dead in sinnes to be meant but holy men who being indued with faith in God and walking in his obedience God authorising them and the Church his Spouse chusing and calling them undertake the government thereof that they may labour to the conservation and edification of the same in Christ saith Iunius A ruling Elder should pray for the Spirit and gifts of his calling that hee may doe the duties of his calling and not bee like him that played the Souldan but a Souter hee must doe his office neither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and pro forma hee himselfe being Parcus Deorum caltor infrequens nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doing all through contention and strife about particulars Si duo de nostras tollas pro nomina rebus praelia I may say Iurgia cessarent pax sine lite foret Nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Empiring and Lording among his brethren and fellow Elders Whosoever will bee great among you let him bee your minister and whosoever will bee chiefe among you let him be your servant saith the onely Lord and Head of the Church Nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 setting himselfe only to do a pleasure or to get preferment to such as he favoureth Nay nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely by establishing good orders and wholesome lawes in the Church but he must carry himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serviceably and ministerially for as his Function is Officium and Iurisdictio so it is Munus a burdensome service and charge laid upon him That a ruling Elder may bee such a one as hee ought to bee two sorts of duties are requisite viz. duties of his Conversation and duties of his Calling The duties of his conversation are the same which the Apostle Paul requireth in the conversation of the Minister of the Word That he bee blamelesse having a good report not accused of riot or unruly vigilant sober of good behaviour given to hospitality a lover of good men just holy temperate not given to wine no striker not greedy of filthy lucre not selfe-willed not soone angry but patient not a brawler not covetous one that ruleth well his owne house having his children in subjection with all gravity one that followeth after righteousnesse godlinesse faith love patience meeknesse c. These and such like parts of a Christian and exemplary conversation being required of Pastors as they are Elders belong unto ruling Elders also This being plaine let us proceed to the duties of their calling For the better understanding whereof we will distinguish with the Schoole-men a two-fold power the power of Order and the power of Jurisdiction which are different in sundry respects 1. The power of Order comprehendeth such things as a Minister by vertue of his ordination may doe without a commission from any Presbyterie or Assembly of the Church as to preach the Word to minister the Sacraments to celebrate marriage to visite the sicke to catechise to admonish c. The power of Jurisdiction comprehendeth such things as a Minister cannot doe by himselfe nor by vertue of his ordination but they are done by a Session Presbytery or Synod and sometimes by a Minister or Ministers having Commission and authority from the same such as ordination and admission suspension deprivation and communication and receiving againe into the Church and making of Lawes and Constitutions Ecclesiasticall and such like whereof we boldly maintaine that there is no part of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction in the power of one man but of many met together in the name of Christ. 2. The power of Order is the radicall and fundamentall power and maketh a Minister susceptive and capable of the power of Jurisdiction 3. The power of Order goeth no further then the Court of Conscience the power of Jurisdiction is exercised in Externall and Ecclesiasticall Courts Fourthly the power of Order is sometime unlawfull in the use yet not voide in it selfe The power of Jurisdiction when it is unlawfull in the use it is also voide in it selfe If a Minister doe any act of Jurisdiction as to excommunicate or absolve without his owne parish wanting also the consent of the Ministery and Elders of the bounds where he doth the same such acts are voide in themselves and of no effect But if without his owne charge and without the consent aforesaid hee baptise an infant or doe any such thing belonging to the power of Order though his act be unlawfull yet is the thing it selfe of force and the Sacrament remaineth a true Sacrament Now to our purpose We averre that this twofold power of Order and of Jurisdiction belongeh to ruling Elders as well as to Pastors The power of Jurisdiction is the same in both for the power and authority of all Jurisdiction belongeth to the Assemblies and representative meetings of the Church whereof the ruling Elders are necessary constituent members and have the power of decisive voycing no lesse then Pastors Howbeit the execution of some decrees enacted by the power of Jurisdiction belongeth to Ministers alone for Pastors alone exercise some acts of Jurisdiction as imposition of hands the pronouncing of the sentence of excommunication the receiving of a penitent c. Are not these things done in the name and authority of some Assembly of the Church higher or lower Or are they any other then the executions of the decrees and sentences of such an Assembly wherein ruling Elders voyced The power of Order alone shall make the difference betwixt the Pastor and the ruling Elder for by the power of Order the Pastor doth preach the Word minister the Sacraments pray in publike blesse the Congregation celebrate marriage which the ruling Elder cannot Therefore it is falsly said by that railing Rabshakeh whom before I spoke of Ep. pag. 7. That the ruling Elders want nothing of the power of the Minister but that they preach not nor baptise in publike congregations yet other things which the Pastor doth by his power of Order the ruling Elder ought also to doe by his owne power of Order And if we would know how much of this power of Order is common to both let us note that Pastors doe some things by their power of Order which all Christians ought to doe by the law of Charity Things of this sort a ruling Elder may and ought to doe by his power of Order and by vertue of his election and ordination to such an office For example every Christian is bound in Charity to admonish and reprove his brother that offendeth first privately then before witnesses and if he heare not to tell it to the Church Levit. 19.17 Matth. 18.15.16.17 This a ruling Elder ought to doe by vertue of his calling and with authority 1 Thess. 5.12 Private Christians ought in Charity to instruct the ignorant Joh. 4.29 Act. 18.26 to exhort the negligent Heb. 3.15 10.24 25. to comfort the afflicted 1 Thess. 5.11 to support the weake 1 Thess. 5.14 To restore him that falleth
assertion I intend to satisfie the scrupulous and to put to silence the malicious so also to confirm the consciences of such as are friends and savourers to the right way of Church government Whatsoever is not of faith iâ— sin saith the Apostle yea though it be in a matter otherwise indifferent how much more is it necessary that we halt not in our judgement concerning the government of the Church but walk straight in the plerophory and full assurance of the same from the warrants of the word of God I say againe from the warrants of the word of God for as it is not my meaning to commend this forme because it is Scotlands so I hope assuredly that my Country-men will not dispise Gods Ordinance because it is Scotlands practice but rather follow them in so far as they follow Christ and the Scripture This therefore I pray that thy love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgement that thou maiest approve the things that are excellent Consider what I say and the Lord give thee understanding in all things Amen THE CONTENTS OF the first part of this Treatise CHAP. I. Of the words Elder Lay-Elder Ruling-Elder FOure significations of the word Elder in Scripture Of the nickname of Lay-Elders That the Popish distinction of the Clergie and the Laity ought to be banished Of the name of Ruling-Elders and the reason thereof CHAP. II. Of the function of Ruling-Elders and what sâ—re of officers they be OF the distinction of Pastors Doctors Elders and Deacons Of the behaviour and conuersation of Ruling-Elders Of the distinction of the power of Order and of jurisdiction That the Ruling-Elder his power of jurisdiction is to sit and voice in all the Consistories and Assemblies of the Church That his power of order is to do by way of authority those duties of edification which every Christian is bound to do by way of charity CHAP. III. The first argument for Ruling-Elders taken from the Iewish-Church THat we ought to follow the Jewish Church in such things as they had not for any speciall reason proper to them but as they were an Ecclesiasticall Republike That the Elders among the Jews did sit among the Priests and voice in their Ecclesiasticall Courts according to Baravias own confession but were not theirâ— will Magistrates as he alleadgeth Bilsons objections answered CHAP. IV. The second Argument taken from Math. 18.17 WHat is the meaning of these words Tell the Church Why the Presbytery may be called the Church Our argument from this place for Ruling-Elders CHAP. V. The third Argument taken from Rom. 12.8 THe words Rom. 12.8 expounded That by him that ruâ—eth is meant the Ruling-Elder The objections to the contrary answered CHAP. VI. The fourth Argument taken from 1 Cor. 12.28 THâ—t by governments the Apostle meaneth ruling-Elders Two glosses given by our opposites confuted CHAP. VII The fiâ—st Argument taken from 1 Tim. 5.17 OUr Argument from this place vindicated against â—en false glosses devised by our opposites CHAP. VIII The testimony of Ambrose for Ruling-Elders vindicated NO certain ground alledged against the authority of those Commentaries upon the Epistles ascribed to Ambrose Other answers made by our opposites to the place upon 1 Tim. 5. confuted CHAP. IX Other Testimonies of Antiquitie TEstimonies for Ruling-Elders out of Tertullion Cyprian Epiphanius Bâ—sil Chrysostome Hierome Eusâ—bius Augustine Origen Isidore the first counsell of Tâ—lido Other testimoâ—ies observed by Iustellus and Voetius Bilsons answer confuted CHAP. X. The consent of Protestant Writers and the confession of our opposites for Ruling-Elders CItatâ—ons of sundry Protestant writers to this purpose This truth hath extorted a confession from Wâ—itgist Saravia Sultiffe Camero and M. Io. Wemys of Craigtown CHAP. XI Dr. Fields five arguments against ruling-Elders answered HIs first reason that no foot-step of Ruling-Elders for many hundreth years could be found in any Christian Church answered five waies Footsteps of Ruling-Elders in the Church of England His second reason answered That we ought to judge of the Officers of the Church not from 1 Tim. 3. only but from that and other places compared together His third reason answered by the câ—rtain bounds of the power of Ruling-Elders His fourth reason answered by the distinction of the Ecclesiasticaâ—l Sanedrim of the Iewes from their civill Sanedrim His last reason concerning the names holdeth not CHAP. XII The extravagancies of Whitegift and Saravia in the matter of ruling-Elders THe one alloweth of Ruling-Elders under an Infidell Magistrate but not under a Christian Magistrate The other alloweth of them under a Christian Magistrate but not under an Infidell That Ruling-Elders do not prejudge the power of the civill Magistrate but the Prelacie doth which confuteth Whitegift That Christian Magistrates are not come in place of the Jewish Seniors which confuteth Saravia CHAP. XIII Whether ruling-Elders have the power of decisive voices when they they sit in Presbyteries and Synods THe affirmative proved by nine reasons Two objections to the contrary answered The place 1 Cor. 14.32 explained CHAP. XIIII Of the Ordination of ruling-Elders Of the continuance of their Office and of their maintenance THat the want of the Imposition of hands in Ordination the want of maintainance and the not continuing alwaies in the â—xercise of the Office cannot be prejudiciall to the Office it selfe of Ruling-Elders The Contents of the second Part. CHAP. I. Of Popular government in the Church THat this question is necessary to be clâ—â—red before the question of the authority of Assemblies That Jurisdiction ought not to be 〈◊〉 by all the Members of a Congregaâ—ion proved by 〈◊〉 reasons Objections answered The controversie 〈◊〉 CHAP. II. Of the independencie of the Elderships of particular Congregations Dr. Fields question whâ—ther the power of Jurisdiction belongeth to the Eldership of every Congregation or to a common Presbytery made up out of many Congregations answered by an eigâ—â—fold distinction A thrâ—â—fold conformity of those Parishionall Elderships to the primitive pattern CHAP. III. Of great Presbyteries which some call Classes THree false glossâ—s on 1 Tim. 4.14 confuted That the Apostle 〈◊〉 by the Presbytery aâ— Assembly of Presbyters whereof also Fathers and Councels do speak The warrant and authority of our Classicall Presbyteries declared both by good reasons and by the Apostolicall patern for assertion of the latter it is proved 1. That in many of those Cities wherein the Apostles planted Christian religion there was a greater number of christians then did or could ordinarily assemble into one place 2. That in these Cities there was a plurality of Pastors 3. That yet the whole within the City was one Church 4. That the whole was governed by one common Presbytery From all which a Corollary is drawne for these our Classicall Presbyteries CHAP. IV. Of the authority of Syâ—â—ds provinciall and Nationall THat the power of Jurisdiction in the Synod differeth from the power of jurisdiction in the Presbyterie The power of Jurisdiction
and infirme Bishops who cannot labour in the word and doctrine Answ. 1. The Apostle speaketh of Presbyters not of Prelates 2. To rule well importeth as great labour as preaching and somewhat more as I shewed before so that they who cannot labour in preaching cannot labour in ruling neither 3. They who have eviscerate and spent themselves in the work of the Ministry who have been as long as they could stand upon their feet valiant Champions for the truth against the enemies thereof who have served their time according to the will of God without the staine of Heresie Schisme Apostasie or unfaithfulnesse when they become old and infirme they ought not to be the lesse honoured as the impious verdict of this Prelate would have it but so much the more honour ought to be given to their hoare head found in the way of righteousnesse Another Glosse is given by the same King namely that the Apostle would have Ministers not onely to live well but to feed also by the word and doctrine Answ. 1. The rising of the Apostles words doth not concern duties but persons as wee have said before 2. To live well is not to rule well unlesse wee will make all who live godly to rule well 3. Thirdly this glosse doth stil leave a double honor to Ministers that live well though they do not preach We see now our opposites have been trying all windes to fetch upon us but here we leave them betwixt winde and wave â—or this our last argument carrieth us away with full saile CHAP. VIII The testimony of Ambrose for ruling Elders vindicated IF wee looke backe beyond the times of declining unto the first and purest times of the Church wee shall finde ruling Elders to be no new fangled device at Geneva but that the primitive government and policy of the Church hath beene in them restored There is one place of Ambrose which cleereth it sufficiently He writing on 1 Tim. 5.1 Rebuke not an Elder saith Vnde Synagoga c. Wherefore both the Iewish Synagogue and after the Church had Senior or Elders without whose counsell nothing was done in the Church which by what negligence it grew out of use I know not except perhaps by the sloth or rather by the pride of the teachers whiâ—es they alone will seeme to be something This sentence is also cited in Glossa ordinar And it sheweth plainely that as the Jewish so the Christian Church had some Elders who though they were not Teachers of the Word yet had a part of the government of the Church upon their shoulders But that this came into desuetude partly through the sloth of the teachers and Ministers of the Word whiles they were not carefull to preserve the ordinances of God and the right way of governing the Church and partly through their pride whilst they would doe all by themselves and have no consorts Vtinam modo nostra redirent In mores tempora priscos But let us heare a triple divination which the non-friends of ruling Elders give forth upon this testimony First Bishop Hall telleth us that it is not Ambrose but a counterfeit who wrote that Commentary upon the Epistles and for this he alledgeth our owne Parker against us The truth is Bellaâ—mine and Scultingius taught him this answer The place of Parker he citeth noâ— in the Margine but I believe the place he meaneth of is de polit Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 13. where he holdeth indeed that the author of these Commentaries was not Ambrose Bishop of Millaine but sheweth withall that he nothing doubteth of the Catholike authority of the Commentaries themselves Hoc vero c. This saith he may befall the best Author whosoever he be that some may ascribe his workes to another But that hee lived before the Councell of Nice this addeth weight to his testimony of the Seniors These Commentaries are commonly cited by our Divines as Ambrose's I finde them in Erasmus his edition both at Collen 1532. and at Paris 1551. acknowledged to bee the genuine workes of Ambrose only the Prefaces before the Epistles are called in question They are also acknowledged in the edition of Costerius at Basile 1555. Sixtuâ— Senensis ascribeth them to Ambrose in like manner The edition of Collen 1616. hath an observation prefixed which repudiateth many of his workes and these Commentaries among the rest Yet the last edition at Paris 1632. hath expunged that observation which they had not done if they had approved the same Howsoever that same observation maketh those Commentaries to bee as old as 372. or 373. Perkins in his preparative before his demonstration of the probleme calleth in question the Commentary upon the Hebrewes but no more Rivet sheweth that these who reject them doe neither give good reasons for their opinion neither yet doe agree among themselves Bellarmine ascribing them to Hilarius Diaconus Maldonat to Remigius Lugdunensis the Censors of Lovaine to the Author of the questions of the old and new Testament I beleeve that Cooke in his Censura Scriptorum veterum hath touched the true cause why these Commentaries are so much called in question which is the perfidiousnesse of Papists who when they finde any thing therein which they imagine to bee for their advantage then they cry Saint Ambrose saith thus but when they finde any thing therein which maketh against them then they say as Hall doth It is not Ambrose but a counterseit I must confesse that Hall is wiser in disclaiming the same then his fellowes in acknowledging them yet because he found that the Testimony may bee of force though not Ambrose's and beside had no proofe for this alledgeance he durst not trust to it but thought upon another answer To proceed then to their next conjecture Bilson Sutcliffe and Doctor Field tell us that Ambrose meant of Bishops who excluded other Clergy men from their consultations and that by the name of Teachers hee might fitly understand the Bishops seeing none but they have power to preach in their owne right others but onely by permission from them This is a most desperate shift for a bad cause For first there is no warrant neither from Scripture nor Antiquity to distinguish Bishops from other Ministers of the Word by the name of Teachers Secondly as for that reason alledged that none but Bishops have power to preach in their owne right it is contrary to that which Field himselfe saith in the very next Chapter where he holdeth that Presbyters are equall with Bishops in the power of order and that they may preach and minister the Sacraments by vertue of their order as well as Bishops Thirdly neither did the advising of Bishops with Presbyters cease in Ambrose his time For as Field himself noteth out of the fourth Councell of Carthage which was holden shortly after Ambrose his writing hereof all sentences of Bishops were declared to bee void which were not confirmed by the presence of their Clergy Let us also
any thing of that kind to the uncertainty of an occasionall meeting 3 The Apostles were freely present in any Presbyterie where they were for the time because the oversight and care of all the Churches was layd upon them Pastors and Elders were necessarily present therein and did by vertue of their particular vocation meete together Presbyterially whether an Apostle were with them or not No other sense can the Text suffer but that by Presbyterie we should understand consessus Presbyterorum a meeting of Elders and so doe Camero and Forbesse themselves expound it Sutlivius objecteth to the contrary that the Apostle Paul did lay on hands upon Timothy which he proveth both from 2. Tim. 1. and because extraordinary gifts were given by that laying on of hands Ans. There is an expresse difference made betwixt Pauls laying on of his hands and the Presbyteries laying on of their haÌ„ds Of the former it is said that Timothy received the gift which was in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the laying on of Pauls hands but he received the gift 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the laying on of the hands of the Presbyterie as Didoclavius noteth But saith Sutlivius Timothy being an Evangelist as you hold how could hee be ordained by the Presbyterie Ans. 1. Though the Presbyterie did neither give him ordination to bee an Evangelist nor yet conferre by the laying on of their hands extraordinary gifts upon him yet did they lay on their hands as setting to the the Seale and Testimony and commending him to the grace of God even as certaine Prophets and Teachers layd hands on Paul and Barnabas and Ananias also before that time had laid his hands upon Paul 2. The Presbyterie might ordaine Timothy to be an Elder If so be he was ordained an Elder before he was ordained an Evangelist 3. If the testimony of the Presbyterie by the laying on of their hands together with the Apostles hands in the extraordinary mission of Timothy was required much more may it be put out of question that the Apostles committed to the Presbytâ—ry the full power of ordaining ordinary Ministers But it is further objected by Sutlivius that this could not be such a Presbyterie as is among us because ordination and imposition of hands pertaine to none but the Ministers of the word Ans. 1. The children of Israel laid their hands upon the Levites we would know his reason why he denyeth the like power to ruling Elders now especially since this imposition of hands is but a gesture of one praying and a morall signe declaring the person prayed for 2. Howsoever our practice whâ—ch is also approved by good Divines is to put a difference betwixt the act of ordination and the externall right thereof which is imposition of hands ascribing the former to the whole Presbytery both Pastors and Elders and reserving the latter to the Ministers of the word yet to bee done in the name of all Thus have we evinced the Apostles meaning when he speaketh of a Presbyterie and this Consistory we find to have continued in the Christian Church in the ages after the Apostles Jt is certaine that the ancient Bishops had no power to judge any cause without the presence advice and counsell of their Presbyters Conc. Carth. 4. can 23. Field Forbesse Saravia and Douname doe all acknowledge that it was so and so doth Bellarmine de Pont. Rom. l. 1. c. 8. Of this Presbytery speaketh Cyprian Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium c. Of the Presbytery speaketh the same Cyprian lib. 2. Ep. 8. lib. 4. Ep. 5. Ignatius ad Trall and Hierom in Esa. 3. Wee finde it also in conc Ancyr can 18 and in conc Carthag 4. can 35.40 Doctor Forbesse alledgeth that the word Presbytery for fifteen hundred yeares after Christ did signifie no other thing in the Church then a Diocesan Synod But herein if hee had understood himselfe he spake not so much against Presbyteries as against Prelats for a Diocesse of old was bounded within one City Tumque jampridem per omnes provincias per urbes singulas ordinati sint Episcopi c. saith Cyprian It was necessary to ordaine Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Chrysostome speaking of the primitive times yea in Country Villages also were Bishops who were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rurall Bishops whose Episcopall office though limited yet was allowed in the Councell of Ancyra can 13. and the Councell of Antioch can 8. 10. Sozomen recordeth that the Village Majuma which was sometime a suburbe of the City Gaza was not subject to the Bishop of Gaza but had its owne proper Bishop and that by the decree of a Synod in Palestina The Councell of Sardis can 6. and the Councell of Laodicea can 57. though they discharged the ordaining of Bishops in villages lest the name of a Bishop should grow contemptible did neverthelesse allow every City to have a Bishop of its owne What hath Doctor Forbesse now gained by maintaining that the bounds of a Presbyterie and of a Diocesse were all one They in the Netherlâ—nds sometime call their Presbyteries Diocaeses and many of our Presbyteries are greater then were Diocesses of old Wee conclude there was anciently a Presbytery in every City which did indeede choose one of their number to preside among them and to lay on hands in name of the rest and hee was called the Bishop wherein they did more trust the deceiveable goodnesse of their owne intentions then advert to the rule of the Word of God These things premitted I come now to that which is principally intended viz. by what warrant and quâ— jure the Classicall Presbyterie among us made up out of many neighbouring congregations should be the ordinary Court of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction at least in all matters of highest importance which doe concerne either all or any of those congregations For resolution hereof we must understand 1. That causes common to many congregations ought not to be judged by any one of them but by the greater Presbytery common to them all 2. It is to bee supposed that particular congregations at least the farre greatest part of them have not in their proper Elderships so many men of sufficient abilities as are requisite in judging and determining the cases of the examination of Ministers of ordination deposition excommunication and the like 3. When one appealeth from a particular Eldership out of perswasion that hee is wronged by the sentence thereof or when that Eldership finding its owne insufficiency for determining some difficult causes resolveth to referre the same into a higher Court reason would that there should be an ordinary Court of a Classicall Presbytery to receive such appellations or references 4. Congregations which lye neare together ought all as one to keep unity and conformity in Church policy and government neither ought one of them be permitted to doe an
matters of importance which are proper unto the same This the Prelacy did not regard 6. Presbyteries and Synods doe not which the Prelats did imperiously and by their sole arbitrement domineer over congregations for their power is directive only ministeriall and limited by the Lawes of God and Nature and the lawdable Ecclesiasticall Lawes received and acknowledged by the congregations themselves 7. Experience hath shewed us Presbyteriall and Synodicall government to bee not only compatible with but most conduceable for the supportment and comfort of congregations whereas Episcopall government draweth ever after it mâ—lam caâ—dâ—m and a generall grievance of the Churches Some other objections there are for obviating whereof I shall permit and explane a distinction which shall serve to answer them all We may consider a visible Church either metaphysically or politically It is one thing to consider men as living creatures endued with reason another thing to consider them as Magistrates masters fathers children servants c. So is it one thing to consider a visible Church as a society of men and women separated from the blinde world by divine vocation and professing together the Gospell of Jesus Christ. Another thing to consider it as a political body in which the power of Spirituall government and Jurisdiction is exercised some governing and some governed These are very different considerations for first a visible Church being taken entitatively or metaphysically her members doe ordinarily communicate together in those holy things which fall under the power of order which I may call sacra mistica but being taken politically her members communicate together in such holy things as fall within the compasse of the power of Jurisdiction which I may call sacra politica Secondly Infants under age being initiated in Baptisme are actually members of the Church in the former consideration but potentially only in the latter for they neither governe nor yet have the use of reason to bee subject and obedient to those that doe governe Thirdly one must necessarily bee a member of the Church metaphysically beâ—ore he can be a member of the Church politically but not contrariwise Fourthly many visible Churches have sometimes beene and may bee without Officers and so without Ecclesiasticall government and exercise of Jurisdiction for that time yet still retaining the Essence of true visible Churches whereas a Church which never yet had any Officers ordained therein of which kinde there have beene many at the first conversion of a Nation to the Gospell or which hath losed all her Officers by death or persecution is not for that time an Ecclesiasticall Republicke nor can bee such till she have Officers This if they had observed who have taken so great paines to prove that there hath beene and may bee a Church without Officers it should happily have made them thinke their labour lâ—st It might also have taught Henry Iacob to distinguish betweene a Church visible and a Church ministeriall or politicall and not to understand these three termes to be all one as he doth in his Lâ—tter bearing date the 4. of September 1611. pag. 9. Fiftly my being a member of any one visible Church metaphysically giveth me right and title to communicate with another visible Church where for the time I am in sacris misticis such as the word prayer c. But my being a member of any one visible Church politically doth not give me right and title to communicate with another visible Church where for the time I am in sacris politicis such as ordination deposition excommunication c. Hereunto doth Master Robinson assent in these words As a man once baptized is alwaies baptised so is he in all places and Churâ—hes where hee comes as a baptized person to enjoy the common benefits of his baptisme and to discharge the common duties which depend upon it But a Pastor is not a Pastor in every Church where hee comes upon occâ—sion neither can he require in any other Church saving that one over which the holy Ghost hath set him that obedience maintainance and other respects which is due from the officers to the people neither stands he charged with that ministery and service which is due to the people from the officers The like he would have said of an Elder or a Deacon Now this distinction shall serve to answer the obiections following Object Every Christian congregation is a compleat body Ecclesiasticall having all the parts and members and all Church officers which Christ hath instituted therefore every congrgation hath the full and absolute power of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction Answ. Every Christian congregation is a compleate Church or body of Christ metaphysically that is hath the compleate Essence of a true visible Church yet every such congregation is not a compleate Ecclesiasticall Republicke except in some certaine cases whereof wee have spoken Chap. 2. And further we answer that this objection is alledged to prove that 2 or 3 gathered together in the name of Christ have immediately under Christ the full power of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction but sure I am that two or three gathered together in the name of Christ are not a compleate Ecclesiasticall body having all the members and officers which Christ hath instituted for they themselves hold that in every Christian congregation by Christs institution there ought to be at least five Officers and when those five shall be had there must bee also a certaine number of Christian people to bee governed and served by them So that their Argument doth not conclude that which they propose to prove Object They who have received Christ have received with him power and right to enjoy him though all the world bee against it in all the meanes and ordinances by which hee doth communicate himselfe unto the Church But every company of faithfull people if they be but two or three have received Christ therefore every such company c. Answ. If by the receiving of Christ they meane the receiving of Christ on his throne or the receiving of him in his ordinance of Church government then wee deny their Assumption for every company of faithfull people is not a Church politically as wee have shewed already Indeed every company of faithfull people who have received Christ in this manner hath right and title to enjoy him in all his politicall ordinances yet not independently but by a certaine order and subordination But if by the receiving of Christ they meane receiving of him to salvation or receiving of him by his Word and Spirit wee grant that not onely every company of faithfull people but every particular Christian hath right and title to enjoy him in the mystical ordinances of the Word Prayer c. as often as the same can be had yea further hath right and title to the fruit and benefit of Ecclesiasticall jurisdicton the exercise whereof is committed by Christ to the officers of the Church Intuitu Ecclesiae tanquam finis But that every company of faithfull people
who have received Christ to salvation hath right and title to enjoy him in his politicall ordinances by their own exercising of all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and that independently this is more then either hath been or can be proved Object The union betwixt Christ and his Church is as strait and immediate as the union betwixt the Vine and the Branches betwixt the Head and the Body betwixt the Husband the Wife Therefore every true Church of Christ hath direct immediate interest in and title to Christ himself the whole new Testament and every ordinance of it Answ. The strait union betwixt Christ and the Church expressed by these comparisons cannot bee understood of the Church taken politically for then the union betwixt Christ and the Church might be dissolved as often as the Church ceaseth to bee ordered and governed as an Ecclesiastical Republick It is therefore to be understood either of the invisible Church or at most of the visible Church taken metaphysically or entitatively But I adde withall it is to be likewise understood of every faithfull Christian so that not onely every true Church but every true member thereof by vertue of this union hath direct and immediate title to Christ and to the benefit of all his ordinances for his edification and salvation This is all which the Argument can conclude and it maketh nothing against us Object If all things be the Churches even the Ministers themselves yea though they be Paul Cephas and Apollos then may every Church use and enjoy all things immediately under Christ. But the first is true 1 Cor. 3.24 Therefore c. Answ. Neither can this prove any thing against us for when the Apostle saith All things are yours whether Paul c. He is to bee understood not onely collectively of the Church but distributively of every beleever who hath right to the comfortable enjoyment and benefit of these things so farre as they concerne his salvation And in like manner I may say to the members of any particular congregation All things are yours whether Sessions or Presbyteris or Provinciall or Generall Assemblies And what wonder God is our Father Christ our elder brother the holy Ghost our Comforter the Angels our keepers heaven our inheritance It is therefore no strange thing to heare that as the supreame civill power so the supreame Ecclesiasticall power is appointed of God in order to our good and benefit that it be not a tyranny for hurt but a ministery for help These are the objections alledged for the independent and absolute power of congregations But this is not all Some seeme to make use of our own weapons against us making objection from the forme of the Jewish Church which wee take for a plat-forme They say that the Synagogues of the Jewes were not as the particular Churches are now for they were not entire Churches of themselves but members of the nationall Church neither could they have the use of the most solemne parts of Gods worship as were then the sacrifices That the whole nation of the Jewes was one Church having reference to one Temple one high Priest one Altar it being impossible that the whole body of a Nation should in the entire and personal parts meet and communicate together in the holy things of God the Lord so disposed and ordered that that communion should bee had after a manner and in a sort and that was by way of representation for in the Temple was daily sacrifice offered for the whole nationall Church So the names of the twelve Tribes upon the shoulders of the Ephod and upon the Breast-plate and the twelve loaves of Shew bread were for Israel signes of remembrance before the Lord. That now the Church consisteth not as then of a Nation but of particular Assemblies ordinarily communicating together in all the Churches holy things whence it commeth that there are no representative Churches now the foundation thereof which is the necessary absence of the Church which is represented being taken away in the new Testament That besides all this if wee take the representative Church at Jerusalem for a paterne then as there not onely hard causes were opened and declared according to the Law but also the sacrifices daily offered and the most solemne service performed without the presence of the body of the Church so now in the representative Churches such as Presbyteries and Synods consisting of Officers alone there must be not onely the use of jurisdiction but the Word and Sacraments whether people bee present or not for how can there be a power in the Church of Officers for the use of one solemne ordinance out of the communion of the body and not of another Answ. 1. To set aside the sacrifices other ceremonial worship performed at Jerusalem the Synagogues among the Jewes had Gods morall worship ordinarily therein as Prayer and the reading expounding of the Scriptures 2. Whatsoever the Synagogues had or whatsoever they wanted of the worship of God they had an Ecclesiasticall Consistory and a certaine order of Church government else how shall we understand the excommunication or casting out of the Synagogue the Rulers of the Synagogue and the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue of which things we have before spoken I will not here dispute whether every sin among the Jewes was either appointed to be punished capitally or else to bee expiated by sacrifices but put the case it were so this proveth that no excommunication or Ecclesiasticall censure was not then necessary for beside the detriment of the Common-wealth by the violation of the Law which was punishable by death and beside the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and guiltinesse before God the expiation whereof by the death of Christ was prefigured in the sacrifices there was a third thing in publike sinnes which was punishable by spirituall censures and that was the scandall of the Church which could not be taken away by the oblations of the delinquent but rather made worse thereby even as now a publike offender doth not take away but rather increase the scandall of the Church by his joyning in the acts of Gods worship so long as there is no Ecclesiasticall censure imposed upon him neither yet to speake properly was the scandall of publike offences punishable by bodily punishments but the Church being a politicall body had her owne Lawes and her owne censures no lesse then the Common-wealth 3. As the Synagogues were particular Churches politically so all of them collectively were one Nationall Church politically governed by one supreame Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim which is the representative wee meant of in our Argument 4. But if we take the Nationall Church of the Jewes metaphysically there was no representative thereof unlesse it were all the males who came thrice in the yeare to Ierusalem The daily offering of Sacrifices was not by a representative Church but by the Priests and though there were twelve loaves of Shewbread before
of the Church of Ephesus it iâ— said that Paul kneeled down and praied with them all and they all wept sore Acts 20.36.37 compared with verse 28. Here is some good number imported To the Angell of the Church of Smyrna that is to the Pastors thereof collectively taken Christ saith The Divell shall cast some of you into prison Revel 2.10 which if not only yet principally is spoken to the Pastors though for the benefit of that whole Church This is more plaine of the Church of Thyatira verse 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnto you I say to the rest in Thyatira as if he would say saith Pareus Tibi â—spicopo cum collegis reliquo coetui dico Paul writeth to the Bishop at Philippi Phil. 1.1 and notwithstanding that there was already a certaine number of Bishops or Pastors in that City yet the Apostle thought it necessary to send unto them Epaphroditus also Phil. 2.25 being shortly thereafter to send unto them Timotheus verse 19. yea to come himselfe verse 24. so that there was no scarcity of labourers in that harvest Epaphras and Archippus were Pastors to the Church at Colosse and who besides we cannot tell but Paul sent unto them also Tychicus and Onesimuâ— Col. 4.7.9 Now touching the third proposition no man who understandeth will imagine that the multitude of Christians within one of those great Cities was divided into as many parishes as there were meeting places for worship It is a point of controversie who did beginne the division of parishes but whosoever it was whether Evaristus or Higinus or Dionysius certaine it is that it was not so from the beginning I meane in the daies of the Apostles for then it was all one to say in every City or to say in every Church That which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 1.5 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 14.22 This is acknowledged by all Anti-prelaticall writers so farre as I know and by the Prelaticall writers also The last proposition as it hath not beene denyed by any so it is sufficiently proved by the former for that which made the multitude of Christians within one City to be one Church was their union under and their subjection unto the same Church governement and governours A multitude may bee one Church though they doe not meete together into one place for the worship of God for example it may fall forth that a congregation cannot meet together into one but into divers places and this may continue so for some yeares together either by reason of persecution or by meanes of the plague or because they have not such a large parish-Church as may containe them all so that a part of them must meete in some other place but a multitude cannot be one Church unlesse they communicate in the same Church government and under the same Governours by one Church I meane one Ecclesiasticall Republike even as the like union under civill government and governours maketh one corporation when the Apostle speaketh to all the Bishops of the Church of Ephesus hee exhorteth them all to take heed to all the flocke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over which the holy Ghost had made them overseers so that the whole was governed by the common counsell and advice of the Elders as Hierome speaketh for the same reason we say not the Churches but the Church of Amsterdam because all the Pastors and Elders have the charge and governement of the whole From all which hath beene said I inferre this Corollary That in the times of the Apostles the Presbytery which was the ordinary Court of Iurisdiction which did ordaine depose excommunicate c. did consist of so many Pastors and Elders as could with conveniency meete ordinarily together which is a paterne and warrant for our Classicall Presbyteries I confesse there might be in some townes no greater number of Christians then did meet together in one place notwithstanding whereof the Pastor or Pastors and Elders of that congregation might and did manage the government of the same and exercise jurisdiction therein I confesse also that in those Cities wherein there was a greater number of Christians then could meet together into one place for the worship of God the Presbytery did consist of the Pastors and Elders within such a City for it cannot be proved that there were at that time any Christian congregations in Landward Villages the persecution forcing Christians to choose the shelter of Cities for which reason many are of opinion that the Infidells in those daies were called Pagani because they alone dwelt in Pagis and if there had beene any such adjacent to Cities we must thinke the same should have beene subject to the common Presbytery their owne Pastors and Elders being a part thereof Howsoever it cannot be called in question that the Presbytery in the Apostolicall Churches was made up of as many as could conveniently meete together for managing the ordinary matters of Jurisdiction and Church-government The Pastors and Elders of divers Cities could not conveniently have such ordinary meetings especially in the time of persecution only the Pastors and Elders within one City had such conveniency And so to conclude we doe not forsake but follow the paterne when we joyne together a number of Pastors and Elders out of the congregations in a convenient circuit to make up a common Presbytery which hath power and authority to governe those congregations for if the Presbytery which we find in those Cities wherein the Apostles planted Churches bee a sure paterne for our Classicall Presbyteries as wee have proved it to bee then it followeth undeniably that the authority of Church-government of excommunication ordination c. which did belong to that Primitive Presbytery doth also belong to those our Classicall or greater Presbyteries CHAP. IV. Of the authority of Synods Provinciall and Nationall TOuching Synods I shall first shew what their power is and thereafter give arguments for the same The power of Jurisdiction which wee ascribe unto Synods is the same in nature and kinde with that which belongeth to Presbyteries but with this difference that Presbyteries doe exercise it in an ordinary way and in matters proper to the congregations within their circuit Synods doe exercise this power in matters which are common to a whole province or nation or if in matters proper to the bounds of one Presbytery it is in an extraordinary way that is to say when either Presbytery hath erred in the managing of their owne matters or when such things are transferred to the Synod from the Presbytery whether it be by appellation or by reference The power of Jurisdiction whereof I speake is threefold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So it is distinguished by our writers and all these three doe in manner foresaid belong unto Synods In respect of Articles of faith or worship a Synod is Iudex or Testis In respect of externall order and policie in circumstances a contriver of a
Canon or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In respect of heresie schisme obstinacie contempt and scandall Vindex not by any externall coactive power which is peculiar to the Magistrate but by spirituall censures The dogmaticke power of a Synod is not a power to make new Articles of faith nor new duties and parts of divine worship but a power to apply and interpret those Articles of faith and duties of worship which God hath set before us in his written Word and to declare the same to be inconsistent with emergent heresies and errours To this purpose it is that the Apostle calleth the Church the pillar and ground of truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may be expounded either in sensu forensi the Church is the publicke witnesse notifier and keeper of truth even as in Courts and places of judgement there are pillars to which the Edicts of Magistrates are affixed that people may have notice thereof or in sensu architectonico as the Church by her faith is built upon Christ or which is all one upon the doctrine and truth of Christ contained in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles and leaneth thereto so by her Ministery she upholdeth under-propeth and conserveth this same truth lest as the Prophet speaketh Truth fall in the streets perish among men Truth standeth fast in the Church and is kept firme while it is professed preached propugned and maintained against all contrary errour and heresie In the same sense saith the Apostle that unto the Jewish Church were committed the Oracles of God by them to be kept interpreted propagated c. By the Diatakticke power a Synod may institute restore or change according to the condition and exigence of the Church the externall circumstances in the worship of God and Ecclesiasticall discipline I meane those circumstances which are common both to civill and sacred Societies the conveniencie whereof is determinable by the light of Nature alwayes observing the generall rules of the Word which commandeth that all bee done to the glory of God that all bee done to edifying that all bee done in order and decencie that we give none offence that wee support the weake that we give no place to the enemies of the truth nor symbolize with Idolaters c. Now for avoiding disorder and disconformity in a Nation professing one Religion it is fit that Nationall Synods give certaine directions and rules even concerning these rites and circumstances not having therein an Arbitrary or Autocratorke power but being alwayes tied to follow the rules foresaid The Criticke power of a Synod is not a Lordly imperious dominiering over the flocke of Christ which is not to bee ruled with force and cruelty but it is the power of spirituall censures as excommunication deposition and the like most necessary for the repressing of heresie errour obstinacie in wickednesse and scandals otherwise incorrigible Without this power schismes and offences could not bee cured but should the more increase whileas liberty is left to heretickes schismatickes and obstinate persons without any censure to pester and disturb a whole Nation without any regard to the constitutions of a Nationall Synod But may one say if the Decrees of a Synod concerning matters of Faith or Worship may and ought to bee examined by the sure rule of the word of God and onely to be received when they doe agree therewith and if also the constitutions of a Synod in externall circumstances doe not binde except ex aquo bono and propter justas mandandi causas or as Divines speak in casu scandali contemptus and not for the meere will or authority of a Synod and if therefore all Christians are by the private judgement of Christian discretion following the light of Gods Word and Spirit to try and examine all decrees and constitutions of any Synod whatsoever to know whether they may lawfully receive the same as our Divines maintaine and prove against Papists If these things be so it may seeme contrary to Christian liberty and to the Doctrine of Protestant Writers that Synods should exercise the foresaid Criticke power or inflict any spirituall censures at least upon those who professe that after examination of the decrees or constitutions they cannot bee perswaded of the lawfulnesse of the same Ans. 1. Our Divines by those their tenents meane not to open a doore to disobedience and contempt of the ordinances of a Synod but onely to oppugne the Popish errour concerning the binding power of Ecclesiasticall lawes by the sole will and naked authority of the law-maker that Christian people ought not to seek any further reason or motive of obedience 2. A Synod must ever put a difference betwixt those who out of a reall scruple of conscience doe in a modest and peaceable way refuse obedience to their ordinances still using the meanes of their beter information those who contemptuously or factiously disobey the same labouring with all their might to strengthen themselves in their errour and to perswade others to be of their minde 3. This objection doth militate no lesse against Ecclesiasticall censures in a particular congregation then in a Nationall Synod And they who doe at all approve of Church censures to be inflicted upon the contemptuous and obstinate shall put in our mouthes an answer to objections of this kinde CHAP. V. The first Argument for the authority of Synods and the subordination of Presbyteries thereto taken from the light of nature HAving now described the power of particular Elderships which we call Sessions of Classicall Presbyteries and of Synods Provinciall and Nationall it remaineth to confirme by Arguments the subordination and subjection of the particular Elderships to the Classicall or common Presbytery of both to the Provinciall Synod and of all these to the Nationall Assembly So that every one may perceive what reason the Church of Scotland hath to give unto the higher Ecclesiasticall Courts authority over the lower I might insist long enough both in the Testimonies of Protestant Writers and in the examples of the reformed Churches abroad as also in the examples of all the ancient Churches all speaking for this authority of Synods But these I shall passe because I know Arguments from Scripture and reason are required and such we have to give First of all I argue from the very light law of nature That same light of nature which hath taught our Common-wealth beside the Magistrates and Councells of particular Burghs to constitute higher Courts for whole Shires Baliveries Stuartries Regalities and above all these the supreame Court of Parliament to governe the whole Nation hath also taught our Church to constitute Synods Provinciall and Nationall with power and authority above Presbyteries Wee are farre from their minde who would make Policy the Mistresse and Religion the Handmaid and would have the government of the Church conformed to the government of the State as the fittest paterne But this we say in all such