Scriptu e reason and common sense and yet they persâ—sting to have no other grounds for their discipline then those feigned ones who seeth not that their discipline must be groundlesse since they cast away that which might strongly support it Thus they are like a man that cuts off his good leggs and buyes himself wooden crutches to walk upon This is that doctrine that my Paraenesis was so much blamed for by my countrey-men yea nearest kindred as if I went about to take away all discipline and to bring in stead of it disorder and confusion yea further to lay the reformed churches open to the persecution of their adversaries But my conscience tells me I never had any such designe and my reason prompts me that no such thing can be concluded from what I have written of that subject For it is with the discipline of the reformed churches in France under their magistrate as it was with that of the Jewes under the Babylonians Persians and Romans for whereas before their captivity they had no distinction betwixt church and state no other discipline then the law of the land no jurisdiction distinct from that of their magistrate afterwards when they lived under magistrates who were no friends to their lawes and religion they were fain as far as they were permitted to set up a discipline by consent which was in lieu of the magistrate whereof one law was to be casting out of the synagogue which we may call excommunication So that their jurisdiction was no otherwise distinct from that of the magistrate then as the power of a son in ordering his own affairs and religion contrary to the unjust commands of his father is distinct from the paternall power When a man cannot go to the charge of lead he must thatch his house with straw if he wants means to keep a servant he must serve himself and if he wants one to govern him he must be his own governour and yet that power whereby he governeth himself and is master of his own actions is not distinct from that which a governour was to have over him The very same thing the reformed churches in France may say who make use of what magistracy they can contrive and set up among themselves in lieu of their own magistrate who cares not for their religion If they be persecuted while they hold that their discipline is taken up by consent as the Jewes was under strange magistrates I do not see how they will be lesse exposed to persecution when ever they hold that their discipline is not of mans devising but of Christs own appointment For the magistrate doth not give them the liberty 〈◊〉 their discipline under any such notion either as it is confederate and arbitrary or punctually set down in Scripture for either way he counteth their discipline to be but a departing from the true church and their reformation to be a meer deformation So that it matters not much as to their safety what foundation they make their discipline to stand upon Sure it is not like that those that were the authors of the discipline of the reformed churches in France did look upon it as a modell left by Christ to his churches but rather as a collection of rules well digested by humane wisedome and prudence alterable according to time and place For so much saith the last article of their discipline These articles contained in this book concerning discipline are not so determined and ratified amongst us but that they may be altered as the emolument and benefit of the church shall require I hope when all prejudice shall be laid asides no rationall man will deny my principles I have alledged John Mestrezat a very learned man late minister at Paris both in my
Paraenesis and in my Corollarie in a letter of his written but a few weeks before he died where his judgement is wholly consonant to my opinion that all church-government is prudentiall arbitrary and taken up by consent for necessity of order and not for conscience Besides I have the testimony of a very reverend preacher in a famous church in Normandy in a letter of his to me wherein after he hath delivered his own judgement concerning the book he addeth that of one of his fellow-ministers in that church in these words One of my collegues who hath read your first book hath given this testimony of it That he is much satisfied upon the reading of it and that your opinion is so far from weakning our discipline that on the contrary it doth rather streng then it and places it upon its true and naturall bottom Geneva's excommunication had the greater influence upon the minds of the Non-conformists and Puritans in England for the respect they bare to Calvin more then to the Hierarchy metaphorphosed from Romish to English For whatever were the thoughts of some Romish Episcopall Doctors such as the English Hierarchy hath alwayes had the practise of all Bishops courts witnesseth that excommunication was but a law of the Land and of the opiscopall jurisdiction annexed to the Crown Excommunication was not much feared since Prince and subjects left off to be afraid of the Popes thunderbolts Wiclâ—ff begun first to pluck off â—ts vizard and to condemne both the abuse and the use of excommunication for the council of Constance recon'd up amongst his errours this tenet That it was a comfort to the faithfull church that excommunication and suspension and such like lying and feigned censures are not grounded on the law of Christ but are craftily devised by Antichrist But that it may appear that Wicliff held no other excommunication then that which is made in the Court of Heaven the 13. article objected to him as an errour clearly sheweth it Whoever leaves off preaching or hearing the word of God because of mans excommunication they are excommunicated and shall be so held in the day of judgement for betrayers of Christ and the 11. article saith that no man must excommunicate another except he knows him to be excommunicated by God In short whereas our brethren the Scots held that all jurisdiction of ecclesiasticall assemblies synods and presbyteries was derived from Jesus Christ the English people at least the magistrate who would never permit the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to get up held no jurisdiction but such as was derived from him for even from King Edward the sixths time the soveraign Princes have been very shie of Bishops keeping any courts or calling synods but only in their name Our brethren the Scots had their excommunication from Geneva as well as the reformed churches of France only Andrew Melvin did mightily improve and heighten it But they and the Geneva churches have this disadvantage which those of France never had that these have two pleas for their discipline and excommunication The one is the necessity of a confederate discipline taken up by consent under a cross magistrate by which plea they may justify all the acts of their jurisdiction the other plea if the first prove not strong enough they have in common with all other reformed churches living under an orthodox magistrate and that plea is the discipline of Christ which as it is a second string to the bow of the reformed churches of France if the first should break so it is the only string and hold that the Dutch Scotish and Geneva churches must hold by so that if they cannot make good their jus Divinum of discipline and excommunication they have no plea at all for their jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate as the reformed churches of France have This book would swell too much if I should make it good as I have done in my Paraenesis and Corollarium that they have outgone all the reformed in the task of building an empire within the empire of another or in the endeavour to settle a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate having while they strive to run furthest from Popery gone so far about that they have joined issue with Popery in that particular I find three main causes why in Scotland more then in any other nation where religion was reformed from popery the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction hath highest lifted up its head The first is it was not so much any humour or designe of the godly people as opportunity that brought it in For reformation taking its beginning there not at the head but at the foot and in opposition to a persecuting magistrate it was not possible to settle the pure worship of God without a government and jurisdiction assumed within the jurisdiction and distinct from that of the magistrate They having had it some time under a Romish magistrate conceived it was to continue in the like manner under a reformed magistrate and so turned the nenessity of a confederate discipline taken up by consent as it was by the faithfull people of Iuda under a heathen magistrate and by the reformed churches of France under a Christian into a necessity of Divine ordinance which being much countenanced by the great ones of the land who rescued the soveraign magistrate from the Popish party and brought him up from his infancy in the reformed religion the same men who were assertors of the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction against the magistrate when he was no friend of theirs had a fair opportunity to keep it still up when the magistrate was their friend and in their power and possession who when he was grown up to years found the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction too deep rooted for him to master and overbalancing the power that by right as all other magistrates and Kings in the world he was to have over all causes matters and persons So that from that time when King Iames in his â—…per years came to understand that he was a King and no King till he came to be King of great Britain we read of nothing but clashings and conflicts betwixt church court Parliament and ecclesiasticall assembly it being impossible that two coordinate jurisdictions and of the same nature could stand together amongst one and the same people in the same countrey Another cause is that the members of Parliament specially the nobility and gentry being also members of ecclesiasticall judicatories and the ecclesiasticalls having over and above an addition of strength by all the ministers of the land who were not members of Parliament it could not otherwise fall out but that the jurisdiction assumed in churches presbyteries synods and assemblies should not only appear distinct from that of the magistrate but also be raised to a greater height A third reason is that the Kings of Scotland having never had that majesty power revenue and splendour that other Kings abroad had and yet the land full of nobility and gentry
who had great jurisdictions many vassals and retainers the greatest part of which received no luster or increase of dignity or wealth from their Prince these had reason in emulation or opposition to that small number which the King favoured and protected to join themselves with the Kirk party there to find what the court could not afford them I have nothing to say concerning excommunication in the Low-countries but that they have no better plea for it then the churches of Scotland or Geneva I should now close up the history of excommunication by relating how it sped in the Palatinate where I think it was received the last of any reformed church though that place was one of the first that was reformed from Popery This may be seen in an Epistle of Zanchius to Conradus Hubertus in the year 1568. where he relates that for many years there was an attempt made to bring in excommunication which was withstood by many not so much that they had a dislike of it as that for some politick reasons it was not judged yet seasonable to stir further in it however by the mention that was made of it the spirits of men have been much alienated one from another Then he tells us of one George Withers an English-man who being to dispute for his degree of Doctor under Boquinus among other positions had one touching the necessity of introducing excommunication which was opposed with much eagernesse so far that one of his opponents being straitned for time so that he could not alledge all that he had to say against excommunication desired another day of dispuâ—ation which being granted Zanchius saith that the disputation grew so hot that one of the opponents a Minister protested openly against the falsity of the position as contrary to the word of God At which time Erastus amongst others wrote against excommunication It is observable that Zanchius did but favour underhand the advocates of excommunication for he saith for many honest reasons I would not intermeddle but keep silence By what I have related of the practise of excommunication in severall churches and countreys we may easily conceive and apprehend 1. That excommunication when retained upon the account of confederate discipline and as answering to the casting out of the synagogue among the Jewes may very well consist with the peace safety and integrity both of life and doctrine in the churches of France or any other under a contrary magistrate 2. That excommunication retained by churches under a contrary magistrate upon the plea of jus Divinum for their discipline and excommunication may be exercised with as little outward disturbance dispute as if they did retain it only upon the account of confederate discipline but such churches then will not only usurp a power which hath no warrant from Christ but besides will enslave mens consciences laying upon them a yoak which is none of Christs 3. But that excommunication upon what plea soever retained by those churches that live under an orthodox magistrate is inconsistent both with the outward peace of the nation where they live and the inward peace and satisfaction of mens minds 4. That excommunication as it is retained by the reformed churches in France or any other under a magistrate differing from them and upon what plea soever exercised either of confederate discipline or as had by Divine right is not attended with those clashings disputes and inconveniences that it is subject unto among those churches that live under an orthodâ—x magistrate keeping with them the same unity of faith that for these reasons 1. A church-member excommunicated in France will hardly complain to the magistrate for he would but slight his complaints and make a mock of the man and therefore the party excommunicated must needs sit still and stand to the sentence against him but a member of a church excommunicated in Geneva or Scotland looking upon the magistrate as a friend to the religion he professâ—th and a defendour and protectour of his own church-discipline will be ready if he can make his cause probably good and plausible to sue and seek for redresse Hence we see there were more appeals in Calvins time from the church-judicatory to that of the magistrate in the little territory of Geneva then are in a whole age through all the churches of France 2. Church-members under a contrary magistrate will be more united in affections and minds and so will keep closer to the observation of the discipline 3. Under a contrary magistrate members are usually such as believe what they outwardly professe and not like those under an orthodox magistrate where there is more of outward conformity to the religion of the state which is no hinderance but rather a furtherance to honours and prâ—ferments and therefore where there is more evennesse foundnesse sincerity and zeal there must be also a greater submission to the church-discipline and lesse clashings arising from the variety of dispositions in the members 4. There is a great necessity of exercising a jurisdiction among the reformed churches in France for the composing of such differences among themselves as have relation to their doctrine and religion which otherwise being opened to the popish magistrate would but bring our religion into contempt and derision But under a magistrate that is a friend to religion these differences may be with as little fear of scandall and derision to the profession and doctrine made up and reconciled by men of his own appointment and chusing as within a consistory and as well and better by the consistory if delegated thereunto and invested with authority from the magistrate then any other way so that there be but one jurisdiction 5. As there was a great necessity of discipline among the Jewes living under an adverse magistrate which should be in some sort distinct from their jurisdiction so was there lesse need either to have it divided from that of the magistrate when he was a countenancer of their religion or to have any at all more then the law of the land The like may be said of the Christian churches I will conclude this charter with two or three passages out of Andrew Rivet my much honoured Uncle when he lived and whose authority is of great weight with all the Divines of this land namely the presbyterian ministers and which taken into consideration will be found to deliver as much as ever I have asserted though none yet hath inveighed against him as an Erastian and an enemy to order and discipline They are all to be found in his exposition of the decalogue tom 1. about the 1373. page It cannot be denyed but that the principall duty in asserting and vindicating religion yea in establishing it pertained to the King of Iuda for when ever the Kings mind changed there was alwayes a change in religion which change whether for good or bad is alwayes attributed to the King as his act and deed neither could ever the chief Priests procure a
change for the better or hinder a change for the worse The King or another magistrate as he doth not ordain so he doth not depose formally as I may so speak or administratorily yet he doth it of himself not only by his counsell command and authority for he may command it when there is just cause of deposing a minister to those that have that power in the church who in that case and there being just cause for it if they do not obey and do what he commandeth are subject not only to wrath but also to Gods judgement Ministers as ministers are subjects to the soveraign magistrate why then should it not be lawfull to appeal from the judgement of subjects to the supreme magistrate and why may it not be lawfull for the supreme magistrate to review the judgements of his subjects to ratify them if they be good and to abrogate them if they be bad There is a subjection of the magistrate to the ecclesiasticall senat but not of jurisdiction as under a command but of direction and counsell CHAPTER XXXIII The judgement of some Divines yet living both of the argument in hand and of the writings of the Author Of some mens strong prejudices against harsh censures of him I Have through all this book and in the first section of my Corollarium proved that I have digressed nothing in my Paraenesis from Scripture reason about the right of churches and the magistrates power in matters of religion but my opinion is also confirmed by two kinds of authorities of learned and orthodox Divines The first kind of authorities is of those that for the main concur with me or rather I with them such are Zuinglius Musculus Bullingerus Gualterus Mestrezat Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs Mr. Lightfoot c. The second kind is of those that though in generall they profess to be for a church-government distinct from that of the magistrate yet if one take notice of all the positions concerning that argument which each of them admit and grant will be found jointly though not every one of them considered a part to say as much as I just as the Protestants doctrine will be found in all though not in each of the Romish authors overcome by the evidence of truth in the handling of some points controverted betwixt them and us as Scotus confesseth that Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture Cajetan denyeth the Popish indulgences Bellarmin after he hath much heightned the merit of works concludeth with a â—utissimum est and flieth to the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith as the safest anchor to stay a staggering Christian Jansenius is right in the doctrine of grace all the rest in some positions or other hold with us And of this kind are Bucer Martyr Jewell Zanchius Reynolds Camero Rivet and many more who besides by yielding an inch have given us a whole handfull to believe that what we have discoursed of the nature of power lawes judgement the right of churches and the magistrates power in matters of religion is both reason and Scripture For whoever admits as most of these authors do that the judgements of Pastors in presbyteries synods are subordinate to that of the soveraign Christian magistrate and that appeals from church-judicatories to the magistrate are grounded upon Scripture reason and the practise of all nations and besides saith that the magistrate is the supreme governour and head of the church over all causes and persons whoever I say grants these to be truths must needs overthrow ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and power of excommunication except it be in subordination to and dependently on the magistrate But among all the reformed Divines who appear in the throng of those that hold an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and a government distinct from that of the magistrate none hath delivered positions in print so near the language of Mr. Coleman as Ludovicus Cappellus pastor and Professor at Saumur yet living hath done which passing currant for truth from the mouth of Cappellus if they had fallen from Mr. Coleman would have been taken by our brethren the Scots for pernicious and dangerous tenets and mere Erastianisme In the first part of his Theses Salmurienses de potestate regimine Ecclesiae thes 12. he saith that pastors have properly no other jurisdiction then that which subdueth the affections of the world and the flesh when the spirit of Christ in the word restraineth the assaults of Satan that there is no other authority of governing the church then what is seated in Christ the head when by the efficacy of his spirit he enlighteneth the mind and convinceth the conscience In his 40. thesis he saith that the constitutions of the church have authority no further then as they agree with reason In his 41. and 42. he puts equall stresse of duty upon the magistrate in governing and ordering the church the commonwealth as being keeper of one table as well as the other These are his words in Latin Porro his de rebus dispiciendi atque statuendi ita penes ecclesiam hoc est ecclesiasticos quos vâ—cant viros est potestas ut si magistratus pius Christianus sit fierâ—id non debeat non modo sine ejus consilio conscientia verum etiam sine ejus authoritate qua ea quae videbuntur in hoc genere conducibilia confirmentur vimque legis obtineant Is nempe est utriusque divinae legis Tabulae vindex atque custos ad quem propterea pertinet etiam pastores si cessent vel peccent in officium movere objurgare ubi opus fuerit castigare denique prospicere atque providere ut omnia tum in ecclesia tum in republica seu politia recte ordinate fiant utque ordinis legitime constituti turbatores violatores pro merito puniantur This he seemeth to speak after Pareus in his Miscellanea Catechetica art 11. aphoris 18. where he layeth upon the magistrate a greater duty in governing the church then the commonwealth and more in keeping the first table then the second Hoc vero jus gubernandi ecclesias sacra Scriptura disertim magistratui attribuit ut ei quemadmodum tenetur procurare ut bonum civile in foro judiciis legitime administretur ita non minor imo longe major ejus cura esse debeat ut jus Divinum bonum illud animarum hoc est vera religio pietas subditis suis in ecclesia scholis ad aeternam eorum salutem proponatur juxta legem testimonium idem docent exempla laudatissimorum regum Davidis c. Sic Paulus affatur Christianos Romanos Minister est Dei tuo bono ubi intelligit omne bonum tam civile terrenum quam ecclesiasticum seu spirituale secus namque magistratus homini Christiano non plus commodaret quam infideli Ac sane dolendum est rectius in hoc capite sensisse olim ethnicos qui unanimi consensu regi suo demandarunt
the sequel of your discourse that you understood it in the sense that you explain in your Corollary so that if all the readers of the book had brought with them such a spirit to the reading of it as mine you had been freed from the trouble of giving a clear exposition of your meaning I had also taken notice of the digression you make in your Preface against Mr. Daillé and Amyraldus and indeed I did then write to Mr. Congnard my opinion thereof and that I could have wished for many reasons that you had not meddled with them but what is written is written which I hope will not hinder but that those that follow their opinion concerning the universality of grace as conceiving it to be grounded upon Scripture and upon the authority of most Doctors both ancient and modern and chiefly of our first reformers will embrace if they be good men the truth which you present unto them so that they may perceive it without any kind of prejudice I pray God they may do it I am sorry I delayed this answer so long but besides that I am entangled with a law suite which a naughty man hath troubled me with I had a great desire that my Collegues should first have your book communicated to them that I might tell you their opinion what they think of it Be pleased therefore not to take this delay in ill part and to favour me so far as to believe that I honour you and value as much as possible the gifts of God whâ—ch shine in you which will readily put me upon studying all occasions to testifie that I am most sincerely Your most humble and most obedient servant VAUQUELIN From Diepe this 16. of August 1657. Having since the receit of this letter desired him to gi e me leave to publish it in print he granted it me by this ensuing letter SIR YOur work carrieth its commendation with it and needeth not to borrow it from others Yet if you and those to whom you communicated my last letter conceive it will signify any thing and think it fitting to be printed either at the beginning or at the end of the extract of your Paraenesis I willingly give my consent I shall not fear to own a truth of that nature which you propound in your book Amicus Plato c. If any body undertakes to confute it and by the strength and evidence of his reasons can convince me that it is not truth but an errour coloured over I will not then fear to disavow it Those famous authors whose authorities you bring to defend all your conclusions will be obliged to do the like and to sing a Palinodia when they see that you are gone astray in going the way they led you But untill I see this demonstration which at present I think impossible I will stick to that I have embraced and in the mean while will assure you that it will be a great satisfaction to me if I can be serviceable to you in any thing whereby I may testify to you that I am in all sincerity Your most humble and most obedient servant VAUQUELIN From Diepe the 2. of Oct. 1657. Among the persons living that have given their approbation to my Paraenesis I might mention the late reverend and learned minister of Paris Iohn Mestrezat because he was then living when it came forth I have in my Corollarium inserted his letter written a few weeks before he died wherein as in his treatise of the Church one may see he wholly concurreth with me in the following particulars 1. That all private churches are independent from any church-judicatory and that what power so ever is given or promise made to a church ought not to be ascribed to the catholick nationall or presbyterâ—all church but to the private church made up of Pastor and flock meeting in one place about the same ordinances 2. That combinations of private churches are of very good use but yet are arbitrary and of humane institution and not commanded in the word 3. That Jesus Christ never appointed any form or modell of church discipline only hath in generall commanded that all things in the church should be done orderly I might adde the testimonies of many English Divines who have approved of the book and argument with no lesse good liking then the ministers of Dâ—epe or Mr. Mestrezat For I do not doubt but that reverend and learned Mr. Baxter as it seems to me in the Preface to a late book of his will come as near me in the main question handled in my Paraenesis as I differ from him in the other controversy betwixt him and me But I forbear to name either those that like of my Paranesis or those that dislike iâ— having no leave from either of them so to do I am however thus far satisfied that these later have condemned it before they read it and when they never intended to read it either out of contempt oâ— prejudice whereas the other have taken the pains to read it over and been as m ch in the extreams to commend it as those to discommend it Should I set down here the vaâ—ioâ—s jâ—dg ments of men both in England and b yond the seas it would hardly be believed that godly and learned men agreeing in the same holy doctrine of faith and in fervent charity one with the other should be so opposite and contrary in their judgement of my book some condemning it as most pernicious and dangerous adam iâ—gaâ—d damnable book as if they had spoken of some pieces of Socinus or Câ—ellius or of â—nâ—ther and eternall Gosâ—ell written some â—…ndred years a gone by the Friars besides a book full of hes casummes and slaunders and wounding the interest of Jesus Christ on the contrary others commending the book both for the matter and the way of handling it and for the Christian moderation that the author oâ—serveth enrough the whole work equally resâ—ecting and honouring those he assents to and those he dissents from The later since they have known me by my works have had more Christian converse with me by letters and otherwise but the other except they be my noble and old friends did flee from me since as from an heathen and a publican and an excommunicated person only for denying excommunication to be an ordinance of Christ yea so far that a reverend person protested to a friend of mine that he would not come in the company where I should be I thank God I cannot find in my heart to value and honour any one more or lesse for loving me either better or worse for my books sake so that I find godlinesse and sincerity shine in them though in some with much prejudice I pardon them their uncharitable and somewhat rash censure both of the work and the Authour The Lord knoweth my heart that in delivering what I did and now do in this present work I look upon Father Brother Kinsmen English French Scots Dutch Calvin Independents Presbyterians Erastians with an indifferent and unpartiall eye not seeking to close with any of them or fearing to dissent from them nor so much as taking notice whether I please any body or no body so that I may abstain from known errour and sin and deliver that which to me is truth and tending to the honour of the ministery to the rooting out of the churches of God all power that is none of Christs to the unsettling the Romish Hierarchy which hath now no longer any plausible plea from Scripture and reason for their setting up an empire within the dominions of others and lastly conducing to the building up of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ in many mens hearts and making it appear to be wholly internall and sâ—…rituall and only over those that are convinced and perswaded by the spirit of God in the ministery of the word The Lord perswade his people of this truth as I my self and I hope rightly am perswaded and informed undeceiving them that he may have all the glory by their endeavouring with one accord to preserve saving truths by this truth FINIS