him all spirituall headship over the Church to the King and Burbillus also But Henric. Salcobrigiensis calleth the King primatem ecclesiae Anglicanae the Primate of the Church of England and â—ges oleo sacro uncti capaces sunt jurisdictionis spiritualis because they are annointed with holy oyle therefore are they capable of spirituall jurisdiction also may saith hee creat propria autoritate by his owne authoritie create Bishops and dâ—prive them See what Calderwood hath said and excerped out of the writings of these men the King as King 1. convocateth Synods 2. defineth ecclesiasticall canons 3. giveth to them the power of an ecclesiasticall Law 4. executeth Church Canons 5. appointeth commissioners who in the Kings authoritie and name may try heresies and errors in doctrine punish non-conformitie to Popish ceremonies may confine imprison banish Ministers 6. descerne excommunication and all Church censures and use both the swords 7. relax from the power and censures of all ecclesiastick Lawes give dispensations annull the censures of the Church upon causes knowne to them give dispensations against Canons unite or separate Parish Churches or diocesan Churches and by a mixt power partly coactive and civill partly of jurisdiction and spirituall the King may doe in foro externo in the externall court of Church discipline all and every act of discipline except hee cannot preach baptize or excommunicate And whereas Cartwright saith when a lawfull Minister shall agree upon an unlawfull thing the Prince ought to stay it and if Church ministers shew themselves obstinate and will not bee advised by the Prince they prove themselves to be an unlawfull Ministery and such as the Prince is to punish with the sword O but saith hee the author of the Survey how shall the Prince helpe the matter shall be compell them to conveene in a Synod and retract their mind but they will not doe this 2. By what authoritie shall the Prince doe this even by extraordinary authority even by the same right that David did eate of the Shew-bread if by ordinary authority the Prince would doe it yet doe you resist that authority also Answ. Though the Prince had not externall force to compell Church-men to decree in their Synods things equall holy juâ— and necessary yet it followeth not that the King as King hath not Gods right and lawfull power to command and injoyne them to doe their dutie force and Law differ much as morall and physicall power differ much 2. If they decree things good lawfull and necessary the Prince hath a power given him of God to ratifie confirme and approve these by his civill sanction but hee hath no power ordinary to infringe or evert what they have decreed 3. And if the Church bee altogether uncorrigible and apostate then wee say as followeth 7. Conclution When the representative Church is universally apostaticall then may the Prince use the helpe of the Church essentiall of found beleevers for a reformation and if they also bee apostatick which cannot be except the Lord utterly have removed his candlestick wee see not what hee can doe but heare witnesse against them but if there bee any secret seeker of God in whose persons the essence of a true Church is conserved The King by a royall power and the Law of charitie is oblieged to reforme the land as the godly Kings with a blessed successe have hitherto done Asa Jâ—siah Jehoshaphat 〈◊〉 in which case the power of reformation and of performing many acts of due belonging to the Church officers are warrantably performed by the King as in a diseased body in an extraordinary manner power recurreth from the members to the â—â—â—â—tick head and Christian Prince who both as a King 〈◊〉 â—â— in an authoritative way is oblieged to do more then ordâ—â—â—y and as a Christian member of the Church in a charitative and common way is to care for the whole body 8. Conclusion The influence of the Princes regall power in making constitutions is neither solitary as if the Prince his 〈…〉 could doe it nor is it 2. collaterall as if the Prince and Church with joynt concurrence of divers powers did it nor is 3. as some flatterers have said so eminently spirituall as the consultation and counsell of Pastors for light onely hath influence in Churches Canons but the Princes power hath onely the power to designe so as the Canon hath from the Prince the power of a Law in respect of us The Kings influence in Church Canons as wee thinke is as a Christian antecedent to exhort that the Lord Jesus bee served 2. concomitant as a member of the Church to give a joynt suffrage with the Synod 3. consequent as a King to adde his regall sanction to that which is decreed by the Church according to Gods Word or otherwise to punish what is done amisse Now that the Prince as a solitary cause his alone defineth Church matters and without the Church and that by his ordinary Kingly power wanteth all warrant of the Word of God 2. The King might have given out that constitution Act. 15. It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and to us which in reason is due to the ministeriall function for these are called Act. 16. 4. the decrees of the Apostles and Elders not the decrees of the King or Emperour either by Law or fact 3. Christ ascending to heaven gave officers requisite for the gathering of his Church and the edification of the body of Christ but amongst these in no place we finde the King 4. If this bee true heathen Kings have right to make Church-Canons though they bee not able and bee not members of the Christian Church and so without and not to bee judged by the Church nor in any case censured Matth. 18. 17. 1. Cor. 5. 11. and this directly is a King Pope who giveth Lawes by a Kingly power to the Church and yet cannot bee judged by the Church Burhillus and Thomson acknowledge that a Heathen King is primat and head of the Church and must hee not then have power aciu primo to make Lawes and to feede the flocke by externall government But Lancel Andreas Biship of Ely Tortura torti saith that a heathen King hath a temporall Kingly power without any relation to a Church power and when hee is made of a Heathen King a Christian King bee acquireth a new power But the question is if this new power be a new kingly power or if it be a power Christian to use rightly his former kingly power if the first bee true then 1. as learned Voetius and good reason saith hee was not a King before hee was a Christian for the essence of the Kingly power standeth in an indivisible point and the essence of things admit not of degrees 2. Then should hee bee crowned over againe and called of God to bee a Christian King and so hee was not a King before which is against Scripture for Nebucâ—adnezzar was to bee obeyed
act of justice at the direction of a Minister commanding him in Gods name to execute judgement impartially yet the King doth not an act of justice in the name and authority of the Church And that is true which Beâ—anus saith What the instrument doth the principall cause may do where the Vicar or Deputy and the principall substitutâ—r of the Vicar are both civill persons or are both Ecclesiasticall persons for in a large and unproper sense the nurse is a sort of deputy under the nurse father the Father may take care that the nurse give milke and wholsom milke to his child yet cannot the Father give milke himself The King may take care actu imperato as one intending in a Kingly way that Christs body bee edifyed that the Priests and Prophets feed with knowledge the Church and sister of Christ and so are the Priests under the King and at his command to feed and to feed with wholsome food the flocke and in obedience to the King all are to do their duty and his care is universall over all and his end universall That which is the end of Pastors Doctors Elders Deacons Lawyers Judges c. is in an universall intention the Kings end even Gods honor by pâ—â—curing in a regall way that all do their duty in keeping the two Tables of the Law and so is hee the great politick wheel moving by his royall motions all the under wheeles toward that same end yet cannot the King without sinne and being like a Bird wandring from her nest do that which is properly Pastorall so that the Office is not subordinate to him but immediately from God yet are the operations of the Office and to Preach tali modo diligently sound Doctrine subordinate to him but in a generall and universall way as hee is a kingly mover of all to keep the two Tables of the Law Neither did the King as Suarez saith one and the same way appoint both the High Priest and the civill Judge And Cajetan saith he decerneth the two chiefe heads of Church and Common-wealth but hee appointed not both for God appointed Amariah to bee High Priest and not the King but here is nothing to prove the Kings headship Asa reformed the Church and renewed the Covenant Ezekiaâ— reformed Religion also and brake in peeces the Brazen Serpent and all these in the case of universall apostasie and the corruption of the Priest-hood did reforme the Lords house breake in peeces graven Images but all this giveth to them no mixt Ecclesiasticall power of making Canons of ordaining and depriving Pastors Whereas some object That the care both of temporall good and spirituall good belongeth to the Magistrate therefore hee must have a power to make Church Laws See Pareus For his care cannot bee supreme if hee must rule at the nod and beck of Church-men I Answer the connexion is weak hee who hath the care of both the temporall and spirituall good of the people hee hath a nomothetick power to procure both these two goods it followeth no way for then might hee have a power in his own person to Preach and administrate the Sacraments this power procureth the spirituall good but such as is the care such is the power the care is politick and civill Ergo the power to procure the spirituall good must bee politick and civill 2. Neither is the King to do all at the nod and direction of the Priesthood blindly and without examination That is the blind doctrine of Papists wee hold that hee hath a regall power to examine if the Decrees of the Church bee just Orthodox and tend to edification For hee is the Minister of God for good and to take vengeance on evill doing And there is no just obligation to sinne hee is not obliged to punish with the sword well-doing but evill doing and the Church can oblige the Magistrate to do nothing but that which in case there were no Church Law and in case of the Churches erring hee should doe 2. They object He to whom every soule is subject he hath a power to make Church Laws about all good but all and every soule without exception of Apostles or Church-men is subject to the civill Magistrate Ergo. The proposition is proved from the Law of relatives for he to 〈◊〉 we are subject he may give Lawes unto us for our gâ—â—d See Pareus Answ. He to whom we are subject may give any Lawes or command any manner of way for our good I deny the proposition in that sense for then he might in the Pulpit preach the Commandements of God for our good He might give Laws under the paine of excommunication It is enough that he may give Laws by sanction and civill enacting of Church Laws and pressing us by the power of the Sword to doe our duty for the attaining of a spirituall good He to whom we are subject he may give Laws that is presse in a coactive way obedience to Laws that is most true but it proveth not a nomothetick power in the King 3. They object What ever agreeth to the Kingly power concerning the good of Subjects by the Law of Nations that doth farre more agreeth Kings by the Law of God For the Law of God doth not desir 〈…〉 â—e Law of Nations But by the law of Nations a care 〈◊〉 Religion belong th to the King for Religion by the Law of nature is indâ—â—ed and brought in by the Law of Nations As Cicero saith And therefore to a Christian Kingly power the care of Religion must be due Answer we grant all for a care in a civill and politick way belongeth to the Christian Prince but a care by any meane whatsoever by Preaching or by making Church Canons is not hence proved by no light of nature or Law of Nations in an ecclesiasticall care of Religion due to the Christian Prince but onely in a politick and civill way 4. All beleevers even private men may judge of Religion not onely by a judgement of apprehension but also of discretion to try what Religion is true and to be holden and what is false and to be rejected Ergo farre more may the Christian Magistrate definitively judge of Religion so he doe it by convenient meanes such as are sound and holy Divines and the rule of Gods word The consequence is proved because the faithfull Prince hath supreame power which is nâ—mothetick and a power to make Lawes Answer it is true all private beleevers may try the Spirits whether they be of God or not but hence we may as well conclude therefore Princes may preach and administer the Sacraments as therefore the Prince may define matters ecclesiasticall For a eivill coactive power giveth to no man an ecclesiasticall power except he be called thereunto as Aaron was 2. The meanes alleadged are the judgement of holy and pious Divines and the word of God but Moses whom they alleadge for a patterne of a civill ruler who
acquire to himselfe poâ—er over the Church of God Though the â—ight of presenting a man to benefice were a meere temporall thing yet because it removeth the libertie of a free election of the fittest pastor as Origen saith it cannot bee lawfull but it is not a temporall or civill right but a spirituall right though wee should grant that the people have a free voyce in choosing and that the patron were oblieged to present to the benefice the man onely whom the people hath freely chosen and whom the Elders by imposition of hands have ordained 1. Because the Pastors hath right to the benefice as the workeman is worthy of his hire and hee hath a divine right thereunto by Gods Law 1 Cor. 9. 8 9. c. Gal. 6 6. Matth. 10. 10. Ergo if the patron give any right to the Pastor to the benefice it must bee a spirituall right If it bee said hee may give him a civill right before men that according to the Lawes of the Commonwealth hee may legally brook and injoy the benefice this is but a shift for the civill right before men is essentially founded upon the Law of God that saith the workeman is worthy of his hire and it is that fame right really that the Word of God speaketh of now by no Word of God hath the Patron a power to put the Preacher in that case that hee shall bee worthy of his wages for hee being called chosen as Pastor hee hath this spirituall right not of one but of the whole Church 2. It is true Papists seeme to bee divided in judgements in this whether the right of patronage bee a temporall or a spirituall power for some Canonists as wee may see in Abb. decius and Rubio and the Glosse saith it is partly temporall partly spirituall Others say it is a spirituall power as Anton. de Butr. and Andr. Barbat and Suarez and whereas Papists doe teach that the Church may lawfully give a right of presenting to Church benefices even to those who are not Church men the power must bee ecclesiasticall and spirituall and cannot bee temporall also Suarez saith that the right of patronage may bee the matter of Simâ—ny when it is â—â—ld for mâ—ney Ergo they thinke it an holy and spirituall power It is true the Bishop of Spalato calleth it a temporall power which is in the hand of the Prince but there is neither reason nor Law why it can bee called a temporall power due to a man seeing the patron hath amongst us a power to present and name one man whom he conceiveth to be qualified for wee find the nomination of a list or the seeking out of men fit for the holy ministry some times ascribed to the Church as Act. 1 23. Then they appointed two Joseph called Barsabas who was surnam d Jusâ—us and Matthias which words may well bee referred to the eleven Apostles and so they nominated men or to the Church of beleevers and so though it bee not an authoritative action it is an ecclesiasticall action and belongeth to the Church as the Church and so to no Patron and the looking out of seven men to be presented as fit to bee ordained Deacons is expresly given to the Church of beleevers Act. 6. 3. Wherefore Brethren looke yee out amongst you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seven men of honest report and sometimes the Apostles doe nominate men for the ministery but never doth the holy Ghost mention a Patron But if the thing it selfe say they hee necessary then is the office not unlawfull But it is most necessary that some one or more eminent and powerfull men should have power to see that the Church goods bee not delapidated Answ. It is a part of the Magistrates office with his accumulative power whereby hee seeth that every one doe their dutie to take care that vulturs and sacrilegious devourers of Church livings bee punished and the Church themselves are to censure all guiltie of Simony or delapidation of the rents of the Church as may bee gathered by due analogie from Peters punishing with death the sacriledge of Ananias and Saphira and the Simony of Simon Magus 2. The ancient Church â—ooke care of dividing of the Church rent very carefully in foure parts one was given to the Pastor who was not to imploy â—ents of the Church upon Horses and Coaches and conquering Baronies and Lordships to their sonnes as our idle belleys were in custome to doe but the Bishop was to entertaine Hospitalls and to feed the poore to take care of bridges repâ—ring of Churches so as Ambrose saith what ever is the Biships it is the poores a second part was given to the Elders and Deacons a third part was for the repairing of Churches and a fourth part for Hospitalls for poore and strangers this distribution with some other order is made if wee beleeve Papists in a Synod at Rome under Silvester the first though Socrates Theodoret Sozomen and others well versed in antiquitie speake nothing of this Synod but you may see this cleare in Synodo Bracarensi in Aventinus in Gregorius so there is no need of a Patron nor was there any in the Apostolick Church Deacons were to take care for tables and the goods of the poore no reason that men seeme more carefull for the good of the Church then Jesus Christ. 3. Though there bee a necessitie that the Church bee defended in her liberties yet is there no reason an office should be made thereof as the Canonists make it an office with a sort of stipend And therefore to make a Patron they require not onely the founding of a Church but also the building of the house upon his owne charges and the dotation of a maintenâ—nce for the Church and for this cause the Patrou hath a buriall place in the Church and if hee or his children become poore they are to be entertained of the Church rents and therefore they call it jus â—uti'e a gainefull power 2. It is jus bâ—norifioum hee hath power to nominate and present a man to the benefice of the vaiking Church 3. It is jus onerosum because hee is oblieged to defend the Church see theâ— Law for this so see also Calderwood Gerardus Suarez Anton. de dom arcb Spal Hâ—spinianus yet Justinianus himselfe forbiddeth that the Patron should present a man to the Bishop to bee examined and tryed and certainly this place and charge for the defending of the Church of Christ from injuries and wrongs 〈◊〉 Christ of want of foresight and providence who hath not appointed officers civill and eccleâ—â—asticall to take care of his Church for no power over the Church was ever given to builders of Synagogues and therefore a calling by the Patron is no more Christs way then a calling by the Prelate and his Chaplaine 2. Nor would the Church receive the ministers from Christ Jer. 2. 5. and the laying
may receive the Seales in another Congregation if he be recommended by Letters as a sound Professor to that other Congregation I Answer Recommendatory Letters can never give a Church-right to the Church-Priviledges of the Seales of the Covenant they doe but onely notifie manifest and declare the Church-right which the man had before Ergo either he cannot in any sort be capable of the Seales of the Covenant in another Congregation then his owne whereof he is an inchurched Member which destroyeth all communion of sister Churches or if he be capable of the Seales in another Congregation he was capable and hâ—d a Church-right in himselfe before he received reconimeâ—â—aâ—ory Letters yea these whom we recommend by Letters as â—it to partake of the Sacraments in another Congregation â—â— presuppose they have Church-right to the Seales in another Congregation visible then in their owne whereof they are members except our testimony be false Ergo before our recommendatory Letters the person of approved piety was a member of all the visible Churches about hoc ipso and by that same reason that he is a member of one visible Congregation yea Peter clearely insinuateth that all who have received the Holy Ghost are to be baptized Act. 8. 47. as Philip Act. 8. 37. and That if the Eunuch beleeved be might be baptized So that Faith to speake properly doth give us right to the Seales and to speake accurately a visible profession of faith doth not give a man right to the seales of grace but onely it doth notifie and d clare to the Church that the man hath right to the seales because he beleeveth and that the Church may lawfully give to him the seales and that profession is a condition required in the right receivers of the seales in an Ecclesiasticall way but faith giveth the right to these seales and because the faith of the beleever goeth with the beleever when he goeth to another visible congregation then his owne that faith giveth him right to the seales in all places and in all Congregations for faith giveth right to receive Christ Sacramentally not in one Congregation onely but in all and a visible profession doth as a condition notifie this faith and Church-right in all Congregations Ergo the man hath right in all Congregations as he hath right in a parishionall Church But our Brethren reply Peter might baptize Cornelius though he was no member of a visible Congregation because the Apostles being â—fficers in al Churches might dispense the Seales in all Churches but Ministers now are pastors onely of the determinaâ—e flocke over which the holy Ghost hath set them therefore they have not Citie Seales at their power to dispense to any other then to Citizens Answ. Peter his argument to Baptize is not from a temporall reason that endureth for a while but from a morall argument of perpetuall equitie and necessitie till Christs second comming He that beleeveth and hath received the holy Ghost is to be baptized But many out of Church-state and who are not members of a particular Congregation have received the Holy Ghost and doe beleeve being Christians of approved pietie we are to adde no restrictions or exceptions where God addeth none Non est distinguendum ubi lex non distinguit They that beleeve should receive the seales but not except they be in-Churched and members of a particular Congregation The proposition is Gods Word but the restriction or exception is not Gods Word 2. The Apostles though they were universall Pastors of the world yet teach us by word and practise who are to be admitted to the seales even to the supper those who do try and examine themselves and that to the end of the world 2. Our brethren say It is probable that Cornelius was in Church-state and the Eunuch comming to Jerusalem to worship argueth he was a proselyte and a member of the Jewish Church not yet dissolved Lydia and the jaylor were members of the Church of Philippi which Church communicated with Paul at the beginning of the Gospel Psal. 4. 15. at least it is probable that Lidia was a member of the Church of the Jewes Answ. It is hard to build a new Church government contrary to the doctrine of the reformed Churches upon probabilities 2. If Cornelius Lydia and others were members of the Jewish Church it was not a good consequence by our brethrens doctrine to make them members of a Christian Congregation without in-churching of them by your Church-oath for you make the constitution of the Jewish Church and ours different yea and as you teach all circumcised were members of the Jewish Church and had right to their Passeover but all circumcised are not meet to bee members of a Christian Church for many circumcised were Idolaters murtherers prophane moâ—keâ—s of God Esay 1. 13 14 15 16. Jer. 10. 7 8 9 10 11. Ezek 10. 6. 17. 18 9. And though the Church of Philippi was one of the 〈◊〉 Church 〈◊〉 communicated with Paul yet was there no Christian Church of Elders and people there when Lydia was converted for Acts 16. 13. in the place where prayer was wont to be made on the Sabbath day none heard Paul preach but some women Ergo there could not be a Christian Church there and it is certaine the jaylor before was a persecutor and no member of a Christian Church They say Abraham and his seede were not circumcised till God called him into Church-Covenant and so into Church-state and there is the same reason and use of baptisme as of circumcision If the argument taken for baptizing of infants be good why may we not inserre a necessitie of Church-membership before baptisme as of Church membership before circumcision So the Apologie saith It cannot be proved that baptisme was imposed upon all beleevers as such no more then it can be proved that circumcision was imposed upon all beleevers as such and Baptisme is no more now necessary to a beleever whose calling or another strong hand of Gods providence will not suffer to live in Church fellowship with Gods people then circumcision was necessary to Melchisedeâ—k Job or others whom the hand of God detained from Church-fellowship with the posteritie of Abraham yea circumcision and the Passeover seeing they were administrated in private houses might more conveniently be administrated to persons not in Church-state nor Baptisme and the Lords Supper can be administrated so in respect they are seales given to a Church body in an assembly 1 Cor. 10. 17. and 12. 13. Answ. Abraham Sarah and the Soules they had gotten in Charran were in Church-state obeyed God built an Altar Gen. 12. 2 3 4. before the Church Covenant which you speake of Chap. 17. and it is denyed that that supposed oath of the Covenant made them a Church So we see no necessitie of Church-membership to one single Congregation before either circumcision or baptisme for baptisme is a seale of our entry into the visible Church as I shall prove 2.
answerable for soules Heb. 13. 18. 4. It is tyrannicall because it putteth power into the Magistrates hand to take from the Church that inbred and inâ—rinsecall power of externall and visible government over her selfe and members which all civill incorporations by instinct of nature have and the Magistrate as such not being a member of the Church hath a headship even being a heathen Magistrate over the redeemed body of Christ. 2. By this reason the Lord Jesus as King hath no Pastors in his name to use the â—â—ves of his kingdom by binding and loosing for discipline being an externall thing say they is not a part of Christs kingly power but the King as Christs civill vicar hath this power but I say all acts of Christ as hee is efficacious by the Gospel to gaine soules are acts of Christ as powerfull by the Scepter of his Word and those who are his instruments to exercise these acts are subordined to him as King of the Church but Church-men by an externall ecclesiasticall power delivering to Satan and externally and visibly casting out of the Church that the spirit may bee saved in the day of the Lord are instruments subordined to Christ who is efficacious to save spirits by excommunication and to gaine soules by rebukes Gregorius Magnus saith those to whom Christ hath given the Keyes of his kingdome by these hee judgeth and why is this word the word of his kingdome the Scepter of his kingdome the sword that commeth out of his mouth by which hee governeth his subjects and subdueth nations so called but because Christs kingly power is with those whom hee hath made dispensators of his Word 9. Conclusion Nor hath the King power of ordaining Pastors or depriving them or of excommunication 1. All these are acts of spirituall and ecclesiasticall power 1 Tim. 3. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. Act. 6. 6. Act. 13. 3. Act. 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 6. and flow from the power of the keyes given by Christ to his Apostles and their successors Matth. 28. 18 19 20. Mark 16. 14 15 16. Joh. 20. 21 22 23. Hence I argue to whom Christ hath given out his power as King of the Church Matth. 28. 18 19. power of the keyes Matth. 18. 18. Matth. 16. 19. and a commandement to lay hands and ordaine qualified men for the ministry and those who by the holy Ghosts direction practised that power by ordaining of Elders these onely have right to ordaine Elders and their successors after them but Apostles and their successors onely are those to whom Christ gave that power and who exercised that power as the places prove 2. Ordination and election both in the primitive Church of the Apostles was done by the Church and consent of the multitude Act. 1. Act. 6. 2 3 4. 5 6 c. but the civill Magistrate is neither the Church nor the multitude 3. Ordination is an act formally of an ecclesiasticall power but the Magistrate as the Magistrate hath no ecclesiasticall power Ergo hee cannot exercise an act of ecclesiasticall power 4. If ordination were an act of Kingly power due to the King as King then 1. The Apostles and Elders usurped in the Apostolick Church the office and throne of the King and that behoved to bee in them an extraordinary and temporary power but wee never find rules tying to the end of the world given to Timothies and Elders of the Church anent the regulating of extraordinary and temporary power that were against the wisedome of God to command Timothy to commit the Word to faithfull men who are able to teach others as 2 Tim. 2. 2. and to set downe the qualification of Pastors Elders Doctors and Deacons to Timothy as a Church man with a charge to keepe such commandements unviolable to Christs second appearing if Timothy and his successors in the holy ministry were to bee denuded of that power by the incoming of Christian Magistrates 2. The King by the laying on of his hands should appoint Elders in every citie and the spirits of the Prophets should bee subject to the King not to the Prophets as the word saith 1 Cor. 14. 32. 5. Those who have a Church power to ordaine and deprive Pastors must by office try the doctrine and be able to 〈…〉 sayers and to finde out the Foxes in their hereticall wayes and to rebuke them sharpely that they may bee sound in the faith but this by office is required of Pastors and not of the King as is evident 1 Tim. 3. 2. 2 Tim. 2. 2â— Tit. 1. 9 10 11. It is not enough to say it is sufficient that the King try the abilities of such as are to bee ordained and the bontgates of hereticall spirits to bee deprived by Pastors and Church men their counsell and ministery and upon their testimony the King is to ordaine and make or exauthorate and unmake Pastors because 1. so were the King a servant by office to that which Church men shall by office determine which they condemne in our doctrine which wee hold in a right and sound meaning 2. He who by office is to admit to an office and deprive from an office must also by office bee obliged to bee such as can try what the office requireth of due to bee performed by the officer nor is it enough which some say that the ignorance of the King in civill things taketh not away his legall power to judge in civill things and by that same reason his ignorance in Church matters taketh not away his power to judge in ecclesiasticall matters for I doe not reason from gifts and knowledge that is in the King simply but from gifts which â—xâ—fficio by vertue of his Kingly office is required in him It is â—â—ue as King hee is oblieged to read continually in the book of the Law of God Deut. 17. and to know what is truth what hereâ—ie in so faâ—re as hee commandeth that Pastors preach sound doctrine and that as a Judge hee is to punish heresie Some say hee is to have the knowledge of private discretion as a Christian that hee punish not blindly I thinke hee is to know judicially as a King 1. Because hee hath a regall and judiciall knowledge of civill things even of the major proposition and not of the assumption and fact onely Ergo seeing hee is by that same kingly power to judge of treason against the Crown the civill State by which he is to judge of heresie to punish heresie it would seeme as King hee is to cognosce in both by a kingly power both what is Law and what is fact 2. Because the judgement of private discretion common to all Christians is due to the King as a Christian not as a King but the cognition that the King is to take of heresie and blasphemy whether it bee heresie or blasphemy that the Church â—â—â—â—eth heresie and blasphemy is due to the King as King because hee is a civill Judge therein and if the Church
testium veritatis They loose the subjects from the oath of fidelitie Lodovick the fourth answering the calumnies of John the 22. saith it is against all Law that the Emperour hath no imperiall authoritie and power except hee bee anointed conâ—eâ—rated and crowned by the Pope he citeth their owne Law on the contrary That Joannes the 22. saith the Emperour insinuateth in his Bull that hee is universall Lord in both temporall and spirituall matters Bonifacius the eighth setteth out a Bull against Philip the Faire Philippus Pulcher King of France as saith Stephanus Aufrerii and speaketh thus that he is universall Lord of the earth in both temparall and spirituall thingâ— Bonifacius Episcopus servus serâ—orum dei Philippo Frâ—n 〈◊〉 regi deum time mandata ejus serva seire te volumus quod in spritualibus temporalibus nobis suâ—es benificiarum preâ—endâ—â—â— ad te câ—â—â—io nuda spectet c. Beleeve if ye will that Constanâ—â—â—â— gave to the Popes of Rome freedome and immunity from the imperiall Laws and that he gave to the Pope the territories of Rome and the City of Rome the Seat of the Empire to be Peter the fishers patrimony and this say they Constantine gave to Silvester which is the Patrimony of the Crowne and the very Empire it selfe given to Peter we teach no such Kingly power given to Church-men and judge this donation to be a forged lye invented by Papists because they are their owne witnesses of this donation For Hieronymus Paâ—â—â—us Cathâ—lanus a Lawyer and Chamberlaine to Pope Alexandâ—r the sixth saith exprelly there was no such donation made by Constantine And because those who are most diligent observers of memorable antiquities speake nothing of this donation as neither Eusebius nor Hieronymus nor Augustine nor Aâ—brase nor Basilius nor Chrysostome nor Ammianus nor Histeriâ— Tâ—ip â—â—tita nor Pope Damasus in his Chronicle nor Beda nor Orosâ—us it is but a dreame yet it is certaine that three hundreth veares after Constantine the Emperours keeped Rome and the Townes of Italy by their presidents and deputies as may be seene in Justiniâ—n And this they did to the time of Innâ—â—â—ntius the second as Chronicles doe beare 6. Wee doe not teach that Church-men are loosed from the positive Lawes of Emperours and Kings Bellarmine saith that the Magistrate can neither punish Church-men nor conveene them before the tribunallâ— so Innocentius the third saith the Empire is not above the Pope but the Pope is above the Empire And Bonifacinâ— the eighth saith all upon hazard of their salvation are subject to the Pope of Rome who hath the power of both swords and judgeth all and is judged by no man Now it is knowne to 〈◊〉 Nicanor that the Prelats of England and Scotland in their high Commission had the power of both swords and that by Episcopall Lawes the Primate 〈◊〉 all the 〈◊〉 and is judged by none and who but he and who ever spake as Suarez That Church-mâ—n 〈…〉 co 〈…〉 against Princes even to detbrane them And as he saith 〈…〉 by divine Law the Pope is eximed from aâ— Laws of Princes and shall we in this beleeve Bellarminâ— Sato â—â—â—etanus Turrecremata Grâ—gâ—rius de Valent. Suaâ—â—â—â— and then forsooth they bring us their Canon Law to judg the Law of God to prove it because it is said by their Silvester nemo judicabit primam â—dem and their Gratian learned this jus divinum this divine Law from Innocentius the Pope And what they alledge for Peters exemption from paying tribute will exime all the disciples and so all Church-men by divine right from the Lawes of Princes Yea all Clergy-men say they by a divine positive Law are eximed from the Laws of Magistrates So saith Suarez Bellarmine and the 〈◊〉 of Rbeimes but with neither conscience nor reason And contrary to their owne practise and doctrine For Paul will have every soule subject to superiour Powers and except the Roman Clergy want Soules they must also be subject Salomon punished Abiathar Josiah burnt the bones of the Priests upon the Aâ—tar Christ subjected himselfe to his Parents payed tribute to Caesâ—r and commanded Scribes and Pharisces to doe the like Matth. 22. Willing that they should give to Cesar those things which are Caesars Paul appealed to Caesars Tribunall and Rom. 13. as many as may doe evill as many as are in danger of resisting the power are to be subject Rom. 13. 4. 2. but Church-men are such therefore they are subject Agatho Bishop of Rome writing to Constantius the Emperour calleth himselfe imperii famulum a Subject of the Empire and saith pro obedientia quam debuimus Leo submitted himselfe to Lodovick the Emperour The Clergy of Constantinople may be conveened before the Patriarch or President of the City See the Law And and Bishops Clerks Monkes c. for criminall causes are judged by the Presidents If a man have a suit with a Clerk for a money matter if the Bishop resuse to heare tunc ad civilem judicem c. say they Sigebertus as also Luitprandus doth witnesse that the Bishops of Rome were compelled to pay a certaine summe of money to the Emperors to be confirmed in their Bishopricke evâ—n till the yeare 700. Leo the fourth who is canonized by Papists as a Saint writeth to Lotharius the Emperour that they will keepe the Emperors Lawes for ever and that they are lyars who say the contrary Arcadius made a Law that if a Priest were found to be seditious and troubling the publick peace he should be banished an hundred miles from that place But how farre Popes have surpassed bounds in these see their blasphemies As they say God should not have beene discreet nisi potestatem Pontifici super principes contulisset except he had given power to the Pope above Princes Also Papam superioritatem habere in imperatorem vacante imperatore imperatori succedere Also Papa habet utriusque potestatis temporalis nempe spiritualis Monarchiam Also Quanto sol lunam tanto Papa superat Imperatorem The Pope is above the Emperor and succeedeth to the Emperors throne when it is vacant and he is as farre above the Emperor as the Sunne is above the Moone The Pope also h in the Nativity night blesseth a Sword and giveth it to some Prince in signe that to the Pope is given all power in heaven and in earth 7. The Pope may loose all Subjects from their oath of Loyalty and may command that a Jesuite stabbe or poyson a King when he turneth enemy to the Roman Faith All these Satan and envy it selfe cannot impute to our doctrine Let Lâ—simachus the Jesuite heare this and see if his owne little Popes the Prclats doe not teach or aime at all these points against the Kings of the earth CHAP. 7. SECT 1. Of the way of
here truth and more true and most true Truth is in an indivisible line which hath no latitude and cannot admit of spleeting And therefore we may make use of the Philosophers word amicus Socrates amicus Plato sed magis amica veritas Though Peter and Paul bee our beloved friends yet the truth is a dearer friend The Sonnes of Babylon make out-cries of divisions and diversity of Religions amongst us but every opinion is not a new Religion But where shall multitude of Gods be had for multitude of new wayes to Heaven if one Heaven cannot containe two Gods how shall all Papists be lodged after death what Astronomy shall teach us of millions of Heavens for Thomists Scotists Franciscans Dominicans Sorbonists c. But I leave off and beg from the Reader candor and ingenuous and faire dealing from Formalists men in the way to Babylon I may wish this I cannot hope it Fare-well Yours in the Lord S. R. A Table of the Contents of this Book A Company of believers professing the truth and meeting in one place every Lords day for the worshipping of God is not the visible Church endued with ministeriall power p. 1. 2 3. seq The keys of the Kingdome of Heaven are not committed to the Church of Believers destitute of Elders p. 7 8. The keys are given to Stewards by office p. 13 14 seq The places Mat. 18. and Mat. 16. fully discussed by evidence of the text and testimonies of fathers and modern writers p. 14 15 16 17. seq Power ministeriall of forgiving sins belongeth not to private Christians as M. Robinson and Others imagine p. 20. 21. seq Private Christians by no warrant of Gods Word not in office can be publick persons warrantably exercising judiciall acts of the keys p. 26 27 28. seq Who so holdeth this cannot decline the meere popular government of Morellius and others p. 28. These who have the ministeriall power by office are not the Church builded on the Rock p. 29. The place Col. 4. 17. say to Archippus discussed p. 26 27. The keys not given to as many as the Gospell is given unto as Mr. Robinson saith p. 28 29. seq There is a Church-assembly judging excluding the people as judges though not as hearers and consenters p. 32. 33. Reasons why our Brethren of New England allow of Church-censures to the people examined p. 33 34 35 36. There is no necessity of the personall presence of all the Church in all the acts of Church censuâ—es p 36 37. seq The place 1 Cor. 5. expounded p 36 37 38. How farre Lictors may execute the sentence that is given out without their conscience and knowledge p. 41. 42. seq A speculative doubt â—nent the act maketh not a doubting conscience but onely a practicall doubt anent the Law p. 43. Ignorance vincible and invincible the former may bee a question of fact the latter is never a question of Law p. 43 44 45. The command of superiors cannot remove a doubting conscience p. 45 46. The conscience of a judge as a man and as a judge not one and the same p. 46 47. The people of the Jewes not judges as Ainsworth supposeth p. 48 49. That there is under the New Testament a provinciall and nationall Church p. 50. 51. seq A diocesian Church farre different from a provinciall Church p. 52 53. The place Acts 1. 21. proveth the power of a visible catholick Church p. 54 55. The equity and necessity of a Catholick visible Church p. 55. 56 57 58. How the Catholick Church is visible p. 58 59. The Jewish and Christian Churches were of one and the same visible constitution p. 60 61 62. The Iewish Church was a congregationall Church p. 61. 62. seq Excommunication in the Iewish Church p. 62. 63 64 65. Separation from the Jewish and the true Christian Churches both alike unlawfull p. 68. 69. The Iewish civil state and the Church different p. 68. 69 17. Separation from the Church for the want of some ordinances how far lawfull p. 71 72 73. A compleat power of excommunication how in a Congregation and how not p. 76. 77. How all are to joyne themselves to some visible Church p. 78. 79 80. The place 1 Cor. 5. 12 considered p. 80. That all without are not to be understood of all without the lists of a parishionall Church ibid 81. 82. That persons are not entered members of the visible Church by a Church-covenant p. 83 84 85 86 87. seq That there is no warrant in Gods word for any such covenant ibid. in seq The manner of entering in Church state in New England p. 91. 92. The place Act. 2 37 38. is not for a Church-covenant ibid. The ancient Church knew no such Church-Covenant p. 97. 98. No Church-Covenant in England p. 98. 99. Nor of old the places Genes 17. 7. Exod 19. 5. Acts 7. 38. favour not the Church-Covenant p. 100. 101 102. Nor Deut. 29. 10. p. 104 105. seq The exposition of Deut. 29. given by our Brethren favours much the glosse of Arminians and Socinians not a Church-Covenant p. 102. 103. 104. 105. A Church-covenant not the essentiall forme of a visible Church p. 123 124. The place 2 Chro. 9. 15. 2 Chro. 30. 8. speak not for a Church-covenant p. 111. 112. Nor doth Nehemiahs Covenant ch 10. plead for it the place of Esai 56. alledged for the Church-covenant discussed p. 112. 113. The place Ezech. 20. 27. considered p 114. 115. And the place Jer. 50. 5. p 115. 116. And the place Esay 44. 5. p 116. 117. The place 2 Cor. 11. 2. violently handled to speak for this Church-covenant p 118. 119. seq A passage of Iustine Martyr with the ancient custome of baptizing vindicated p. 121. John Baptists baptising vindicated p. 121. The place Acts 5. and of the rest durst no man joyne himselfe to them c. wronged and put under the Arminian glosse p. 123. 124. The pretended mariage betwixt the Pastor and the Church no ground of a Church-covenant and is a popish error p. 127. 128. Power of election of Pastors not essentiall to a Pastor all relation p. 128 129. It is lawfull to sweare a platforme of a confession of faith p. 130 131 132. seq Our Brethren and the Arminian arguments on the contrary are dissolved p. 136 137 138. Pastors and Doctors how differenced p. 140. Of ruling Elders p. 141. 142. And the place 1 Tim. 5. 17. farther considered the place 1 Tim. 5. 17. Elders that rule well examined p. 141 142 143. especially 144 145. seq Arguments against ruling Elders answered p. 152. 18. seq The places 1 Cor. 12. 18. Rom. 12. 8 discussed and vindicated p. 154. 155 156 157. seq Of Deacons p. 159. 160. seq The place Acts 6. for Deacons discussed p. 161. 162. The Magistrate no Deacon p. 161 162. Deacons instituted p. 163. 164. seq Deacons are not to preach and Baptize p. 165 166. seq Os Widdowes p. 172. 173 174. How the Church is before the
Ministery and the Minestery before the Church p. 175 176 177. The Keys and power of ordaining Officers not committed to the Church of believers destitute of Elders p. 180. 181. 182. Robinsons reasons on the contrary siding with Arminians and Socinians who evert the necessity of a Ministery are dissolved p. 182. 183. No Ordination of Elders by a Church of onely Believers but by Elders in a constituted Church p. 184. 185. seq Ordination and Election differ ibidm Corrupt rites of the Romish Church added to ordination destroy not the nature of Ordination though such an Ordination be unlawfull yet is not invalid and null p 186. 187 188. The various opinions of Romanists anent Ordination ibid. Election may stand for Ordination in case of necessity p. 187. Of the succession of Pastors to Pastors p. 185. 186. Calling of Pastors seems by our Brethrens way not necessary p. 200 Arguments for Ordination of Elders by a Church of onely Believers dissolved p. 189. 190 191 seq Believers because not the successors of the Apostles have not power of Ordination p. 192. 193 194. seq The Keys by no warrant of Gods word are given to Pastors as Pastors according to the Doctrine of our Brethren p. 197. seq They side with Sociaians who ascribe Ordination to sole Believers p. 200. Election belongeth to the people p. 201. 202. seq In the ancient Church this was constantly taught till Papists did violate Gods Ordinance p. 203. Election of a Pastor not essentiall to his calliâ—g p. 205. The calling of Luther how ordinary and how extraordinary p. 205 206 207. seq The essence of a valid calling p. 208. 209. How it may be proved by humane testimonies that the now visible Church hath been a visible Church since the dayes of the Apostles p. 229. 230. seq Since the long continuance of the Waldenses p. 235 236. seq A calling frow the Papists Church as valid as Baptisme from the same Church p. 237 238. seq Robinsons arguments are removed p. 239. 240. Of addition of members to the Church p. 241. What sort of Professors whether true or seeming believers doe essentially constitute a visible Church divers considerable distinctions anent a visible Church p. ib. 242. 243 seq The invisible not the visible Church the prime subject of the Covenant of grace and of all the priviledges due to the Church and of all title claime and interest in Jesus Christ and how by the contrary doctrine our brethren imprudently fall into a grosse poynt of Arminianisme p. 244. 245 246 247 248. seq The invisible Church hath properly right to the seales of the Covenant our brethren in this poynt joyne with Papists whom otherwise they sincerely hate p. 242 205 251. seq What sort of profession doth constitute a visible Church p. 356. That Christ hath provided no Pastors as Pastors for converting of soules and planting visible Churches is holden by our Brethren p. 256. The arguments of our brethren for a pretended Church of visible Saints not only in profession but also in some measure of truth and sincerity as the author saith are disolved p. 256. 257 258. Robinsons arguments at length are discussed p. 268. 269 seq The Lords adding to the Church invisible no rule for our adding p. 256. The places Mat 22. Mat. 13 of the man without his wedding garment comming to the feast and of the tâ—res in the Lords Field discussed p. 261 262. 263. The typical Temple no ground for this pretended visible Church p. 263 264. Nor the place 2 Tim. 3. 5. p. 261. Nor Rev. 22. 15. without are Dogs p. 267. 268. And of diverse other places and persons at length in seq Ordinary and prosessed hearing is Church-Communion p. 268 269 270 seq Excommunicated persons not wholy cut off from the visible Church p. 272 273 274 seq Sundry distinctions thereanent collected out of the Fathers and Schoolemen p. 277 278 279 282. Some Separatists deny that the regenerated can be excommunicated as Robinson some say onely the Regenerated are capable of excommunication as Peter Coachman p 279 280 281. Of the diverse sorts of excommunication and the power thereof p. 282 283 295. The reason why Papists debar not the excommunicated from hearing the word p. 275 276. How the Seals are due to the visible Church only in foro Ecclesiastico properly p. 281. In what diverse considerations the word preached is a note of the visible Church p. 283 284. seq The difference betwixt nota and signum p. 301. And nota actu primo notificativa and nota actu secundo and notificans p. 285. Arguments of Robinson and others answered p. 286. 287. Whether discipline be a note of the true church diverse distinctions thereanent p. 287 288. The order of Gods publick worship p. 228. Of the Communion of the visible Catholik Church p. 289 290. The Ministery and Ordinances are given principally to the guides of the Catholick Church and to and for the Catholick Church p. 289 290 291. And not to a Congregation only ibid 292. Congregations are parts of a Presbyteriall Church p. 293 294. Christ principally the head of the Catholick Church and secondarily a Spouse Head Lord King of a praticular Congregation p. 295. The excommunicated is east out of the Catholick visible Church p. 295 296. A sister Congregation doth not excommunicate consequenter only but antecedenter also p. 297. How Presbyteriall Churches excommunicate not by power derived from the Catholick visible Church p. 299 300. Of the power of the Catholick visible Church p. 300 301. A Congregation in a remote I le hath power of Jurisdiction p. 302. A Presbyteriall Church is the first and principall subject of the Ordinary power of Jurisdiction p. 302 303. What power generall councells have and how necessary p. 304. Power of excommunication not in a single Congregation consociated with other Churches p. 205 206. Synods or councels occasionall rather then ordinary p. 307. A Congregational Church how it is by divine right p. 307. 308 Tell the Church Mat. 18. not restrained to a single Congregation only p. 310 311. The place Mat. 18. 17. Tell the Church considered p. 310 311 312 313 seq An appeale from a Church that hath lawful power p. 315. A representative Church p. 316. The power of a single Congregation p 320 321 322. Matthew 18. Tell the Church establisheth a Church Court p. 322 323 324. What relation of Eldership do the members of the classicall Presbytery beare to the whole Presbyteriall Church and to all the congregations thereof p. 325 326 327 328 329 seq They have power of governing all Congregations in those bounds and not power of Pastorall teaching in every one of them ibidem Oncrousnesse of ruling many Churches whereof the Elders of the classicall Presbytery are not Pastors no more then the onerousnesse of advising that is incumbent to sister Churches p. 331 332 333. The power of Presbyteries Auxiliary not destructive to the power of Congregations p 334. 335.
Ministeriall Church actions can be performed by it 4. Dist. It is one thing for a company to performe the actions of a Church mysticall and redeemed of Christ and another thing to performe actions ministeriall of a Church instituted and ministeriall 1. Concl. A company of believers professing the truth is the matter of the Church though they be saints by calling and builded on the rock yet are they but to the Church instituted as stones to the house 2. Because they cannot performe the actions of a constituted Church till they be a constituted Church 3. Our Divines call men externally called the matter of the visible Church so Trelcatius Tilenuâ— professors of Leyden Piscator Bucanus so say our brethern 2. Concil Ordination of Pastors and election of Officers administration of the seales of grace and acts of Church censures are holden by Gods Word and by all our Divines actions of a ministeriall and an instituted visible Church and if so according to our third distinction It is a wonder how a company of Believers united in Church-Covenant cannot performe all these for they are united and so a perfect Church and yet cannot administrate the Sacraments for though they be so united they may want Pastors who onely can performe these actions as this Treatise sayth and Robinson and the Confession And it is no lesse wonder that Officers and Rulers who are to feed and governe the Flock are but only accidents and not parts not integrall members of a constituted Church no perfect Corporation maketh its owne integrall parts or members a perfect living man doth not make his owne Hands Feete or Eyes the man is not a perfect one in all his members if all the members be not made with him but Officers by preaching make Church-members 3. Concl. The visible Church which Christ instituted in the Gospel is not formally a company of believers meeting for publick edification by common and joynt consent as this Author sayth 1. The instituted Church of the New Testament is an organicall body of diverse members of eyes eares feete hands of Elders governing and a people governed 1 Cor. 12. 14 15. Rom. 12. 4 5 6. Act. 20. 28. But a company of believers meeting for publick edification by common consent are not formally such a body for they are a body not Organicall but all of one and the same nature all believers and saints by calling and are not a body of Officers governing and people governed for they are as they are a visible Church a single uncompounded body wanting Officers and are as yet to choose their Officers and all thus combined are not Officers Rom. 10. 14. How shall they preach except they be sent 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Apostles are all Prophets we justly censure the Papists and amongst them Bellarmine who will scarce admit an essentiall Church of believers but acknowledgeth other three Churches beside to wit a representative Church of their Clergy onely excluding the Laickes as they call them 2 A consistoriall Church of Cardinalls 3. A virtuall Church the Pope who hath plenitude of all power in himselfe against which our writers Calvin Beza Tilenus Iunius Bucanus professors of Leyden Whittaker willet doe dispute so the other extremity can hardly be maintained that there is an instituted visible ministeriall Church to which Christ hath given the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven exercising Church actions as to ordaine and make and un-make Officers and Rulers without any officer at all The major of our proposition is grantted by our brethren who cite 1 Cor. 12. Rom. 12. Acts 20. 28. To prove a single Congregation to be the onely visible Church instituted in the New Testament Nothing can be said against this but a Church of Governours and People governed is an instituted visible Church but there is an instituted visible Church before there be Governours but such an instituted Church we cannot read of in Gods Word which doth and may exercise Church acts of government without any Officers at all 2. That company cannot be the Church ministeriall instituted by Christ in the New Testament which cannot meete all of them every Lords day as the Church of Corinth did for administration of the holy Ordinances of God and all his Ordinances to publick edification for so this Author describeth a visible instituted Church 1 Cor. 14. 23. But a company of believers meeting for publick edification by joynt and common consent cannot meete for the publick administration of all the Ordinances of God 1. They cannot administer the seales of the Covenant being destitute of the Officers as the Scripture and their confession saith 2. They cannot have the power of publick edification being destitute of Pastors because the end cannot be attained without the meanes appointed of Christ. But Christ for publick edification and Church edification hath given Pastors Teacherâ— and other Officers to his Church Eph. 4. 11. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Iâ— is not enough to say that such a company meeting hath power of Pastorall preaching and administration of the Seales of grace because they may ordaine and elect Officers for such publick edification but 1. we prove that that which our brethren call the onely instituted visible Church of the New Testament hath not power to administrate all the Ordinances of Christ and how then are they a Church can we call him a perfect living man who cannot exercise all the vitall actions which flow from the nature and essence of a living man 2. If this be a good reason that such a company should be the only instituted Church in the New Testament having power of all the Ordinances because they may appoint Officers who have such a power then any ten believers who have never sworne the Church-Covenant meeting in private to exhort one another is also the only instituted Church ministeriall in the New Testament for they have power to make such Officers and may invest themselves in right to all the Ordinances of Christ by our brothers Doctrine 3. All the places cited by the Author speake of a Church visible made up of Officers governing and people governed as Mat. 16. Mat 18. cannot exclude Pastors who binde on Earth and in heaven or Pastors who are stewards and beare the keyes as hereafter I shall prove Also the Church of Corinth did meete for the administration of the Lords Supper 1 Cor. 11. 20. and so were a Church of Officers and governed people they met with Pauls spirit and the authority of Pastors 1 Cor. 5. 4. another Church that exercised Discipline as Collosse Col. 2. 8. was a Church of Officers and people Col. 4. 17. Philippi consisted of Saints Bishops and Deacons Phil. 1. 1. 2. Ephesus of a flocke and an eldership Acts 20. 28. so the visible ministeriall Church that the word of God speaketh of as all the seven Churches of Asia and their Angels had in them Officers to governe and people governed and therefore they were not
a number of sole believers united in a Church-covenant which in very deed iâ— but stones and timber not an house builded of God for in the ministeriall Church of the New Testament there is eâ—eâ— a relation betwixt the Elders and the flock wee desire to to see a Copy of our brethrens instituted visible Church to the which Elders are neither essentiall nor integrall parts for their instituted visible Church hath its compleat being and all its Church-operations as binding loosing ordeining of Officers before there bee an Edldership in it and also when the Eldership is ordained they are not Eyes and Eares to the instituted Church nor watchmen because it is a body in essence and operation compleat without officers 2. the officers are not Governors for as I trust to prove they have no act of ministeriall authority of governing over the people by our brethrens Doctrine 2. all their governing is to Rule and moderate the actions of the whole governing Church which maketh them no wayes to be governours nor over the believers in the Lord nor overseers nor watchmen as a Preses who moderateth a Judicatorie a moderator in a Church-meeting a Prolocutor in a convocation is not over the Judicatorie Synod or meeting or Convocation 3. The Eldership are called by them the adjuncts the Church the subject the subject hath its perfect essence without its accidents and common adjuncts 2 Quest. Whether or not Christ hath committed the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to the Church of Believers which as yet wanteth all Officers Pastors Doctors c. The Author sayth this company of believers and Church which wanteth Officers and as we have heard is compleat without them is the corporation to which Christ hath given the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven which deserveth our brotherly censure for wee then aske a Scripture for the Lords giving of the keys to Pastors and Elders if the keys be given to Peter Mat. 16. as a professing believer by what Word of God are they given to Peter as to an Apostle and Pastor it would seem the Pastors have not the keys jure Divino for by this argument our Divines prove the Bishop not to bee an Office of power and jurisdiction above a Pastor and Presbyter because the keys were not given to Peter as to the Archbishop but as to a Pastor of the Church and indeed this would conclude that Pastors are not Officers of authority and power of jurisdiction jure Divino Hence the question is if it can be concluded that the keyes of of the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 16. Mat. 18. were given to Peter as he represented all professing believers or if they were given for the good of professing believers but to Peter as carrying the person of Apostles Pastors and Church-guides 1. Distinction There is one question of the power of the keyes and to whom they are committed and another of the exercise of them and toucheth the government of the Church if it be popular and democraticall or not 2. Dist. It is not inconvenient but necessary that Christ should give to his Church gifts Pastors and Teachers of the which gifts the Church is not capable as a subject as if the Church might exercise the Pastor and Doctors place and yet the Church is capable of these gifts as the object and end because the fruit and effect of these gifts redoundeth to the good of the Church see Parker see the Parisian schoole and Bayner 3. Distinct. There is a formall ordinary power and there is a vertuall or extraordinary power 1. Concl. Christ Iesus hath immediatly himselfe without the intervening power of the Church or men appointed offices and Officers in his house and the office of a pastor and Elder is no lesse immediately From Christ for men as Christs Vicars and Instruments can appoint no new Office in the Church then the office of the Apostles Eph. 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Mat. 28. 19. The Offices are all given to the Church immediatly and so absolutely and so the power of the keys is given to the Church the same way But the Officers and key bearers now are given mediatly and conditionally by the intervening mediation of the ruling and ministeriall Church that she shall call such and such as have the conditions required to the office by Gods Word 1. Tim. 3. 12 3. Hence we see no reason why the keys can be said to be given to believers any other wayes then that they are given for their good 2. Concl. I deny not but there is a power virtuall not formall in the Church of believers to supply the want of ordination of pastors or some other acts of the keyes simply necessary hic nunc this power is virtuall not formall and extraordinary not ordinary not officiall not properly authoritative as in a Church in an Iland where the pastors are dead or taken away by pest or otherwayes the people may ordaine Pastors or rather doe that which may supply the defect of ordination as David without immediate Revelation from Heaven to direct him by only the Law of nature did eate shewbread so is the case here so answer the casuistes and the schoolemen that a positive Law may yield in case of necessity to the good of the Church so Thomas Molina Suarez Vasquez Vigverius Sotus Scotus Altisiodorensis Durand Gabriel and consider what the learned Voetius sayth in this What if in an extreame case of necessity a private man endued with gifts and zeale should teach publickly after the example of the faithfull at Samosaten Yea and Flavianus and Diodorus preached in Antioch as Theodoret sayth yea saith Voetius an ordinary ministery might be imposed on a Laick or private person by the Church though the presbytery consent not in case of necessity God sayth Gerson may make an immediate intermission of a calling by Bishops yea sayth Anton. speaking of necessities Law The Pope may commit power of Excommunication quia est de jure positive pure Laico mulieri to one meere Laicke or a woman though we justifie not this yet it is hence concluded that God hath not tied himselfe to one set rule of ordinary positive Lawes a captive woman as Socrates saith preached the Gospell to the King and Queen of Iberranes and they to the people of the Land 3. Concl. The Author in the foresaid first proposition will have no instituted visible Church in the New Testament but a Congregationall or Parishionall Church that meeteth together ordinarily in one place for the hearing of the Word But we thinke as a reasonable man is the first immediate and principall subject of aptitude to laugh and the mediate and secondary Subjects are Peter Iohn and particular men so that it is the intention of nature to give these and the like properties principally and immediately to the speciâ—e and common nature and not immediately to this or that man
so are the blessings of the promises as to bee builded on a Rock victory over hell and such given principally and immediately to the Catholick and invisible Church as to the first and principall subject and no wayes to a visible Congregation consisting of 30 or 40. professing the Faith of Christ but onely to them not as Professors but to them as they are parts and living members of the true Catholick Church For sound professors though united in a Church-covenant are indeed the mysticall Church but not as professors but as sound believers and therefore these of whom Christ speaketh Mat. 16. Are builded on a Rock as true believers but the keys are given not to them but for them and for their good as professors making Peters confession and in Gods purpose to gather them into Christ. But the Text evinceth that these keys are given to Peter as representing the Church-guides especially though not excluding believers giving to them popular consent and not to Believers as united in a company of persons in Church-covenant excluding the Elders 1. To that Church are the keys given which is builded on the rock as a house the house of wisdome Prov. 9. 1. The house of God 1 Tim. 3. 15. Heb. 3. 4. By the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles by Doctors and Teachers whom Christ hath given for the building of his house Eph. 4. 11. But this house is not a company of professing believers united by a Church-covenant and destitute of Pastors and Teachers but a Church edified by the Word Seales and Discipline Ergo such a Church is not heere understood The propofition is granted by the Author I prove the assumption The Church of believers combined in Church-covenant but wanting their Pastors and Teachers is not wisdomes house nor builded by pastors and Doctors given to edifie and gather the body but they are only the materialls of the house yea wanting the pastors they want Ministeriall power for pastorall preaching and administrating the Seales and for that they want the power of edifying the body of Christ which is required in a visible Church Eph. 4. 11. Though the building of this Church on the Rock Christ may well be thought to be the inward building of the Catholick and invisible Church in the Faith of Christ yet as it is promised to the Church to the which Christ promiseth the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven it can be no other beside external and Ministeriall building by a publick Ministery 2. Arg. To these are the keys here promised who are stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4. 1. And servants of the house by office 2 Cor. 4. 5. And are by office to open the doores and behave themselves aright in Gods house 1 Tim. 3. 16. and to divide to these of the house their portion in due season Mat. 24. 45. and to cut the word 2 Tim. 2. 15. But a company of professing believers joyned together in a Church-covenant and destitute of officers are not stewards by office nor servants over the house c. Ergo to such a company the keyes are not here given The proposition especially is to be proved for the assumption is granted by our brethren and evidently true but it is sure by the phrase of Scripture Esai 22. 22. And I will lay upon his shouldier the key of the house of David 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clavis a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apperuit proveth this Shindlerus in Lexico metonymicè significatur Authoritas Facultas potestas omnis gubernationis iubendo ac vetando expediendo ac coercendo power of government Musculus so Calvin these who are made masters of housholds receive keys whereby they open and shut it is a token of power given to Kings Iunius it noteth a full government by this borrowed speech sayth Beza is signified the power of Ministers Isai. 22. Mat. 16. Pareus I shall make the steward of my house Hierom the key is a power of excellency and Chrysostom Augustine Beda sayth the same Fulgentius calleth this the power of binding and loosing given to the Apostles so other Scriptures expound the keyes to be a power of office as Esa. 9. 6. And the government shall be upon his shoulder Interpreters say Davids keys are given here Rev. 3. 7. These things saith he that hath the key of David who openâ—h and no man shutteth and shutteth and no man openeth Rev. 1. 18. I have the keys of hell and death Rev. 9. 1. And to him was given the key of the bottomlesse pit so Stephanus on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clavis Whittaker it signifieth a power of office given to some and not to all as Calvin here saith he Christ speaketh of Peters publick office that is of his Apostleship so Bullinger Erasm. Zwinglius Marlorat Pareus on the same place I think while of late never interpreter dreamed that in the Text Mat. 16. the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven are given to all believers but only to the stewards of the house builded upon the Rock 3. Arg. To these in this Text doth Christ give the keys to whom he giveth warrant for the actuall exercise of the keys to wit to bind and loose on Earth and so open and shut the doores of the Kingdome But this warrant and officiall authority of binding and loosing Christ giveth to Peter onely as representing Apostles Teachers and Elders and not to the Church of believers convened Covenant-wayes and destitute of Officers Ergo the proportion is cleare in the Text to the same person to whom the promiseth the power or keys to the same he promiseth Officiall warrant to exercise the speciall acts of the keys but to Peter is the promise of both made 19. and if Christ allude to the place Is. 22. 22. Then I say these to whom Christ gave the keys doe by Office represent him who hath the keys of Davids house and the Government on his shoulder And I will give to thee the Keys of the Kingdome of Heaven there is the power and authority granted And whatsoever thou shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven there is a warrant for the exercise of the acts of the power given also to Peter Now if the keys be not given to Peter as to a Pastor Peter and pastors by this place as pastors neither have the keys nor officiall warrant to preach and to remit or retaine sinnes and if by this place they have it not we desire to see a warrant from Christ before he went to heaven for pastorall preaching Beza in his marginall notes in this Text sayth here is the Heavenly authority of the Church Ministery also binding and loosing is all one with opening and shutting Heaven Gates and with remitting and retaining sinnes Ioh. 20. Papists I know deny that the Apostles were made priests judicially to remit
people ought to obey and we condemne a meere popular government such as our writers condemne in Morellius They adde Government meerly Aristocraticall where all authority is in the hands of the Eldership excluding the people from intermedling by way of power we conceive to be without warrant and injurious to the people infringing their liberties in chusing Officers admitting members censuring offenders even Ministers Col. 4. 16. To which doctrine we oppose these conclusions 1. Concl. Our brethren hold a meere popular government with Morellius 1. Because nothing is left peculiar in government to the Officers which all the people have not 2. Because a greater power of Church-Jurisdiction as I shall prove is given to the people then to the guides for cursing by Excommunication of all the Officers and blessing of them by pardoning their faults and admitting of Members and laying on of hands is the greatest power that can be given to people But this and many other acts of jurisdiction the people have by our brethrens Doctrine 3. The people is no more obedient to the Eldership in teaching then Indians and Infidels who are hearers of the word and are under an obligation to obey the word and under the very same obligation of an Evangelicke offer made to all The people say they are under the obligation of obedience to Pastorall teaching under the paine of Church censures but so are not Indians who may be onely hearers but are in no Church-membership I answer Obligation to Church censures from the Pastors as Pastors lyeth not on the people by our brethrens doctrine 1. Because Pastors as Pastors are not the Church builded on the rocke nor the Spouse of Christ nor any part thereof nor any part of the visible Church to the which Christ hath given the Keys for the visible Church is a compleate Church in esse in operari in their being and Church actions of a visible Church without all Pastors of any Officers as they teach 2. Because Pastors are onely parts of the visible Church as believers and so have the power of the Keyes as believers and this the believers have which the Pastors have not and so seeing the Pastors as Pastors have not the Keyes nor can they use the Keyes or excommunicate as parts or members of the visible Church because as Pastors they are neither parts nor members of the Church but adjuncts and meere accidents of the visible Church and therefore the people are under no obligation of obedience to Pastors as Pastors under paine of Ecclesiasticke censures more then Indians or Infidels who are their hearers 2. Concl. Christ hath given no warrant at all of actuall Church government to all the whole visible Church 1. so the places that I cited before Iadde the styles of Officiall dignity given to Officers because of their government are given onely to Officers and never to the people Ergo the people have no power of government the consequence is sure those who are priviledged of Christ to governe ordinarily should be and duely are Governours But the stile of Gods is given to Church-guides Ioh. 10. 33 36. Ioh. 20. 21. which title for governing is given to Judges Psalm 82. 6. Exod. 21. 6. And his Master shall bring him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Judges Now the people are not Gods nor are they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 13. 17. over the people in the Lord. Which word no doubt the Apostle borrowed from the Septuagint so stiling the Rulers not because of their place of preaching onely but of governing also as Jos. 13. 21. Micah 3. 9. Ezech. 44. 3. Dan. 3. 2. Acts 23. 24. Matth. 27. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and it is given to the Kings or supreame rulers 1 Pet. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so it is frivolous that they say Church-Officers are never called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For these words of officiall power of government are no lesse powerfull and never communicated to any but to Church-Officers such as are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 watchmen not onely for preaching but also for government Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 3. 2. Acts 20. 28. and the people are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Governours 1 Cor. 12. 28. nor are they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 12. 8. nor obliged to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers as they are the visible Church nor should they bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 5. 17. nor are they to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Labourers and over the Saints in the Lord. 1 Thess. 5. 12. 2. If all the people as contradistinguished from Officers are to watch over one another and by office to rebuke censure excommunicate ordaine and exauthorate Officers then must they in Conscience attend the judging of all causes of adultery fornication drunkennesse swearing oppressing defrauding one another as they fall under scandall Now this is a calling distinct from their owne calling in respect the holy Ghost alloweth to the Elders stipend and maintenance 1 Tim. 5. 17. yea and hire as to labourers Matth. 10. 10. as to souldiers husbandmen dressâ—rs of vineyards feeders of flocks 1 Cor. 9. 7 8. yea as to the oxe that treadeth out or thresheth the corne vers 9. and by this all the people are made officers and stipendiaries to whom by the Law of God and nature stipend is due Now this looscth them from their own proper callings of Merchandise Trading Husbandry Laws Medicine Manufactures and maketh all these callings sinfull unlawfull to the Saints by calling who are members of a visible Church according to that 2 Tim. 2. 4. No man that warreth in t angleth himselfe with the affairs or callings of this life which is grosse Anabaptisme condemned by Gods Word 1 Cor. 7. 20 21. Eph. 6. 5. Col. 2. 22. 1 Thess. 4. 11. Now certainly if actuall government with the power of the Keyes be committed to all the members of the visible Church the Epistles to Timothy and Titus and Canons of right government must be written to Timothy and Titus not as to Pastors but as to beleevers as the Keyes were given in Peters person and a warrant to binde and loose Matth 18. Matth. 16. as representing beleevers not as to a Pastor then they are to commit the word to faithfull men who are able to teach others and to give up their earthly callings as 2 Tim. 2. 2 3 4. and to lay hands suddenly on no man and not to receive a testimony against an Elder but before two or three witnesses 1 Tim. 5. 22 19. and to war a good warfare 1 Tim. 1. 18. And this must needs follow since Separatists teach That all the people are obliged in Conscience to judge and to be personally present and that by their Office and Church-calling when ever any sentence is given out against offenders for if the Elders be onely present and the people absent the Elders shall tyrannize saith Answorth over the peoples Consciences for the
people being absent shall not know if the Eldership have proceeded right yet must they repute the excommunicated person as an heathen or a publicane 3. Arg. That government is not to be admitted which maketh men take honour to themselves without God calling them thereunto But the Doctrine of government in the hands of people is such ergo the assumption is proved 1. By it all are Kings Rulers and Guides and all have the most supreame power of the Keyes as authoritative receiving in of members and judiciall casting out by the pastorall spirit of Paul and all governe over all 2. Beleevers are a ministeriall Church a company of private Christians put in office and doing acts of a Ministeries now a Ministerie is a peculiar state of eminency that God calleâ—h some selected gifted persons unto that to the which he calleâ—h not all professors as in Israel he chosed one Tr be to minister to himselfe not all the visible Church of Israel as the Scripture teacheth us Ministers of the house of God the Levites the Lords Ministers Ministers of Gods Sanctuary and the ministery of the New Testament is a speciall emiâ—ency of office given to some few and not to all believers a matter of worke that some not all believers are put upon and employed in the act of the Ministery not common to all but restricted to the Ministers of the Church and not common to the whole visible Church Now to ordaine Elders excommunicate admit members into the Church are positive actes of a received ministery and must flow from an other principle then that which is common to all professing believers 4. Arg. All who have received such a Ministeriall state to discharge such excellent and noble actes as laying on of hands receiving of witnesses committing the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others and must save some by gentle awaiting and stop the mouthes of other Pastors as the Scripture saith these must acquit themselves as approved worke-men to God and shall therefore receive a Crowne of Glory at the appearance of the chiefe Shepheard and must in a speciall manner fight the good fight of Faith and must be worke-men who neede not to be ashamed But these are not required of all the Church visible all are not men of God and ministeriall Souldiers of Christ and feeders of the flock but only such as Timothy Titus and Elders like to Peter as these Scriptures prove For the reward of a prophet is not due to all 5. Arg. That Government is not of God which taketh away the ordinary degrees of members in Christs body the Church But government exercised by all the visible body taketh away the deversity of offices members places of Rulers and ruled Ergo I prove the assumption 1. All have one and alike equall power of governing all the members are one in place and office all are Eyes all Eares all are hands according as all have one joynt and common interest and claime to Christ. One is not an Eye and head in relation to another for all are both governours and governed all the Watchmen and all the City all the flock and all the feeders all the House and all Rulers Key-bearers Stewards all the children of the house all the Fathers Tutors to bring up nuâ—ture and correct the children 2. If the power and use of the Keys result from this that the Corporation is the Spouse Body Sister of Christ the redeemed flock what should hinder but according as God inequally dispenseth the measure of grace to some more to some lâ—sse so some should have more some lesse power of the keys and some exercise more eminent acts of government as they be more eminent in grace some lesse eminent acts and if we grant this we cannot deny the order of a Hierarchy amongst Pastors This connexion may be denied happily by our brethren but there is no reason if their arguments be good they alwayes conclude church-Church-power from the graces of the members of the Church 3. Concl. It is cleare then that the state of the Church cannot be called popular and the government Aristocraticall or in the hands of the Elders as our brethren meane 1. Because by our brethren the government and the most eminent and authoritative acts thereof are in the hands of the people Ergo both state and government are popular 2. Because the people are not only to consent to the censures and acts of government but also authoritatively to judge with coequal power with the Eldership as they prove from 1 Cor. 5. 12. 3. The Parisian Doctors the authors of this distinction acknowledge a visible monarchy in the Church and are far from popular government Let us heare what our brethren say for the government of the people and their judiciall power in generall Quest. 15. Our brethren say the Colossians are exhorted Col. 4. 17. to say to Archippus Take heed to the Ministery that thou hast received of the Lord to fulfill it in all points Ergo the people are to censure and rebuke the Pastors and therfore they may and ought to exercise acts authoritative Ans. 1. This is an argument off the way with reverence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say to Archippus take heede Ergo say Judicially and rebuke with all authority it is an argument à genere ad speciem affirmativè and a non-consequence Mat. 18. 17. If he will not heare them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tell the Church Ergo exercise an act of authority over the Church Ioh. 8. 48. The Jewes said unto him Ergo they said it authoritatively 1 Ioh. 1. 8. If we say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have no sinne by no authority can we say we have no sinne Luk. 12. 11. Take not thought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what ye shall say Rev. 22. 17. 2. The Fathers as Augustine Chrysostome Ambrose Hyeronimus The Schoolemen as Aquinas D. Bannes Suarez say correcting of our brother is sublevatio miseriae peccantis a succouring of the misery of a sinner Cajetanâ—ait actum correctionis elici à prudentia imperari à misericordia To warne or rebuke our brother is an act of prudence commanded by mercy and compassion And. Duvalius saith it is an act Non solum juris divini sed etiam naturalis and he citeth Lev. 19. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart but shalt rebuke him and shall beare one anothers burdens and so fulfill the Law of Christ. And Greg. de Valent. saith it is a spirituall almes actum misericordiae quo subveniatur spirituali necessitati fratris So the Doctors of the Canon Law So the Fathers say as Basilius esse benevolentiam potius quam severitatem Augustin Vulnus fratr is contemnis vides cum perire negligis pejor es tu tacendo quam ille te offendendo Excellently Hieronim Sivide at in corpore carnes putridas dicat An
ad me pertinet scias quiae crudelis est And Nazianz. Charitatem potius hic quam potestatem ostendendam To rebuke is a worke of charity rather then of power Calvin saith Good Ministers stand in need to be admonished Davenant thinketh that Archippus in the absence of Epaphras his collegue was to supply his absence and it is like was somewhat cold and therefore needed to be admonished But because the Collossians were to exercise an act of mercy towards their Pastor which the Law of nature enjoyned them it is a wide inference therefore they had Church authority and power over him to censure deprive excommunicate him so the faithfull receiveth a charge Hos. 2. 1. Say ye to your brethren Ammi and to your sisters Ruhammah 2. Plead with your mother plead pleading for wheredomes is more then a simple exhorting of Archippus yet none can well collect from these words that those faithfull who kept themselves cleane from the common defection had power of jurisdiction over their breth en sisters and mother to censure them judicially and by authority to un-Church them And certainely the Apostle if he had commanded here the judiciall act of Church-jurisaiction to all the Saints of Colosle men and women who may admonish Archippus we we would looke he had said command and charge with all authority Archippus to take heed to his ministery Also it is much to be doubted if the duties of rebuking exhorting and comforting one another be positive acts of Church-membership which the fellow-members of a visible Congregation owe one to another by vertue of a Church-covenant or that the people owe to the Pastor in a Church way for these ex hort teach comfort one another are duties mutuall not restricted to fellow-members of a visible Church or Parish but such as we owe to all the members of the Catholique Church as we are occasionally in company with them Yea and duties as our brethren say that sister Churches owe to sister Churches and acts of the Law of nature that we owe to all as brethren not as brethren in Church-membership Levit. 19. 17. onely I will here answer What Robinson saith By the Keyes is meant the Gospell opening a way by Christ and his merits as the doore into the Kingdome the power of binding and loosing opening and shutting Heaven is not tied to any Office or Order in the Church it dependeth onely upon Christ who alone properly forgiveth sinnes and hath the Key of David and this Key externally is the Gospell which with himselfe he giveth to the Church Isa. 6. 9. Rom. 3. 2. Ergo the Keyes are given to all though not to be used by all and every one alike which were grosse confusior The Keyes were not given to Peter as Prince of the Apostles as Papists say nor to Peter as chiefe Officer of the Church and so to Prelates nor to Peter as a Minister of the Word and Sacraments but we say to the confâ—ssion of faith which Peter made by way of answer to Christs demand and therefore to every faithfull man and woman who have received the like precious faith with Peter 2 Pet. 1. 1. Ans. 1. If the Keyes be given to as many as the Gospell is given unto all have the Keyes who are beleevers children women whether within or without the Church for all have obtained alike precious faith So it is vaine to speake there of a Church builded on the Rockâ— or of any ministeriall Churcâ— 2. The Keyes are not given to the naked Office or Order distinct from the spirits working and proving the acts of preaching and discipline to be mighty through God 2 Cor. 10 5. to open hearts Act. 16. 14. for what or who is Paul and who is Apollo but Ministers by whom ye beleeved 1 Cor. 3. 4 5. and Christ alone worketh with the Sacraments and without him great Iohn Baptist can but baptize with water Joh. 1. 26. yet all say administration of Sacraments externally is so tied to the Office as none can administer them without warrant but Pastors 1 John 5. 25 Math. 26 19. 1 Cor. 1. 17. and therefore this is weake to prove that because Christ onely hath the Keyes of the Word yea and of the Sacraments also that therefore he hath not committed the Keyes to certaine Officers under him who are Stewards and Key-bearers 3. The places alledged prove not Is. 6. 9. Christ is given to us that is to the Church as to the subject O say it not but to us the Church as the object and end for our salvation Ergo the Keyes and the Gospell are given to the Church yea and to every faithfull that they may by preaching open and shut Heaven You cannot say so Also Rom. 3. 2. to the Jewes were committed the Oracles and Scriptures that every one might be a Priest and Prophet to teach and sacrifice it is a shame to say so but to the Jewes as to the object and end that by the Scriptures and faith in these Oracles they might be saved 4. The Keyes that is the Gospell is given to all though not to be used alike by all and every one which were grosse confusion that is the same we say the Gospell in use is not given alike to all but to the believers as to the object and end to the Officers as to the subject and proper instrument And so you fall into grosse confusion while you eschew it Robinson The Keyes be one and the same in efficacy and nature and depend not upon the number and excellencie of any persons but upon Christ alone though the order and manner of using them be different Ans. The Sacraments remaine one and the same in nature and efficacy who ever be the persons many or few excellent or not excellent in whose hands soever they be it followeth not therefore the power of administration of Sacraments is given to all 2. We see no difference in the order and manner of using the keyes if all even a faithfull man or woman either may also truly and effectually loose and binde both in heaven and in earth as all the Ministers of the world for those be your words Robinson These keyes in doctrine may be turned also as well upon them which are without the Church as upon them which are within and their sinnes either loosed or bound Matth. 28 19. in discipline not so but onely on them that are within 1 Cor. 5 13. Answ. If this distinction were in Gods Word we would receive it but seeing by preaching there is receiving in and casting out and binding and loosing I aske how these who were never within can bee judged and cast out by preaching more then by discipline may Pastors judge these who are without by preaching and not judge those who are without by discipline and that in a setled Church Robinson There is an use of the keyes publike ministeriall by men in office by the whole Church joyntly
and Ostorodius Theoph. Nicolaides reason against Gods ordinance of a sent Ministerie Robins God hath indeed set in the body some to be eyes and mouth and hath not said to all the Church Goe and preach but first they have not their gifts from the Church Secondly you would have the body to starve if such hands as Deacons will not feed and all the body blinde if the eyes of the watchmen be blinde Answ. Yet thus much is granted that gifts give not the keyes nor authority to use gifts and so that all beleevers though gifted and graced also have not power of the keyes 2. It 's certaine that in a constituted Church there be no hands nor mouthes to doe and speake by authority and ex officio by vertue of an office save onely Elders and Pastors and that if they doe or speake they doe it extraordinarily when Churches hands are lame and her eyes blinde or if they doe and speake ordinarily it is from the law of charity in a private way not by power of the keyes and as Judges and Officers Manuscript 5 ch 4 sect The Churches not the Angels of the Churches are blamed for not executing censures against Balaam Jezabel the Nicolaitans g Robinson saith more 1. These whose workes Christ commendeth for that dwelling where Sathans throne was they kept his name and denyed not his faith these he reproveth for suffering the doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitans 13 14 15 16. 2. They which were commended by Christ for their workes love service faith patience increase of workes are reproved for suffering Jezabel but these were not the Angels onely 3. These conjunctions but never the lesse say though they were zâ—alous in many things yet they failed in not being zealous enough against false teachers Ans. 1. These connexions prove guiltinesse in Angels or Pastors and one common fault may be laid upon them all but hence it followeth not that they all abused one and the same power of the Keyes as being all collaterall Judges no doubt the Angels preached not against Balaam Jâ—zabel and the Nicolaitans doctrine and yet women dwelt where Sathans throne is and there faith and patience was commended and yet our brethren will not say women are rebuked and all the beleevers because they did not pastorally preach against Balaam and Iezabel so this argument hurteth them as much as our cause The Pastors were guilty because they did not in their place use the Keyes and the people because they did not say to Archippus and their Officers Take heed how you governe as Israel was involved in Achans trespasse because they warned not one another 2. Seeing the Spirit of God maketh mention of Churches in the plurall number and every one of the seven Churches of Ephesus Rev. 2. 7. of Sâ—yrna v. 11. of Pergamus 17. of Thyatira 29 of Sardis 3. 6. Philadelphia 13. Laodicea 22. It is cleare there were more Churches then a single Congregation and an independent incorporation in every one of them and so a Presbytery of Angels in every one of them behoved to be guilty of this neglect of discipline yet not all one and the same way It is not cleare enough though that the whole Church in Ephesus was to be rebuked or that all and every one of the Elders whereof there were a good number Act. 20. 26. He prayed with them all they all wept sore were guilty of these abuses of the power of the Keyes for in Sardis there were a few names which had not defiled their garments yet the whole body is rebuked Manuscript Ch. 5. Sect. 4. When the word Congregation is put for the Elders or Judges only it is never understood of them sitting in consistery and judgement there alone by themselves and apart from the people but in the presence of the publick assembly who also had liberty in such cases to rescue an innocent from unjust judgment 1 Sam. 14. 45. I answer we urge not a Church assembly of Elders only to exclude the people from hearing yea and in an orderly way from speaking reasoning and disputing even in our Generall assembly but for judiciall concluding we find not that given to any but to the Church-guides Act. 15. 6. Act. 16. 4. 2 It is not a good argument the people sate with the Rulers and rescued innocent Jonathan 1 Sam. 14. Therefore all the people may fit and give judiciall sentence or impede the Elders to sentence any This I grant is alledged by Ainsnorth for to give popular government to the people as also 1 King 21. 13. and Ier. 26. 11 12. but 1. a fact of the people is not a Law 2. It was one fact and that in an extraordinary case of extreame iniquity in killing innocent Ionathan a Prince and Leader of the people 3. in a civill businesse and the people were to be executioners of the sentence of death and they saw it manifestly unjust 4. they were not the common people only but in thar company were the Princes of the Tribes and heads and the King and his family only on the other side what will this infer but that there were no Kings in Israel who had power of life and death nor any judges as Ainsworth contrary to Scripture sayth but that the people were joynt Judges with the King and that the people in the New Testament are co-equall Judges with the Elders from so poore an example and so the Separatists proving from the peoples power of judging in civill causes which yet is a wide mistake and a punishment bodily to be inflicted upon strangers as Paget doth learnedly observe doe conclude the peoples power of judging in Ecclesiastick causes which concerneth only the members of the visible Church Manuscript We grant it is orderly to tell the Elders the offence that the whole Church be not frivolously troubled but it followeth not that the Officers may judge there alone without consent of the people he who told his complaint to the Levite told it orderly enough to the whole Congregation assembled at Mizpeh Jud. 20. Ans. These to whom we are to complaine these and these only are to be heard and obeyed as Judges binding and loosing in Earth and validly in Heaven Mat. 18. but these are not the multitude nor one Elder only but the Church of Elders 2. if the Church of Believers be the only subject as you teach of the Keys and not the Elders but in so far as they are parts of the believing Church then it is more orderly to complaine to the multitude who only are proper Judges then to Elders who are not properly Judges Manuscript A second reason why we allow such power to the people in Church censures is from the Church of Corinth 1. He directeth the whole Church of Corinth to whom he writeth to excomunicate the incestuous man Ans. He writeth to all the faithfull and so to women the woman is not to usurpe authority over
the man 1 Cor. 14. 34. 1 Tim. 2. 11 12. but to voyce judicially in Excommunication is an act of Apostolick authority Manuscript Ib. The whole Church is to be gathered together and to Excommunicate Ergo not the Bishop and Elders alone 3. Pauls spirit was to be with them and Christs authority 4. the whole Church 2 Cor. 2. did forgive him 5. nothing is in the Text that attributeth any power to the presbytery apart or singularly above the rest but as the reproofe is directed to all for not mourning so is the Commandement of casting out directed to all Ans. 1. It is cleare that if some were gathered together in the power of Christ and the spirit of Paul that is in the authority that he received over the Corinthians for edification 2. Cor. 10. 8. and Pauls Rod 1 Cor. 4. 21. then as many as were convened Church-ways and mourned not for the same did not cast out and authoritatively forgive seeing women and believing children did convene with the whole Church and were not humbled for the sinne and yet women and believing children cannot be capable of pastorall authority over the Church which was given for edification 2. The power of the Lord Jesus that is the keys of the Kingdom of God were committed to Peter as to a Pastor Mat. 16. and power to bind and retaine to loose and pardon sinnes Joh. 20. 20 21 22. Which power is given to these who are sent as Ambassadors as the Father sent Christ v. 21. which power cannot be given to puffed up women 3. Except this be said the Text must beare that there was not a Presbytery of Prophets Governors and Teachers there of all who had a more eminent act in excommunicating and Church pardoning then the women who mourned not for by what reason our brethren would have the act of excommunicating an act of the whole Church convened including all to whom Paul writeth women and children by that same reason we may appropriate it to these only who are capable of Pauls pastorall spirit and authority according as attributes are appropriated by good logick to their own subjects else that cannot be expounded 1 Cor. 14. 31. For ye may all prophecy one by one What may all that the Apostle writeth unto 1 Cor. 1. 2. prophecy one by one even the whole Church even all sanctified in Christ Jesus called to be Saints and all that in every place call upon the Lord Iesus I thinke our brethren will not say so so when Paul sayth 1 Thess. 5. 12. Esteem highly of these that are over you if that command be directed to the whole Church of the Thessalonians which is in God our Father as the Epistle is directed to them all 1 Thess. 1. 1. then doth Paul command the Elders in Thessalonica to esteem highly of themselves for their own workes sake if exhortations be not restricted according to the nature of the subject in hand we shall mock the Word of God and make it ridiculous to all Ainsworth sayth The putting away of leaven was commanded to all Israel Ergo the putting away of the incestuous person is commanded to them all in Corinth without exception and the putting away of the Leper was commanded to all Israel I answer 1. Proportions are weake probations 1. every single woman 2. privately in her own house 3. without Churches consent and authority was to put away Leaven but it is a poore inference therefore every woman in Corinth heâ—e alone might excommunicate without the Churches authority and in their private houses 2. The Priest only judicially putteth away the Leper Deut. 17. 13. and the Priests without the peoples consent put out Uzzah their Prince from the Sanctuary when he was a Leper 2. Châ—on 26. 20. Manuscript Lest this judgement should be restrained to Presbyteries only he magnifieth the judging of the Saints taking occasion from thence to stretch their judicature in some cases even to the deciding of civill causes rather then that they should fly suddenly to Law one against another before Infidels Ans. That upon this Church judging he taketh occasion to magnifiy the judging of the Saints I see not for he passeth to a new subject in reprehending their pleadng before heathen Judges 2. Though that cohesion of the Chapters were granted yet doth he not magnifie the Judging of all the multitude the Saints of men and women shall judge the world by assenting to Gods Judging but all the Saints even women are not Church-Iudges Also he extendeth Judging of civill causes to the most eminent Seniors amongst them v. 5. Is there not a wise-man amongst you no not one who shal be able to judge betwixt his brethren and therefore he layeth a ground that far lesse can all the rest of men and women be Judges Ecclesiastick to binde and loose validly in Earth and Heaven but onely the wiser and selected Elders I may adde what Master Robinson sayth that our argument from confession may be objected to the Apostles no lesse then to Separatists Acts 1. 23. They presented two that is the multitude which were about an hundred and twenty men and women and Act 6. 5. And the while multitude presented seven Deacons to the twelue Apostles and the twelve Apostles called the multitude and so spake to them and v. 6. prayed and laid hands on the Deacons Now when the multitude Acts 1. presented Joseph and Matthias it behoved them to speak spake they joyntly or all at once this were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 14. did the women speak they must not meddle in Church-maters v. 34. did children speak It is impossible so Acts 6. did all the twelve Apostles speak at once and pray vocally at once did the whole multitude speak when they presented the seven Deacons that is confusion by these and the like women and children are utterly excluded from the Church as no parts of it Acts 15. 22. The whole Church sent Messengers to Antioch 1 Coâ— 14. 23. the whole Church commeth together in one to exercise themselves in praying and prophecying but children could not send messengers nor pray nor prophecy and women might not speak in the Church and therefore women and children must be excluded from being parts of the Church if one be excluded why not another and so till we come to the chiefe of the Congreation Ans. This is much for us every way therefore the 120 Acts 1. and the multitude Acts 6. did present the two elect Apostles and the seven Deacons by some select persons and when these select persons spake the Church spake and when one Apostle prayed the whole twelve prayed Ergo there is a representative Church which performeth Church actions in the name of the Church and you will have a representative Church in the New Testament to be a point as you say of Judaisme yet here you are forced to acknowledge it 2. By all good reason when Christ Mat. 18. sayth if he refuse to heare the Church
together a visible act of government in sending messengers to 〈◊〉 Acts 15. 22. Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders and the whole Church our Brethren say the whole collective Church Men Women and Children at Ierusalem to send men of their own company to Antioch 23. And wrote Letters and some Decrees and Commandements to be observed Now the many thousands of the Church of Ierusalem by no possibility could meete aâ— one Parish in one materiall house to administrate the Lords Supper farre lesse could they be as is said Acts 2. 42. all continuing stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and followship our Brethren say in Pâ—rishionall or Congregationall fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayer nor could they dayly continue in the Temple and breake bread from house to house being all one Church or a fixed parishionall meeting in one materiall house Now it is cleare they were 〈◊〉 even after they exceeded many thousands in number in one Parishionall and Congregationall government as our Brethren would prove from Acts 15 22 23 24 25. And Acts 2. 42 43. Else how could they have all their goods common if there be not one visible government amongst them but this government could not be of one single Congregation for all who sold their goods and had all things common could not meete to give voyces in Discipline a judicatory of so many thousand Judges were impossible and ridiculous 2. Paul writeth to the Galatians where there were many Parish Churches Gal. 1. 2. as our Brethren teach yet doth he write to them as he doth to the Corinthians where our Brethren will have one Parish Church and writeth to them of uniformity of visible government that they meete not together to keepe dayes Sabbaths and yeers Gal. 4. 10. as the Iewes did that they keep not Iewish and ceremoniall meetings and conventions Gal. 4. 9. these Churches are called one lumpe in danger to be leavened as Corinth is a Parishionall lumpe in hazard to be leavened as our Brethren teach Now how could Paul will them that the whole lump of all the Churches and Congregations in Galatia be not leavened except he lay down a ground that they were with united authority to joyne in one visible government against the false Teachers suppose there were twenty sundry Kings in Brittaine and twenty Kingdoms could our friends over Sea write to us as to one Nationall lump to beware of the Spanish faction except they laid down this ground that all the twenty little Kingdomes had some visible union in Government and might with joynt authority of all the twenty Kingdomes concurre to resist the common Enemie Here that godly and learned Divine Mr. Baynes sayth Communion in government is not enough to make them one Church this sayth he maketh them rather one in tertio quodam separabili in a third thing which may be separated then one Church Government being a thing that commeth to a Church now constituted and may be absent the Church remaning a Church I answer this is a good reason against the Prelates Dioceseâ—n Church which as Baynes sayth well is such a frame in which many Churches are united with one head Church under one Lord prelate common Pastor to all the Pastors and particular Congregations of the Diocese as part aking of holy things or at least in that power of government which is in the chiefe Church for all the others within such a circuit Now the prelâ—tes frame of a properly so called Church under one Pastor being a Creature with a hundred heads having Church and pastorall care of a hundred little Congregations and Churches is a dreame for we know no such Church fed by a Prelate nor no such prelaticall Argos to oversee so many flocks nor doe we contend that the many Congregations united in a presbyteriall government doe make a mysticall visible Church meeting for all the Ordinances of God But union of many Congregations in a visible government is enough to make all these united Churches one visible ministeriall and governing Church who may meete not in one collective body for the worship of God yet in one representative body for government though worship may be in such a convened Church also as we shall heare The name of the Church I thinke is given to such a meeting Mat. 18. 17. Acts 15. 22. though more usually in Scripture the Church is a fixed Congregation convened for Gods worship now government is an accident separable and may goe and come to a mysticall Church but I thinke it is not so to a Ministeriall governing Church So the Church of Ephesus is called a Church in the singular number Rev. 2. 1. and all the Churches of Asia Rev. 1. 20. but seven Churches and Christ directeth seven Epistles to these seven and writeth to Ephesus as to a Church having one government v. 2. Thou hast tryed them which say they are Apostles and are not and hast found them lyers This was Ecclesiasticall tryall by Church-Discipline yet Ephesus contained more particular Congregations then one 1. Because Christ speaking to Ephesus only sayth v. 7. He that hath an Earâ— to heare let him heare what the spirit sayth unto the Churches in the plurall number 2. Because there were a good number of preaching Elders in Ephesus Acts 20. 28. 36. 37. and it is incongruous to Gods dispensation to send a multiude of pastors to over see ordinarily one single and independent Congregation 3. This I have proved from the huge multitudes converted to the Faith in Ephesus so huge and populous a City where many Iewes and Greeks dwâ—lâ— and where the Word of God grew so mighâ—â—ly Acts 19. 17 18 19 20. and Christ writeth to every one of the seven Churches as to one and yet exhorteth seven times in every Epistle that Churches in the plurall number heare what the spirit sayth Now as our Brethren prove that the Churches of Galatia so called in the plurall number were many particular Churches so doe we borrow this argument to prove that every one of the seven Churches who are seven times called Churche in the plurall number contained many Congregations under them yet doth Christ write to every one of the seven as having one visible Government 2. Concl. A nationall typicall Churchâ— was the Church of the Iewes we deny But a Church nationall or provinciall of Cities Provinces and Kingdomes having one common government we thinke cannot be denyed so Paul Baynes citeth for this 1 Pet. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Though we take not the Word Church for a my sticall body but for a ministeriall company But Acts 1. Matthias was elected an Apostle by the Church as our Brethren confesse but not by a particular Congregation who met every Lords-Day and in ordinary to partake of all the holy things of God the Word and Sacraments 1. Here were the Apostles whose Parish Church was the whole World Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations 2. In this Church were the brethren of Christ
from Galilee Acts 1. 14. and some from Jerusalem v. 15. 3. No particular Church had power Ecclesiasticall as this Church had power to choose an Apostle who was to be a Pastor over the Churches of the whole World as our brethren teach so Mr. Paget sayth well These Disciples who waited upon Christ such as Barsabas and Matthias were no members of the Church of Jerusalem and so what powâ—r had a particular Church to dispose of them who were no members of their Church 3. That which concerneth all must be done by all and that which concerneth the feeding and governing of the Church of the whole World must be done by these who represent the Church of the whole World but that Matthias should be chosen and ordained an Apostle to teach to the whole World concerned all the Churches and not one particular Church 〈◊〉 Therefore there was here either no Church which no man dare say for â—here is here a company of believers where there is preaching and Church government v. 15. 16. 26. or then there was here a Congregation which is against sense and Scripture or there is a Church Provinciall Naturall or Oecumenick call it as you please it is a visible Church instituted in the New Testament after the ascension of Christ and not a Parishionall Church Some answer this was extraordinary and meerely Apostolick that an Apostle should be ordained and is no warrant for a nationall Church now when the Churches of Christ are constituted But I answer this distinction of ordinary and extraordinary is wearied and worne to death with two much employment 2. Beza Calvin Piscator Tilenus Whittaker Chamier Pareus Bucanus professors of Leyden Walaeus VVillet P. Martyr Ursinus c. and all our Divines yea Lorinus the Jâ—suite Cajetan alledge this place with good reason to prove that the ordination and election of Pastors belongeth to the whole Church and not to one man Peter or any Pope Yea Robinson and all our Brethren use this place to prove that the Church to the second comming of Christ hath power to ordaine and exanthorate and censure her officers 2. We desire a ground for this that the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church which is ordinary and perpetuall to Christs second comming should joyne as a collâ—terall cause in ordination and election of an Apostle which ordination is extraordinary temporary apostolick see for this Pet. Martyr VVhittaker Bilson Chamier Pareus Beza Calvin Harmonie of the confessions Iunius Cartwright Fulk Ursinus Zwinglius Munsterus and Theodoret would have us to rest upon Apostolick demonstrations like this And Irenaeus speaketh against rectifiers of the Apostles in this Cyprian sayth the like 2 Acts 6. A Church of Hebrewes and Graecians together with the twelve Apostles is not a particular Ordinary Congregation and a governing Church choosing Deacons therefore they are a nationall Church though the first ordination of Deacons be meerely Apostolick and immediately from Iesus Christ yet the ordination of these seven persons was a worke of the Churches power of the keys Now let our Brethren speake if this was a Congregationall Church that meeteth ordinarily to the word and Sacraments such as they say the Church of Corinth was 1 Cor. â—1 18. So say I of the Church Acts 15. 22. called Apostles Elders and Brethren and the whole Church this could not be a particular Church for no particular Congregation hath Ecclesiasticall power to prescribe Decrees and Canons to all the Churches of the Gentiles and that this was done by an ordinary Ecclesiastick power that remaineth perpetually in a Church such as this was is cleare because our Brethren prove that the whole multitude spake in this Church from vers 12. Then all the multitude kept silence and therefore the multitude say our Brethren spake from v. 21. all the Church voyced in these Decrees and Canons say they 3. Sister Churchers keepe a visible Church-communion together 1. They heare the word and partake of the Seales of the Covenant occasionally one with another 2. They eschew the same excommunicated heretick as a common Church-enemy to all 3. They exhort rebuke comfort and edifie one another as members of one body visible 4. If one sister Church fall away they are to labour to gaine her and if she will not be gained as your Author sayth they tell it to many sister Churches if shee refilse to heare them they forsake Communion with her 1. Here is a visible body of Christ and his Spouse having right to the keyes word and seales of grace 2. Here is a visible body exercising visible acts of Church-fellowship one toward another Hence here a visible Provinciall and Nationall Church exercising the specifick acts of a Church Ergo Here is a Provinciall and Nationall Church For to whom that agreeth which essentially constituteth a Church visible that must be a visible Church You will say they are not a visible Church because they cannot and doe not ordinarily all meete in one materiall house to heare one and the same word of God and to partake of the same Seales of the Covenant joyntly but I answer 1. This is a begging of the question 2. They performe other specifick acts of a visible Church then to meete ordinarily to partake joyntly and at once of the same ordinances 3. If this be a good reason that they cannot be a Nationall Church because they meete not all ordinarily to heare the some word and to partake of the same Ordinances then a locall and visible and ordinary union joyntly in the same worship is the specifick essence of a visible Church but then there was no visible Nationall Churches in Iudea for it was impossible that they could all meete in one materiall house to partake of the same worship 4. These who for sicknes and necessary avocations of their calling as Navigation Traffiquing and the like cannot ordinarly meet with the congregation to partake joyntly with them of these same Ordinances loose all membership of the visible Church which is absurd for they are cast out for no fault 5. This is not essentiall to a nationall Church that they should ordinarily all joyntly meet for the same worship but that they be united in one ministeriall government and meet in their chiefe members and therefore our Brethren use an argument à specie ad genâ—s negativè a provinciall or nationall company of believers cannot performe the acts of a particular visible Church Ergo such a company is not a visible Church just as if I would reason thus A Horse cannot laugh Ergo he is not a living Creature or it is an argument à negatione unius speciei ad negationem alterius such a company is not such a congregationall Church Ergo it is no visible Church at all an Ape is not a reasonable Creature Ergo it is not an Ape 3. Conclu There ought to be a fellowship of
of God as Simon Magus did All the Congreations and Synagogues in Israel might joyne together to condemne him if there were such a thing as an Arke in Scotland if it were taken captive as the Prelates kept the Gospell in bonds it were a morall dutie to all the Congregations to convene in their principall Rulers and Pastors to bring againe the Arke of God and by the power of Discipline to set it free and if the whole Land were involved in a Nationall apostacie they are to meet in their principall members and this is morall to Scotland as to Israel by Ordinances of the Church to renew a Covenant with God that his wrath may be turned off the Land In this sence we see it never proved that it was peculiar to Israel onely to be a Nationall Church Nay I affirme that the Jewes had their Congregationall Churches as we have For that is a Congregationall Church which meeteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that same place for Doctrine and Discipline But the Jewes meet every Sabbath in their Synagogues for teaching the people Gods Law and for Discipline Ergo the people of the Jewes had their Congregationall Churches as we have The major proposition is the doctrine of our brethren except they say as its like they must that except they meet to paâ—take of all the Ordinances of God they are not a Congregationall Church Yet truely this is but a knot in a Rush for 1 Cor. 14 meeting for prophecying onely is a Church Convention and the forbidding of women to teach in the Church is an ordering of a Congregationall worship and the meeting of the Church for baptising of Infants is in the mind of our brethren the formall meeting of a Congregationall Church though they should not celebrate the Lords Supper 2. What Ecclesiasticall meetings can the meeting of Gods people be in the Synagogues of God as they are called Psal. 74. 8 for hearing the Word and for exercise of Discipline if not the Church meeting in a Congregation I prove the assumption by parts and first I take it to be undeniable that they did meet for doctrine Act. 15. 21. For Moses of old time hath in every City them that preach him being read in the Synagâ—gâ—e every Sabbath day And Ps. 74. 8 9. these two are joyntly complained of as a great desolation in the Church the burning of Gods Synagogues in the Land And v. 8. that there are no Prophets which know how long And Math. 9. 35. Christ went about all Cities and Villages teaching in their Synagogues Luke 4 16. He went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day and stood up to read Math. 6. 2. And when the Sabbath day was come he began to teach in the Synagogue and many hearing him were astonished Luke 6. 6. And it came to passe another Sabbath day he entered into the Synagogue and taught John 18. 20. I ever taught in the Synagogues and daily in the Temple whither the Jewes alwayes resort Math. 13. 54. And when he was come into his ownâ— Countrey he taught them in their Synagogue in as much as they were astonished And that there was ruling government in the Synagogue is cleare 1 by their Rulers of the Synagogue Act. 13. 15. Act. 18. 17. 8. Luke 13. 14. Marke 5. 22. 35. And if this Ruler had beene any save a Moderator if he had beene an unlawfull Officer Christ would not have acknowledged him nor would Paul at the desire of the Rulers of the Synagogue have preached as he doth Acts 13. 15 16. 2. Also if there was teaching cisputing concerning the Law in the Synagogue there behooved to be some ordering of these acts of worship for onely approved Prophets were licensed to preach in their Synagogues to say nothing that there was beating in the Synagogues and therefore there behoved to be Church discipline Hence that word of delivering up to the Synagogue Luke 21. 12. 3. There was the censure of excommunication and casting out of the Synagogue and a cutting off from the Congregation Hence that act of casting out of the Synagogue any who should confesse Jesus John 12. 42. which they executed on the blind man John 9. 34. It is true our brethren deny that there was any excommunication in the Church of the Jewes and they alledge that the cutting off from the people of God was a taking away of the life by the Magistrates Sword or as some other say Gods immediate hand of judgement upon them But 1. to be cut off from the congregation or from the people of God is never called simply off-cutting and expounded to be destroying as it is Genes 9. 11. but expressed by dying the death for who will conceive that the Sword of the Magistrate was to cut off the male child that is not circumcised who is said to be cut off from the people of God Gen. 17. 14. or to cut off by death the parents I grant the phrase signifieth bodily death Exod. 31. 14. and for this God sought to kill Moses But Divines say it was excommunication and never Ruler in Israel executed this sentence not Moses nor any Judge that ever we read tooke away the life of an infant for the omission of a ceremony Nor are we to thinke that for eating leavened bread in the time of the Passover the Magistrate was to take away the life as is said Levit. 7. 20 21. 2. â—his word to cut off is expounded 1 Cor. 5. to put away which was not by death for he willeth them 2 Cor. 2. to pardon him and confirme their love to him 2. Neither could Paul rebuke the Corinthians because Gods hand had not miraculously taken him away or because the Magistrate had not taken away his life which was not the Corinthians fault 3. I am perswaded to be cast out of the Synagogue was not to be put to death because Ioh. 9. the blind man after he is cast out of the Synagogue Jesus meeteth with him in the Temple and he believeth and confesseth Christ and Christ Ioh. 16. distingusheth them cleerely They shall kill you and beside that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They shall excommunicate you But though it were granted tâ—â—t the Jewish Church used not excommunication had they no Ecclesiasticall censures before for that I thinke it doth not follow for the excluding of the Leper that these who touched the dead were legally uncleane and might not eate the Passover were censures but they were not civill Ergo Ecclesiasticall they must be as to be excluded from the Lords Supper is a meer Ecclesiasticall censure in the Christian Church Also if Pastors and Preachers be complained of that not only at Ierusalem but every where through all the land they strengthened not the â—â— eased sheep They did not bind up the broken nor bring againe the loosed but with force and cruclty they did governe Ezek. 34. 4. and if every where the Prophets did prophecy falsely and the Priests bare rule by their
or the Covenant of grace and so must tie us to other duties then either the Law or Gospell require of us and so is beside that Gospell which Paul taught and maketh the teacher though an Angell from Heaven accursed and not to be received The Apologie answering this saith First We call it a Church-covenant to distinguish it from civill Covenants and also from the Covenant of grace for the Eunuch and godly strangers Isaiah 56. 3. were in the covenant of grace by faith and yet complained that they were separated from the Church and not in Covenant with Gods visible Church Answ. 1. No doubt an excommunicated person whose spirit is saved in the day of Christ may be in the Covenant of grace and yet cut off from the visible Church for enormous scandals but this is no ground to make your Church-covenant different from the Covenant of grace A beleever in the Covenant of grace may not doe a duty to father brother or master but it is a weak consequence that therefore there is a Covenant-oath betwixt brother and brother sonne and father servant and master which is commanded by a divine Law of perpetuall equity under both old and new Testament as you make this Covenant of the Church to be which persons must sweare ere they can come under these relations of brother son and servant The Covenant of grace and the whole Evangell teach us to confesse Christ before men and to walke before God and be perfect and so that we should joyn our selves to the true visible Churh But none can in right reason conclude that it is a divine Law that necessitateth me to sweare another Covenant then the Covenant of grace in relation to those particular duties or to sweare over againe the Covenant of grace in relation to the duties that I owe to the visible Church else I am not a member thereof And that same Covenant in relation to my father brother and master else I cannot be a sonne brother or servant this were to multiply Covenants according to the multitude of duties that I am obliged unto and that by a divine commandment The word of God layeth a tie on Pastors to feed the flock and the flock to submit in the Lord to the Pastors But God hath not by a new commandment laid a new tie and obligation that Timothy shall not be made a Pastor of a Church at Ephesus and a member thereof nor the Church at Ephesus constituted in a Church-state having right to all the holy things of God while first they be all perswaded of one anothers regeneration secondly while all sware those duties in a Church-oath thirdly and all sweare that they shall not separate from Church followship but by mutuall consent Heare a reply againe to this of the Apologie such promises as leave a man in an absolute estate as he was before and ingage onely his act not his person these lay no forcing band on any man but as every man is tied to keepe his lawfull promise are tied But yet such promises or covenants as are made according to the Ordinances of God and doe put upon men a relative estate they put on them a forcing band to performe such duties such as are the promises of marriage betwixt man and wife master and servant magistrate and subject minister and people brother and brother in Church-state these put on men a divine tie and binde by a divine Ordinance to performe such duties But these Scriptures make not these relations these places make not every man who can teach a Pastor to us except we call him to be our Pastor indeed if we call him we ingage our selves in subjection to him you might as well say It is not the câ—venanting of a wife to her husband or the subject to the magistrate that giveth the husband power over his wife and the magistrate power over his subject but the word of God that giveth power to both and yet you know well the husband cannot call such an one his wife but by covenant made in marriage Answ. This is all which with most colour of reason can be said But these places of Scripture are not brought to prove the Pastors calling to the people or their relative case of subjection to him but onely they prove that the covenant of grace and whole Gospell layeth a tie of many duties upon us which obligeth us without comming under the tie of an expresse vocall and publique oath necessitating us by a divine Law because in this that I professe the faith of Christ and am baptized I am a member of the visible Church and have right to all the holy things and seales of grace without such an oath because the covenant of grace tieth me to aâ—joyne my selfe to some particular congregation and a called Pastor who hath giâ—â—â— and a calling from the Church is a member of the visible Church before he be called to be your Pastor though he be a member of no particular congregation for you lay down as an undeniable principle and the basis of your whole doctrine of independent government that there are no visible Churches in the world but a congregation meeting in one place to worship God which I have demonstrated to be most false for if my hand be visible my whole body is visible though with one act of the eye it cannot be seene if a part of a medow be visible all the medow thought ten miles in bredth and length is visible so though a congregation onely may be actually seene when it is convened within the soure Angles of a materiall house yet all the congregations on earth make one visible Church and have some visible and audible acts of externall government cummon to all as that all pray praise fast mourne rejoyce one with another and are to rebuke exhort comfort one another and to censure one another so farre as is possible and of right and by Law meet in one councell and so by Christs institution are that way visible that a single cong egation is visible which meeteth in one house though many be absent de facto through sickenesse callings imprisonment and some through sinfull neglect and therefore you doe not prove that we are made members of the visible Church having right to all the holy things of God by a Church-oath or covenant as you speake neither doe we deny but when one doth enter a member to such a congregation under the ministery of A. B. but he commeth under a â—ew relative state by an implicite and vertuall covenant to submit to his ministery yea and A. B. commeth under that same relative state of Pastorall feeding of such an one But you doe not say that A. B. entereth by a vocall Church-covenant in a membership of Church order and that by a commanded covenant of perpetuall equity laying a new forcing band upon both the person and the acts of A. B. just as the husband and the wife come under
Church-assemblies and heare the word Ergo this union must be as in all Bodies Cities Houses Armies by Covenant none is made a Citizen to have right to the priviledges of the City but by a Covenant for when one is received a member of an House or of an Army or of any incorporation 〈◊〉 is by a Covenant Answ. 1. The ennumeration is unsufficient for the Seale of Baptisme and a profession of the truth is that which maketh one a member of the visible Church 1 Cor. 12. 13. for by one spirit we are all baptized into one body and can you deny the covenant which is sealed in baptisme and by this are all the Citizens and Domesticks inchurched and received into the visible Church and when one removeth from one congregation to another hee maketh a tacite covenant to serve God in all his Ordinances with that new society but he is not thereby made a member of the visible Church for that he was before nor hath hee right to the Seales as they are Seales of such a Church but as they are Seales of the whole Catholick Church The Apostles saith the apology did two things when they planted Churches 1. They joyned them together in a Church covenant 2. They constituted Elders in every Church Acts 14 13. what the Apostles did after they converted their hearers a baptizing praying for them laying on of hands exhorting inchurching against persecuters disputing against adversaries miracles are acts tending to the good of the Church not acts of planting a Church Answ. 1. The first of these two is in question we reade not of such a covenant as our brethren speake of 2. Converting of Soules after the Church is constitute is an adding to the Church and preaching tendeth to this The Law of the Lord converteth Psal. 19. and when the Church is planted it is not a perfect house but stones are fitted and laid upon the corner stone dayly 3. That the Apostles act of planting is conversion and gathering to a visible body by a covenant we deny for planting is an erecting of Professors and Judges or Officer whether they be converted or not so they professe the truth 3. Arg. All Churches saith the discourse are confounded if there be not this Covenant to distinguish them Smyrna is not Ephesus or Thyatira none of them is Laodicea 2. Every one of them is rebuked for their own faults 3. Faith or cohabitation doth not distinguish them Ergo this Church-covenant only doth distinguish them Answ. Particular congregations differ not in essence and nature as Church covenants differ not in nature onely they differ in accidents and number and it is folly to seeke differences for Church covenants make not the difference for â— Church covenant ia common to them all 2. So Peter may be rebuked for his fault and John for his yet Peter and John differ not in nature The apology addeth it is not a Covenant simply and is generall that doth constitute a Church or distinguish it from another but a Covenant with application or appropriation to these persons as in mariage all promise these same duties yet a Covenant applyed to this man and this woman maketh this man such a womanâ— husband and no other man Answ. If this be all baptisme and professed Faith applied to this man rather then to this shall as well distinguish persons and Churches as Church covenants so applied 2. This is not a good and fit division so to appropriate this Pastor to this flock as he shall be a Pastor to no other people but to them and everteth all communion of Churches and Saints and denieth the use of the Seales in this Congregation from all members of another congregation whereas God hath made him a pastor in relation to the whole visible Church on Earth though his labours be tyed to one determinate Church So Papists marry the Bishop and his Church hence they thought it unlawsull for a Bishop to d mit his Church in any case for Enaristus calleth that spirituall adultery and we cannot approve of the councell of Antioch and Sardis that none can leave his Wife that is his married Church etiamsi à populis eriâ— Episcopus necessitate adactus And they say that Cresâ—on was condemned in the councell of Carthage for changing his Wife to wit his Church and Innocentius 3. saith the spirituall baend of mariage betwixt a Bishop and his Church is stronger then the mariage-band betwixt a man and his wife yea Dominicus a Soto saith to change Churches is against the Law of nature as to change Wives yea saith Innocentius 3. Onnipotens Deus conjugium quod est inter Episcopuâ— Ecclesiam suo tantum judicio reservavit dissolvendum 3. Argu. A free people saith our Author cannot be joyned in a body but by mutuall consent as appeareth in all Relations betwixt Parents and Children Husband and Wife no Church saith he can take charge of a stranger believer comming from another congregation unlesse he give himselfe and offer his professed subjection to the Gospell also it is a part of the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free that every one choose â—his own Pastor Rom. 14. 1. we are to receive a weake believer Ergo he is to offer himselfe to the Church and to their order by Covenant Answ. 1. It is true the relation of Pastor and free people is founded upon a tacite Covenant but this Covenant is made in Baptisme for a pastor is a pastor to yound children whom â—he received into Covenant in baptisme according to that Acts 20. 28. feed the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers now infants are of these because he is to feed them as a pastor loveing Christ his lambes and young ones no lesse then the aged 2. Because hee exercised pastorall acts over young ones when he baptizeth them yet infants are not under a ministery by a Church covenant 3. The act of election includeth a tacite promise of subjection to the Minister who is elected and the pastors acceptation of the Church-Office includeth a tacite promise to feede that flock but this is no Church-covenant which I prove by one argument unanswerable The Church-covenant say our Brethren is the formall cause of our Churchmembership and of a visible Church as a reasonable soule is the formall essence of a man now the covenant that can intervene betwixt a pastor elected and a people electing is a posterior and later by nature then a Church-covenant for a people is a Church as our brethren teach and so constitute in its full power of all Church operations and so hath its entyre essence and essentiall forme before they elect a pastor as a man must be a reasonable man before he can exercise the second operations or actus secundos flowing from a reasonable soule Therefore a Church and Pastor dâ—e take charge of a stranger comming to the Congregation though there be no
Church-covenant betwixt the Pastor and stranger for the Church covenant is prior to the comming of this stranger and hath already constituted the Church in its entyre essence and operations though no stranger come at all and though that stranger never covenant to obey the Pastor and the Pastor never covenant to take care of that stranger 4. Whereas it is said It is a part of the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free that every one choose his own Pastor I see not the truth of this in Scripture The people hath power to choose but that is a part of Christian liberty in this sense I see not the Prophets and Apostles exercised pastorall acts over many who made not choise of their Ministery yea they preached to them against their will and Paul preached as a Pastor to many in Corinth against their will and a faithfull Pastor may preach to many who never made choise of him for their Pastor and to whom the word is the savour of death unto death and to whom he hath vengeance in readinesse 5. There is no liberty purchased to us by Christ but such as is regulated by Gods Word and found reason a liberty of sole will in embracing or refusing a Minister is licence not liberty now in Christ we are called to liberty not to licence and if some of a congregation wanting the spirit of discerning upon prejudice refuse a called pastor to be their pastor yet if the most part of the congregation elect him he is a pastor to all and to those who refused him as Christ doth reigne in the word and Ministery over hypocrites in a congregation who say in their hearts we will not have this man to reigne over us yet here is a Ministeriall charge which a pastor hath lawfully over such as are not willing to submit to that ministery the power of electing a pastor is not infallible what if they or most of them upon sole groundlesse prejudice refuse such a man to be their pastor is he not their pastor because all consent not are we to thinke that Christ purchased a liberty in his bloud of refusing a called pastor nor can we thinke these who taught the doctrine of the Nicolaitans in Pergamus and these who held the doctrine of Balaam or that the woman Jezebel which called her selfe a prophetesse in Thyatira and seduced the people of God to commit fornication and to eate things sacrificed to Idols were received in Pergamus and Thyatira by a Church covenant nor hath it colour of truth that the faithfull there were satisfied in conscience with the conversion of Iâ—zabel and such as held the doctrine of Balaam and that they consented and did choose the Angell of the congregation of Pergamus and Thyatira as our brethren speake for their pastor and yet the pastors and Church are rebuked for not executing the censures of the Church over the followers of Balaam Revel 2. 14 15. and upon Iezabel the false prophetesse Ergo they are not all such materialls of a visible Church as our brethren say even saints by calling and a Church doth well take the charge of those who never offered their professed subjection to Christs Ordinances we are not to thinke that these who called themselves Apostles and yet were Lyers were visible saints approved in the sight of God to the consciences of the Church of Ephesus and that such did offer their professed subjection to the Angell and Church of Ephesus as you teach yet that Church tooke care of them by the censures of the Church and are commended therefore Revel 2. 2. Thou canst not beare them that are evill and hast tryed them which say they are Apostles and hast found them liers If a false teacher shall come to a congregation and be a hearer for some yeares and at length fall to and teach pernitious Doctrine will not the Church censure him labour to stop his mouth yea and excommunicate him that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord I thinke they cannot but exercise some Church censures and that the pastors convincing of such a gaine-sayer and a stopping of his mouth is the very pastorall charge layd upon Titus by Paul Tit. 1. 10 11 12. as is most cleare v 13. Rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the faith 6. That place Ro. 14. is not rightly expounded for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to receive into Church-state by way of covenant but it is as Pareus saith amâ—â—ter placide instituere patienter tolerare to instruct him patiently in the Christian liberty about meates and dayes and so Beza take him in and far lesse slee not his company Marlorat institute fovete donec proficiat and so Calvin e Castellio opitulemini helpe him and the word is Philem. 12. receive him as my bowells not unto Church-state for Philemon was no pastor Question 3. VVhether or not it be lawfull for one or many particular Churches to sweare a plate-forme and prescribed vocall covenant called the confession of Faith of such a Church It is a fit place having spoken so much of a Church covenant to speake of a covenant of the faith of a Church our Brethren being asked what meanes have you to preserve unity and verity Answ. 1. We have say they Scriptures 2. The pastors Epkâ— 4. 11. and Gods promise to leade them in all truth Ierem. 32. 39. Ier. 16. 13. But this is not a right Answer for when we inquire of the meanes to preserve verity and unity we aske for the externall meanes whereby the Scriptures are kept from false glosses it is true the Scriptures keepe themselves from false interpretation but the Question is by what externall meanes doe the Scriptures keepe themselves from false glosses The answer is not right the Scriptures keepe themselves from false glosseâ— by keeping themselves from false glosseâ— Also the Question is by what meanes doe pastors keep unity amongst themselves It is not right answered that pastors by pastors keepe â—nity amongst themselves But we think a plat-forme say â—ur Brethren ibid of doctrine and discipline or a confession of Faith or doctrine according to godlines may be made by any Church or person but say they â—â— plat-forme to be imposed on our selves or others as a binding Rule â—f faith and practise so that all men must believe and walke according to that plat-forme without adding altering or omitting we doubt whether such be lawfull or convenient Whence our brethren conâ—emne the swearing or subscribing by Oath of a confession â—mposed or stinted by the Church Let these considerations be weighed 1. Distinction There is a principall and originall and formall â—round of faith which is the Word of God in the Old or New Testament this is the onely persit and formall ground of Faith 2. There is a secondary and materiall ground of Faith which is so far â— ground of Faith and practise as it agreeth with the VVord â—f God 2.
of writing was that it might be a part of the Canon of faith So also the Covenant of Grace and the Gospell was made upon this occasion by reason that the first Covenant could not save us Heb. 8. vers 7. Rom. 8 2. 3. Gal. 3. 21 22. is therefore I pray you the Covenant of grace but a temporary and a prudentiall peece Upon the occasion of the death of Zelophead who died in the wildernesse without a male-childe whose name thereby was in danger to be delete and blotted out of Israel the Lord maketh a generall Law through all Israel binding till the Messiah his comming Numb 27. 8. If a man die and have no sonne then shall you cause his inheritance to passe unto his daughter this was no prudentiall Law I might alleage infinite Ordinances in Scripture the like to this Yea most of all the Ordinances of God are occasioned from our spirituall necessities are they therefore but humane and prudentiall Statutes that are onely to endure for a time I thinke no. Ob. 3. But if the civill Magistrate had been a friend to the Church Acts 6. his place had beene to care for the poore for the law of nature obligeth him to take care of the poore therefore did a woman in the famine at the siege of Samaria cry Helpe O King and if this were done by Christian Magistrates Pastors should be eased thereof that they might give themselves to the Word and Prayer and there should be no neede of a divine positive institution of Deacons for this charge Answ. That the godly Magistrate is to take care of the poore as they are members of the Common wealth I could easily grant But this is not now in question but whether or not the Church as it is an Ecclesiasticall society should not have a treasure of the peoples Eâ—angelike free-will-offering for the necessity of the Saints as Heb. 13. 16. 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. 2 Cor. 9. 5 6 7 8 and concequently whether or not Christ hath ordained not the Pastors but some officers besides to attend this worke VVee affirme he hath provided for his poore members even their bodily necessi ies Secondly if this be true that there should be no Deacon but the Christian Magistrate then were these seven Deacons but the Substitutes and Vicars of the Emperour and King Now certainly if Apostolike benediction and laying on of hands in the wisdome of God was thought fit for the Vicars and Deputies of the Magistrates it is like that beside the coronation of the Roman Emperour the twelve Apostles ought to have blessed him with prayer and separated him by laying on of hands for this Deaconrie for what Apostolike calling is necessary for the temporary substitute is more necessary and at least that same way necessary for the principall But that civill Magistrates ex officio are to be separated for this Church-office so holden forth to us 1 Tim. 3. 12. I can hardly beleeve Thirdly I see not what the Magistrate doth in his office but he doth it as the Minister of God who beareth the sword Rom. 13 4. and if he should compell to give almes then should almes be a debt and not an almes and free-will-offering It is tâ—uâ— there may intervene some coaction to cause every man to do his duty and to force men to give to the poore but then I say that forcing with the sword should not be an act of a separated Church-officer who as such useth no carnall weapons Fourâ—â—ly the law of nature may lead to a supporting of the poore but that hindreth not but God may ordaine it as a Church-duty and appoint a Church-officer to collect the bounty of the Sainâ—â— 1 Cor. 16. 3. 5. I see not how the Apostle 1 Tim. 3. should not hold forth his Cannons concerning a Deacon to the King if he ex officio be the Church-treasurer but the Apostle doth match him with the Bishop Acts 6. the appointing of the Deacon is not grounded Acts 6. upon the want of a Christian Magistrate but on another ground that the Apostles must attend a more necessary worke then Tables Object 4. But the occasion of appointing Deacons was to disburden the Pastor who was to give himselfe wholy to preaching and praying Ergo at the first the Apostles and so also Pastors were Deacons if therefore the poore be fewer then they were at Ierusalem Act. 6. where the Church did exceedingly multiplie this Office of Deaconry was to returne to the Pastors as its prime and native subject and therefore is not essentially and primarily an Office separated from the Pastors Office And if the poore cease to be at all the Office ceaseth also Ans. I cannot well deny but it is apparent from Act. 6. 4. that the Apostles themselves were once those who cared for the poore but I deny that hence it followes in the case of fewer poore that the Office can returne to the Pastors as to the first subject except you suppose the intervention of a divine institution to place it againe in the Pastors as the power of judging Israel was once in Samuel but upon supposition that Saul was dead that power cannot returne backe to Samuel except you suppose that God by his authority shall re-deliver and translate it backe againe to Samuel For seeing God by positive institution had turned the power of judging over from Samuel into the person of Saul and changed the same into a regall and Kingly power that same authority who changed the power must rechange it againe and place it in and restore it to its first subject 2. The fewnesse of poore or no poore at all cannot be supposed Joh. 12. 8. for the poore you have alwaies with you And considering the afflictions of the Churches the object of the Deacons giving and shewing mercy as it is Rom. 12. 8. cannot be wanting as that the Churches fabricke be kept in good frame the poore the captives of Christian Churches the sicke the wounded the stranger the distracted be relieved yea and the poor Saints of other Churches 1 Cor. 16. be supported 3. Not onely because of the impossibility that Pastors cannot give both themselves to praying and the Word and to the serving of Tables but by reason of the wisdome of Christ in a positive Law the Pastor cannot be the Deacon ex officie in any case For 1. Christ hath made them distinct Offices upon good grounds Act. 6. 4. 2. The Apostle hath set downe divers qualifications for the Bishop 1 Tim. 3. 1. and for the Deacon V. 12 13. And 3. the Pastor who is to give the whole man to the preaching of the Gospell cannot entangle himselfe with Tables 1 Tim. 4. 15. 2 Tim. 2. 3 4 5. if we should say nothing that if there were need of Officers to take care of the poore when there was such grace and love amongst the Saints and Apostles able and willing to acquit themselves toward the poore and when all things were common Act.
hands of the Elders Secondly the practice of the Apostles is our safe rule because at all ordination of Church-officers the Apostles and Pastors were actors and ordainers as Acts 1. 15 16. Acts 6. 2. 3. Acts. 14. 23. 1 Cor. 3. 6. Tit. 1. 5. and this Robinson granteth because the charge of all the Churches did lie on the Apostles As also before the Law the people did not ordaine the Priest hood but God ordained the first borne by succession to be teachers and priests and after he chose the Tribe of Levi without consent of the people though the Princes and heads of Tribes said hands upon them And also God of sundry other Tribes raised up Prophets and did immediately call them they had onely of the people not the calling buâ—â—â—t the least the silent approbation of the faithfull amongst the people Christ comming in the flesh chose twelve Apostles not knowing either the governing Church or the people at length when the Apostles established a Church-government and a Pastor to a certaine flocke they ordained that the châ—sing of the man should be with consen of the people and begâ—n this in Maâ—thias then the seven Deacons then Acts 14. 23. Elders were chosen by lasting up of the peoples hands But that persons were ordained Pastors and sanctified and set apart for the worke of the ministery by the authority of the sole multititude and that without all Officers we never read And the laying on of the hands we see not in the New Testament we shall be dâ—siâ—ous to be informed of this by our deare brethren and intreat them in the feare of the Lord to consider of an unwritten calling of a Ministery Thirdly if ordination of Pastors bee laid downe in the Apostolike Canons to Officers as Officers then is not this a charge that doth agree to the people especially wanting Officers But the former is true Ergo so is the latter I prove the proposition What is charged upon Officers as Officers cannot be the charge of the people because the people are not Officers I prove the assumption because 2 Tim. 2. 1 2. To commit to faithfull men the things of the Gospell which Timothy heard Paul preach is a charge laid on Timothy in the very tearms that he is vers 4. not to intangle himselfe with the affairs of this life but to be separated for preaching the Gospell from all worldly imployment as a Souldier sworne to hiâ— Captaine can attend no other calling vers 5. and as he is to put other Pastors in minde of these things and to charge them that they strite not about words and as he is to be an approved workman dividing the word aright vers 14. 15. But these are laid upon Timothy as a Pastor So 1 Tim. 5. as he sheweth the honour and reward due to Elders so doth he charge Timothy not to heare accusations of Elders but upon two or three witnesses testimony which is the part of Church-Iudges even as hee is to rebuke sinne publikely that others may feare vers 19 20. So according to that same office must imposition of hands be conserred upon Pastors advisedly vers 22. As the Apostle commandeth all beleevers to lay hands suddenly on no man Also Paul would have said I left a Church of beleevers at Crete to appoint Elders in every City if it be the Churches part even though destitute of Elders to appoint Elders over themselves but by what poâ—er Titus was to rebuke sharpely the Cretians that they may be found in the saith by that power was he left at Crete to appoint Elders in every City but this is an officiall power Titus 1. 13. due to Bishops as a part of their qualification vers 9. 4. Argu. The speciall reason against ordination of Elders by Elders onely is weake and that is a succession of Pastors must be granted ever since the Apostles times which is say ourbrethren Popish This reason is weak because a succession of Elders and Pastors such as we require is no more popish then a succession of visible beleevers and visible Churches ordaining Pastors is popish but our brethren maintaine a succession of beleevers and visible prosessors since the Apostles daye Secondly we deny the necessity of a succession perpetuall which papists hold Thirdly we maintaine onely a succession to the true and Apostolike Doctrine papists hold a visible Cathedrall succession to the chaire of Rome and titular office of Peter 4. Quest. Whether or not our brethren doe prove that the Church of believers have power to ordaine Pastors In answering our brethrens reasons I first returne to our Author secondly I obviate what our brethren say in the answer to the Questions sent from old England and thirdly shall answer Robinsons arguments Our Author saith Beleevers have power to lay hands on their Officers because to them Christ gave the keyes that is the ministeriall power of binding and loosing Matth. 16. 16 17 18. and Acts 1. The voices of the people went as farre as any humane suffrages could goe of an hundred and twenty they chose two And Acts 14. 23. The Apostles ordained Elders by the lifting up of the hands of the people Acts 6. They are directed to looke out and chuse seven men to be Deacons And the ancient Church did so from Cyprians words Vlebs vel maxime potestatem habet vel dignâ—s sacerdotes eligendi vel indignos recusandi Answ. The places Math. 16. and 18. give to some power ministeriall to bind and loose open and shue by preaching the Gospell and administring the Sacraments as to stewards the Keyes of an house are given but this power is given to Elders oâ—ely by evidence of the place and exposition of all Divines 2. If the ministeriall power and the warrantable exercise thereof be given to all then are all Ministers for the faculty and exercise doth denominate the subject and agent but that is false by Scripture 2. That all the hundred and twenty did ordainâ— Matthias an Apostle Act. 1. is not said they did nominate and present him 2. they did choose him But authoritative separation for the Office was Christs and his Apostles worke 3. That women and Mary the mother of Iesus v. 14. being there had voice and exercised authority in ordaining an Apostle cannot be orderly Yea the Apostles names are seâ— downe and these words V. 23. and they appointed two are relative to v. 17. these words For he was numbred with us the Apostles and to these V. 21. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us c. and to these v. 22. must one be ordained to be witnesse with us of his resurrestion and they appointed two that is the Apostles and the rest are set downe as witnesses v. 14. These continued that is the Apostles with the women and Mary the mother of Iesus c. The women and others were onely consenters 3. Here is no probation that onely a company of believers wanting Pastors are
the Lords resurrection 3. It is good you grant that ordination and election are different we will make use of it hereafter The Authour addeth We willingly also acknowledge where God hath furnished a Church with a Presbytery to them it appertaineth by imposition of hands to ordaine Elders and Deacons chosen by the Church but if the Church want a Presbytery they want a Warrant to repaire to other Churches to receive imposition of hands to their Elders 1. Because ordination is a worke of Church power now as Church hath power over another so no Presbytery hath power over another Church then their owne All the Apostles received alike power Ioh. 20. 23. 2 The power of the keyes is a liberty purchased by Christs blood Math. 28. 8. Phil. 2. 8 9 10. Therefore it is unlawfull for any Church to put over that power into the hands of another Answ. We desire a warrant from Gods Word where Elders where they are present are to ordaine Elders by imposition of hands and not believers for ordination is a worke of the Church Officers are not the Church nor are they parts or members of the Church but onely accidents the Church hath its full being the power and use of the Keyes given to them by Math. 18. though there be not a Pastor or Officer among them and if Christ before his resurrection gave the Keyes to beleevers as to his Spouse living body and such as have Peters faith Math. 16. Resolve us we beseech you brethren in this how Christ can give the Keyes after his resurrection Ioh. 20. 23. to the Apostles as Pastors and as no believers not his Spouse not his body for Officers as Officers are not the redeemed of God nor Christs Spouse If you say that Christ Ioh. 20. gave the Keyes to his Disciples as beleevers then he gave the power of baptizing after his resurrection also by the parallel place Math. 28. 19. to the Apostles as to beleevers Hence 1. Christ hath never given the Keyes to Officers as Officers 2. The place Ioh. 20. is but a renewing of the Keyes given to the Church Math. 16. and Math. 18. and all believers are sent and called to be Pastors as the Father sent Christ and as Christ sent his Apostles as our Lord speaketh John 20. 21. This I thinke all good men will abhorre though M. Smith saith these words and that power Iohn 20. 21. was given to Cleoâ—has and Mary Magdalen And by your way Paul as I thinke without warrant interdicted women of the use of that power that Christ purchased by his blood 3. There is no warrant of the Word to make good that Christ gave the Keyes to Officers as Officers by your way but onely to Officers as to beleevers and therefore believers ought rather to ordaine Pastors then the Officers though there be Officers to ordaine 3. That Pastors of other Congregations may not ordaine Pastors to Congregations who have no Pastors of their owne as they may baptize infants to them also we see no reason Yea and Church power is not a thing that cannot be communicated to another Church by your Doctrine for ye grant members of one Congregation may receive the Lords Supper in another Congregation except you deny all communion of sister Churches for it is a worke of Church power to give the Lords Supper to any then if you give that Sacrament to members of another Congregation consider if the liberty purchased by Christs Blood be not communicable to other Churches Thirdly saith he if one Church repaire to another Church for ordination they may submit to another Church for censuring of offenders now how can Churches censure these that are not members Is not this a transgression of the Royall Law of governement Mat. 18. 15 16 17 18. Answ. The offence being great and the offender deserving to be cast out of all the visible congregations round about yea and to be bound in Earth and Heaven the congregation is to have recourse to all the congregations consociated when they are convened in one presbytery that they being convened in their principall members may all cast him out because it concerneth them all as if onely one congregation doe it they transgesse that royall Law Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet 2. The Author granteth that the Church presented their officers chosen by them to receive ordination from the Apostles Ergo The Church did give a way their liberty of ordination bought by Christs bloud to the Apostles not as to Apostles but as to pastors which is against our Brethrens Doctrine for except the Apostles bee said to ordaine Officers as Pastors and not as Apostles our Brethren shall find none to be the successors of Apostles in the power of ordination but onely Believers so Pastors have no power at all to ordaine Pastors the contrary whereof our Brethren teach Now I come to the Brethrens minde in their Questions It was objected How can it be lawfull for meere lay and private men to ordaine Elders they answer the persons ordaining are the publick assembly and so cannot in any congruity of speech be called meere Lay-men I answ Seeing they have no Church office they can be nothing but meere private men For the unwarrantable action of ordination maketh them not publick Officers As if a Midwife baptize in the name of the Church shee is not a meere private person 2. They say The Church hath power from Christ for the greater to wit for Election Ergo she hath power to doe the lesse which is ordination or ordination dependeth upon Election and it is nothing but the putting of a person in actuall possession of that office wherunto he had right by Election Answ. Ordination by your owne grant is more then Election for the Apostles ordained Acts 6. and must have done the most and the multitude elected the seaven DeacÌ„ons Acts 6 2. Ordination is more then the installing of a person chosen it is a supernaturall act of the Presbytery separating a man to an holy calling election is posterior to it and is but an appropriation of a called person his Ministery to such a particular flock 3. Say they Ordination may be performed by the Elders where there be Elders 1 Tim. 4. 14. yet it is an act of the whole Church as the whole man seeth but by the Eye Answ. Though you say Pastors in the Churches name baptize yet doth it not follow Ergo where Pastors are not the Church of believers may baptize 4. They object when the Church hath no Officers the prime grave mâ—n performe ordination as Nuâ— 8 The Israelites layd on Hands on the Levites that is some prime Man layd on hands Answ. Israel wanted not Officers 2. These prime Men are called the Congregation Ergo there is a representative Church 5. They object If B lievers may not ordaine it shall follow either that Officers may minister without ordination against the Sripture 1 Tim. 4. 14. Heb.
provinciae cum iis orainare sibi comprovincales Episcopos quod si id facero negligat populus convocare debet Episcopos vicinae provinciae peterâ— sibi rectorem In the councell of Toledo it was ordained that the Bishop of Toledo might chuse in quibustibee Prâ—vinciis in any provinces about Bishops to be his successors salvo privilegio uniusâ—njusquâ— provinciae Cardinalls are forbidden to usurp to chuse a Bishop if the see vace in the time of a generall Councell this was enacted in the councell of Constance and Basil. The Abbot of Panormo saith it was obtained of the councell of Carthage to avoyde dissension that they should transfer their right to the Cardinalls So Almain and Gerson prove the equity of this by good reasons That wicked councell of Trent labouring to exalt the popes chaire did abrogate these good acts to the offence of many as the Author of the review of the councell of Trent sheweth nor should good men stand for Leo his abrogation of what the councell of Basil did in this kinde as may be seene in that wicked councell of Lateran wherein much other wicked power is given to the pope and his Legates by Iulius III. and Paul the III. and Pius the IIII. and Theodoret saith all the Bishops of a Province ought to bee at the ordination of a Bishop The ordination of the worthy Ambrose as hee himselfe saith was confirmed by all the Bishops of the East and West Cornelius Bishop of Rome was confirmed by the Bishops of Africa More of this may be seene in Zonaras In Theodoret the councell of Carthage and Petrus a Navarre who all witnes ordination of a Bishop was never done in the ancient Church by one single Congregation and these destitute of pastors and Elders The learned say that Gregory the VII or Hildebrand did first exclude the people from voycing in elections of pastors Illiricus sayth onely from the time of Frederick the XI about the yeare 1300 they were excluded from this power And though it were true that the election of Alexander the III. was made 400 yeeres before that by the Cardinalls onely without the peoples consent the Law and Logick both say from one fact no Law can be concluded Yea the election of Gregory the VII saith Vasquez was five hundred yeeres before that and like enough that such a monster and such a seditious head to the Lords annoynted to Henry the IIII as this Gregory was could violate Christs order Platina sayth so yet Bellarmine Suarez and others grant in the Apostles time it was so bâ—â— because it was a positive Law some say and others that it was a Church constitution not a divine Law the Pope might change it Yet the Jesuite Sanctius in his comment proveth it from Scripture Azorius sayth it should be common Law communi jure Krantius layeth the blame of wronging the people in this on Gregory the IX yea the councell of Bracare the second councell of Nice The councell of Constantinople 4 called the eight generall Councell the councell of Laodicea are corruptly expounded by Bellarmin Vâ—squez and others because 1. They forbid onely disorder and confusion 2. That all the multiude without exceptionosage gifts or sexes should come and speak and voyce at the election For in the councell of Antioch it is expressely forbidden that the multitude should be debarred And wee will not deny but a pastor may be sent to a Church of Infidels that knoweth nothing of Christ without their knowledge as Ruffinuâ— sayth that Frumentius was ordained Bishop to the Indians they knowing nothing of it Indis nihil scientibus neque cogitantibus Epiphanius writeth to Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem that hee had ordained Paulinianus a presbyter the people not consenting Gregorius ordained Augustine Bishop of England and sent him to them to teach them Anglis nescientibus And Gregorius II. ordained Bonifacius a Bishop to bee sent to Germany Germanis nihil de eare cogitantibus And thus Perkins if the Gospell should arise in America where there were no Ministers ordination might be wanting And why not say I election also in another case if as Petrus Martyr sayth well a woman may be a Preacher of the Gospell Yea and a Turke sayth Zanchius converted by reading the New Testament and converting others may baptize them whom hee converteth and be baptized where both ordination and election should be wanting and this may answer what Robinson saith for ordination by the people Nor did the people first begin to have hand in election in Tertullians time as Bellarmine saith nor yet that the people might love their Bishops nor yet by meere custome Conclus III. It is false our Brethren say that the calling of a Minister consisteth principally and essentially in election of the people for the Apostles were essentially pastors yet not one of them except Matthias was chosen by the people 2. If as our Brethren say the peoples after acceptance may supply the want of Election at first as Iacobs after consent to Leah made her his Wife yet all the pastorall acts of Word Sacraments and censures going before the after consent shall be null because he wanteth that which most principally and essentially is required in a calling And all baptized by him must be rebaptized And what if the people shall never assent and it is ordinary that hypocrites in hearts will never consent to the Ministry of a gratious pastor shall his acts of converting and baptizing be no pastorall acts and to the hypocrites no pastorall acts and shall all be Infidels who are baptized by him The people are not infallible in their choise and may refuse a man for a pastor whom God hath called to be a pastor election maketh not one a pastor in foro Dei then he shall be no pastor whom God hath made a Pastor because people out of ignorance or prejudice consent not to his Ministery Nor are we of Dr. Ames judgement that the calling of a Minister doth essentially consist in the peoples election for his externall calling consisteth in the presbyters separation of a man for such a holy calling as the Holy Ghost speaketh Wee finde no Church-calling in all Gods Word of sole election of the people and therefore it cannot be the essentiall forme of a right calling All the arguments of Doctor Ames prove that election is necessary to appropriate a made Minister to such a Congregation but concludeth not the poyn Qu. 5. From whence had Luther Calvin and our blessed Reformers their calling to the pastorall charge This question there is moved because of our Brethren who thinke 1. If ordination of pastors by pastors be so necessary for an ordinary calling to the Ministery and if Election of people be not sufficient though they want pastors and Elders then Luther and our Reformers had no calling
for they were called by the Pope and his Clergy for saith Robinson when there be no 〈◊〉 Church-officers on Earth to give ordination we must hold with Arrians and expect new Apostles to give ordination neither can a true pastor go and seek a calling from a false pastor Hence observe carefully the following distinctions to obviate both papists cavillations and our Brethrens doubts 1. Distinct. That is 1. Properly extraordinary which is immediately from God without any other intervening cause so Moses his calling when God spake to him out of the Bush to goe to Pharaoh and command the letting goe of his people was extraordinary for both the matter of the calling and the persons designation to the charge was immediately from God Luthers calling this way was not extraordinary because hee preached no new Gospell nor by any immediate calling from God 2. That is extraordinary which is contrary to the Law of of nature Neither the calling of Luther nor of Hus and Wiccliff was extraordinary for that any inlightened of God and members of the Catholick Church should teach informe oâ— helpe their fellow-members being seduced and led by blind guides is agreeable to the Law of nature but according to our Brethrens grounds Luthers calling here was not onely extraordinary but unlawfull and contrary to a Divine Law For now when Apostles are ceased Luher had no warrant if our Brethren say right no calling of God to exercise pastorall acts of preaching converting soules to Christ and baptizing through many visible Churches congregations because that is say they Apostolick and no man now can bee a pastor but in one fixed congregation whereof he is the elected pastor 3. That is extraordinary which is beside a Divine positiâ—â— Law So that one should be chosen a pastor in an Iland where there be no Elders nor pastors at all and that the people onely give a calling is extraordinary and so it is not inconvenient thaâ— something extroardinary was in our reformers 4. That is extraordinary which is against the ordinary corruptions wicked and superstitious formes of an ordinary caling so in this sense Luher and our reformers calling was extraordinary 2. Dist. A calling immediately from God and a calling from God some way extraordinary are farre different An immediate calling often requireth miracles to confirme it especially the matter being new yet not alwayes John Baptists calling was immediate his Sacrament of Baptisme beside the positive order of Gods worship yet hee wrought no miracles but an extraordinary calling may be where there is an immediate and ordinary revelation of Gods Will and requireth not miracles at all 3. Dist. Though ordinarily in any horologe the higher wheele should move the lower yet it is not against ordinary art that the hotologe be so made as inferiour wheeles may move without the motion of the superiour Though by ordinary dispensation of Gods standing Law the Church convened in a Synod should have turned about Hus Wicliff Luther to regular motions in orthodox Divinity yet it was not altogether extraordinary that these men moved the higher wheeles and laboured to reforme them Cyprian urged Reformation Aurelius Bishop of Carthage Augustin and the African Bishops did the like the Bishop of Rome â—epining thereat It is somewhat extraordinary that Reformation should begin at Schollers and not at principall Masters 4. Dist. A calling may be expresly and formally corrupt in respect of the particular intention of the ordainers and of the particular Church ex intentione ordinanris operantis Thus Luthers calling to bee a Monke was a corrupt calling and eatenus and in that respect hee could not give a calling to others But that some calling may be implicitely and virtually good and lawfull in respect of the intention of the Catholick Church and ex inteâ—tione opâ—ris ipsius ordinationis he was called â—o preach the Word of God 5. Dist. Luthers Oath to preach the Gospell did oblige him as a pastor this is his calling according to the substance of his Office and is valid but his Oath to preach the Roman Faith intended by the exacters of the Oath was eatenus in so far unlawfull and did not oblige him Even a Wife married to a Turke and swearing to bee a helper to her Husband in promoving the worship of the Mahomet or being a papist is ingaged in an Oath to promote Romish Religion if shee bee converted to the true Faith of Christ needeth not to be married de novo but remaineth a married Wife but is not obliged by that unjust Oath to promove these false Religions though the marriage Oath according to the substance of marriage duties tieth her 6. Dist. A pastor may and ought to have a pastorall care of the Catholick Church as the hand careth for the whole body and yet neither Luther nor Zuinglius are universall pastors as were the Apostles For they had usurped no power of Governing and Teaching all Churches though I professe I see no inconvenience to say that Luther was extraordinarily called by God to goe to many Churches to others then to Wittenberg where hee had one particular charge yea even through Germany and the Churches of Saxony and Zuinglius through the Helvetian and Westerne Churches which yet doth not make them essentially Apostles because 1. They were not witnesses of Christs Death and Resurrection which as a new Doctrine to the World as Apostles they behoved to preach Acts 1. v. 22. They only revealed the old truth borne downe by an universall Apostacy 2. Because they were not immediately called nor gifted with diverse Tongues And the like I may say of Athanasius for men in an extraordinary apostacy to goe somewhat farther then to that which a particular Church calleth them to is not formally apostolick yet lawfull 7. A calling to the Ministery is either such as wanteth the essentialls as gifts in any messenger and the Churches consenâ— or these who occupy the roome of the Church the Church consenâ—ing such a Minister is to bee reputed for no Minister Or. 2. An entry to a calling or a calling where diverse of the Apostles requisites are wanting may bee a valid calling as if one enter as Caiphas who entered by favour and money and contrary to the Law was High-Priest but for a yeer â—yet was a true High-Priest and prophecied as the High-priest 8. If the Church approve by silence or countenance the Ministery of a man who opened the Church doore to himselfe by a silver key having given the prelate a bud The ordinance of God is conferred upon him and his calling ceaseth not to be Gods calling because of the sins of the instruments both taking and giving 9. Though Luther was immediately called by Men An. 1508. by the Church of VVittenberg as may be seene in his writings as Gerard sheweth and the Jesuit Becanus saith hee was called and ordained a Presbyter and so had power to preach and administer the Sacraments yet that hindereth
3. Wee are no where forbidden in Gods Word to heare Teachers sent and called but onely Wolves in sheepe skinnes voyd of all calling and intruders for pastors may be antichristian in the manner of the entry as Cajaphas 2. In the matter of their Doctrine Teaching some of mens Traditions in place of Gods Word as Scribes and Pharisees 3. Yea and brooke an antichristian calling as prelates doe and have done in Brittain◠and yet their Ministery be valid For that the calling of a Minister be valid and his Ministeriall acts not null it is sufficient that the governing Church give him a calling either by themselves their expresse call their silence or tacite consen◠or their approbation communicating with him in his Ministery or by these to whom the Church resigned her power or by these who stand in place of the Church though prelates invade the place of the Church yet because first they themselves be pastors and have power to teach and Baptize as pastors called of Christ. Mat. 18. 19. 2. Because they stand for the Church the Church approving or some way by silence consenting as in the case of Cajaphas entry to the priest-hood thereunto these who are baptized of them are not rebaptized and these who are ordained pastors by them are not reordained but have a calling to the Ministery and doe validly confer a calling upon others Yea many of great learning thinke that at the beginning of Reformation thousands being under popery baptized by Midwives and private persons were never rebaptized not that they thinke such Baptisme valid but where the Sacrament is wanting ex invincibili ignorantia facti out of an invincible ignorance of a fact such that way baptized doe indeed want the Lords Seale but wee cannot for that say that they are no better then Infidells and unbaptized Turkes and Iewes because 1. Their being borne in the visible Church giveth a federall holinesse as all of Jewish parents had a federall right to circumcision and were eatenus in so far separated from the wombe 2. Because their profession of that Covenant whereof Baptisme is a seale separateth them sufficiently from Infidells though they want the seale externall But our Divines esteeme and that justly baptisme administrated by Women or such as have no calling to be no baptisme at all for which let the Reader see Calvin Beza the learned Rivetus We stand not for what Bellarmine Maldonatus Gretserus and other papists say on the contrary and also Cajetan and Toletus 4. Robinson and our Brethren acknowledge that the Church of Rome hath true baptisme for they retaine the essentiall causes of Baptisme even as the vessells of the Lords house profaned in Babylon may be carried back to the Temple but if these vessells were broken and mingled with brasse and iron and cast in another mould they could not obtaine their former place in the Temple Baptisme is a vessell profaned in Babell but not broken but the ministry and priest hood of Rome is like the new melted and mingled vessell and essentially degenerated from the office of pastorship But I answer if baptisme be valid in Rome so are the Ministers baptizers for if the Ministers and priests be essentially no Ministers the baptisme administrated by the Romish priests is no Ministery and all one as administrated by Midwives and private persons who therefore cannot administrate the Sacraments validly in the essentiall causes because they are essentially no Ministers If therefore Robinson will have the Romish priest-hood essentially no ministery by that same reason he must say baptisme administrated by Romish priests i◠no baptisme the contrary whereof he confesseth otherwise hee must say baptisme administrated à non habente potestatem even by Women and private Men is valid and cannot be but esteemed lawfull in the substance of the act 2. These have a ministery essentially entyre who have power under Christ to preach the Gospell and administrate the Sacraments Matthew 28. 19. The Romish priests have this and are called to this by the Church But saith Robinson How can England forsake the Church of Rome and forsake the ministery which is in the Church as in the subject especially seeing you teach that a true ministery maketh essentially a true Church I answer England may well separate from Rome everting the fundamentall parts of Faith and not separate from Romes baptisme or ministery in so farre as they be essentially the ordinances of Christ and I retort this argument How can Separatists separate from both us and Rome and yet retaine the baptisme in both our Church and Rome 2. A ministery true in the essence may make a Church true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in so far but because of many other substantiall corruptions in Rome it is a Church which we ought to forsake But sayth Robinson Apostates in the 10. Tribes leaving the Church which was radically at Jerusalem upon their repentance were readmitted to enter into the Temple into which no uncircumcised person might enter but any of the priests following Idolls were never readmitted to be priests though they should repent Therefore the ministery and baptisme are not alike I answer that the true Church was onely at Jerusalem radically as you say would import that the 10. Tribes revolting from Davids house ceased to be a Church which is false Israel though all the Land were in Covenant with God had circumcision and the Passover and so were a true visible Church even when they did meete in their Synagogues The Altar sacrifices Temple are not the essentialls of a visible Church they were a Church and did pray toward the Temple even in Babylon and were to professe the True God before the heathen Ierem. 10. 11. 2. There be typicall reasons to hinder men why they cannot be capable of the priest-hood that did not exclude them from Church state but this hindereth not but if the seales administated by a Minister be true seales then is the Minister thereof catenus in so far a true Minister He addeth a Minister may leave off to be a Minister and be justly degraded and excommunicated but none ever attempted to unbaptize one who was baptized nor can he be unbaptized who is baptized Answ. That proveth a difference betwixt the ministery and Baptisme which is not the question but it proveth not this to be false if Romes baptisme be lawfull in its essence so is Romes ministery CHAP. 9. SECT 9. Of the addition of Members to the Church THE Author sayth a Church cannot consist of a fewer number then seven since there must be foure of them a Pastor Doctor Elder and a Deacon Ans. And wee contend not for number but foure may be a Church of your making and in Church-covenant for it is a wonder that you require officers who by your Doctrine cannot be parts of the Church seeing you make them accidents of the Church and teach that the Church in its being and operation
in the parable imputeth it to the sleepines and negligence of the servants that tares were sowen amongst his wheat Mat. 13. 35 38 39. Ergo Pastors are to be blamed that there be scandalous persons in the visible Church Answ. This doth but strengthren Anabaptists who objected the same It is a fault that a very popish Doctor Aquinas condemneth Theologia symbolicâ— non est argumentativa For it is not said while the servants sleeped the envious man did sâ—w his seed but while men sleeped which is spoken saith Pareus according to the manner of men for otherwise Gods providence can hinder the growing of tares and Cajetan saith here is not accused the negligence of pastors and certainly since as Bullinger observeth well Christ when he expoundeth the parable passeth this part of it to teach us as Calvin saith not to presse every part and tittle of a parable except we would be saith Bullinger Christo argutiores sharper sighted then Christ and therefore the Author alleadgeth that by sleeping of men is understood the negligence of pastors but that is beside the Text and is not expounded at all of Christ but signifieth that men cannot see the hollownesse and falsehood of Hypocrites till it breake out in their actions no more then the sleeping husbandman can see when weeds grow up in his Fâ—elds And if the Lord here condemne the sleepinesse of Pastors for suffering scandalcus Professors to be members of the Church how doth the Lord forbid these servants to plucke up the tares but to let them grow till Harvest for he commandeth the officers to cast out of the Church and excommunicate the scandalous persons Yea certainly seeing the Field is the Field of the visible church it maketh for us against our Brethren that wicked men are growing in the visible church It is true that Barow with the Anabaptistes expound the Field to be the Field of the World mistaking Christs Words v. 41. which indeed signifie the Field of the visible Kingdome of Christ because the World of all mortall men is not the Lords Field where he soweth his Wheate but the visible Church only is such a Field For seeing the Gospell the immortall seed of the regenerate 1 Pet. 1. 23. is not sowen through the whole World of mortall men Psal. 147. 19 20. Mat. 10. 5 6. Acts 16. 6. but only in the visible Church the Field must be Christs Field or his World of Church-Professors And also by this their exposition falleth for then it is the sleepines and sloth of Preachers that wicked men are borne in the World of mortall men which is absurd We are bidden 2 Tim. 3. 5. Turne away from such as have a form of godlines and have denied the power thereof Ergo we cannot joyne in Church communion with them Answ. It is cleare by this argument to our Brethren that one and the same reason holdeth for turning away and separation from all persons and Churches which are not inchurched by covenant and constituted of visibly regenerated persons and the not admitting Church-members So our Brethren by this professe the lawfulnesse of separation from all Churches except from their owne 2. No marvell then Paul will have Timothy to separate from Apostates and from Resisters of the truth v. 8. and from proud boasters blaspâ—emers Traitors For such are to be excommunicated as 1 Tim. 6. 3. 5. At lâ—quitur Paulus saith Parkerus de fundamentali corruptione istius Doctrinae quâ— est secundum piâ—tatem but Paul here forbiddeth to exhort the proud and malitious blasphemers and resisters of the Truth and not to waite upon them any longer whereas otherwise he had said in the end of the preceding Chapter 24. 25. 26. Others who are detained in the snare of Satan must be waited on and instructed with meekenesse if God will give them Repentance Ergo Tim thy was as a Pastor to instruct unconverted persons and to joyne in communion with them but as for desperate enemies and blasphemers he was not to waite on them nor to exhort them with meekenesse And if this Text prove any thing it will conclude against our Brethren that such as deny the power of godlinesse should not be hearers of the Word and farre lesse as our Breathren reason members of the visible Church Can any sayth the Author judge such persons fit materials for the constituting and edifying of a Church who are more fit for the ruine and destruction of the Church such as leave their first love as all hypocrites will at length do they procure the removall of the candlestick Answ. The argument must be thus formed All these whom God intendeth shall edifie and not ruine the Church are to be only members of the visible Church but all knowen hypocrites are such Ergo. The proposition is false for if we speake of Gods secret Intention and his decreeing Will It is not a rule for the Church to square and to regulate them in the choysing or refusing Church-members because God intendeth in his decreeing wiâ—l that many hypocrites such as Judas and Dâ—mas shall be Church-members and let our Brethren judge if they be fit materialls to edifie the Church If we speake of Gods revealed will the proposition also is false for by our Brethrens Doctrine it is Gods revealed will that the Church receive as Church-members latent hypocrites such as Simon Magus Acts 8. who are conceived to be regenerated as the church Acts 8. conceived Simon Magus to be a sound Believer as our Brethren say and yet latent hypocrites are no lesse unfit materialls to build the Church then knowen hypocrites 2. We doe not thinke that hypocrites fallen from their first love and by scandalous living declaring themselves to be such should bee kept in the Church But so the Author alleadgeth Revel 2. That the Church of Ephesus falling from her first love must bee a false constituted Church in which there were members fitter to ruine then to edifie the Church And yet certaine it is Paul Eph. 1. and Christ Revâ—l 2. acknowledgeth the Church of Ephesus to be a true visible Church We passe saith the Author the types of the Old Testament which yet are not without their due weight Rough stones were not laid in the building of Salomons Temple till they were hewen and prepared before 1 King 6. 7. and behold a greater then Salomen is hâ—re the attendance of the porteres suffering none to enter into the Temple who were uncleane 2 Chron. 23. 19. doth evidently type forth the watchfulnesse of the officers of Christs Church to suffer none uncleane in estate or in this course of life to enter into the fellowship of the Church which ought to be a communion of Saints Their apology sayth though all Israel were admitted to the fellowship of the Ordinances administrated in the synagegne yet none uncleane were admitted into the Temple for Revel 21. without are dogs c. So Master Can and Robinson
originally in caetu sidelium in a Church of Believers but they cannot say that therefore the acts of Preaching administrating of the Sacraments and all acts of jurisdiction can be exercised by the Believers because they are the first subject Secondly the farther that the members or Churches either Congregationall Presbyteriall or Nationall are removed in locall distance one from another the lesse is the visible and externall communion of rebuking comforting and admonishing one another yet the power and obligation of these duties are not removed So though the Nationall Churches be locally distant one from another yet their power of exercising duties and so their power of Jurisdiction in an Oâ—cumenicke Councell is not from thence concluded to be null Yea Nationall duties upon occasion are still obligatoryâ— and communion of men of sundry Nations is cleare to mee Esai 2. 3. many Nations shall flow unto the Mountaine of the Lords House Zach. 8. 23. Ten men shall take hold out of all Languages of the Nations they even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew saying we will goe with you for wee have heard that God is with you I do not say these Nations doe meete all in one Synod but the places doe well prove the power lawfull of performing duties whereas the exercise of them in one place is not hic nunc in ordinary providence possible And so this consequence must be weake the whole catholick visible Churches in their principall guides cannot ordinarily and constantly meet hic nunc for the exercise of their power Ergo they have no such power For if the power be exercised in parts which through occurrences of Providence and the corruption of mens nature cannot be exercised in whole at once yet it s not hence evinced to be a power not given of Christ for eâ—ification for by our Brethrens grant three thousand are added to the Congregationall Church of Jerusalem Acts 2. and to this Church of three thousand and a hundred and twenty Christ hath given the ordinary power of the Keyes as to the first subject though through occurences of providence and the corruption of mans nature some of these suppose a thousand through sicknesse pest danger of persecution and sinfull separating from the assembly of Saints could not hic nunc meet in one house to exercise joyntly all the acts of that power which our Brethren say is given to them by Christ they cannot say therefore Christ never gave to this whole Church consisting of three thousand and a hundred and twenty any such power Thirdly there is a great difference betwixt the power given ad esse simplictèr to the being of a Church and the power given ad benè esse tantùm onely to the well-being 2. Great difference also there is betwixt ordinary power to be exercised constantly and ordinarily because of neerer consociation of the Churches in those things that concerne that Church in particular suppose a presbyteriall or Congregationall Church and a power to be exercised but more rarely not ordinarily because of the lesse communion visible and great locall distance of Churches as it falleth out in the whole visible Church Now from this First The ordinary power of Jurisdiction because of neerest vicinity and contiguity of members is given by Jesus Christ to one Congregation in an Isle 1. Because that Church is a Church properly so called though it be not a perfit and complete Church I say it is a Church properly so called Because 1. It is a little City and a little Kingdome of Jesus Christ having within it selfe power of the Word and Sacraments and that is a Church and hath the essence of a Church to which agree the essentiall notes of a visible Church Now preaching of the Word and Administration of the Sacraments are essentiall notes of a visible Church But I say it is not a compleate and perfit Church in the latitude of visibility for Churches are lesse or more visible according as they have lesse or more visible communion for visible communion constituteth a visible Church Now a Congregation in a remote Island hath a lesse communion visible with other visible Churches then conscciated visible Churches have 2. It is not compleate and perfit in its operations because in case of doubts of conscience touching government and practice and dogmaticall poynts it wants the joynt authority and power of Jurisdiction needfull for the well-being of a Church which it should have if it were consociated with many other Congregations so as wee say an hand with five fingers is a compleate hand but it is not a compleat organicall body but a part of the organicall body of a man so is a Congregation a Church wanting nothing of the being and essence of a Church yet is it incompleate because it is a part or member of a Presbyteriall Church and not being consociated wanteth that which belongeth to the well being of a compleat visible Church For visibility of a Church must have a latitude because it is an accident or adjunct of an organicall politick body which is totum integrale Secondly the ordinary power of ordinary Jurisdiction in a more perfit way because of ordinary and perfiter consociation is given to the Presbyteriall Church as to the proper subject in the constant and ordinary exercise of Discipline because contignity being the foundation of visible externall government the Presbyteriell Church of Ierusalem Ephesus Corinth Antioch and Rome is a perfit compleat consociaâ—d body To which the power of ordination exauthoration or deprivation of Pastors of excommunication in a constant and ordinary way doth belong For this is a principle of Church-policy Every politick body of Christ hath power of Church government within it selfe But a Presbyteriall church is such 2. This is a received maxime also Quod tangit omnes ab omnibus suo more tractari debet VVhat concerneth all should be agitated by all according to their degrees of concernment but excom nunication of a person in a consociated Church concerneth all the consociated Churches in a Presbytery all are scandalized all may be and are in danger to be leavened with the infectious lumpe And here it is to be observed that as preaching of the Word is an essentiall note of the visible Church and agreeing to the visible Church as necessary ad esse simpliciter to the very being of a visible Church For if the word as Preached and some way promulgated be not in such a society we cannot call it a visible Church so Discipline is a note of the visible Church and necessary ad bene esse and it cannot be a Ministeriall Church in a good condition exercising acts of edification if the wall of Discipline be broken downe and meeting in one place for Word and Sacraments is but accidentall for a Ministeriall Church If the Word be preached and the Sacraments administrated in sundry Congregations though not in a Presbyteriall Church all convened in all its members
the Câ—urt as an Heathen and therefore here is no shadow of any Court Ans. It is an ordinary hebraisme when the second person is put for the third especially in Laws as Thou shalt not send him away empty Also Thine eye shall not spare him Also Then shalt out away evill out of Israel And therefore here is a reall Court it the context be considered Christ speaketh so Let him be to thee as an Heathen in opposition to that which he was called to be for his obstinacy to wit a brother if thy brother offend And how weake is this Let him be to thee as an Heathen Ergo He should not be to the Church as an Heathen The contrary consequence is most necessary if he be to thee as an Heathen because he is now convinced of obstinacy before two brethren and before all the Church Ergo these two brethren and the whole Church are to count him as an Heathen for the offended brother hath gone along all the way in the unanimous judgement and a consort of mind with both the witnesses and the Church Ergo this obstinate man is the same to the Church that he is to the offended brother that is he is to both as an Heathen and a Publican and both are to abstaine from eating or brotherly conve siâ—g with him as the Jewes would not familiarly converse with the heathen and as Paul commandeth 1 Cor. 5. 10 11. that with an excommunicated man we are not to eate Ob. 7. Whatsoever you bind on earth is in good sence that he who offendeth any little one that believeth his sinne is bound in Heaven as the friends of Job c. 42. were not accepted of God till they made their peace first with Iob yet Iob had no power of the Keyes over his friends and an offering is not accepted while first the offerer be reconciled to his brothâ—r and so his sinnes are bound in Heaven and yet one brother hath not a jurisdiction over another Answ. Binding and loosing in this Chap. 18. must be the same with binding and loosing Chap. 16. 19. but expresly their binding and loosing is by the Church power of the Keyes and is all one with that authoritative power of remitting and retaining sins 〈◊〉 20. 21 22 23. and in Scripture the keyes and binding and loosing are never ascribed but to Stewards Officers Princes and Judges who have power of jurisdiction as I have proved already and therefore that which is spoken of Jobs friends and of the offerer not reconciled to his brother Come not up to the point for Iobs friends doe not binde on earth and the offended brother is a more private man destitute of the keyes and of all power of jâ—risdiction It is first objected by our reverend brethren The extent of the power of jurisdiction in the Elders of a classicall Presbytery must be proved by Gods Word which cannot be For if many classicall Elders have power over many Congregations possibly twenty or thirty Churches then they beare the relation of Elders to these thirty Congregations and they must all be Elders of these Churches as the Scripture saith the Elders of Ephesus the Angel of the Church of Pergamus the Angel of the Church of Thyatira now this cannot be for then First Deacons must be Deacons of many Congregations and Deacons might meet in one Colledge to dispose of the Treasury of these thirty and yet these thirty Churches should not be consulted with nor could they all convene in one to give their consent and judgement concerning their Treasury Now though Deacons be inferiour to Pastors yet are they no lâ—sse Officers in their owne sphere having power then the Pastors and Paul writing to the Church of Philippi writeth to the Deacons as to the Bishops insiâ—uating that Deacons are Deacons in relation to that Church no lesse then Pastors Answ. I deny the Proposition to wit If many Elders be one Presbytery ruling many Congregations then doe they beare the relation of Elders to these many Congregations as proper Pastors to every Congregation of or within that Presbyteriall Church nor doe they beare that relation of watchmen and proper Pastors to every one of these Congregations that a Pastor of a particular Congregation beareth to his particular flock that is to be â—oved It is true they are called the Elders of the presbyteriall Church of Ephesus the Colledge of the Angells of the Church of Pergamus but this is a generall and different relation from that which each Pastor doth carry to his owne flock in those respects 1. The Presbytery are Elders to the classicall Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â— not in things proper to each Congregation but in things common to all or in that which is the proper object of government to wit those things which rather concerne the consociation and combination of those thirty Churches then the thirty consociated and combined Churches in particular 2. The Presbytery doth rather take care of the regâ—lation of the acts of governing in all these Churches then the governed Churches for they are to heed to the Pastors ordained and to lay hâ—nds suddenly on no man to commit the Word to faithfull mâ—n to see that Pastors preach sound Doctrine and exercise Discipline according to the rule but they doe not feede as speciall Pastors the particular flocks but every one is to feede his owne flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath set him Acts 20 28. 3 The Elders of the classicall presbytery are Elders to all these Churches as the Elders themselves are in Collegio Presbyteriali in the Colledge of Presbyters and properly as they are in the Court but not separatim and oct of Court so this and this Archippus is not an Elder or Pastor to all these Congregations so as he hath to answer to God and to watch for the Soules of them all but hee hath a charge of them onely in Collegio and if he doe any thing as a classicall Elder as if hee lay hands on a Pastor ordained to bee the Pastor of such a Congregation hee doth it as the hand and instrument and deligate of the Presbytery or if hee pronounce the sentence of excommunication in a Congregation hee is virtualitèr in Collegio when he doth that act in respect he doth it as the deligate of the Presbytery And this our Brethren may see in their owne particular Eldership of their independent flock if an Elder occasionally rebuke any of the flock never convened before the Church he doth not in that exercise an act of Church Jurisdiction because he is not now in a Court and when hee is not in the Court hee cannot excommunâ—cate Yet â—iting in Court hee doth in Collegio with the rest of the Eldership exercise Church Jurisdiction And separatim and not joyned in the Court they cannot exercise Church Jurisdiction 2. The presbytery hath a Church-Relation to all these 30. Churches not taken distributively but collectively as all those are united in one Church
classicall under one externall and visible government even as the Elders of an independent Church are not Elders of their single Congregation being separated from their Court and extra collâ—gium Presbyteriale in the notion of the relation of a Church-Jurisdiction for they are Elders by reason of Church Jurisdiction only in their Court 3. Classicall Elders in the Court have power of Jurisdiction in relation to this presbyteriall or classiciall Church but they have not properly an ordinary power of order to preach to them all and every one and to administrate the Sacraments to them The Elders of a particular Congregation have power of order and power of Jurisdiction without the Court but they have not power of Church jurisdiction but in the Court for there is a difference betwixt a power of jurisdiction which Elders have as Watchmen and a power of Church-Jurisdiction which Elders have not but in foro Ecclesiae in the Court of Church-Jurisdiction So the great Sanedrim beare rule over all the Tribes of Israel But this Judge of the Tribe of Dan a member of the Sanedrim is not a Judge of the Tribe of Benjamin or a Judge to a thousand of that Tribe as the Captaine of that thousand 2. I distinguish the proposition if the Elders of the Presbytery be Elders of the Presbyteriall Church then are they Elders in relation to the many Congregations in that Church if they bee Elders in these common affaires which concerne government in generall then are they Elders in feeding by the word of knowledge and in governing in all the particulars which concerne the government of each Congregation That I deny for their oversight in governing in things belonging to all the consociated Churches doth not make them Elders of all those particular Congregations 3. Deacons in some cases are also Deacons in relation to all the particular Churches in some reserved cases if all the Deacons of Macedonia Corinth and other Churches should meete in one and take course for supplying the distressed Saines at Jerusalem what inconvenient were in this Ob. 2. If Presbyteriall Elders be Elders to mary Congregations in a generall Relation what sort of Elders are they are they Elders ruling or are they Elders teaching it is unpossible that they can be Elders teaching to so many Congregations for teaching is a personall and incommunicable act that mâ—n cannot commit to any others they must performe it in their owne persons aâ—â— cannot commit it to others if they be Ruling Elders onely and not teaching Elders this is against the Scripture for the exten of teaching and the extent of ruling are commexsurable in the Word and of alike extersion Acts 20. 28. These same whoe are to feede the flâ—ck at Ephâ—sue are to governe and rulâ— and they are to feede the whole flâ—ckâ— not a part of it so the Text sayth Take heede to the whole flâ—cke then they are not to governe all in a presbytery and to feede with teaching the Word one particular Congregation onely so 1 Peâ— 5. 2. feed the flock of God which is amongst you not with knowledge onely but be addeth their duty of governing Taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly c. So Hâ—b 13. 7. Remember them that have the rule over you who have spoken unto you the Word of God Ergo these same who have the rule over the flock and governe du also speake the Word of the Lord and teach v. 17. obey them that have the rule over you and submit to them for they watch for your soules as these who must give accompt Ergo these same who governe doe also as Pastors watch for the flock as those that are to give an accompt but the governing classicall Presbytery doe rule but it is unpossible that they can give an accompt for all the Congregations of a classicall Presbytery for they cannot watch over them all except every one of these must have many Eyes Nor can they be both ruling and teaching Officers for then they should have two Offices if one man be both a Physitian and a Chyrurgion to two severall companies he must have two Offices in relation to two charges which he hath to those two companies if he practise physick to the one company and chyrurgery to the other this is against the order that Paul Col. 2. rejoyced to behold Therefore the classicall Elders cannot be Rulers having the oversight of the whole câ—â—ssicall Church and yet every one of them must be a 〈◊〉 and teaching pastor only to the single Congregation over which 〈◊〉 Answ. As grand-Fathers and fathers doe beare a relation to these same Children divers wayes both are fathers and may tutor and provide for the children but both are not begetting â—athers so also doe the classicall Elders and the Elders of particular Congregations beare divers relations to the flocks the question then is what sort of Elders are the Presbyteriall Elders to the Presbyteriall Church I distinguish Church I distinguish Elders They are Elders classicall only to the classicall Church collectively taken and they have an authoritative care over this Church But they are proper Elders to the classicall Church taken distributively that is this man is an Elder to this part or member of the Presbytery to wit to this Congregation And another man to this Congregation as the Elders in the Court and Aslembly at Jerusalem Acts 15. they are Elders in relation to the whole Churches of Antioch Syria and Silicia and the Gentiles collectively taken in those dogmaticall poynts with the confession of our Brethren and these same Elders were in speciall manner Elders to the Congregations of Antioch Syria and Silicia and other Churches taken distributively so also the Elders of many consociated and Neighbouring Churches are speciall watchmen over their own flâ—cks by teaching and ruling according to our Brethrens grounds and also they have a Brotherly care over all the consociated Church to Councell â—dmonrth Comfort seeing every man is his Brothers keeper by a Divine Law and the care is like as is it were authoritative onely by our Brethrens way it wanteth the relation of authority vet doth it not follow that Elders this way have two Offices but onely that they performe two acts of one and the same Office also a Pastor of an independent flocke who writcth â— Bâ—â—ke for the instruction of Sister-Churches as hee preacheâ—â— those same Sermons that are in the printed Bâ—oke to his owne people and flocke hath two Relations one to his owne flocke whom hee preacheth unto as a Pastor another as an instructer of other Churches by his writings yet for that hee hath not two Offices as one who is a ' Physitian and a Chyrurgion to two sundry companies if any say hee writteth not Bookes as a Pastor by vertue of his Office but as a gifted man by power of fraternity let mee deny the truth of the distinction for this is to begge what is in question For to teach the Churches by writing should
proceede from the authoritative power of a Pastor as a Pastor and by that same officiall power that hee teacheth his owne flocke vivâ voce by vocall preaching as a Doctor hee teacheth other Churches by writing But it was asked whether are the classicall Elders ruling Elders or Teaching Elders to the classicall Church Answ. They are both and they are neither in divers considerations they bee teaching Elders in all the Congregations distributively taken they are Rulers in all collectively taken they are Teachers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in some reserved acts resolving synodically some cases of conscience and dogmaticall poynts upon occasion but they be not the constant Teachers to watch for the Soules of all 3. The places Acts 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Heb. 137. 17. prove that those that rule in common many Churches should be Teachers of these same Churches distributively and all the Eldership at Ephesus should rule the whole Churches amongst them And there should no Pastor be a sole Ruler and not a Teacher as the Prelate is nor is there a Pastor who is a sole Teacher and it is very true hee who is a ruling Pastor is also a Teaching Pastor but not to that same flock alwayes Neither is this true that because power of jurisdiction is founded upon power of order therefore teaching should be every way commensurable with ruling for 1. The Eldership convened in Court and onely formalitèr in foro Ecclesiae in this Court hath Church-power of Jurisdiction in a Congregation and in this Court they governe but the Eldership in this Court neither doth preach nor can preach 2. The power of ruling is in the ruling Elder but not the power of teaching and the power of teaching publickly is in the unâ—fficed Prophet as our Brethren teach and yet in him there is no power of ruling Ob. 3. It is strange that to excommunicate agreeth to the ruleing Elder in a classicall Presbytery which he may doe in many Congregations and so he may performe his principall acts over thirty or forty Congregations and yet the Pastor may not performe his principall act of teaching in many Congregations by vertue of his office but onely in one congregation by this frame of a classicall Church Answ. The ruling Elder doth onely in some common cases with the presbytery performe his speciall acts but all the ordinary acts of the spirituall Jurisdiction the ruling Elder performeth in that Congregation whereof he is an Elder nor is this an inconvenient but preaching which is given to unofficed men by our Brethren should not be called the principall part of a Pastors charge Ob. 4. It is unreasonable that a Prelate or a Pope should rule me and not teach me and we condemned this in Prelates that they would onely rule and not teach But the classicall presbytery doth fall in that same fault for they governe the whole classicall Church but they doe not teach the whole classicall Church It is dreadfull for a man to watch for the soules of one single Congregation as being under necessity to give an accempt Ergo far more dreadfull it is to watch also for a whole tract of thirty or forty Churches the Apostle will have Him who watcheth for one flock to entangle himselfe with no other imployments How then shall hee take the burden of thirty or forty Flockes Answ. It is unreasonable that Prelate and Pope should rule me and so many hundred Churches 1. as the sole and proper Pastors and all under them be but suffragans and deputed Pastors doing by borrowed authority from Pope and Prelate 2. That their sole Office should be to command feeders as Pastors of pastors and not to feede with knowledge the flocke that is most true but the classicall presbyters are neither principall nor proper pastors of the whole classicall Churches collectively nor are two or three pastors under them as deputies 3. Nor is their Office to rule onely not to feede with knowledge also 2. The pastors of independent flocks are obliged by brotherly association to be Vine-Keepers Governours fellow-Counsellers to forty sister Churches for they acknowledge that Churches cannot subsist in good government without the helpe of Synods Now if wee distinguish onerousnâ—sse care and labour of Bâ—therly watching over one another and onerâ—uâ—nâ—sse care and labour by way of Jurisdiction the former is as great in foro Dei in the Court of Conscience as the latter and so ouâ— Brethren make Governing without Teaching as well as wee doe They in a Brotherly way wee in a way of Jurisdiction I prove that their way is as dreadfull and laboâ—ous in the â—oynt of conscience and in a way of giving accompt to God as our way For 1. A divine command that wee be our Brethrens keepers and we watch over one another commandeth onerousnesse and care in Brotherly governing to them as to us 2. Wee make the ground and foundation of governing a Classicall Church that band of Love and Union of the members of one Body of Christ and this band of Lovely and Brotherly consociation of many Congregations commandeth and tiâ—th us to doe no more in Governing and iâ— Helping and promoting the edification of sister Churches then if wee had no further warrant to promâ—te edification then the alone relation of Brotherly consociation for the onely and very reason why the Wisdome of our Law-giver Christ hath put a speciall Commandement on consociated Churches to make one Presbytery and to governe one Classicall Church in these common poynts that concerne the whole Classicall Church in the poynt of sound Doctrine and lawfull and Ministeriall Jurisdiction is the necessity that Members of one Body have of Brothâ—rly Helpe Light Direction Comfort one of another Which poynt I desire carefully to bee observed for wee see no ground to make the powers of a Congregation of a presbytery of a Province of a Nationall Church powers formally and essentially different they differ onely in more or lesse extension as the adjunct or genuine property of one and the same great visible Body which is one integrall part That same 1. Covenant of God 2. That same Lord 3. That same Spirit 4. That same Faith and Baptisme 5. That same power of the Keyes in Nature and Essence belongeth to all onely the power must bee more or lesse as the Body is more or lesse as there is more of that vis locâ—motiva the power of moving in the Hand then iâ— one Finger and in the whole Arme then in the Hand onely and in the whole body then in the Hand And I cleare it in this a man is a gifted Preacher in a Congregation in an Island there is none other gifted of GOD to Preach the Gospell but hee onely I would thinke as a Brother hee were under as great an Obligation of care and laborious onerousnesse of conscience to bestow his Talent for the gaining of Soules by preaching though hee were not called to bee their Pastor and that by vertue of
his Brotherly relation to the people as if hee were called to bee their Pastor I desire to know what the naked relation of Authority or Jurisdiction addeth to his care and onerousnesse in poynt of labouring by preaching the Gospell Indeed now being called his care is Pastorall and more authoritative But if according to the measure of the Talent every one is to proportion his paines to gaine more Talents to his Lord and if the relation of a Pastor adde no degrees of gifts to His Talent as wee may suppose I thinke his onerousnesse in labouring was as great before hee was a Pastor as after but I speake not this to say that in a constituted Church there is no calling required other then giftes Nor doe I speake this to say that a calling is not a new motive why a man should imploy his gifts for the honour of the Giver But only to shew that CHRIST hath united powers of Jurisdiction in Congregations in Presbyteries in Churches of Provinces and Nations that so not onely gifts might conduce to helpe and promove edification but also united powers of Jurisdiction which are also gifts of God and though some may say that a calling to an Office layeth on Mâ—n a more speciall Obligation to make accompt for Soules then gifts onely which in some sense I could also yeeld yet seeing wee thinke the relation of the Eldership to a whole Classicall Church is not founded upon an Office different from the Offices of Pastors and Elders which they have and are clothed with in relation to their particular Congregations but onely authoritative acts of the same Office and that for the common promoving of edification in the whole Classicall Church grounded in the depth of his Wisdome who hath seven Eyes upon a Brotherly Consociation in which they must either edifie one another and occasionally partake of these same holy things or then scandalizâ— and leaven one another with their publique transgressions wee cannot see how presbyteriall Elders are more to give accompt for the Soules of the whole Classicall Church in Scriptures sense Hebrewes 13. 17. then consociated pastors and Elders of consociated Churches are to give an accompt to GOD for sister Churches over which they are to watch and whose Soules they are to keepe and so farre as they are Brethren must make a reckoning to GOD for them And how can the presbytery be more said to intangle themselves in governing the Classicall Church in some things with things not proper to their calling seeing consociated Churches in a Brotherly way doe medle with those same things though not in a way of Jurisdiction For helping the Classicall Church by way of Fraternity is not unproper to a Christian calling of Brethren and the joyning of power of Jurisdiction I meane of power lesser to another power greater to helpe the Classicall Church upon the same ground of Fraternity cannot bee unproper to the calling of a Colledge of presbyters Objecti 5. The power of Presbyteries taketh away the power of a Congregation therefore it cannot bee lawfull The antecedent is thus confirmed 1. Because if the Presbytery ordainâ— one to bee Excommunicated whom the Elders of a Congregation in conscience thinke ought not to bee Excommunicated the man Jure Divino must be Excommunicated and the power of the Congregation which Christ hath given to them is nul And the exercise thereof impeded by a greater power 2. the voyces of two Elders of a Congregation which are now sitting in the greater and classicall Presbytery are swallowed up by the greater number of Elders of thirty or forty Congregations met in one great presbytery Ergo the power of the Congregation is not helped by the presbytery but close taken away Answ. The Argument doth presuppose that which is against GODS Law to wit 1. That there is a contradiction of Voyces betwixt the Elders of a Cong egation and of the greater presbytery which should not bee for Brethren even of Galathia which contained many Congregations as our Brethren confesse should all minde and speake and agree in one thing that belongeth to Church Discipline as is cleare Gala. 1. 8. Gala. 5. 10 v. 15. Gala. 6. 1. 2. 2. The Argument supposeth that the greater presbytery is wrong in their voycing that such a man should be excommunicated and the two Elders of the Congregationall Church is right and hath the best part in judging that the same man ought not to be Excommunicated But Christ hath given no power to any Church to erre and that power which in this case the presbytery exerciseth is not of Christ and de jure the power of the greater presbytery in this case ought to bee swallowed up of the two Voyces of the Elders of the Congregation But suppose that the Elders of one Congregation and the whole meeting all agree in the truth of GOD as they all doe Acts 15. will you say that Peter Paul and Iames their power is null and taken from them and their three voyces are swallowed up in that great convention because to their power and voyces are added in this dogmaticall determination which you grant even now to many consociated Churches the power and voyces of the rest of the Apostles and Elders yea and as some say of the whole Church Acts 15. 2 v. 6. 25. Acts 16. 4. Acts 21. 18. 25 I believe addition of lawfull power doth not annull lawfull power but corroborate and strengthen it So this shall fall upon your owne Eldership of your independent Congregation Suppose â—en Pastors Elders and Doctors in one of your Congregations whereas sometime there were but three and these three had the sole power of Jurisdiction and exercise of the Keyes you cannot say that the accession of six Elders to three hath made null the power of three and swallowed up their voyces for if their power and voyces were against the truth it is fit they should be swallowed up if they were for CHRIST they are strengthened by the accession of lawfull power and moe voyces and neither annulled nor swallowed up Object 6. The Church at the first for example when it was but a hundreth and twenty had the full entire power within it selfe Ergo it should bee in a worse case by the multiplication of Churches if now that power bee given to Presbyteries Ans. It is a conjecture that the whole Christian Church Acts 1. was onely an hundreth and twenty I thinke there were more though these onely convened at the ordination of Matthias for there were above five hundred Brethren at once which saw CHRIST after his Resurrection 1 Cor. 15. 6. and these I Judge belonged to the Christian Church also 2. It is constantly denied that addition of lawfull power to lawfull power doth arnull or put in a worse condition the prexistent power it doth helpe it but not make it worse and twenty Churches adding their good and Christian counsells and comforts to two Churches doe not annull or hurt or swallow up
either the power of good counseling in these two Churches or their good counsels but do much confirme and strengthen them Object 7. It is absurd that there should be a Church in a Church and two distinct kind of Churches or a power above a power a Jurisdiction above a Jurisdiction a State above a State as Master and Servant and Father and Sonne so there is here a governing and a commanding Classicall Presbytery and a governed and commanded Classicall Church and in a politicall consideration formally different now where there bee two different States there be two different names Titles and Adiuncts as 1 Cor. 12. 28. GOD hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets So it is said Genesis 1. GOD made two distinct Lights a greater Light to serve the Day and a lesser Light to rule the Night But the Scripture maketh no mention of greater or lesser Presbyteries wee have the name of Presbytery but twice in the New Testament and in matter they differ not for these same Elders are the matter of both in form they differ not for the same combination and union is in all they differ not in operations for the superior hath no operations but such as the inferior can exercise for because a Pastor exhortâ—th a Pastor comsorteth we doe not make two kindes of Pastors if wee cannot finde a distinction betwixt presbyter and Presbyter how can wâ—e 〈◊〉 a distinction betwixt Presbytery and Presbytery Hath the Wisdome of Christ left these Thrones in such a confusion as by Scripture they cannot be knowen by Name Title Nature Operations And if there be a power above a power wee have to aâ—end to a Nation and so to subdite a whole Nation and their consciences to this Government and we are to put a Kingdome within a Kingdom Answ. A Church-Congregationall within a Church-Classicall is no more inconventent then a part in the whole an Hand in the Body and that is a lesser body in a greater and our Brethren call the people a Church and the Elders the Elders of the Church and what is this but a Church in a Church 2. A power above a power is not absurd exâ—ept it be a Church-power so above a Church-power as the Superior power be privative and destructive to the inferior as the Popes power distroyeth the power of the Chuâ—ch Universall and the prelates power destroyeth the power of the 〈◊〉 where of he is pretended Pastor But the power of the presbytery is Aâ—xiliarte and cumulative to helpe the Congregation not privative and destructive to destroy the power of congregations Secondly a power above a power in the Church cannot be denied by our Brethren for 1. In the Eldership of a â—â—â—gle Congregation the Eldership in the Court hath a power of Jurisdiction above a power of order which one single Minister hath to preach the Word and administrate the Sacraments for they may regulate the Pastor and censure him if he preach hereticall Doctrine is not this a power above a power yea two Elders in the Court have a power of Jurisdiction to governe with the whole prebsytery but the power of the whole presbytery is above the power of a part But to comâ— neerer The Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem met in a Synod have a power in dogmaticall poynts over the Church at Antioch and others and our Brethren say that the Church at Antioch might have in their inferiour Synod determined these same poynts which the Synod determined at Ierusalem her 's power above power Thirdly we doe not see how they be two or divers indicatures formally and specisically different in nature and operations for they differ onely in more or lesse extension of power as the reasons doe prove as the power of government in one City or Borough doth not differ formally from the power of the whole Cities and Boroughs incorporated and combined in one common Judicature and the power of two or three or foure Colledges doth not differ from the power of the whole combination of Colledges combined in the comm on Judicature of the Universities so here the powers of the inferior Judicatures do differ from the Superior onely in degree and in number of members of the Judicatures the policy divine is one and the same though the Superior can exercise acts of Jurisdiction different from the Acts of the inferior in an ordinary way such as are ordination of Pastors and excommunication where many Churches are consociated though where this consociation is not Ordination and Excommunication may be done by one single Congregation also to argue from the not distinction of Names Titles and Adjuncts of the Iudicatures is but a weake Argument because Congregationall and presbyterian provinciall and a nationall Church-Body make all one body and the inferior is but a part and member of the Superior and thefore it was not needfull that as Apostles and Prophets and the Sun the greater light by name and Office is distinguished from the Moone Gen. 1. the lesser light that Congregation and Presbyter should be distinguished by Names and Office and Titles in the Scripture for a Prophet is not formally a part of an Apostle but an Officer formally different from him and the Moone is not a part of the Sun as a Congregation is a part of the Classicall Church so Mat. 18. the Scripture distinguisheth not the people and Elders in the word Ecclesia Church as our Brethren will have then both meant in that place Mat. 18. Teil the Church Now we say as they doe to us in the like we are not to distinguish where the Law doth not distinguish But the Scripture sayth Mat. 18. The Church that the offended hath recourse unto is that Church which must be obeyed as a Judicature and spirituall Court but the people is neither a Judicature nor any part thereof And 2. Of that Church Christ doth speake that doth actually bind on Earth and loose on Earth and that by the power of the Keyes but the people neither as a part of the Court doth actually bind and loose on Earth by power of the Keyes 3. Christ speaketh of that Court and of that Church which doth exercise Church-power on Earth under the title of binding and loosing but we find not a Church in the face and presence of the people binding and loosing under the name of the Church in the Word of God Shall we use such an insolent signification of the word Church as the Word of God doth not use and Lastly I say of these of Corinth gathered together convened together in the Name of the Lord Jesus with the Ministeriall spirit of Paul and with the power of the Lord Iesus these cannot be the Church excommunicating before the people The Text destinguisheth not the Court of Elders who hath the power of Jurisdiction from the people and all these to whom he writeth and who were puffed up and mourned not for the scandall have no such power of Jurisdiction nor can the
is a Member of that common Court which doth concerne them all therefore all these consequences are null Object 9. But when the Presbytery doth excommunicate in a particular Congregation by a delegate they may with as good reason preach by a delegate as exercise Jurisdiction by a delegate the one is as personall and incommunicable as the â—â—â—r Answ. It is certaine there bee great oddes for the acts of jurisdiction performed by speaking in the Name of Iesus Christ doe come from a Colledge and Court and because it were great confusion that a whole Court should speake therefore of necessity such acts must be done by a delegate Indeed the Juridicall acts of the whole juridicall proceeding of decerning the man to be excommunicated cannot bee done by one man onely it would bee most conveniently done by the whole Senate or at least by a select number against which the accused party hath no exception and is willing to bee judged by but the acts of order as Preaching flowing from the power of order can be performed only by the Pastor in his owne person and not by a deputy Except that a Synodicall teaching which commeth from the power of Jurisdiction may bee sent in writ by Messengers and Deputies to the Churches Acts 15. 25. Acts 16. 4. Object 10. A Pastor is not a Pastor but in relation to his owne Church or Congregation Therefore hee cannot doe Pastorall Acts of either Order or Jurisdiction in a Presbyterie Answ. How a Pastor is a Pastor in relation to all the World deserveth discussing First Some have neither power of Order nor Jurisdiction in any place as private persons Secondly some have both power of Order and Jurisdiction through all the World as the Apostles who might teach and administrate the Sacraments and Excommunicate as Apostles in every Church Thirdly some have power of Order and Jurisdiction in a certaine determinate place as Pastors in their owne particular Congregations Fourthly some have power of Order in relation to all the VVorld as Pastors of a Congregation who are Pastors validly Preaching and Administrating the Sacraments but orderly and lawfully Preaching where they have a calling of those who can call to the occasionall exercise of their calling hic nunc In this meaning a Pastor of one flock is a Pastor in regard of power of Order to all the World Because though his pastorall teaching be restrained by the Church in ordinary onely to this Congregation yet hath hee a pastorall power to preach to all the World in in an occasionall way both by Word and Writ yet doth not this power being but the halfe of his Ministeriall power denominate him a Pastor to all the World as the Apostles were and the same way hath hee power to administrate the Sacraments and this way may our Brethren see that power of order to be a Minister or Pastor is given by the Presbytery so as if the man were deprived clave non errante hee now hath lost his pastorall relation to both the Catholick Church and that Congregation whereof hee is a Pastor So as hee is now a private man in relation not onely to that Congregation whereof hee was a Pastor but also in relation to the whole visible Church now no particular Congregation hath power to denude him of this relation that he had to the whole catholick Church But a Pastor of a flock is a Pastor in respect of power of Jurisdiction not over all the World to excommunicate in every Presbytery with the Presbytery hee is onely capable by vertue of his power of order to exercise power of Jurisdiction where hee shall come upon suposall of a call if hee be chosen a Pastor there or be called to be a Commissioner in the higher or highest Courts of the Church catholick but other wayes he hath no power of Jurisdiction but in that Court whereof he is a member that is in the Eldership of a Congregation and in the Classicall Presbytery for hee is so a member of a Congregation as he is also a member of the Classical Presbytery and therefore though he be not a Pastor one way in this Classicall Court I meane in respect of power of order yet is hee a Pastor 〈◊〉 in watching over that Church in respect of power of Jurisdiction Our Brethrens ground then is weake when they say A Pastor cannot give the Seales to those of another Congregation because he hath no Ministeriall power over those of another Congregation if they meane power of Jurisdiction it is true he hath no Jurisdiction over those of another Congregation but if they meane hee hath no power of order over them that is for what ever be the Churches part in this it is certaine the Pastor doth administrate the Seales by power of order and not by power of Iurisdiction and the Church as the Church hath not any power of order for shee is not called to any pastorall dignity though wee should grant that which yet can never bee proved that shee is invested with a Ministeriall power Object 11. If the Church which you suppse to be presbyteriall to wit the Church of Corinth did excommunicate or was commanded to excommunicate the incestuâ—us person before the Congregation convened and met in one then must your classicall Church exercise all other acts of Iurisdiction before all the Congregationall Churches of the Classicall Presbytery meete in one But this latter is as unpossible as absurd For how shall thirty or forty Congregations meet all in one place for all the severall acts of Jurisdiction Also you confesse that many Congregations cannot meete in one place that the proposition may be made good We suppose these grounds of the Presbyteriall frame of Churches 1. That the presbyteriall Church of Corinth not the Congregation had the onely power of excommunication 2. That this man was to be excommunicated in presence and so with the consent of the whole multitude for so the Text sayth 1 Cor. 5. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When you are gathered together 3. Excommunication is the highest act of Iurisdiction in the Church being the binding of the sinner in Heaven and Earth if therefore this highest act of Iurisdiction must bee performed before all the Church congregated in one then must all acts of Iurisdiction be performed also in presence of the congregated Church for it concerneth their edification and is a matter of conscience to then all 4. The reason why wee thinke sit hee should be excommunicated before or in presence of that Congregation whereof hee is a member is because it concerneth them and hee is a member of this Congregation But by your grounds the whole Presbyteriall or classicall Church should be present which were unpossible for hee is to you a Member of the whole Classicall Church and the power of excommunication is in the whole classicall Church and they ought to bee present by the same reason that the Congregation whereof hee is a neerest member is present Answ. 1.
neerely because as I sayd before the more universall the Church visible is the externall visible Communion is lâ—sse even as when the number of a Family is cut off by the Sword of the Magistrate the matter first and more intimately and more neerely concerneth the Family whereof hee is a Member yet it doth also concerne the Common-Wealth of which also hee is a Member A Finger of the right Hand is infected with a contagious Gangren it is to bee cut off yet the cutting-off concerneth more neerely the right Hand then it doth the left Hand and the whole Body For the contagion should first over-spread the right Hand and Arme and Shoulder before it infect the left Hand and the whole Body though it doe not a little concerne the whole Body also So though actuall Excommunication concerne all the Churches of the Presbyterie yet it doth more neerely concerne the Congregation whereof hee is a Member 2. The pronouncing of the sentence being edificative it is a fit meane to worke upon others but calling and trying of witnesses and Juridicall decerning of a Man to bee Excommunicated requiring secrecies yea and some scandals and circumstances of Adultery Incest Pestiality requiring a modest covering of them from Virgins young Men Children and the multitude wee have no warrant of GOD that they should bee tryed before the whole multitude nor are acts of Jurisdiction for their excellency to bee brought forth before the people but for their neerenesse of concernment and use of edification Object 12. The people are to consent yea they must have a power and some thing more than a consent in Excommunication Ergo they are all to bee present The antecedent is proved 1. Because they were not puffed up they did not keepe the Feast they did not dostaine from eating with the incestuous person onely by consent 2. Others not of that Church did excommunicate by consent 3. It is said v. 12 doe yee not judge them that are within Answ. If you will have them to excommunicate the same way that they doe other duties you may say they excommunicate the same way that Pastors and Elders doe and if they Judge vers 12. as the Elders doe either all the people are Judges and where are then all the governed if all bee governours or then hee speaketh in this Chapter to the Churches-Iudges onely 2. There bee degrees of consent these of other Churches have a tacite and remote consent the people of the Congregation are to heare and know the cause and deale in private with the offender and to mourne and pray for him Object 13. The highest and double honour is due to him who laboureth in the word 1 Tim. 5. 17. but if the Presbyteriall Church be the highest Church it shall not have the double honour for it is onely the governing Church Answ. Highest honour is due in suo genere to both And this is as if you should compare obedience and honour that I owe to my Father with that which I owe to my grand-Father 2. Paul 1 Tim. 5. 17. compareth Elders of diverse sorts together as the Ruling and Teaching Elder here you compare Pastors to bee honoured in respect of one act with themselves to bee honoured in respect of another act and this might prove I am to give more honour to my Pastor for preaching in the Pulpit then for ruling in the Church-Senate Object 14. The Congregation is the highest Church for it hath all the Ordinances Word Sacraments Jurisdiction Ergo there is not any Presbyteriall Church higher which hath only disciplinary power Answ. There is a double highnesse one of Christian Dignity 2. Another of Church-prehemenency or of Ecclesiasticall authority indeed the Congregation the former way is highest the company of Believers is the Spouse and ransomed Bride of Christ. But the Eldership hath the Ecclesiasticall eminency as the Kings heire and Sonne is above his Master and Teacher one way yet the Teacher as the Teacher by the fift Commandement is above the Kings Sonne as the Teacher is above him who is taught And so is the Case here Object 15. The Arguments for a Classicall or Presbyteriall Church do much side with Prelacy for you make many Lords ruling and not teaching Answ. Let all judge whether the independent power of three Elders accountable to none in a Church-way but to Iesus Christ onely as you make your little Kingdomes on Earth be neerer to the Popes Monarchy and especially when there is but one Pastor in the Congregation then the subordinate Government of fourescore or an hundred Eldersâ— sure I am three Neighbours are neerer to one Monarch then three hundred 2. One Monarchicall Society is as tyrannicall Antichristianism as one Monarchicall Pastor 3. If wee made many ruling and dominering Lords you should say something but wee make many servants endued onely with Ministeriall power onely to teach and rule and to bee accomptable to the Church your Eldership in this agreeth with the Pope that though they deliver many Soules to Satan yet no Man on Earth can in a Church-way say What doe you ACT. XV. A Patterne of a juridicall Synod THat the Apostles in that famous Synod Act. 15. did not goe on by the assistance of an immediately inspired spirit and by Apostolick authority but onely as Elders and the Doctors and Teachers assisted with an ordinary spirit to me is evident from the course of the context 1. Because Act. 15. when a controversie arise in the Church â—â— Antiochia Epiphanius saith as also Hieronymus by Câ—â—mbus and others touching the keeping of Moses his Law especially the Ceremonies except they would bee losers in the buâ—nesse of their salvation Paul could not goe as sent by Amiâ—h to submit that Doctrine which hee received not from flesh and blood but by the revelation of Jesus Christ Gal. 1. 12. to the determination of a Synod of Apostles and Elders for who would think that the immediatly inspiring spirit iâ— Pâ—ul would submit himselfe and his Doctrine to the immediately inspiring spirit in Paul Peter Apostles and Elders therefore Paul and Birnabas come as sent to Jerusalem not â—â— Apostles or as immediately inspired but as ordinary teachâ—â— Therefore saith Diodatus Not because these two A◠〈…〉 were every wayequall to the rest in the light and conduct 〈◊〉 Spirit and in Apostolicall authority Gal. 2. 6. 8. had any 〈◊〉 instruction or of confirmation but only to give the weake 〈◊〉 who had more confidence in Peter and James and in the Church at Jerusalem and to stop false doctors mouths and to estaâ—â—â—â— by common votes a generall order in the Church Hence when a controversie ariseth in the Apostolicke Church and the Controversie is betwixt an Apostle as Paul was and others and both sides alledge Scripture as here both did out of all controversie there is no reason that the Apostle Paul who was now a party should judge it and when a single Congregation in the like case is on two
Elders â— Presbyters and by the same reason the Elders concurre by way of obedience to the Apostles for as the Elders as Elders and above the fraternitie so the Apostles as Apostles are above the Elders but then I much wonder how the acts are called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders joyntly Act. 16. 4. and how the Elders of Ierusalem doe ascribe those decrees to themselves Act. 21. 25. and how all the assembly speake as assisted by the holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. Shall wee distinguish where the Scripture doth not onely not distinguish but doth clearly hold forth qualitie and an identitie But some object that the holy Ghost v. 28. is the immediatly instiring Apostolick Spiritâ— and so the Apostles must here concurre in giving out those decrees as Apostles not as ordinary Elders 1. Is Peter and Paul alledge Scripture and testimonies of Gods Spirit in this Syned as Elders not as Apostles then they reason in the Synod as falliâ—â— men and men who may erre but that is impossible for if they 〈◊〉 Scripture as men who may erre the Scripture which they alâ—â—dge 〈◊〉 be fallible Answ. Though the Apostles here reason as Elders not as Apâ—stâ—â—s I see no inconvenience to say they were men who might â—re though as led with the holy Ghost they could not erre in this Syned following the conduct of the holy Ghost as is said â— 28. though the holy Ghost there bee onely the ordinary holy Ghost given to all the Pastors of Christ assembled in Gods name and the authoritie of Iesus Christ yet in this Act and as led by this Spirit they were not fallible neither men who could erre for I see not how ordinary beleevers as led in such and such Acts by the holy Ghost and under that reduplication can erre for they erre as men in whom there is flesh and a body of corruption and therefore though both Apostles and Elders modaliter might erre as Logick saith Apostaâ—â—s err are est possible yet de facto in this they could not erre being led by the holy Ghost v. 28. and the necessitie of their not erring is not absolute but necessary by consequent because the Spirit of God led them as v. 28. But the reason is must weake if they might erre Ergo the Scripture they alledge might bee fallible for though hereticks alledge Scripture and abuse it and make it to bee no Scripture but their owne fancie while as they alledge it to establish blasphemous conclusions yet doth it no way follow that Scripture can bee fallible or obnoxious to error but onely that abused and aâ—â— applved Scripture is not Scripture Object 2. If ever the Apostles were led by an infallible spirit 〈◊〉 to bee in a matter like this which so much concerned the 〈◊〉 and consciences of all the Christian Churches amongst the Gen 〈◊〉 Eâ—go in this Synod they could not bee led by a fallible spirit but â—â— an infallible and so by an Apostolick Spirit Answ. I conceive the spirit which led both Apostles and Elders in this Synod was an infallible Spirit but Ergo an immediatly inspiring and Apostolick Spirit it followeth not yea the holy Ghost of which Luke doth speake v. 28. as the president and leader of this first mould of all Synods and so the most perfect Synod is never fallible no not in the meanest beleever and it were blasphemy to say the holy Ghost in any can bee obnoxious to errour and I thinke de facto neither Apostles nor Elders could erre in this Synod because de factâ— they followed the conduct of the holy Ghost without any byas in judgement but it followeth not 1. that the men could not erre because the holy Ghost leading the men could not erre as wee answer Papists who produce this same argument to prove that generall councells and so the Church must be infallible 2. It followeth not Ergo this holy Ghost was that immediatly inspiring and Apostolick Spirit leading both Apostles and Elders which is the question now in hand Object 3. This is a patterne of all lawfull Synods then may all lawfull Synods say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us if therefore the men might erre the leader to wit the holy Ghost might erre which is absurd Answ. It followeth onely that all lawfull Synods should so proceed as they may say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us and there is a wide difference betwixt Law and Fact all are lawfull Synods conveened in the name and authoritie of Christ and so by warrant of the holy Ghost speaking in his Word but it followeth not as Papists inferre and this argument proveth that therefore all which de facto those lawfully assembled Synods doe and conclude that they are the doings and conclusions of the holy Ghost and that in them all they may say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us 2. The consequence is false and blasphemous that if all lawfully conveened Synods may not say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and us that therefore the holy Ghost is fallible and may erre but onely that men in the Synod following their owne Ghost and spirit can say no more but it seemed good to our Ghost and spirit and cannot say it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us for an ordinary Pastor lawfully called and preaching sound doctrine in the power and assistance of Gods spirit doth speake in that act from the holy Ghost and yet because in other acts wherein with Nathan and Samuel hee may speake with his owne spirit see with his owne eyes and light it followeth not that he is infallible or that the holy Ghost is infallible Object 4 Is the Apostles did not conclude in this Synod what they 〈…〉 an Ap sâ—a â—â—k spirit it shall follow that the holy Ghost 〈…〉 15. 28. is not that same holy Ghost of which Peter 〈◊〉 2 Pet. 1. 21. But holy men of God spake as they were moved 〈◊〉 Ghost and if so that holy Ghost which spake in the Pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not also speake in the Apostles Answ. I see no necessitie of two holy Ghosts 1 Cor. 12. 4. Now 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—ersities of gifts but the same Spirit there be divers acts of the same holy Ghost and I willingly contend that the Synodicall acts of Apostles and Elders in this Synod though comming from the holy Ghost assisting them as Elders in an ordinary Synod v. 28. are different from the acts of that same holy Ghost as immediatly inspiring the Prophets and Apostles in prophecying and penning canonick Scripture and yet there bee not two holy Ghosts for Paul did not beleeve in Christ by that same spirit which immediatly inspired him and the rest of the Apostles and Prophets to write canonick Scripture â— meane it is not the same operation of the Spirit because Paul by the holy Ghost given to all the faithfull as Christians and not given to them as canonicall writers or as Apostles or immediatly inspired
Prophets doth beleeve in Christ love Christ contend for the prise of the high calling of God as is cleare Rom. â— 37 38 39. 1 Cor. 2. 12. 16. Phil. 3. 13. 14. 1 Cor. 9. 25. Yea Paul beleeveth not in Christ as an Apostle but as a Christian and yet hee beleeveth by the grace of the holy Ghost but â—â— followeth not that the same spirit which immediatly inspired the Prophets doth not immediatly inspire Paul as an Apostle and all the rest of the Apostles Object 5. These decrees Act. 16. 4. are called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders but if the Apostles in giving out these decrees gave 〈◊〉 as ordinary Elders not as Apostles then the sense of the words Act. 16. 4. should bee that they were the decrees of the Elders and of the Elders which is absued Answ. It followeth onely that they are the decrees of the Apostles who in that give them out as Elders and as a part of the ordinary established Elders of Jerusalem Whence if Christ promise the holy Spirit to lead his Apostles in all truth hee promiseth also the holy Spirit to all their successors Pastors Teachers and Elders not onely conveened in a Congregationall-Church but also in a Synod as hee maketh good his promise here Act. 15. 28. and whereas the holy Ghost commandeth in a Synod of Apostles and Elders who are lawfully conveened by our brethrens confession and speaketh authoritatively Gods Word by the holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. they cannot speake it as a counsell and brotherly advise onely for that a brother may doe to another a woman to a woman Abigail to David a maide to Naaman wee desire a warrant from Gods Word where an instituted societie of Pastors and Elders conveened from sundry Churches and in that Court formally consociated and decreeing by the holy Ghost as Act. 15. 28. against such and such heresies shall bee no other then a counsell and advise and no Church-commandement nor binding decree backed with this power Hee that despiseth you speaking by the holy Ghost the Word of God despiseth mee and whether doctrines or canons concerning doctrine comming from a lawfull Court conveened in Christs name have no ecclesiasticall power of spirituall jurisdiction to get obedience to their lawfull decrees for if every one of the suffrages of Elders bee but a private counsell having onely authoritie objective from the intrinsecall lawfulnesse of the thing and no authoritie officiall from the Pastors because Pastors then the whole conclusion of the Synod shall amount to no higher rate and summe then to a meere advise and counsell If it bee said that when they are all united in a Synod and speaking as assembled Act. 15. 25. and speaking thus Assembled by the holy Ghost v. 28. the authoritie is more then a counsell yet not a power of Church-jurisdiction Then 1. give us a warrant in Gods Word for this distinction 2. Wee aske whether this authoritie being contemned the persons or Churches contemnibg it bee under any Church-censure or not if they bee under a Church-censure what is this but that the Synod hath power of censure and so power of jurisdiction if you say non-communion is a sufficient censure But I pray you spare mee to examine this 1. If the sentence of non-Communion bee a sentence of 〈◊〉 it must proceed from a judicature that hath a 〈◊〉 of jurisdiction but give mee leave to say as all Church 〈◊〉 have and must have warrant in Gods Word so must 〈◊〉 such as non-communion for the ordinary Church punishments such as publike rebuâ—ing have warrant in the Word as in 1 Tim. 5. 20. and excommunication 1 Cor. 5. 4. 〈◊〉 1â— and the great Anathema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. and forbearing to eate and drinke with scandalous persons 1 Cor. 5. 10 11. withdrawing from his company 2 Thâ—s 3. 14. and I pray you where hath the Word taught us of such a bastard 〈◊〉 ensure or if you will not allow it that name a censure indicted by the Church or Churches as is non-communion May our brethren without Christs warrant shape any punishment equivalent to excommunication without Gods Word 〈◊〉 they may as well without the Word mould us such a censure as excommunication if they say separation warrenth this censure of non-communion But 2. By what Law of God can an equall give out a sentence of non-communion a 〈◊〉 an equall an equall cannot as an equall punish when a Christian denieth followship to another because hee is excommunicated hee doth not punish as an equall for the punisher in this case denying fellowship to the excommunicated doth 〈◊〉 an equall but as having authoritie from the Church who hath given this commandement in the very sentence of communication 1 Cor. 5. 4. compared with v. 10 11. Separation under a great controversie and denyed in many cases â—â— the way of those who are more rigid therein even by our 〈◊〉 2. Christ Matth. 18. 15 16. will not have any brother who 〈◊〉 but private authoritie and no Church-authoritie over a broâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 non habet potestatem to presently renounce 〈◊〉 give up all communion with his brother though hee bee 〈◊〉 before two or three witnesses and inflict on him the sentence of non-communion while hee first tell the Church and non-communion is inflicted on no man as if hee were a heathen 〈◊〉 to speak no thing of delivering to Satan while hee â—â— conveened and judicially sentenced before the Church 〈◊〉 our brethrens sentence of non-communion is in inflicted by an equall Church upon a â—â—ster Church in a meere pâ—â—â—â— way and by no Church-proces 4. Non-communion if it bee warranted by the law of â—â—ture as communion of equalls is yet should wee not bee refused of the like favour when wee plead that the Law of nature pleadeth for combination and communion of joynt authorities of sâ—sâ—er-Churches in one presbytery for if non-communion of Churches bee of the law of nature so must communion of Churches and authoritative communion and authoritative and judiciall non-communion by natures law must be as warrantable upon the same grounds They 6. Object â— the Apostles were in this Synod as ordinary Elders thâ—n The Synod might have censured and in case of obsâ—inacie excommunicated the Apostles which were admirable Answ. For reâ—ukeing of Apostles wee have against Papists a memorable warrant in Paul Gal. 2. withstanding Peter to â—ce face and Peter his giving an account Act. 11 1 2 3. to the Church of Jerusalem of his going in to the Gentiles which Parker acknowledgeth against Papists and Prelats to bee a note of Peters subjection to the Church Papists say it was Peters humilitie other Papists say Peter gave but such a brotherly account to the Church such as one brother is oblieged to give to another also all our Divines and those Papists who contend that the Pope is inferiour to universall councels doc with good warrant alledge that by Matth. 18. Peter is subjected to the Church-censures if hee sinn against
from any who walketh inordinately 2. Thes. 3. 14. 15. 3 It is not well said that Christ giveth no Lawes for sinnes that seldome fall out What say you of Anathema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. to bee used against an Apostate from the faith and against such as fall into the sinne against the holy Ghost I thinke visible professors capable both of the â—nne and the censure yet I thinke it falleth seldome out it fell seldome but that an Apostle was to bee rebuked haâ— Paul then no law to rebuke Peter Gal. 2. Object 2. A Synod or presbytery may prâ—nounce the dâ—â—dfull sentence of non-communion against persons and Churches 〈…〉 Answ. But I aske where is the power and institution from Christ that one private man as hee may counsell his brother so hee may by our brethrens grounds pronounce this sentence Object 3. One private man may not doe it to a whole Church â—â— a classicall Presbytery and a Synod hath more authoritie over him then hee hath over them Answ. One private man may rebuke another yea bee may plead with his mother the whole Church that hee liveth in for her whoredomes Hos. 2. 2. But if hee justly plead and his mother will not heare may hee not separate Our brethren of New England I thinke shall bee his warrant to separate for their sixth Synodicall proposition saith the fraternitie and people are to separate from the Eldership after they refuse wholesome counsell Now what Scripture warranteth twenty to withdraw and separate shall also warrant ten and five and one for no reason that if twentie bee carelesse of their salvation in the dutie of separation and shall not separate that one man shall not separate because a multitude doth evill I am not to doe evill with them Object 4. But a Synod or a classicall presbytery hath more 〈◊〉 and authoritie then one private man or one single Congregation 1. Because they are a company of Elders to whom as to the Priests of the Lord whose lips should preserve knowledge the â—â—yes of knowledge and consequently a power and Synodicall authoritie is given though they have no power of jurisdiction 2. Because as a private mans power is inferiour to a Pastors so is the power of classicall and Synodioall meeting of Elders above a man or a single congregation and a Synod in dogmaticall power ariseth so higher then these â—â— divine institution doth fall upon it Answ. The power of order and the key of knowledge doth elevate a Pastor whose lippes doth preserve knowledge above a private Christian yea as I conceive above a multitude of beleevers but I would know if a Synods dogmaticall power bee above the power of single congregations I thinke it is not by our brethrens â—enents for they say expresly that every particular 〈…〉 jus to decide dogmaticall points and this â—ight the Church of Antioch had Act. 15. and laboured to end that 〈…〉 in her selfe which sheweth that they had right and â— we but they had not habilitie and therefore in that case they 〈…〉 light and advise from other Churches and they say The câ—niociation of Churches into classes and Synods wee 〈◊〉 to bee lawfull and in some cases necessary as namely in things 〈…〉 not peculiar to one Church but common to all And likewise when a Church is not able to end any matter that concernes onely themselves theâ— they are to seek advise counsell from neighbour Churches hence the power of Synods is only by way of counsel and advise a Pastors advise is but an advise he giveth not his advise virtute 〈◊〉 as he is a Pastor for then his advise should bee pastorall and authâ—â—itative and proceeding from the power of order though not from the power of jurisdiction hee onely giveth his advise as a gifted and inlightned man and so to my poore knowledge two hundreth five hundreth holy and learned Pastors determining in a Synod any dogmaticall point they sit all there not as in a court not as Pastors for then their Decrees should have pastorall authoritie and some power formally ministeriall to determine yea and to sway in a ministeriall way by power of the keyes of knowledge all the inferiour Churches whom the decree concerneth even as the Eldership of Pergâ—mus which to our brethren is a congregationall Church doth decree by the dogmaticall power of the keyes of knowledge that the doctrine of Balaam is a false doctrine therefore they sit there as gifted Christians and so have no Church-power more then a private brother or sister of the Congregation hath toward or over another for though a multitude of counselling and advising friends be safer and more effectuall to give light then a counselling friend yet are they but a multitude of counselling friends and the result of all counselling and advising men doth never rise higher then a counsell and advise and can never amount to the nature of a command as twenty schâ—â—â—-fellowes suppose as â—udent and wise as the twentie masters of an Universitie if these twentie schoole-fellowes give their advise and counsell 〈◊〉 a weightie businesse that concerneth the practise and obedience of all the students the result of their counsell and advise can never bee more then an advise and cannot amount to the same determination of the twentie masters of the Universitie the result of whose determination is a soveraigne commandement and an authoritative and judiciall decree and statute to all the whole Universitie 2. Whereas these Godly brethren say the power of Synods in things which belong to particular Churches is but a counsell and advise they should have told their mind whether or no the Synod hath more then advise and counsell in things that are not peculiar to one Church but common to all the Churches in that bounds for it would seeme that a Synod is a colledge of commanders in dogmaticall points that doe equally concerne all Churches this should have beenespoken to though in those things which are peculiar to each particular Church they bee but a colledge of friendly advisers and counsellers 2. If a Synod bee but a societie of counsellers they have no more any authoritative power to pronounce the sentence of non-communion against any single Congregation or private man then a private man or a single Congregation hath authoritative power to pronounce that sentence against them but 3. You make the Synodicall power so above the power of private Christians in counselling as that this Synodicall power is of divine institution as you say but let me aske what to doe to counsell and advise onely then that power of counselling in Abigail to David in one brother or sister to another brother and sister is of divine institution warranted by the Law of nature Levit. 19. 18. by the Law of charitie by the communion of Saints Col. 3. 15. 1 Thes. 5. 14. Heb. 3. 13. Heb. 10. 24. Mal. 3. 16. Zach. 8. 21 22 23. for there is a divine institution for one brother to counsell
principally seated in the Presbytery in regard of the latter Synods are the first subject of the occasionall Church-power in things which â—e in common belong to many Presbyteries or to a nationall Church But to returne if the Synodicall power bee different in essence and nature and not gradually onely from the counsell and advise of Christians then first it is not a determination that bindeth by way of counsell and brotherly advise onely but under some higher consideration which is as like a Church-relation of Church-power as any thing can bee seeing here bee Pastors acting as Pastors 2. formally gathered in a councell 3. speaking Gods Word 4. by the holy Ghost But this shall bee against the Church-government of New England 2. If it bee essentially different from an advise and councell and warranted by divine institution why doe not our brethen give us Scripture for it for if they give us Act. 15. then can they not say that the Apostles in this Synod did determine and voyce as Apostles by an Apostolick and immediatly inspiring Spirit for the spirit Synodicall is a spirit imitable and a rule of pertually induring moralitie in all Synods and must leade us for an Apostolick spirit is not now in the world 3. As they require a positive divine institution for the frame of a Presbyteriall Church in power above a Congregation and will not bee satisfied with the light of nature which upon the supposall of a spirituall government instituted by Christ in a Congregation which is a part may clearely by the hand lead us to the inlarging of that same spirituall government in the whole that is to a number of consociated Churches which are all interessed as one common societie in a common government so they must make out for their Synod endued with dogmaticall power a positive divine institution 4. We desire a warrant from the Word why a colledge of Pastors determining by the Word of God as Pastors having power of order and acting in a colledge according to that power should not bee a formall and ordinary great Presbytery 5. How can they by our brethrens determination exercise such pastorall acts out of their owne Congregations towards those Churches to which they have no pastorall relation virtute potestatis ordinis 6. How can the wisedome of Christ who provideth that his servants bee not despised but that despisers in a Church way should bee censured 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. cloth his messengers in a Synod with a power dogmaticall and deny all power of iâ—â—â—diction to them upon the supposall that their determinations be rejected I feare there bee something under this that none are to bee censured or delivered to Satan for heterodox opinions except they erre in points fundamentall But farther it may bee made good that a power dogmaticall is not different in nature from a power of jurisdiction for we read not of any societie that hath power to meet to make Lawes and decrees which have not power also to backe their decrees with punishments if the Jewish Synedry might meet to declare judicially what was Gods Law in point of conscience and what not and to tie men to it they had power to conveene and make Lawes farre more may they punish contraveners of the Law for a nomothetick power in a societie which is the greater power and is in the fountaine must presuppose in the societie the lesse power which is to punish and the power of punishing is in the inferior judicature so a nomothetick power ministeriall cannot want a power of censuring It is true a single Pastor may ministerially give out commandements in the authoritie of Christ but hee cannot his alone censure or excommunicate the contraveners of those commandements but it followeth well in an assembly hee hath power to censure and excommunicate now here Pastors and Elders are in an assembly It is objected Pastors in a Synod have no jurisdiction as Pasters for what they doe as Pastors that they may doe there alone and on of a Synod but they doe not nor cannot determine and give out Canons there alone and they cannot there alone determine juridically therefore they doe not wholly and poorely as Pastors in relation to those Churches give out these decrees yet doe they not give out the decrees as privite men wholly but in some pastor all relation for Pastors as Pastors have something peculiar to them in all Churches whither they come to preach so as a speciall blessing followeth on their labours though they be not Pastors in relation to all the Churches they come to even as a Sermon on the Lords day is instamped with a more speciall blessing bâ—â—â—use of Gods institution imprinted on the day then a Sermon preached in another day Answ. This argument is much for us it is proper to acts of jurisdiction ecclesiasticall that they cannot bee exercised by one onely but must bee exercised by a societie now a Pastor as a Pastor his alone without any collaterally joyned with him exerciseth his pastorall acts of preaching and of administrating the Sacraments but those who give out those decrees cannot give them out Synodically but in a Synod and Court-wayes as forensicall decrees and so in a juridicall way and because Pastors whither so ever they come doe remaine Pastors 1. The Apostles are not in this Synod as Apostles Secondly nor yet as gifted Christians to give their counsell and advise nor thirdly as this answerer granteth meerely as Pastors then it must follow that fourthly they are here as such pastors conveened Synodically by divine institution and that this is the patterne of a Synod Object 2. But there is no censuring of persons for scandalls in this meeting because there is nothing here but a doctrinall declaration of the falsehood of their opinion who taught a necessitie of circumcision and that all is done by way of doctrine and by power of the Keyes of knowledge not of jurisdiction is cleare from the end of this meeting Act. 5. 2. Paul and Barnabas were sent from the Church of Antiocâ— unto Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning this question and v. 6. the Apostles and Elders came together to consider 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of this matter consideration of questions being the end of the Synod is a thing belonging to doctrinal power meerely so Mr. Mather Answ. 1. It is false that there is no censuring of persons here for to say nothing that Peter accuseth those of the wrong side as personally present at the Synod either being summoned or comming thither by appeale v. 10. Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoake upon the necke of the Discip'es c. which reproofe comming from one man onely cannot be called a Synodicall reproofe It is more then evident that the publick Synodicall censure of rebuke is put upon those who held and urged the necessitie of circumcision and why not excommunication also in case of obstinacy for the Synodicall censure
of a publick Synodicall rebuke is onely gradually different not specifically from excommunication and both must proceed from one and the same power Now the Synodicall censure is evident in the Text v. 24. certaine went out from us so it is cleare they pretended they were in this point followers of the Apostles and Lorinus thinketh that some deemed them schismaticks 2. They have troubled you with words Lorinus citeth the Sy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vedalacachum they have terrified you as if your salvation were not sure except you keepe Moses his Law of ceremonies and the morall Law 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destraying by false arguments your soules it is a word contrary to building up in sound knowledge as Aristotle taketh the word saying that you must bee circumcised and keepe the Law 4. They abused the name of the Apostles as having an Apostolick commandement and so a divine warrant for their false doctrine and therefore are they refuted as liars 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence it is cleare they did labour to prove a necessitie of circumcision not onely from the old Testament and an expresse divine Law but also from the authoritie of the Apostles which was manifestly false out of which I argue thus If the Apostles doe not onely in a doctrinall way refute a false doctrine in this Synod but also in a Church-way and by a juridicall power rebuke and Synodically charge the authors as subâ—erters of soules and liars then they doe not onely use a meere doctrinall power in this Synod but also a juridicall power but the former is true Ergo so is the latter 2. Observe two things in these obtruders of circumcision First the error of their judgement It is more then apparent that they had a heterodox and erroneous opinion of God and his worship and the way of salvation as is cleare Act. 15. 1. And certaine men which came downe from Judea taught the brethren and said except yee bee circumcised after the manner of Moses yee cannot bee saved This doctrine is clearely refuted both by Peter v. 10. That yoake of the Law wee disclaime there is a way of salvation without that yoake v. 11. But wee beleeve that through the grace of the Lord Jesus wee shall bee saved as they and it is synodically refuted v. 24. wee gave no such commandement it is not the mind of us the Apostles of the Lord that you keepe Moses Law as you hope to bee saved there was for this error in their judgement required a doctrinall or dogmaticall power and this the Synod used 2. Besides this erroneous opinion in their judgement there was another fault and scandall that the Synod was to censure to wit their obtruding of their false way upon the soules and consciences of the Churches as vers 1 They taught the brethren this false doctrine 2. That they wilfully and obstinately did hold this opinion and raised a Schisme in the Courch v. 2. wherefore Paul and Barnabas had no small 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissention the word signifieth sedition which was raised by those who held that erroneous opinion and great disputation with them 3. They laid a yoake upon the brethren v. 10. and v. 7. They made great disputation against the Apostles and v. 24. They troubled the brethren and perverted their soules This was not simply an heterodox opinion which is the materiall part of a heresie but had something of the formall part of an heresie to wit some degrees of pertinacie of brutish and blind zeale even to the troubling and perverting of the soules of the Churches while as they would make disciples to themselves and lead away soules from the simplicitie of the Gospell now the Synod doth not helpe this latter simply in a Synodicall way by a dogmaticall and doctrinall power but by an authoritie Synodicall and therefore they authoritatively rebuke them as subverters of soules and whereas these teachers laid on an unjust yoake to keepe Moses his Law upon the Churches v. 10. the Synod by their ecclesiasticall and juridicall authoritie doth free the Churches of that yoake and they say in their decree v. 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us not to lay the yoake of Moses his Law on you as those who trouble you have done to lay upon you no greater burden then these necessary things c. now if there had beene nothing to doe but to resolve the question if this had beene the totall and adequat end of the Synod in a meere doctrinall way to resolve the question Whether must wee bee circumcised and keepe the Law morall and ceremoniall of Moses upon necessitie of salvation as the argument of our brethren contendeth Peter v. 10. 11. made a cleare issue of the question We are saved by the grace of God both â—â—nes and Gentiles and it is to tempt God to lay the yoake of the Law of Moses upon the brethren the resolving of that question is the end of the Synod but not the adequat end for here that not onely the doctrinall power was to bee used but beside that 1. the schisme was to bee removed and the authoritie of the Synod to bee used against the wilfulnesse and obstinacie of those obtruders of circumcision in rebuking them as perverters of soules 2. For the scandall which might have been taken if the Gentiles should have eaten blood and things strangled and meats offered to idols and therefore the Apostles and Elders behoved as a conveened Synod to forbid a grievous scandall and a spirituall homicide against the Law of nature to wit that the Gentiles for feare of scandalizing weake beleevers amongst the Jewes should abstaine from the practise of some things at this time meerely indifferent in their nature though not indifferent in their use such as were to eate things offered to idols things strangled and blood and whereas our brethren 3. Object If the Apostles did any thing more then might have been done by private Pastors out of a Synod it was meerely Apostolicall and the Elders did but assent to the Apostles Apostolicall determination and every one did here Apostles Elders and Brethren more suo Apostles as Apostles Elders and Brethren as Elders and Brethren after their manner as consenters to the Apostles but other wayes it is a begging of the question for to say the Apostles and Elders rebuked Synodically the obtruders of circumcision it s but said because one Pastor might have rebuked those obtruders for the specification of actions must not bee taken from their efficient causes but from their formall objects therefore this is no good consequence the Synod rebuked those obtruders Ergo the Synod rebuked them as a Synod and by a power of jurisdiction it followeth not for Paul Gal. 2. rebuked Peter Ergo Paul had a power of jurisdiction over Peter I thinke your selves will deny this consequence I Answer 1. These two answers are contradictory and sheweth that our brethren are not true to their owne
principles for sometime they say the Apostles gave out this decree as Apostles and sometime there is nothing here done by a meere doctrinall power such as Paul had over Peter or one single Pastor hath over another now it is sure that Paul had no Apostolick power over Peter and that one Pastor have not Apostolick power over another 2. When our brethren say here that the Apostles as Apostles by an infallible spirit gave out this Decree they doe in this helpe the Papists as Bellarmine Becanus Grâ—â—rut and in particular the Jesuit Lorinus who saith decrâ—um authenticum cujus inspirator spiritus sanctâ— and so saith Cornelius a lapide visiâ—m est nob is inspiratis decretis a Spiritu sanctus therefore saith hee the councell cannot erre and so Salmeron and Cajetan say and expresly Stapleton saith this Apostosack definition flowed from the instinct of the holy Ghost observandum saith Stapleton quanta habenda sit ecclesiae definienth authoritâ—s hence our brether here must yeeld either that all Synods are infallible as Papists say this Synod the patterne of all Synods being concluded by an Apostolick spirit could not erre and so neither can councells erre or they must with Socinians and Arminians say there is no warrant for Synods here at all And certainly though wee judge our brethren as farre from Popery and Socinianisme as they thinke wee detest Anti-Christian Presbytery yet if this Synod bee concluded by an Apostolick spirit it is no warrant to bee imitated by the Churches and wee have no ground hence for lawfull Synods Whittakerus Calvin Beza Luther and all our Divines do all alledge this place as a pregnant ground not of Apostolick but of ordinary and constant Synods to the end of the world and Diodatus good to the holy Ghost because they did treat of ecclesiasticall reders concerning the quietnes and order of the Church wherein ecclesiasticall authoritie hath place the Assembly used this tearme it seemed good to us which is not used neither in articles of faith nor in the commandements which meerely concerned the conscience and to shew that authoritie was with holy reason and wisedome there is added and to the holy Ghost who guided the Apostles in these outward things also 1. Cer. 7. 25. 40. 2. If our brethren meane that the Elders and brethren were in this Apostolick and immediatly inspired Synodicall determination not as collaterall penners of Scriptures joyned with the Apostles but onely as consenters and as consenters by power of an ordinary holy Ghost working consent in them more suo according to their capacitie as ordinary Elders 1. They yet more helpe the Papists because they must say onely Apostles and so onely their successors the Prelates had definitive voices in this Synod the Presbyters and Brethren did no more then Papists and Prelates say Presbyters did in generall councells of old and therefore the Presbyter is to subscribe Ego A. N. Presbyter consentiens subseribo whereas the Prelate subscribed say they Ego A. B. Episcopus definiens subscribo wee crave a warrant in Gods Word to make an Apostle or a Prelate a Synodicall definer having a definitive voyce and the Elder Brother or Presbyter to have a consultative voyce for here all the multitude if there was a multitude present doe make Synodicall decrees by consulting and consenting yea all the nation may come to a nationall Synod and both reason dispute and consent because matters of doctrine and government of the Church concerneth all therefore all have an interest of presence and all have an interest of reasoning and 3. by consequent all have an interest of consenting yea of protesting on the contrary if the Synod determine any thing against the Word of God If they say there is a threeford consent in this Synod 1. an Apostolicall 2. a second Synodicall agreeing to Elders as Elders and a third that of the people or a popular What a mixt Synod shall this be but 1. then as the Epistle to the Tlxssalonians is called the Epistle of Paul not the Epistle of Silvanus and Timotheus though Silvanus and Timotheus did consent so these dogmata or decrees should not be called the decrees of the Apostles and Elders as they are called Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 6. Act. 21. 25. but onely the decrees of the Apostles seeing the Elders did onely consent and had no definitive influence in making the decree by this doctrine as Silvanus and Timotheus were not joynt pen-men of Scripture with Paul 3. When as it is said the specification of actions must not bee taken from the efficient cause but from the formall object and all that a done in this Synod might have beene done by a single Pastor I answer wee doe not fetch the specification of this rebuke and of these decrees from the efficient causes but from the formall object for an Apostle might his alone have rebuked these obtruders of circumcision and made this decree materialiter for Paul did more his alone then this when hee wrote the Eâ—istle to the Romans but yet one Pastor could not have Synodically rebuked and given out a decree formally Synodicall laying an Ecclesiasticall tie on moe Churches then one there is great ods to doe one and the same action formally and to doe the same action materially and I beleeve though actions have not by good logick their totall specification from their efficient cause yet that ordinances of God as lawfull have their specification from the efficient causes in part our brethren cannot deny For what made the difference betwixt Aaron his fire offered to the Lord and Nadab and Abihu their strange and unlawfull fire that they offered to the Lord but that the on fire had God for its author the other had men and the like I say of Gods feasts and the feasts devised by Jeroboam else if a woman preach and administrate the Lords Supper in the Church that preaching and sacrament administrated by her should not have a different specification and essence if wee speake morally or Theologically from that same very preaching and celebration of the Supper performed in the Church by a lawfull Pastor it is as I conceive of the essence of an action Synodicall I say not its totall essence that it cannot bee performed by one in a Church-way and with an ecclesiasticall tie but it must be performed by many else it is not a Synodicall action and it is true that Paul Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. hath in substance the same Canon forbidding scandall which is forbidden in this Canon prohibiting eating of meats offered to Idolls and blood in the case of scandall but I pray you is there not difference betwixt the one prohibition and the other yea there is for Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 10. it hath undenyably Apostolick authoritie here it hath onely Synodicall 2. There it is a commandement of God here it is a Canon of the Church 3. There it commeth from one man here from a
and the Churches of Antioch had here Commissioners for Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas with certaine other of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this must relate to Pastors and Elders if Syria and Cilicia had no Commissioners here as certainly they were oblieged to send Commissioners as well as Antioch seeing their case was one with Antioch v. 23. and they could not but heare of this Apostolick remedie to remove the scandall of false Doctrine and therefore their Commissioners were either here or then they were oblieged to bee here and here wee have the true essence of a Synod to wit a meeting of the Churches of Antioch and Jerusalem at Jerusalem to determine of this question But that the Church of Jerusalem did not determine all the businesse in a Presbyteriall way and that others had hand in it is cleare 1. Because Paul and Barnabas and others with them are expresly sent from Antioch to Jerusalem as Commissioners and Elders and here they reason and voyce as is cleare ch 15. v. 12. v. 22. v. 28. ch 16. 4. ch 21. 25 26. and the Acts and Decrees are ascribed to all the Apostles and Elders who were present at the councell ch 14. 4. ch 15. v. 22. v. 12. and amongst these were Paul and Barnabas with certaine others sent from Antiâ—b Act. 15. 2. and the Elders of Jerusalem Act. 21. 25. with the Apostles Act. 16. 4. 2. the reasons alledged are false for Act. 16. 4. Act. 15. 22. Act. 21. 25. the Acts and Synodicall Decrees are not ascribed to Elders of Jerusalem onely but to the Apostles who were not Elders at Jerusalem and to the Elders in Jerusalem Act. 16. 4. not of Jerusalem 3. It is no matter though it cannot bee proven that the Churches of Syria and Cilicis had no Commissioners there for first the contrary cannot bee proven secondly they ought to have had Commissioners here thirdly the Acts are sent to them conjunctly with Antioch and messengers to report the mind and sense of the Assembly as to Antioch v. 23. 4. It is but a groundlesse conceit to say that Paul and Barnabas came to the Synod as Commissioâ—â—â—s or as servants to receive information not as Elders to give their decisive voices because Paul carried himselfe in the assembly as Peter and James who were Elders in the assembly and they being Apostles the decrees are ascribed to the Apostles without any distinction Act. 15. 28. Act. 16. 4. And if Paul and Barnabas and Silas a Prophet of the Church at Antioch Act. 15. v. 32. with Judas v. 27. also a Prophet had beene onely Commissioners and servants of the Church at Antioch and not Elders and members of the Assembly how could they have voices in the Church or Congregation of Jerusalem for the messengers of one Congregation hath not place to voyce in another Congregation 2. It is said expressely It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send chosen men of their owne with Paul and Barnabas namely Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas chiefe men leading men amongst the Brethren now I desire to bee resolved in two 1. how Judas and Silas were men of their owne company 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 certainly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must relate to the Assembly to wit to Elders and Apostles by all good Grammar and how are they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Captaines and leading men amongst the Brethren which brethren are certainly these mentioned in the same verse Apostles Elders and the whole Church and these mentioned in the next verse 23. Apostles Elders and Brethren that is chosen men of this Assembly now it is evident that Judas and Silas were no part of Elders of the Church of Jerusalem but Prophets at Antiab v. 32. and members of that Presbytery spoken of Act. 13. 1 2. and Act. 15. v. 35. And what power then had the Assembly to send them and especially what power had the Eldership or presbytery of Jerusalem to send men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of their owne company who were not men of their owne company therefore they were called chosen men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of their owne company and leading men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Brethren because they were members of the Assembly and of that councell gathered together with one accord v. 25. and not because they were naked messengers of the Church of Antioch but Elders Prophets v. 32. and members of the Assembly v. 22. 23. And when as it is said Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 28. These decrees are ascribed to the Elders in Jerusalem I answer they are not called the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem as Revel 2. 1. To the Angel of the Church of Ephesus v. 8. To the Angel of the Church of Smyrna and v. 12. of the Church of Pergamus and v. 18. and Act. 20. 17. but the Eders which were at Jerusalem assembled and this doth no more prove that all these Elders were onely the Elders of the Church at Jerusalem then it proveth that the Apostles were the Apostles of the Church at Ierusalem which no man can say yea by the phrase of Scripture used in other places it is cleare they were not the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem and for Act. 21. 25. The Elders of the Church of Jerusalem taketh those Decrees upon them not as if they made the whole Synod but because they were a considerable part of the Synod for it is cleare from the story Act. 15. that the Apostles and others were members of that assembly and therefore that v. 25. Wee have written and concluded c. must bee expounded wee as a part of the Synod have written c. and it is a Synecdoche and the pronoune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wee includeth no Apostle but James whereas Peter Paul Barnabas Iudas Silâ—s and others Elders and Brethren were members of the Synod yea and as our Brethren say though to mee it is not probable the whole Church of Ierusalem from v. 22. c. 15. Object 7. They take away the scandall in a doctrinall way only declaring that they ought to abstaine from things scandalous Answ. The very delivering to Satan may thus bee called doctrinall because it is a Declaration that the mans sinnes are retained in heaven yet it is an authoritative declaration and if it bee meere doctrinall one Pastor and one Prophet might have done all which this venerable colledge of Apostles and Elders disputed reasoned and concluded Synodically A meere doctrinall power layeth not on burdens and Decrees Herodian calleth such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 senatusconsultâ—in and Budeâ—â—s a man excellently skilfull in the Greeke language saith the like of it and so doth the civill Law make it a statute of the Senate Object 8. The reason why Patel could not though hee was an Apostle determine this at Antioch was not because hee wanted Apostolick authoritie but because his Apostolick power was more questionable hee not having seene Christ in the flesh
hand in it 2. The formall acts of a politicall Congregation not fixed are one and the same in nature and essence with the formall Church-acts of a fixed Congregation For 1. the Word and Sacraments are one and the same 2. their acts of government in rebuking accusing and joynt consenting to deliver to Satan an incestuous man are one and the same whether the Congregation bee fixed or not fixed shew us a difference But it is said they are different in a politicall or in a Church-consideration 1. Because this determinate Congregation is to subject their consciences in the Lord to this fixed Eldership whom they have called and chosen to bee their Elders and not to the ministery of any others as 1 Thess. 5. 12. Know them that labour amongst you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not those who are over others and that are over you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and are over you in the Lord not over others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and admâ—nish you not others and 2. The Pastors are to feed such a flocke over which the holy Ghost hath set them Acts 20. 28. and they are to feede the flocke amongst them 1 Pet. 5. 2. not any other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore Pastors are fixed by the holy Ghost to a fixed congregation 3. Pastors are not rebuked by the Spirit of God for remisse exercise of jurisdiction and church-Church-power but over their owne fixed Congregation not because they doe not exercise their power over other Congregations over which they are not and for whose soules they do not watch as is evident in the severall rebukes tendered by Christ to every Angell or Eldership of the seven Churches in Asia Revel 2. c. 3. where every Angel and Church is rebuked for their owne omissions towards their owne fixed and particular flocks Answ. The places doe not come up to prove fixed Congregations in the Apostles times for 1. wee deny that the Church of Thessalonica was one single fixed Congregation or the Church of Ephesus either and farre lesse can the Churches of Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bythinia to which Peter writeth and whose Elders 1 Pet. 5. 1. 2. hee exhorteth to feede the flock of God bee one fixed Congregation nor doe they prove that fixed Congregations were though I thinke it not unprobable that when Phebe Rom. 16. 1. is called a Deacâ—nisse of the Church which is at Cenchrea that there were fixed Congregations at that time but many things not without apparent strength of much probabilitie may bee said by the learned on the contrary 2. The Eldership of Ephesus I dare not call the Eldership of one Congregation farre lesse of one fixed Congregation and they are all commanded to feed the flocke over which the holy Ghost had set them and no other Church that is most true But how doe our brethren inferre a fixed Congregation at Ephesus from thence farre lesse I think can they in ferre that the formall Church-acts of a fixed and a not fixed Congregation are different in nature and therefore if we can show that in the Apostolick Churches they had many Congregations though not fixed under one common Eldership which did feed them in common with Word Sacraments and Discipline as is clearely proved then have wee a patterne of a Presbyteriall Church 3. The Elders of Ephesus and these Elders 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. had all of them a burden of the soules amongst them and over which the holy Ghost had set them and they had not a burden and charge in particular of others as watching in particular for the soules of others but how fixed Congregations are hence inferred I see not for I may have with other six Pastors a Pastorall burden and charge to watch for three Congregations according to my talent and strength though I bee not a fixed pastor to all the three collectively or to any fixed one distributively so as all the omissions of my six fellow-labourors shall bee laid to my charge in the Court of the Judge and Lord of all if I do what I am able which I demonstrate thus 1. That morall obligation of conscience which did obliege the Apostles as Pastors of the Christian world which was to bee converted is not temporary but perpetuall and morall and did obliege the Apostles as Christians Therefore this morall obligation did lie upon the Apostles to feed the Catholick fiocke of the whole Christian world over which the holy Ghost had set them just as the Elders of Ephesus Act. 20. 28. are commanded to feed the whole flock of God which is at Ephesus now I aske if every single Apostle is to make a reckoning to God for the soules of all the Christian world 2. If Peter must bee answerable to God because Paul by negligence should incurre the woe of not preaching the Gospell 1 Cor. 9. 16 3. If upon this morall ground of an obligation lying on the Apostles to feed the Catholick flock of the whole world amongst which they were for the most part by speciall commandement of Christ to preach to all nations Matth. 28. 19. to every creature Mark 16. v. 15. If I say the Apostles bee tied to plant Churches in such determinate quarters and fixed kingdomes of the habitable world and if the dividing of the world into twelve severall parts and large parishes to the twelve Apostles bee juris divini of divine institution I believe this can hardly bee proved by Gods Word 2. Where there bee six Elders in a Congregation supposed to bee independent every one of the six are oblieged in their place to feed the whole flocke over which the holy Ghost hath set them and that by the commandement of God Act. 20. 28. 29. 1 Pet. 5. 1. as our brethren teach but I hope by these places no humane logick would inferre nor could our brethrèn collect that 1. every one of these six should by divine institution bee set over each of them the sixt determinate and sixt part of that Congregation 2. That every one of the sixt were not to give a reckoning for the whole Congregation and did not watch for the whole Congregation according to his Talent 3. That one might not be accused even one Archippus possibly at Colosse Col. 4. 17 for his owne particular neglect to the whole flock though others were also joyned with Archippus who fulfilled their part of their ministery Col. 2. v. 5. yea we justly aske if all the Elders of Thyatira were guiltie of remisse discipline against the false Prophetesse Jezabell and if all the Church of Sardis did become sleepie and secure and had a name that they were living and yet were dead though the Eldership under the name of the Angel of the Church bee indefinitely rebuked Revel 2. 20. c. 3. 1 2 3. 4. yea it is like to mee that seeing the Lord Jesus commendeth the one for love service faith patience Revel 2. 19. and the other that c. 3. 4 they had a few names that had
formally in collegio this they did not nor could they doe in appointing the office for they were immediatly inspired by the Spirit to appoint new offices but in ordaining the officers in concreto that is in ordaining the men Steven Philip c. they proceed after a presbyteriall way every way as an ordinary presbytery doth Object But they ordaine Elders here upon this Apostolick â—round because they were Apostles and Pastors to all the world c. if the ground was Apostolick the action was formally Apostolick Answ. Wee must distinguish betwixt ordination comparative and absolute ordination comparative is in relation to the place if the question bee upon what ground doe the Apostles ordaine in all the world I answer because they are Apostles and every where Ergo they may ordaine every where but as for absolute ordination here in Jerusalem if the question bewhy they did ordaine Stephen Philip c. tali modo by conveening the Church I answer because the Apostles were Elders But our brethren say Then the Apostles in this act laid downe their infallible Apostolick spirit I answer they laid downe the ininfallible spirit which they had as Apostles and tooke them to â— fallible spirit but they did not operate and governe in this Act from this infallible spirit but from an ordinary spirit else you must say 1. when the Apostles did eate and drinke they laid downe an infallible and Apostolick spirit and tooke an ordinary and fallible spirit for they did not eate and drinke by immediate inspiration and as Apostles but as men 2. because they were Apostles where ever they came it shall follow by this that they did all by this Apostolick spirit as if the question bee upon what ground Did the Apostles every where baptize pray pasiâ—aâ—â—y exhort as Pastors governe in Corinth deliver the incestuous man to Satan at Corinth If you answer because they were Apostles then I say because they were Apostles alwayes and in every place they never used the ordinary power of the keyes given to them as common to them and all Pastors to the end of the world Matth. 18. 18. Matth. 16. 19. John 20. 23. and so they could not doe any thing as ordinary Pastors or ordinary Elders 2. Christ gave to the Apostles an ordinary power which they could never put forth in Acts 3. we have no warrant from the Apostles preaching baptizing exhorting governing retaining and remitting sinnes excommunicating rebuking to preach baptize exhort governe retaine and remit sinnes excommunicate and rebuke because the Apostles in Acts Apostolick and extraordinary are no more to bee imitated by us then wee are to imitate them in speaking with divers tongues and raising the dead Hence upon these grounds wee are certainly induced to beleeve that the Apostles did here ordaine not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders 1. Because in these Acts the Apostles are imitable but in what they doe as Apostles they are not imitable 2. What ever rules of the Word doth regulate the ordinary classicall presbytery the Apostles goe along in all these acts here condescending to these rules such as the meeting of the presbytery the twelve do meet 2. They tacitely acknowledge a neglect of the daily ministration to the widowes which is an act of misgovernment of the Deaconrie which is an ordinary office of the presbytery and therefore they desire of the Church to bee freed of this office 3. They referre the nomination and election of the seven men to the people 4. They ordaine seven constant and perpetuall officers as the presbytery doth Ergo they doe not ordaine by their transcendent power as Apostles 3. From this place our brethren prove their Congregationall presbytery which they would not doe if the Apostles did here manage affâ—ires as extraordinary officers 4. This colleâ—ium of Apostles doe nothing in all this which by confession of both sides may not bee done and to the end of the world is not done in the transacting of the like businesse by the ordinary presbytery 4. What the Apostles doe as Apostles agreeth onely to Apostles and can be done by none but Apostles or by Evangelists having their power by speciall warrantable commission from them as what a man doth as a man what a Pastor doth as a Pastor a Deacon as a Deacon a Prophet as a Prophet can bee done by none but by a man onely a Pastor onely a Deacon onely except whereas one Act as to teach agreeth both to a Pastor and a Doctor which yet have their owne differences but all here done the Apostles might have done if wee suppose they had not beene Apostles 5. If as Apostles they ordaine any one of the twelve Apostles should compleatly and entirely ordaine all the seven and so the seven Deacons should have beene twelve times ordained at this time which needles multiplication of Apostolick actions were uselesse served not for edification and is not grounded in the Word for the whole twelve in collegio doe ordaine and what any one Apostle doth as an Apostle by the amplitude of a transcendent power every Apostle doth it compleatly and wholly his alone as without helpe of another Apostle Peter worketh a miracle especially any one Apostle as Paul his alone might ordaine Timothy an Evangelist 6. If they did here act as Apostles any one Apostle might have ordained the Deacons in an ordinary way as here but that wee cannot conceive for then one and the same action should have beene ordinary and not ordinary for one man cannot bee a Church or a societie to doe the ordinary Acts of an ordinary societie for it should bee extraordinary to one to act that which is the formall Act of many as many and should involve a contradiction except it were an Act which cannot bee performed by many as when one Paster speaketh for many for a whole Church but that is ordinary and necessary because a multitude as a multitude cannot speake without confusion in a continuated discourse for that all the people say one word Amen is not a multitude as a multitude using one continuated speech Object 1. If the Apostles did not all their Ministeriall acts as Apostles they did not fulfill their commission given to them as to Apostles Matth. 28. Goe and teach all Nations Answ. The consequence is nought if they had not done all things which by vertue of their Apostolicall Office they were commanded to doe they had not then fulfilled their commission given to them by Christ. That is true but now the assumption is false they were under no commandement of Christ to doe all their Ministeriall Acts as Apostles prove that they did neither Preach nor Baptize as Apostles but only as Apostles they did preach infallibly 2. In all places of the world as Catholick Pastors 3. With the gift of Tongues 4. Working of Miracles which by divine institution were annexed to their preaching but their preaching according to the substance of the act was ordinary Object 2. The Apostles went
to Jerusalem by revelation as Paul did Gal. 1. Ergo all their acts that they did there they did them by immediate revelation Answ. The consequence is null Paul went by revelation up to Jerusalem and there Gal. 2. hee rebuked Peter as an Apostle no as a Brother for then Paul should have exercised Apostolick Authority over Peter which is popish Object 3. If the Apostles did act as Presbyters here they did wrong the particular Churches and took their Liberty from them in exercising ordinary Ministeriall acts there which are proper to that Church Answ. It followeth upon the denyed principles of an independent Congregation onely for a Church without Elders hath no Presbyteriall power and therefore such a power can not bee taken from it you cannot take from a Church that which by Law it hath not If the Acts of the government in the Apostles are according to the substance of the Acts all one with the Acts of government in the ordinary presbytery Ergo say I those Acts come not from an Apostolicall and extraordinary power even as the Apostles preaching and baptizing are not different in nature and essence from the Acts of preaching and baptizing in ordinary Pastors though they had power to preach and baptize every where and wee onely where wee have an ordinary calling of the Church and from the Apostles preaching and baptizing every where wee may inferre it is lawfull for the ordinary Elders their successors to preach and baptize in some place why may we not inferre because the Apostles in collegio in one presbytery did ordaine ordinary officers that we have thence a patterne for an ordinary presbytery Object 4. If there were no institution for preaching and baptizing but onely the Apostles naked practise we were not warrantably to preach and baptize from the sole and naked example of the Apostles Answ. Shew us an institution for preaching and baptizing then for that which we alledge is an institution Matth. 28. 19 20. Mark 14. v. 15. to you is a commandement given to the Apostles as Apostles as you said in the 1. objection proponed by you and therefore we have no more warrant to preach and baptize from the Apostles example then we have to work miracles and because by the same reason of yours Christs command to his Apostles to preach before his death Matth. 10. is not ordinary presbyteriall preaching but conjoyned also with the power of casting out devills Matth. 10. 1 2 3. it must also upon the same ground bee a Commandement given to the Apostles not as ordinary Pastors but as Apostles if we compare Matth. 10. 1 2 3. with Mark 16. 15 16 17 18. If you flee to John Baptist his practise of baptisme 1. you are farther off then you were 2. What warrant more that John Baptist his practise should warrant preaching and baptizing if it want an institution then the Apostles preaching and baptizing when it is separated from an institution 2. This argument pincheth you as much as us for a thousand times in your bookes a warrant for our ordinary Elders to preach and baptize is fetched from the sole practise of the Apostles 3. By this the argument for the Christian Salbath from the Apostles observing that day shall also fall 4. This also shall make us loose in fundamentalls of Church government which are grounded upon the Apostles practise 5. The Apostles had no Apostolick and extraordinary ground which moved them to preach and baptize according to the substance of the Acts for they did preach and baptize upon these morall and perpetuall motives and grounds which doe obliege ordinary Elders to preach and baptize even to Christs second comming Ergo their very practise not considered with the institution is our patterne and rule It is as evident that there was a Presbyteriall Church at Ierusalem after the dispersion seeing the dispersion as we have proved did not reâ—rench them to one Congregation because our Brethren doe conclude from a company of Elders of the Church of Ephesus Acts 20. of Ierusalem from the Angell of the Church of pergamus of Thyatira a formall ordinary Presbytery of Ephesus of Ierusalem of Thyatira Let us have the favour of the same argument upon the supposall of many Congregations which the word doth warrant and upon the supposall that it is called one Church alwayes as Acts 2. 47. The Lord added to the Church Acts 5. 11. feare came upon all the Church Acts 8. 1. there arose a great persecution against the Church Acts 12. 1. Herod stretched forth his hand to vex certaine of the Church v. 5. prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God Acts 15. 4. and when they were come to Jerusalem they were received of the Church and of the Apostles and Elders Acts. 21. 15. Paul went up to Jerusalem and v. 18. The day following Paul went in with us into James and all the Elders were present Here be Elders of the Church of Ierusalem and Ierusalem is named one Church frequently and alwayes before and after the dispersion it is called a Church in the singular number not onely in relation to persecuters but also in relation to government and because they were a politicall society to which there were many added Acts 2. 47. and which hath Elders Acts 15. 4. Acts 21. 15. 18. And a Church-union in a constituted body hearing the Word and receiving the Sacraments as this Church did Acts 2. 42. is not a Church but in regard of Church-policy and Church-government They reply That enemies doe persecute the Church Acts 8. 1. Acts 12. 1. Acts 8. 3. Saul made havock of the Church that is of the faithfull of the Church for Saul had no regard in his persecution to a Church in their government or Church combination therefore the enemies are said to persecute the Church materially I answer this objection I tooke off before But 2. Principally the enemies persecuted the Church under the notion of â— Society politicall holding forth in a visible Church-profession their faith in Christ and that by hearing receiving the Seales and subjecting themselves in a visible way obvious to the Eye of all to the government of the Christian Church Yea the enemies had no better character to discerne them to be Saints and so worthy of their malice then Church-characters of a Church-profession But 2. Whereas the Holy Ghost giveth the name of one Church to the Church of Ierusalem all constantly speaking of it both as a Church and in relation to persecuters and that every way in that notion as our Brethren say that the Scripture speaketh of their own Corgregationall Church wee have the same reason to call it one Church because of one government for the question is not now if it bee many Congregations but it it bee one Church Object 2. They are called the Elders at Jerusalem not the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem Ergo from this it is not concluded that they were one Church Answ. Acts 16. 4.
flow immediately and necessarily from the essence of a Church and a congregation be essentially a Church then this power agreeth to all Churches whether consociated or not consociated and without respect of what neighbours they have whether many or few whether any or none 2. A congregation its alone cannot have sole power of jurisdiction and then be deprived of it when God sendeth neighbour Churches for then neighbouring Churches which are given for helpe should be given for losse the contrary whereof Ames saith Nor doe Synods saith he constitute a new forme of a Church Answ. Power of Iurisdiction floweth from the essence of a congregation in an Iland Ergo a totall and compleat power of jurisdiction floweth from the essence of a Church or congregation consociated it followeth no wayes so a pastor of a Congregation hath as a pastor power to rebuke sinne and to administrate the Sacraments Ergo when three pastors are added to help him he hath the sole power of rebuking sinne and the sole and entire power to administrate the Sacraments and none of these three pastors hath power with him it followeth not and because these three pastors are added to help him and their pastorall power added to him is cumulative and auxiliary but not privative or destructive of his pastorall power therefore the first pastor suffereth losse by the addition of these three to him who will say this our Brethren do conceive the power of Congregations in its kind and essence to be Monarchicall so as if any power from consociated Congregations be added thereunto the Congregations power Monarchicall is d minished and the essence of it changed 2. Compleat and entire power to rule both the Congregation and the Members of consociated Churches in so far as they do keep communion with that Congregation and may either edifie or scandalize them floweth not immediatly and necessarily from the essence of every Congregation even in remote Islands not consociated with others that we never said 3. A power to governe well and according to the rule of the word added to another power to governe well and according to the word is an auxiliary power and no way destrective of that power to which it is added indeed a power to governe well added to a power of male administration in a Congregation is distructive of that power and reason it should be so because Christ never gave any such power of male administration to a Congregation but a power of right governing added to a power of right governing is neither destructive thereof nor doth it constitute a new forme of a Church or a Church power but only inlarge the prâ—existent form to extend it selfe farther for the edification of more soules But saith Mr. Mather if it be against the light of nature that the adverse party be the sole judge which must be if the sâ—le power of Iurisdiction be in the Congregation as we grant in an extraordinary case when a Congregation is in an Island its alone and so it shall be lawfull for a single Congregation to doe that which is against all equity and the very light of nature it must then follow that it is not against the light of nature that a Congregation though consociated with other Congregations have entire jurisdiction within it selfe Answ. None of us do teach that it is against the light of nature that the adverse party be the judge it might fall out in a generall councell lawfully convened from which there is no provocation yea and in a nationall councell for all councels may erre the adverse party may judge as it was a lawfull councell according to a Church-constitution that condemned Christ of blisphemy and they were also his enemies but we teach that it is not congruous to the wisdome of Christ nor to the light of nature that Christ should have appointed all the ordinary Churchcourts so many thousand congregations who may rather erre then extraordinary and higher Synods to be the onely ordinary judges in their owne cause Nor doth any thing more follow from this argument that when there is one congregation its alone in an Iland destitute of the helpe of consociated Churches which is a defect of an extraordinary providence of Christ in that one singular exigence that that congregation shall be both judge and party in its owne cause if we suppose that one Micaiah shall contend for the truth and all the rest of the Prophets and people of that congregation to be against the truth and to judge and condemne one man who seeketh the Lord in truth It is a wonder to me that Thessalonica was but one single congregation all hearing one Word partakers of one Lords Supper at one Table yet the Apostle ascribeth to them that which is a note to worthy Baynes of the numerous multitude of the Church of Ierusalem from whence went the Word of God to all the world 1 Thes. 1. 8. For from you sounded out the Word of the Lord not onely in Macedonia and Achaia but also in every place your faith to God-ward is spread abroad I deny not what Mr. Mather and Thomson say but 5000 may meet to heare the word and many thousands were gathered together Luke 12. to heare Christ but these reverend brethren doe leave out 1. The inconvenience of thronging so all at once for they trode one upon another 2. Christ preached not to all those thousand at once for it is expresly said v. 1. He began to say to his Disciples So Christ refusing to preach to such a disorderly confluence of people who could not heare and his doctrine being all for his Disciples the very Sermon being preached to his Disciples onely Matth. 10. 2 3 4 c. and the Parable of the rich man v. 22. he applieth to his Disciples Then he said to his Disciples therefore I say unto you take no thought for your life c. It evidenceth to me that Christ condemneth a numerous multitude in one congregation to heare at once And whereas Chrysostome saith 5000 persons did heare his voyce at once in one congregation by meanes of Scaffolds and Galleries and Mr. Mather is willing to yeeld eight thousand an hundred and twenty were all assembled in one place to heare the Word and that all the multitude of converts at Ierusalem were together in Salomons porch Act. 5. 12. I grant three thousand could heare one at once but alas this is a great uncertainty for independent congregations But 1. this is to be proved that eight thousand Mr. Mather hath not added many other multitudes mentioned Act. 5. 14. Act. 6. 1. v. 7. and elsewhere did meet daily in the Temple 2. Daily and ordinarily from house to house 3. To celebrate the Lords Supper daily in the Temple and in every private house there were need of many Scaffolds and Galleries to sit at one Table 4. To make one judicature and have more then power of consenting in Church censures as our brethren
Latine 3 A direction is put on the Prophets on these who speake with Tongues that they be not children in understanding and that they be in malice as children but as concerning understanding men v. 20. which agreeth well to Prophets as they are ordinary Pastors 4 What more ordinary then the comming together of the whole Church for prophecying v. 23. 24. and convincing of unbelievers aâ— 25. 5 the Prophets are to be limited to a way of speaking to edification as he who speaketh with Tongues who must speake by an Interpreter or then be silent in the Church v. 27. 28. 6 These Prophets aâ— our ordinary Prophets must speake orderly and that but one at once to eschew confusion v. 29. 7 What they speake is to be judged and put under censure for the whole Colledge must judge v. 29. 8. 8 And as the women are here put under a rule when to speak and when to be silent v. 34. 35. So are these prophets all which and divers other rules doe regulate our ordinary Prophets which clearely saith to me that this is a patterne of a Colledge of ordinary Prophets under that same policy and rules of policy as the ordinary Colledge of Pastors at Corinth and 3. To this Colledge agreeth a power dogmaticall of judging and censuring the Doctrine of the Prophets delivered 29. let the Prophets speak two or three and let the other judge This is not a power of judging that every Christian hath For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Piscator doth relate to the Prophets who are to judge But as I take it a propheticall judging which may by good anology warrant the juridicall power of a presbytery to judge and examine these who preach the word that there creep not in false Teachers into the Church And for Ephesus The huge number of Believers and yet making one Church Rev. 2. 2. saith that Ephesus was a presbyteriall Church as many circumstances evince Acts 19. for 1. Paul established twelve men Prophets who spake with Tongues and prophecied To what end did Paul set up twelve Labourers at Epheseus with diverse languages but to establish divers Assemblies did they all meet dayly in one house with Paul to heare him and turned silent Prophets themselves when they were indeed with the gift of Tongues to speake to the edification of Assemblies of divers tongues It is not credible 2. And v. 10. Paul continued here for the space of two yeares and was this for one competent number who did all meet in one private house how can this be credible 3. All that dwelt in Asia heard the Word of the Lord Iesus both Jewes and Greeks then in great Ephesus there behoved to be more then one Congregation 4. The great miracles done by Paul v. 11. 12. to admiration of all and to procure the imitation of false Prophets 5. The name of the Lord Iesus was magnified by the Iewes and Greeks that dwelt at Ephesus 6. There behoved to be a great work of God when great Ephesus turned to the faith It is 1. Remarkable that Christ the wisdome of the father directed his Apostles to the most famous Cities to cast out their nets for conquering of soules to Christ as in Indea they came to Samaria and to great Jerusalem in Syria to Antiochia in Grecia to Corinth in Italy to Rome in Asia the lesse to Ephesus now the Scripture is cleare the Apostles that ever we read planted but one Church as is cleare in one City in Ierusalem in Antiochia in Corinth in Rome in Ephesus and observe the basis and prime principle of our Brethrens independent Churches doth all ly upon this meer conjecture that the Lords Grace did restrict and limit the fruits of the triumphing Gospell in the hands of the Apostles the conquerors of the World to Iesus Christ that they planted but in the greatest Cities they came to and they appoynted Elders in every City onely one poore single Congregation as a patterne of all independent Churches and this consisted of no more then could meet conveniently in one House for Word Sacraments one Lords Table and one Ecclesiasticall Church court for censures Certainly this Church being a patterne to all instituted Churches could not exceed the number of a thousand men or two thousand Believers and this is a greater number by some hundreds I am sure then can make a competent Church-meeting and I hope no man could say we erred if we should now make eight or ten thousand one Congregation in ordinary as our Brethren say the first Congregationall Church of Jerusalem waâ— Bâ—t 2. This City was the mother City and flower of Asia 2. It was noble because of Diana's Temple the length whereof was foure hundred and twenty five foot the breadth two hundred and twenty foot the pillars were an hundred and twenty seven the height of every pillar was sixty foot Amongst which there were thirty pillars most curiously carded Others say they were an hundred and thirty seven pillars made by severall Kings the Temple was built by all Asia for the space of two hundred and twenty some say fourty yeares It was inlarged by Alexander And thither came all Asia the lesse to the Temple of great Diana For they had no other Religion here dwelt the proconsull of Asia as saith Philostratus It abounded with artes and Sciences Philosophers and Orators Chrysostom saith that in it were Pythagaras Parmenides Zeno Democritus it was compassed with excellent Cities and noble for Asiatick commodities see Plinius and Alexander Neopolitanus Ignatius highly commendth it from the purity of the Gospell All this I relate not as an unpertient digression but to shew that the Gospell behoved to be more mighty here then that Paul set up but one single Congregation and an Eldership congregationall only Acts 20. 28. v. 36. 37. Especially consider what Beasts Paul fought with at Ephesus for here were many Jewes who opposed him 2. All the multitude by the instigation of Demetrius avowing that their Diana was the goddesse not only of Ephesus but of all Asia yet God made the word so mightily to prevaile for v. 10. Paul remaining there by the space of two yeares all that dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord both Jewes and Greeks I aske how it could stand with Pauls universall commission to preach to Iew and Gentiles 1 Cor. 9. 20. 21. as an Apostle to â—emâ—ine neere three years at Ephesus for one single congregation and the erecting of one Congregationall presbytery 3. We see how zealously mad they have been on their Religion when they had such a curious Temple for Diana And 4. Demetrius and the crafts had their living by making silver shrines to Diana And 5. What power of the Gospell it behoved to be which made their learned men who used curious arts to submit to the Gospell and bring their Books and burne them before all men and the sums of these Books extended to a great
because the Apostle mentioneth onely one single Church-meeting I think not and therefore the Apostles mentioning of one assembling of the Church acts 11. 26. and of one multitude in the singular number acts 15. 30. can never prove that there was but one single Congregation at Antioch Therefore there be great â—dds betwixt meeting in a Church and meeting in the Church Also Tit. 1. 5. for this cause was Titus left at Creet that he might appaynt Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in every City if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be not all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 14. 23. acts 16. 4. 5. That is if ordaining of Elders of every City bee not as good as ordaining of Elders in every Church then must there be but in all and every City where ever the Apostles or Evangelists planted Churches but one single Congregation and not any more then could meet in a single Congregation which is a conjecture and much contrary to these times when the Gospell admirably grew in the World And it must follow that every City had but such a competent number as met in one place and if this hold as an uncertaine thing in great Cities then must we say an Eldership in a City and an Eldership of many Congregations were the first planted apostolick Churches and so rules to us also And looke what frame of Churches the Apostles did institute in Cities that same they behoved to institute in Villages also for places cannot change the frame of any institution of Christ. 2. The communion of Saints and Church-edification is as requisite for Villages as for Cities Arguments removed which Mr. Richard Mather and Mr. William Thomson Pastors in New England in their answer to Mr. Charles Herle do bring so far as they make against the authors former Treatises and a scanning of some Synodicall propositions of the Churches of N. England MR. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 1. 9. Governing power is only in the Elders 1 Cor. 12. 28. Rom. 12. 8. Heb. 13. 17. the people hath no power but rather a liberty or priviledge which when it is exercised about Ordination Deposition Excommunication is of the whole communiter or in generall but not of all and every member in particular Women for their Sex children for want of discrâ—tion are dâ—barred Answ. If there be no governing power in Women nor any act at all in excommunication You loose many arguments that you bring 1 Cor. 5. to prove that all have hand in excommunication 1. Because Paul writeth to all 2. All were to mourne 3. All ware to forbeare the company of the excommunicated men Then belike Paul writeth not to all Saints at Corinth not to Women and Women were not to mourne for the scandall nor to forbeare his company 2. The priviledge being a part of liberty purchased by Christs Body it must be due to Women for the liberty wherewith Christ hath made Women free cannot be taken away by any Law of God from their Sex except in Christ Iesus there be difference betwixt Iew and Gentile male and female nor is it removed because iâ— iâ— a power or authority for the authors say it is no power but a priviledge 3. What priviledge the people have in ordination to confer a Ministery which they neither have formally nor vertually I know not But I doe willingly say something here of the peoples power The first Synodicall proposition of New England is 1. Propos. The fraternity is the first Subject of all Ministeriall power radicalitèr idest 〈◊〉 per modum collationis some say suppletivè non habitualitèr non actualit â—r non formalitèr That is if I conceive it right The people voyd of all Officers have a vertuall power to conferre a Ministery on their Officers though they have not this power in themselves I could in some sense yield that Believers not Angells are capable of the Ministeriall power to exercise it formally but that Believers doe or can by any way of causative influence make Church-Officers I see not they may design a man qualified to bean Officer to the Office and that is all But say they people wanting or being naked and without all Officers hath not formally or habitually any power in them this latter part Igrant and the 2. Proposition I grant to wit That the presbytery is the first subject of all presbyteriall power habitually and formally But I doe not see how it standeth with the third proposition which is 3. The fraternity or the people without the Officers and without Women or children have an authoritative concurrence with the presbytery in judiciall acts Because if the Brethren have an halfe Ministeriall power with the Officers in acts of Jurisdiction and Excommunication Deposition and Censures I see not how there is not a Ministeriall power formally and habitually at least in part in the Brethren and so contrary to the third proposition the Prasbytery is not the first subject of all Prebyteriall power for the brethren are sharers with the Elders in this power 2. We desire to see it made good by Gods Word that the brethren have a joynt power of Jurisdiction with the Elders for the Table giveth them a brotherly publick power not by way of Charity but a politick Church power in many eminent acts especially in those eight and that constantly 1. In the admission 1. In Sending Messengers to the Churches 2. In the excommunication of members 2. 2. In interpretation of Scripture 3. In the calling 3. In a judiciall determination of controversies of Religion in a synod 4. And Deposition of Ministers 4. In a power of disposing of things indifferent I cannot see any judiciall power or any farther then a charitative yielding by way of a loving and brotherly consent that the Scripture giveth to brethren 3. How this can be denied to be a power of jurisdiction and governing and an actuall Ministeriall using of the Keyes of the Kingdome by those who ex officio by place and calling are no Officers I believe is not easily understood 4. The letter that I saw sayth that that learned and godly Divine Mr. Cotton and some others thinke that the Church as it is an Organicall Body made up of Elders and people is the first subject of all Ecclesiasticall power and they divide it into a power of authority and a power of liberty whereof the power of authority belongeth to the Elders or Eldership and the power of liberty to the Fraternity or Brethren that are not Officers and therefore these reverend brethren deny any authoritative concurrence to the brethren and they thinke that the Church as it is an homogeneall body that is a company destitute of Officers cannot formally ordaine excommunicate or censure the Elders though in case of obstinacy they may doe that which is equivalent and so separate from them The 4. Proposition is The fraternity or Brethren in an Organicall Body or in a â—â—med and established Church consisting of Officers and people act and use
their authority subordinate per modum obedi ntâ—ae subordinately and by way of due obedience to the Elders 2 Câ—r 10. 6. But I desire a word of Christs Testament for this where wee aâ—de that collaterall Judges acting as Judges doe act by way of obedience and subjection one to another for if the brethren 1 Cor. 5. convened in Court with the Elders to deliver the incestuous man to Satan do act in that Court as giving obedience to the Elders I see not how they concurre authoritatively is sharers with them of that same Ministeriall power if it be said brethren though they act as Judges in excommunicating yet they remaine brethren and a part of the flock and so in all their morall acts of authoritative concurring with the Elders they are under the pastorall care of these who watch for Soules and so they judge and act even in the Court as under subjection to their watchmen who must give an accompt for their Soules I answer so the Elders in their acts of the most supreame Ministeriall authority and acting in a Church court leave not off to be brethren and a part of the flock of Christ and so in subjection one to another for six Elders watch for the Soule of one and one also for the Soules of six and so if this were a good reason the Elders should act with subordination of obedience to Elders As the people act with subordination to the Elders 2. The place cited for this 2 Cor. 10. 6. where it is said that the Preachers have in readinesse to revenge all disobedience must inferre that they are to revenge by the word which is mighty through God to cast downe strong holds as is said there v. 4. 5. even disobedience of Elders ruling unjustly and abusing the Keyes no lesse then disobedience of the people And I see not how brethen acting in a Church-Court joyntly with Elders how in that they put on the relation of the flock and the part governed in the very act of exercising acts of governing for otherwayes one Pastor in the act of preaching in the Name of Jesus Christ and so in authority above these to whom he preacheth doth preach subordinatè and as in subjection to the whole organicall and formed Church who hath power to censure him if he preach erroneous Doctrine 3. I see not how the third Proposition doth stand to wit that the brethren share with the Elders in authoritative acts of the Keyes and yet they â—ct according to the. 4. Proposition as under the Eldership by way of subjection and obedience to them Except this be that which our brethren meane that the people of a single Congregation exercise acts of Jurisdiction by way of dependence so as they may be censured by the Elders if they erre but the Elders if they erre are every way Popes and so independent that there is no Church-power on Earth above them that in a Church-way may censure them or call them to an accompt 4. The Table of New England divideth the actuall exercise of the power in a Charitative power by way of Love and Charity and a politick or Church-exercise the politick exercise againe is either brotherly fraternall or Presbyteriall and the presbyteriall exercise is either 1. Teaching  or  2. Governing And Teaching is either by way of Office or Administrating the Sacraments The Presbyteriall exercise of the Keyes is independentElders in the power of governing sed respectâ— apotelesmatis sâ—u complementi censurae in respect of the effect or a compleat act of governing the Elders Rule and Act with dependence upon the people in these foure cases 1. In excommunication  2. In judging  3. In sentencing the aocused  4. In election or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in calling of a Minister So that the Elders there alone without the people can exercise none of these acts completely without the people so heare the Elders depend upon the people in their actuall governing and the Fraternity or Brethren depend on the Elders by way of subjection or obedience to them Yet give me leave the letter informeth me that it is said by many learned and godly men in New England that if their policy should make the government of the Church popular they should give up the cause But I conceive the government to be popular though the people only be not governours for Morâ—llius never taught any such thing now this government maketh Elders and people to governe the Church joyntly with mutuall dependence one upon another which certainly maketh the brethren in the Lord as well as the Elders for if the Elders be not these onely which watch for the peoples Soules as these which must give an accompt Heb. 13. 17 18. and they be not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over the people in the Lord as is said 1 Thess. 5. 12. 13. Then the brethren must be taken in with them aâ— joynt governours as is said Propos. 3. Which certainly must confound the Scripturall order established by God betwixt the Pastors and the Flock the Watchmen and the City the shepâ—eards and the flock these who are to obey and these who are over them in the Lord. The 5. and 6. Proposition is The Brethren may not excommunicate an Elder but mediante concilio by the intervening sentence of the Elders is but the brethren may separate and withdraw from the Presbyteris after they refuse sound advise Answ. 1. This is much contrary to that which they ordinarily teach to wit that people destitute of Officers may ordaine and excommunicate their Officers 2. By this learning the Soules of Elders are in an hard case for when they do all scandalously 〈◊〉 there is no Ecclesiasticall meane of edifying them for there is no Church on Earth to excomunicate Elders when they â—â—re Separation from them is an unwarrantable way except they be excommunicated 3. In the case of the Elderships incorrigible scandalls the power of excommunication retireth into the brethren yet it was never formally in the brethren nor can they exercise this power but mediante Presbyteriâ— that is they cannot excommunicate the Eldership but by the Judiciall sentence of the Eldership and so the power is but a shadow Mr. Mather Mr. Thomson cap. 2. pag. 16 17. though some have appealed as Luther and Cranmer from the Pope to a generall councell Yet not from a Congreation to a generall councell Answ. In matters doctrinall some as Luther and others have justly appealed from a Congregation to a generall councell though Luther and Cranmer did it not though verily I professe I cannot see what power of Jurisdiction to censure scandalls can be in a generall councell there may be some meerly Doctrinall power if such a councell could be had and that is all M. Mather Mr. Thomson c. 2. pag 20. if Churches be dependent on Synods because the light of nature teacheth a communion and assistance in government by the same reason Churches must end in a Monarchy on
Church may doe it Nor did they lay on hands as Ecclesiasticall Elders because what these which layd on hands did they did as from the Congregation for 1. These Levites were taken in stead of the first borne of Israel and not in stead of the first borne of the Elders only Num. 3 40 41. 2. They were presented to the Lord as an offering of the children of Israel not of the Elders only 3. When the multitude brought an oblation the Elders put their hands on the head of the sacrifice Levit. 4. 15. in stead of all the multitude Answ. These who layd on hands did it as a worke peculiar to the Elders because the Elders were a part of the first borne who by Office were Elders and in whose stead the Levites were assumed Num. 3. 40. 41. else the Church of Israel being a constituted Church before this time wanted Officers which is against all truth 2. We grant the Magistrates layd not on hands but they who layd on hands did it as Ecclesiasticall Elders And the reasons against this conclude not 1. The first reason concludeth not because these who layd on hands were the first borne who by Office were Church men 2. The other two reasons prove nothing for because these who layd on hands did lay on hands as representing the whole Congregation alas it doth no wayes conclude that they layd not on hands as it is a works peculiar to them as Elders for the Priest offered sacrifice first for his owne sinnes and then for the peoples Heb. 7. 27. and so did represent the people But I hope it followeth not that therefore the Priest did not sacrifice as a Priest and by vertue of a peculiar Office but onely as a principall member of the Congregation 3. What if there be no Elders in a single Congregation as our brethren suppose there were no Elders in Office in Israel to lay hands on the Levites it will not follow therefore the people are to lay on hands except there were no Elders in all the Land or Nationall Church to lay on hands And though I thinke imposition of hands not so essentiall perhaps as a Minister can be no Minister without it yet I thinke not so of Ordination for these to mee are as different as the authoritative calling of a Minster and a rite annexed to that calling because none can be a Minister in a constituted Church but one which is called of God as was Aaron But you will say in a Church in an Island one may bee a Pastor without any ordination if the people elect him and there be no Elders to ordaine I answer it is true but so many Pastors send a Pastor to bee a Pastor to a Congregation though that Congregation never chuse him as possibly they bee for the most part Popish or unwilling yet both Cases are extraordinary and the Church not constituted and established M. Mather if the people may elect Officers then in some cases they may ordaine them also because ordination is lesse then election and dependeth upon it as a necessary antecedent and it is nothing but aâ— consummation of election or the admission of a person into the possession of that Office whereto hee had right before by election If then a single Congregation may elect which is the greater they may ordaine which is the lesser Answ. Ordination is the more and election the lesse for ordination is an act authoritative of the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. 14. and for ought I see the authors might argue thus the people may ordaine Ergo they may preach and baptize for all the three are presbyteriall acts given to men in office 2. Some doubt if I said rightly in my former Treatise that ordination is prior to election because ordination is that whereby a Minister is made a Minister and election that whereby he who is a Minister first by order of nature is made the Minister of such a flâ—ck I will not contend with any of either sides for order But when I said so I tooke the word election for the peoples actuall receiving and their compleat taking him for their Minister after hee is now ordained a Minister this is his installing in his Office And my reason is because the peoples naming of such a man to bee their pastor doth stand with his never being their pastor hee being unwilling to be their pastor and the presbytery thinking it unfit hee be the pastor of such a people 2. The people elect him as a pastor to be their pastor they doe not elect him as a gifted man And whereas some say Acts 6. 3. 4 5. Election of seven men to be Deacons goeth before ordination and imposition of hands v. 6. Answ. Election of the people goeth before ordination in the relation of Luke true Ergo election is prior by order of nature it followeth not But Acts 1. Ordination of Matthias God casting the lot upon him vers 25. is prior to the peoples electing of him for the peoples appoynting of two vers 23. cannot be their election for they were to elect one but I submit to the learneder my thoughts in this As also my tearming Paphnutius neither Bishop nor Elder at the Councell of Nice which I did not as denying him to bee a Bishop but because hee was called to that Councell of Nice where as before hee had beene deprived but was restored by Constantine though in the estimation of these who contended for the single life of Priests whose corruptions Paphnutius opposed hee was in an Ecclesiasticall sense neither Bishop nor Presbyter but deprived from both But let the righteous rebuke mee and it shall be as Oyle to my Head 3. It cannot bee that election of the people is the whole calling of a man to the Ministerie and Ordination onely a supplement and an consummatory rite or a benedictory signe which may bee spared 1. Because by the imposition of the bands of the Presbytery Timothy was made a Minister 1 Timothy 4. 14. Paul and Silas separatted to preach to the Gentiles Acts 13. 1 2 3 4. the Deacons ordained Acts 6. 6. and this is enjoyned with the right manner of acting it to Timothy 1 Timothy 5. 22. 2 Timothy 2. 2. as a Ministeriall act 2. A Ministeriall caling standeth in an authoritative sending Romans 10. 15. and I see not well how the people themselves doe send a Minister to themselves 3 The people have not either formally or by any grant of CHRIST vertually the Keyes committed to them how then can they give the Keyes to pastors 4. People may as the Sheepe of CHRIST Ioh. 10. decern His Voyce and so have a power of Election of their owne pastors nor doth this make good which our Brethren say Mr. Mather sayth that because they are all taught of God Esa. 54. 13. and they knew Christs ' Doctrine Joh 7. therefore they may judge of a Ministers fitnesse for it is plaine that there it a twofold knowledge one of
of these congregations as where there is not a head of a Family and members there is not a Family and so you prove not Jerusalem a presbyteriall Church over many fixed and formed Churches as they are in Scotland and if the Apostles were pastors in a circular and fluid way to many congregations every one was a pastor to many congregations and so elected by many congregations which is absurd Ans. 1. Fixed or not fixed cannot vary the essence of the government 1. The Priests Levites and Prophets teaching in the wildernes from place to place and the people by war scattered to sundry Tribes doth not make these meetings not to be under the government of the great Sanedrim more then if the meeting made a fixed Synagogue divers members and dverso heads in one Family occasioned by death and pestilence diverse Souldiers and new Commanders in a Regiment diverse Inhabitants yea and weekly altered rulers and watchmen in a City doth not infer that that family Regiment and City is not under one government of the City one of the whole army and one parliamentary law of the whole kingdome no more then if all were fixed in members and heads 2. Churches their persecution may have both members and teachers removed to a corner and altered yet they remain the same single Congregation having the same government 3. Officiating in the same word seales censures by Peter to day and by Andrew to morrow though members also be changed is of the same species and nature even to the worlds and if we suppose the Church of Ierusalem to be one Congregation induring a patterne these sixteen hundred yeares members and officers must be often altered yet it is one Congregation in specie and one single Church in nature though not in number and the government not altered through the fluidity and alteration of members and officers as it is the same Parliament now which was in the raigne of King Iames though head and members be altered fluidity and alteration of rulers and members must be by reason of mortality accidentall to all incorporations and yet their government for all that doth remaine the same in nature if these same Lawes and Government in nature by these Lawes remaine CHAP. 4. SECT 5. Why we doe not admit the Members of the Churches of Old England to the Seales of the Covenant Quest. I. VVHether the Seales of the Covenant can be denyed to professors of approved piety because they are not members of a particular visible Church in the New Testament Our Brethren deny any Church Communion and the seales of the Covenant Baptisme to the children of Beleevers the Lords Supper to beleevers themselves who come to them from Old England because they be not members of the particular Congregation to which they come and because there is no visible Church in the New Testament but one particular Parish and all who are without a particular Parish are without the visible Church and so are not capable of either Church censures or the Seales of the Covenant because 〈◊〉 have right to the seales of the Covenant but onely this visible Church We hold all who professe faith in Christ to be members of the visible Church though they bee not members of a visible Congregation and that the seales of the Covenant should not be denyed to them And for more full clearing of the question let these considerations be observed First Dist. All beleevers as beleevers in foro Dei before God have right to the seales of the Covenant these to whom the Covenant and body of the Charter belongeth to these the seale belongeth but in foro Ecclesiastico and in an orderly Church-way the seales are not to be conferred by the Church upon persons because they beleeve but because they professe their beleeving therefore the Apostles never baptized Pagans but upon profession of their faith Second Dist. Faith in Christ truely giveth right to the seales of the Covenant and in Gods intention and decree called voluntas beneplaciti they belong onely to the invisible Church but the orderly way â—f the Churches giving the seales is because such a society is a professing or visible Church and orderly giving of the seales according to Gods approving will called voluntas signi revelata belongeth to the visible Church Third Dist. The Church may orderly and lawfully give the seales of the Covenant to those to whom the Covenant and promises of grace doth not belong in Gods decree of election Fourth Dist. The Church may lawfully adde to the Church visible such as God addeth not to the Church invisible as they may adde Simon Magus and the Church may lawfully cast out of the visible Church such as Christ hath not cast out of the invisible Church as the Church may excommunicate regenerate persons for scandalous sinnes Fift Dist. Then the regenerate excommunicated have right to the seales of the Covenant as they have to the Covenant and yet the Church doth lawfully debarre them hic nunc in such a scandalous case from the seales of the Covenant Wee hold that those who are not members of a particular Congregation may lawfully be admitted to the seales of the Covenant First Because those to whom the promises are made and professe the Covenant these should be baptized But men of approved piety are such though they be not members of a particular Parish The proposition is Peters argument Act. 2. 38. Secondly Those who are not Members of a particular Church may be visible professors and so members of a visible Church Ergo the seales of the Covenant belongeth to them Thirdly The contrary opinion hath no warrant in Gods Word Fourthly The Apostles required no more of those whom they baptized but profession of beleefe as Act. 10. 47. Can any forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we Act. 8. 37. If thou beleevest with all thy heart thou mayest he baptized no more is sought of the Jaylor Act. 16. 31. 34. The Authour saith To admit to the Seales of the Covenant is not an act of Christian liberty that every Christian may dispense to whom he pleaseth but an act of Church power given to the Ministers to dispense to those over whom the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers but we have no Ministeriall power over those of another Congregation and who are not members of a particular Congregation Answ. First To dispense the Seales to whom we please as if mens pleasure were a rule were licentiousnesse not Christian Liberty There may be a communion of benefits where there is no communion of punishment Beneficia sunt amplianda Secondly It is false that Pastors have no Ministeriall power over those who are not of their Congregation for if so all communion of Churches should fall for Letters of recommendation from other Churches whereof they are Members cannot make Pastors of New England to have a Ministeriall power over those of another
Congregation as set over them by the Holy Ghost as they are set over their owne Parish to whom they be onely Pastors having Ministeriall power by a Church Covenant and the peoples Ordination as our Brethren teach 2. Manuser Those over whom saith our Authour we have no power of censure over those we have no power to dispense the communion Now if we should censure any such for drunkennesse or other scandals who are not of our Congregation it should be a non habente potestatem an act done by those who have no power Answ. The major proposition by your owne Doctrine is clearely false for you say your selfe Strangers sojourning with us members of other Churches knowne not to be scandalous are admitted to the Lords Supper yet can you not excommunicate strangers sojourning for a time falling in scandals For First to you they are without how then can you judge them as you say Secondly You have by the holy Ghost no ministeriall power over them as over your owne flocke as you expone Act. 20. 28. Thirdly You looke aside at excommunication for those of other Churches consociated in a classe we doe lawfully excommunicate and censure for excommunication is not a cutting off of a person from one single Parishionall Church onely as you imagine but a cutting off of a person from all the visible Churches consociated first because he is delivered to Satan and his sin is bound in heaven in relation to all the faster Churches and is so to be esteemed and not in reference to the one single Congregation whereof he is a member Secondly all are to be humbled and mourne for his fall and to consent he be cut off and not one single Congregation onely Thirdly all consociated Churches shall be leavened by keeping Church-fellowship with such a lumpe Fourthly all are to repute him as a Heathen and a Publican Fifthly all are to admonish him as a Brother 2 Thessalon 3. 15. Sixthly all are to forgive him and receive him in Church-communion if he shall repent and occasionally to edifie him as a brother The Seales of righteousnesse of faith saith the Author are not seales to the faithfull as such but as they are joyned together and consederate in some visible Church none but in a visible Church may dispense the seales in the Oâ—d Testament none were partakers either of the Passeover or of Circumcision unlesse they were either Israelites borne or proselytes in the Church of Israel We read not that Job and his friends though righteous through faith were circumcised nor would they have omitted to speake of Circumcision as of a pertinent evidence of the corruption of mans nature of which they speake much the Sacraments saith this same Author are not given to the invisible Church nor to the members thereof as such but to the visible particular Churches of Christ and to the members thereof therefore the seales are not to be givento those who are of no particular visible Church Answ. 1. The Seales of the Covenant are principally given to the invisible Church as the Covenant it selfe in Gods decree of election is especially made with the elect and such as shall never fall away as is cleare Jer. 31. 37. Jer. 32. 40. Esay 54 10. Heb. 8. 9. 10. and the invisible Church as such as a number of beleevers have onely right before God to both Covenant and seales yea and consequently are onely Christs body and Spouse and redeemed Saints and so onely have all the power of the keyes and the ministeriall power of dispensing the Seales and by our brethrens doctrine the visible Church not as visible but as the true body Spouse and Bride of Christ so as the invisible company of the redeemed ones have the Seales and Covenant and so all Ministeriall power of Christ is given unto them 2. It is true the orderly and Ecclesiasticke way of dispensing the Seales is that they bee dispensed onely to the visible Church but this visible Church is not one parish but all professing the faith of Christ though they be not joyned in one visible parish by one Church oath as the Author meaneth for the Saints in Scripture as Cornelius the Eunuch the Jaylor did professe and visibly evidence their faith and so that they were capable of the Seales by desiring to be saved and saying What shall we doe to be saved by trembling at the Word of God by asking the meaning of the Word of God which expressions are in many not in-churched to particular Congregations not did the Apostles aske if they were members of one parish before they baptized them but if they beleeved in Christ. 3. Whether Job his friends Melchisedeck Lot and others the like were circumcised we need not dispute but that they were not circumcised because they were not in a visible Church estate with Abraham is a question and uncertaine and therefore not sure to be a foundation of new opinions in Church Government but though it were granted it followeth not because none were circumeised but Abrahams seed and all and onely Abrahams seed were circumcised therefore none are to be baptized but those who are members of one particular Congregation Alas this is a weakâ— consequence rather it followeth all borne of Jewes were circumcised Ergo all borne of Christian parents are to be baptized and we see not but sacrificing was restricted to the visible Church no lesse then Circumcision yet Job sacrificed to God Job 1. and Chap. 42. The Author addeth The difference here is The circumcised in Israel might rightly keepe the Passeover amongst themselves because the whole nation of Israel made but one Church and the officers and ministers of any one Synagogue and the Priests and Levites were ministers in â—â—mmune of the whole house of Israel in proportion whereunto they that are baptized in any particular Church may in like manner require the Lords Supper if there be no other impediment in regard of their unfitnesse to examine themselves which is a thing requisite to receive the Lords Supper more then was required to receive the Passeover But now because the Churches of the new Testament are of another constitution then the nationall Church of all Israel baptisme in one Church doth not give a man right to the Lords Supper in another unlesse the Officers of the one Church were Officers of all as in Israel they â—erâ— or unlesse that one Church and the Officers thereof did recommend their right and power to another Answ. 1. It is true in the one Church of Israel there was something typicall that is not in our Churches as one Temple â—â—e high Priest one place of sacrificing one Priesthood one Aâ—ke c. but this was peculiar to Israel as such a specifice Church and typiâ—ied also the externall visible unitie of the whole visible Church of the new Testament in professing one Lord one Faith one Baptisme one externall communion and government externall de jure but this agreed not to
Matth. 10. 5 6 7. they were members of the Jewish Church and called Apostles To the 3. I answer ignorance of fundamentall points not fully proposed and revealed if there bee a gratious disposition of saving faith to beleeve these when they shall be revealed such was as in the Lords Disciples Matth. 16. 16 17. Luk. 12. 32. Luk. 22. 28 29. may well stand with the dignitie of young and as yet limited Apostles Matth. 10. 5 6 7. who had not yet received the holy Ghost in that measure Act. 1. 8 9. that was requisite for Apostles in their full Apostolicke charge and made infallible pen-men of Canonick Scriptures sent to preach to all the world To the 4. I answer They were not non-residents because they returned to reside with Christ after they had casten out devils Ioh. 4. 1 2. which your lay-Prophets by your owne confession cannot lawfully doe not to bee idle but to learne more and to be eye and care witnesses of the doctrine life death resurrection and ascension to glory of Christ 2 Pet. 1. 16 17 18. 1 Joh. 1. 1 2 3. Matth. 26. 37 38 39. Luk. 24. 50 51 52. Joh. 20. 19 20. Act. 4. 20. which was necessary that they might preach these things to the world Nor is a Pastor in his studie attending reading as 1 Tim. 3. 15 16. though he be not then teaching a non-resident To the 5. I say when Christ ascended unto heaven Ephes. 4. 11. He gave some to bee Apostles c. but that gifting of Apostles is not to restrict the institution of Apostles to the precise time of his ascension for you grant that after the Lords resurrection and before his ascension they were ordained Apostles Matth. 28. 19. Joh. 20. 23. but the full sending of the holy Spirit to Apostles Evangelists Pastors and Teachers is ascribed to his ascension as a speciall fruite of his ascension Act. 1. 8 9. Joh. 16. v. 7 8 9. and therefore is their sending called an effect of the holy Spirit For the second point Giving and not granting that the Apostles were not Apostles till after the resurrection yet will it not follow that they were lay-Prophets or Prophets out of office for they might have beene Pastors in office though not Apostles in office for there were beside these others in the Jewish Church else where were Scribes Pharisees Lawyers Doctors all sitters in Moses his chaire They were not Apostles sure what were they then all teachers out of office No If then I prove that the Apostles were teachers in office though it were granted that they were not Apostles as in the fulnesse and plenitude thereof they were not till Christ arose from the dead I prove as much as taketh this argument for lay-prophets out of their hands But that they were not non-officed teachers but called Apostles or Pastors I prove 1. Argum. Judas was chosen one of the twelve and an Apostle Ergo farre more were the rest I prove the Antecedent 1. Act. 20. Let another take his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his charge 2. v. 17. He took part with us say they in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this ministery 3. Matthias v. 25. was chosen in that place and Apostleship from which Judas fell Now Lay-Prophets have no officiall Episcopacie no Ministery nor can any chosen in their place said to bee chosen to an Apostleship Ioh. 6. 7. Have not I chosen you twelve this choosing was to an Embassage saith Cyrill Augustine Euthymius and all our Divines with them 2. Matth. 10. 2. These are the names of the twelve Apostles v. 5. he send them What power he giveth to them in respect of al the world to remit and retaine sinnes Iob. 20. that hee giveth to them toward the house of Israel v. 11 12 13. under the name of offered peace Magis minus non variant speciem Mark 13. 14. Mark 3. 14. hee ordained twelve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee made twelve to be with him which he might send to preach Luk. 9. 1. and he called the twelve and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be sent them hee tooke them from their fishing and made them fishers of men and Matth. 10. 10. hee calleth them workmen worthy of their hire private Prophets are not gifted nor sent nor taken from their callings nor are they workmen deserving stipend for that is due to Prophets by office 1 Cor. 9. 13. 14. Gal. 6. 6. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 3. Those who have power to dispense the seales of grace and to baptize are not private or unofficed Prophets but sent of God and in office as Matth. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 1. 17. and Robinson granteth this and so doe Separatists teach But the Disciples of Christ before his resurrection baptized Ioh. 4. 2. 4. Those who were witnesses of the life miracles doctrine of Christ and preached the same and confirmed it by miracles were pastors 5. Those who were twelve selected men chosen Luk. 6. 13. named Apostles Mark 9. 35. Mark 10. 32. Luk. 8. 1. to whom the keyes of the kingdome were given Matth. 18. 17 18 19. Matth. 16. 19. are not unofficed men 6. This is a Popish opinion and to be suspected for Papists to advance Peter to a Popedome will have him no Apostle while after the resurrection for Bellarmine saith Imposition of hands is essentiall to holy orders and that the Apostle ordained no Presbyters while Christ was risen and made the Apostles and gave them the holy Spirit The Councell of Trent hinteth at the same opinion Bellarmine saith the Apostles were made Priests at the last Supper to sacrifice Christs body but not Presbyters till after that when they received the holy Ghost and Cardinall Hosius Martinus Ledesma Petrus a Soto say the Disciples are made Apostles Ioh. 21. Toletus saith they had power before this time to preach but not to forgive sinnes in the Sacrament of pennance while now And Cardinall Cajetan saith here was first the Sacrament of pennance ordained and it is true Cyrillus and Chrysostome say that Iohn 21. Soli sacerdotes onely Pastors by this place have power to forgive sinnes but not by this place onely for they say that Matth. 16. power is given Joannes de Lugo the Popes Professor at Rome teach that Joh. 21. the Apostles first received this power And jayne with him Suarez Thomas Sanchez Aegidius Coniuk and Vasquez though as good as they say the contrary as Panormitanus a late Schooleman Avila and Sylvester and John Bishop of Rochester writing against Papists and their Popes power of dethroning Kings saith how could the Apostles who are examples of good order preach and baptize if they were meere Layicks and not Pastors while after Christ was arisen from the dead Robinson citeth Luk. 8. 39. Christ biddeth the dispossessed man gâ—shew what great things the Lord had done for him and hee went and preached it now
miracles are a part of the Gospel and written that we should beleeve Joh. 20. 30. and they prove that Jesus is the Sonne of God Ergo This man being no Prophet preached the Gospel Answ. 1. This will not conclude the Question 1. One man published one single miracle wrought upon himselfe which is a part of the Gospel onely 2. And upon a particular occasion did show what things the Lord had done for him 3. He is commanded to publish it to his friends and domesticks onely Matth. 5. 19. Go to thy house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to thine owne friends and show them what the Lord hath done for thee Hence from this narrow antecedent a vaste and broad conclusion is drawne Ergo it is lawfull because this man published one particular of the Gospel for any gifted man to preach the whole Gospell because one man did it upon a miraculous occasion to his friends Ergo all gifted men may prophesie the whole Gospel to all the Churches ordinarily it is a vaine consequence 2. Because hee published one particular upon a particular exigence therefore any gifted man may ordinarily and weekly and daily Preach for the conversion of soules 3. Because hee published one miracle to his friends in a private way therefore any gifted man may preach the whole Gospell in publick to all the Church truly here is a weake reason 2. It is most like that this man was an intruding Prophet like the Separatists Prophets for he requested that hee might be with Jesus and bee made a Disciple to preach the Gospell as Calvin Marlorat Bullinger expone it but Jesus suffered him not Now if Christ had commanded him to be a Prophet as Robinson will have him he should have granted what he sought Lastly the man did more then Christ commanded for Mark. 9. 20. Hee published it in Decapolis throughout all the citie whereas Christ had limited the publishing thereof to his friends and house onely Robinson saith Luk. 10. The Seventie Disciples preached and yet they were men out of office I answer 1. The Seventie Disciples were Pastors in office 1. Satan by their ministery fell from heaven as lightning v. 19. Christ saith Behold I give you power to tread upon serpents Luk. 10. 1. After these things the Lord apponted other Seventie and sent them out here is a cleare calling they confirme their doctrine by miracles and casting out of devills as the twelve Apostles 2. Christ sent out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also other Seventie Ergo as hee gave a calling to the Twelve so hee did to these Seventie and the same paâ—â—orall commission is given to them Behold I send you c. Luk. 10. 3 4 5 6. 3. The Seventie are called workmen sent out to the Lords harvest Luk. 10. 2. and the same is said of Shepheards in office Matth. 8. 36 37 38. to whom wages are due as to Pastors in Office 1 Cor. 9. 13 14. Gal. 6. 6. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 3. It is said by Christ of these Seventie He that heareth you heareth me he that despiseth you despiseth me Ergo they were Ambassadors in Christs stead as Pastors in office are 2 Cor. 5. 20. The Samaritane woman saith Robinson Job 4. 28. Preached and many of the Samaritans beleeved because of her v. 39. and without preaching of the word of God none can beleeve Rom. 10. 14 15. If a woman may teach without the Church then may a man teach in the Church Answ. 1. A woman may teach 2. In a non-constituted Church where there is no salvation and they worship they know not what Joh. 4. 22. 3. A woman may occasionally declare one point of the Gospel that Maries Sonne is Christ but hence it followeth not Therefore 1 a man 2 in a constituted Church 3 may ordinarily preach the whole Gospell to the Church in publick a weake sparre for so vast a roofe 2. He abuseth the place Rom. 10. 14. and would hence prove that a woman or any gifted teacher is a sent Preacher by whom faith ordinarily commeth for otherwayes who dare deny but faith commeth by reading and just as the Catechise of Raecovia exponeth the place Rom. 10. 14. to evert the necessitie of a sent ministery so doth Robinson expone the place Robinson Act. 8. 1 2 3 4. Act. 11. 20 21. All the Churches were scattered abroad except the Apostles and those who were scattered preached every where the Gospell Ergo Disciples out of office may lawfully preach the Gospel Answ. Whether these of the scattered Church who preached were the Seventie Disciples as learned Divines thinke I dispute not But that they were Prophets out of office the Text saith not But that they were extraordinarily gifted Prophets who preached I conceive the text doth insinuate for it is said Act. 11. 21. The hand of the Lord was with them the very word which is Ezek. 3. 14. The hand of the Lord was strong with me 2. In a scattered and dissolved Church gifted persons may prophesie Ergo in a constituted Church gifted persons are the ordinary and onely Ministers of conversion though they bee never called to the office it doth no wayes follow Robinson saith it is not reasonable to think that they were all extraordinary Prophets and that if they were immediately inspired there had beene no need of so speedy sending of Barnabas from Hierusalem to Antioch with supply though he were a man full of the holy Ghost for â—â— were such Prophets as well as â—ee Ephes. 2. 20. and 3. 5. Answ. Wee doe not affirme that all and every one of the Church even women and children were extraordinarily gifted but whether their gift was ordinary or extraordinary the Text doth not say that they were Prophets out of office and the Law of disputing saith Affirmanti incumbit probatio the hand of God was with them as it useth to bee with Prophets 2. They travelled as farre as Phenice Cyprus and Antioch preaching the word of the Lord this is that which the Apostolick planters of Churches did as Master builders laying the foundation of Churches and Calvin calleth them Ministers planters of the Gospel Nor is it like that Prophets not in office would so travell and preach the Gospel to the Gentile â—s and Calvin saith singulari Dei impulsu hoc factum and that many were turned unto the Lord. 2. Barnabas saw the grace of God in them 3. And exhorted them that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord Ergo there was grace and a profession visible of cleaving to the Lord before Barnabas came and so a founded Church and if it had beene done by gifted Christians of ordinary gifts and wanting the spirit of Prophecy the work had been the more illustrious and it would not have beene concealed yea and helpe in so great an harvest by Barnabas an Apostolick man was very needfull the number being so great of those who were converted to the faith seeing the great Apostles sought helpe
and Paul tooke Titus and Timothy with him often for helping the worke of the Lord. The next Scripture saith Robinson is 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. As every man hath received the gift so let him minister as good stewards of the manifold graces of God if any man speake let him speake as the oracles of God Answ. This saith with us for private Christians are not stewards who gave them the keyes Yea 1 Cor. 4. 1. it is a word of office and it is not given to Ministers not in office as Beza observeth well he setteth downe one generall that the Ministers be ready to distribute and then two species 1 Preaching Ministers that they speake the Oracles of God 2. Serving Ministers Elders and Deacons that they minister out of the habilitie that God giveth them and the place is against private Prophets Robinson alledgeth Revel 11. 3. I will give power to my two witnesses and they shall prophecy a thousand two hundreth and sixtie dayes clothed in sackcloth The Clergie men are not onely witnesses against the Antichrist In the Antichrists raigne no Church officer aâ— anâ— officer witnesseth against him but all for him as both having their authority from him and binding themselves to submit their doctrine to his censure The persons indeed that were officers even Masse-Priests Monkes and Friers witnessed some of them against him but so did not their office something was extraordinary I acknowledge in respect of the then prevailing order and in respect of their degree of gifts and graces but no extraordinary and miraculous gift of prophecying and Brightman exponeth the two witnesses to bee the holy Scriptures and assemblies of the faithfull Answ. The two witnesses saith Junius are the Ministers for number few and for place contemptible so saith Couper and Paraeus induceth many paires of witnesses as in Bohemia John Hus and Jerome of Prague An. 1415 1416. in Saxonie Luther and Melancthon in Argentine Bucer and Cariton in Helvetia Zwinglius and Oecolampadius in France Farell and Calvin and these were Pastors in office We need not stand upon the number of two but because two is the least and fewest number the witnesses were two But first there is no reason to fetter and restrict the Text to witnesses and Martyrs out of office excluding the Ministers and Prophets in office and to inferre thence that gifted persons in a constitute Church are the ordinary Ministers of conversion 1. These two witnesses did prophecie in the midst of Popish Babylon where God had no visible Church They did upon a particular exigence being called thereunto as the Martyrs of Christ to give a witnesse for Christ against Antichrist and they sealed the truth with their blood but the consequence is null a Martyr at the stake though no Pastor may give a confession of his faith to the persecutors as Stephen did Therefore a gifted person not in office may ordinarily preach in the Church I would not buy such logick with a rotten nut 3. Many women were witnesses and Martyrs and gave a testimony against Antichrist Ergo women may preach in the Church what vanitie is this 2. Also if those witnesses had an extraordinary measure of gifts and graces to beare witnesse to the truth it followeth not Ergo Christians gifted with an ordinary measure of the Spirit are ordinary Prophets for the conversion of soules 2. Though these witnesses were only unofficed Prophets yet the prophecying ascribed to them after they arose from the dead will not inferre that unofficed Prophets are ordinarily to preach for the rising againe of slaine Prophets is not to be exponed of the raising againe of the persons of unofficed Prophets to preach but it is to be exponed of the rising againe of the buried Gospel which in the ministery of faithfull Pastors and in other new Martyrs Pastors and others arose againe from the dead with the Spirit and power of these Martyrs and that buried truth that was in former times persecuted by Antichrist did now revive againe to the wondering of Babylon for the intent of the Spirit is to show that the Gospel and true Church slaine and buried shall arise againe within a short time as three dayes and a halfe 4. It is vaine that he saith none of the Clergy witnessed and prophecied against Antichrist he is not versed in the Churches history who teacheth so for Monkes and Fryars were Ministers though their office unlawfull and as Ministers of Christ. Luther Melancthon and thousands other gave testimony against Antichrist Robinson addeth Revel 14. 6. Where an Angell flyeth in the midst of heaven that is in the visible Church having the everlasting Gospell to preach to them that dwell on the earth and to every nation and kinred That is God raised men in the midst of popery not miraculously inspired for you can show me no such who preached the Gospel not by vertue of an office The office of a Friar Monk or Massâ—-Priest is no ministery of Christs appointment and when they gave their clearest testimony they were almost all excluded out of Rome and so in respect of their personall gifts and graces they were Angels of God in respect of their office they were Angels of Antichrist Answ. 1. There is no reason to reject the interpretation of Junius that this Angell was a type of the servants of God who opposed Popery after the times of Bonifacius the eight as Cassiodorus the Italian Arnoldus de villa nova Occam Dante 's Petrarcha Ioannâ—s de Rupe the Franciscan Wickliff And Pareus refers the type to Wickliffe Marsilius Patavinus Petrarcha Our country man Napper exponeth it of Luther Melancthon and Calvin in the seventh age Anno 1541 and it is false that they were all excommunicated and though the accident of their office to be a Monke a Fryar was Antichristian yet the ministery it selfe was of Christ and by it they did preach against Antichrist as they did validely baptize for I hope they did not baptize as unofficed Prophets Lastly this Angel did not preach in the visible Church but in the midst of Popery and therefore doth not prove it is lawfull in a true visible constituted Church for gifted Prophets out of office to bee ordinary Preachers Robinson much urgeth the place 1 Cor. 14. 1 Because the Apostle speaketh of the manifestation of the gifts and graces common to all as well brethren as ministers ordinary as extraordinary 2. Hee speaketh of the fruits common to all edification exhortation and comfort compared with 1 Thess. 5. 11. 14. and of that which at all times remaineth amongst the Christians to wit love Answ. The cohesion of this Chapter with the former is cleare charitie should be followed because so excellent Therefore cover gifts which are most conducing to love and edification and that is to prophecie he proveth excellencie of prophecying above others and teacheth in this Chapter the right ordering of publick Church meeting Now Robinsons Argument is
Rom. 15. 16. 1 Cor. 1. 10. Act. 1. 14. I answer 1. that is because they are in Church-government all one and a conspiracy in error is but seeming unity But 2. I say good men as Paul and Barnabas will differ But 3. what if all be wrong of three parts as 1 Cor. 1. 12. Some said I am of Paul some I am of Apollo some I am of Christ all the three were wrong in that case doth not a Synod by the word of God determine the matter best certainly though Synods may erre yet are they of themselves Christs lawfull way to preserve veritie and charity and unity But our brethren answer us divisions ought not to be and they will not but all agree in the truth if the Church will lay aside corrupt judgement and depend on Christ considering the promises made to the Church Jer. 32. Ephes. 3. 9. Matth. 18 20. Let me answer there is much more charity in this answer then verity 1. They ought not to disassent from truth true but what then the remedy is not given except you returne to a Synod the division Act. 15. ought not to be the house should not be fired true but the question is how shall water be had to quench it for many things are which ought not to be 2. Neither will divisions be that is false 1 Cor. 1. 12. 3. As heresies must be so scandals must be our author saith they will not be they will not be say the brethren if the Church lay aside corrupt judgement and affection and attend upon the rule and depend on Christ. I answer There is but vanity and no solidity I crave pardon in this answer it is the vaine answer of Arminius in the case of the Saints perseverance The regenerate say they cannot fall away if they be not inlaking to Gods grace and if they in holy feare take heed to their wayes so saith Arminius in his Declaration and in his answer to Perkins so also say the Arminians in their confession and Episcopius But what is this but regenerate persons shall persevere upon condition that they shall persevere for not to be inlaking to the grace of God is to cooperate to the grace of God or with the grace of God and to cooperate with the grace of God is very perseverance it selfe for saith the the wicked Socinus and Smalcius and so say our brethren all shall agree in the truth if they lay aside corrupt judgement And what is that if they lay aside corrupt judgement that is if they agree with the truth and assent to the Word of God But so it is that the best regenerate even Barnabas a man full of the holy Ghost Act. 11. doth not lay aside corrupt judgement But our brethren proveth they will law aside corrupt judgement but how you alleadge the Papists abused Scriptures Ier. 32. God promiseth to put his Spirit and feare in his Church that they shall not depart from the Lord. True say I they shall not depart from God providing they lay aside corrupt judgement as you teach us But doe you not teach us by your answer to elude these pregnant places which unanswerably prove the necessity of the perseverance of the regenerated But 2. what though God promise to put his feare in the heart of the regenerate this promise is not made to the visible Church conveened in a Synod as it is such nor will it prove that a Synod shall all agree in the truth that the whole Church shall lay aside corrupt judgement except you serve your selves with these and the like places as Papists and by name as Bellarmine Gâ—etserus Snarez Bucanus Stapleton Gregorius de Valentia doe serve themselves with them and the like to prove that Councels are in fallible What is said in the fourth Section anent the power of the people in Church-governâ—â—â—â— is already examined onely in the closure thereof they seeme to give something peculiar to the Elders which the people have not which I discusse in the insuing question Quest. VIII What peculiar auhority is in the Eldership for the which they are over the people in the Lord according to the doctrine of our brethren We hold that Christ hath given a superiority to Pastors and Overseers in his House whereby they are by office government and power of the keyes above the people But 1. this authority is limited and conditionall not absolute as if they may doe what they please 2. It is a power ministeriall not a Dominion for as meere Servants and Ambassadours of Christ they doe but declare the will and commandement of the King of Kings 3. When this authority is not exercised by the precise rule and prescript of the Law of God it is not valid but null and of no force 4. They are so above the people as 1. they are their Servants for Christs sake 2 Cor. 4. 5. yea we are their servants servants not as if the people had a dominion over the Pastors or as if they had their authority from the people they have it immediately from Christ but because all their service is for the good and the salvation of the people 5. They have so superiority as they are subject to the Prophets to be judged and censured by the Church representative of Pastors Doctors and Elders It will be found that our brethren give no authority or superiority to the Eldership above the people In their answers to the 32. questions We acknowledge say they a Presbytery whose worke it is to teach and rule and whom the people ought to obey and condemne a meere popular government such as our writers condemne in Morellius Answ. So say our brethren in their Doctrine we acknowledge that the people and gifted men not in office should teach and all the faithfull is the governing Church to which Christ hath committed the keyes and power of ordination and highest Church censures even excmmunication and that the Elders should obey the Church of beleevers Ergo in teaching and â—uling you acknowledge no Presbytery 2. Seeing you ordaine the Elders to be ordained by the imposition of the peoples hands to be elected called censured excommunicated exauthorited shew us why the people are not the Rulers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Elders ruled 3. The key of knowledge is a chiefe part of the keyes and these keyes by which sinnes are remitted and retained and men bound or loosed on earth and heaven and seeing Morellius Anabaptists and your selves teach that these keyes were given to the whole Church of beleevers how doe you thinke that people are not in teaching Overseers as properly as the Elders and that your government is meerely popular as Morellius taught to say nothing that when you deny your government to be meerely popular you doe not deny but it is popular for a government meerely popular admitteth of publike men to rule for the people and we never read of a government in Athens Lacedemonia
if they stand in need thereof more then other As Peter gave an account Act. 11. to the Church of Jerusalem of his going in to the uncircumoised Answ. 1. If a warrant or example from the word that one single company of sole beleevers wanting Elders did in a Church way censure any one Pastor or a whole Eldership and that the Church of Jerusalem consisting onely of beleevers without Elders called Peter before them judicially to give an account of going in to the uncircumcised is a dreame and though Peter should have given satisfaction to a number of sole beleevers to remove the scandall it proveth not that they had authoritie over Peter for one private offender is obliged to give an account and a satisfaction to another private brother whom he hath offended Matth. 18. 15. yet hath not a brother Church authoritie over one another to excommunicate him as our brethren say that a company of onely private beleevers may excommunicate all the Elders of the Congregation 2. It followeth not that Elders should want the medicine of excommunication when they stand in need thereof because the people may not excommunicate them for there be others who of office should excommunicate and also the want of a meane of salvation as the want of baptisme where such are wanting as have the onely Church power to administer such means doth not condemn men On the other side saith the Author the Elders have rule over the Church and that in sundry Acts as 1. in calling together the Church upon any weighty occasion Act. 6. 2. Answ. 1. This power of conveening the multitude cannot bee the power of governing Gods house spoken of 2 Tim. 3 4 5. Tit. 1. 5. to obey those who watch for our soules Heb. 13. 17. cannot bee to conveene to a Church meeting at their commandement 2. To conveen the Church meeting or Synods is an action of the whole Church for Christ hath given power to his owne Church an ecclesiastick power to conveen her owne Courts and this can no more be a peculiar act of authoritie agreeing onely to the Elders or to a Pastor then the act of excommunication for it is given to all the faithfull by your owne grounds 1 Cor. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 11. 18 1 Cor. 14. 23. how then is it a peculiar act of auhoritie in the Elders 1. The Elders if they bee to bee accused and censured are they to conveen the Judicatory as the Consull did conveen the Senate and to summon themselves also if they have any power to conveen the Church it is but delegated for orders sake to them by the Church Ergo this authoritie is principally and first in the Church and so it is no authoritie peculiar to the Elders also if it be but a thing of meere order it is not an act of jurisdiction over the Church a Moderator who conveeneth the Synod or a Consul who conveenth the Senat have not in that jurisdiction or authoritie over the Synod or Senat and may the Elders hinder I pray you the conveening of the Church I thinke not 3. This is but a Popish argument Pope Julius the third in his Bull taketh this upon him to conveene Councells The Cardinall de Monte President for the Pope gave leave by a speciall Bull from the Pope to the Councell of Trent to advise about the translating of the Councell from Trent to Bonony And Good Bellarmine and Harding as Jewell teacheth us make this a part of the transcendent power and authoritie of the Pope over the Church to conveen the Church Catholick and if it bee an act of authoritie over the Church to conveene the Church farre more must it bee in the Pope to conveene the Catholick Church Lastly this power in Elders should bee made good by the Word of God Secondly saith hee their authority over the Church is in opening the doores of speech and silence to any of the Assembly Act. 13. 13. unlesse it be where the Elders themselves lie under offence or suspition then the offended party may begin with them Act. 11. 2. Yet with due reverence observed as to their yeares so to their place 1 Tim. 5. 3. Answ. If to speake first in a Church meeting prove that the Elders have authority over the Church then one Elder hath authority over all the rest of the Elders and must be a little Pope or a great Prelate for two or foure Elders cannot all speake first We seeke now an act of authority due to Elders or Pastors as they are such and above the people if you make this an act of authority you then give us in every Church-meeting and Synod a Pastor of Pastors and an Elder of Elders and a Pope 2. If this be an act of authority over the Church then have Papists well proven that Peter hath an authority and power over all the Church for Suarez and Bellarmine and Harding prove Peter to be a Pope because he speaketh first in the councell Act. 13. 13. and the text that you cite they cite also But Whittakerus and Gerson saith as also Lyran and Carthusian It is like that James spake first as President of the Councell 3. The Author leaveth this act of authority as weake and saith that the offended party may speake first Ergo say I to speake first is not an authoritative act of Pastors as Pastors agreeing to them by vertue of their office seeing this act is communicated to those who are out of office Ergo they have not shewen as yet any Pastorall act of office due to the Elders as Elders and if it were most convenient that Elders should first speake our brethren will not say that it is due to them by their office but for their age and gifts and so they say nothing Thirdly saith the Author Elders have rule over the Church in preaching the word and they have power to teach and exhort to charge and command to reprove and rebuke with all authoritie 1 Tim. 5. 7. and 6. 17. 2 Thes. 3. 6. Answ. It can not be denied but Elders that is preaching Elders or Pastors have authoritie over the people in preaching and rebuking with all authoritie but 1. I aske at our brethren by what authoritie of the Scripture is pastorall binding and loosing an authoritative act of the preaching Elder onely for the concionall or preaching power of remitting and retaining sinnes Joh. 20. 21. is all one with the power of the keyes Matth. 16. and that is given saith our brethren to the whole Church and by these texts are not restricted to Pastors as they expone them 2. Our brethren alledge there is a two-fold power of preaching in Pastors one by vertue of their gift another by vertue of their office By the first Pastors doe preach to Infidels Turkes and unconverted ones now this preaching is not proper to Pastors as Pastors nor is it any authority peculiar to Pastors over all the flocke for
all gifted persons as our brethren teach may preach and so the gifted ones amongst the people have authority over the Pastors in this meaning as well as the Pastors have over them and so the difference of rulers and ruled of feeders and the fed is taken away Now for the power of Pastorall teaching the Pastors have authority over the Church but that is over the invisible Church of beleevers and regenerated persons for Pastors as Pastors doe not convert Soules and so they preach to the unconverted not as Pastors or with any Pastorall care for they teach that Pastors Doctors and Church-officers are given Ephes. 4. 11. onely for confirming of those who are already converted not for converting of Soules and by this meanes 1. Pastors doe not preach the Law for the humbling of unconverted sinners they doe not as Pastors or by vertue of the office open the eyes of the blinde nor are they Ministers by whom men beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. nor are they Fathers who begot men in Christ Jesus through the Gospell as 1 Cor. 4. 25. Nor doe they pray men in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God as 2 Cor. 5. 20. Which is strange and uncouth Doctrine of our brethren for all these acts ministeriall are performed upon non-converts who are not properly members of Christs mysticall body nor of the spouse of Christ nor members of the visible Church nor the Sonnes and Daughters of the Lord God Almighty nor have some measure of sincerity and truth as this author Chap. 3. Sect. 3. requireth of members of the visible Church and these are not under any pastorall care really and in very deed who are yet unconverted to the faith therefore the Pastor if hee convert any by his preaching he doth it by vertue of his gift not as a Pastor or by vertue of his office as they teach in their answer to the 32. questions so as Pastors they have no authoritie over the unconverted within the visible Church and this authoritative act of Elders over the people falleth to the ground by their principles 3. This authoritative preaching doth not yet make over to the Elders authoritative power above or over the people such as wee now seeke For 1. By this ruling Elders who do not preach and labour not in the Word and doctrine 1 Tim. 7. 17. by office have not this power Ergo yet you give no peculiar authoritie to the whole Eldership over the people 2. The Spirit of God requireth an authority of overseeing and governing to bee in Pastors beside the authoritative power of preaching for besides that a Bishop should bee â—apt to teach 1 Tim. 3. 2. hee must also v. 4 5 6. bee one who can both govern his own house and also the Church of God and not onely must hee not neglect the gift of prophecying 1 Tim. 4. 14. but also hee must know 1 Tim. 3. 13. how to behave himselfe in the Church of God and must bee circumspect in receiving accusations against an Elder and lay hands suddenly on no man and not be partaker of other mens sinnes 1 Tim. 5. 19. 22. he must not onely bee an approven workman to divide the Word aright 1 Timothey 2. 15. and preach in season and out of season 2 Tim. 4. 2. but also must commit the Word to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. All which are singular points of authoritative power of government different from authoritative power of teaching And so Titus must not onely have the oversight by sound doctrine to exhort and convince the gainesayers Tit. 1. 9. but hee hath power in governing to order the things of discipline and to appoint Elders in every citie Tit. 1. 9. Act. 4. 23. yea there is an oversight in watching for soules in governing no lesse then in teaching Hâ—b 13. 17. Now this Author sheweth us nothing that is a peculiar authoritative power in ruling governing and a disciplinary overseeing of soules which the Word giveth to Elders as they are Elders and called Governors of Gods people as yet yea all the people are governors rulers and overseers in government by them no lesse then the Elders 4. The Author saith Elders have rule over the Church in dispensing all the censures of the Church unlesse it bee in their owne cause for though they take the consent of the Church in dispensing a censure yet they set on the censures with great authoritie in the name of the Lord yea it is no small power that they put forth in directing the Church what censures are due according to the word as though the Judge dispense no sentence but according to the verdict of the Jury yet his authority is great both in directing the Jury to give their verdict according to the Law and in pronouncing the sentence with power and terrour the like dâ—e the Elders in dispensing Church censures Answ. This dispensing of Church censures hath two branches 1. A directing of the Church in the qualitie of the censures 2. A binding of the censures upon them or in executing the censures of the Church For the former if it bee a pastorall direction it is all one with preaching of the Word and is not an act of authority by way of governing but by way of pastorall teaching But 1. Wee would have a word from God giving this power of the keyes peculiarly to the Pastors for if you give the keyes to all the Church of beleevers as beleevers and because they are Christs Spouse his mysticall body the habitation of his Spirit by faith then with your good leave there bee neither keyes nor any power of the keyes given to the Pastors as Pastors and in respect of their office but onely as they are a part of Christs body now as Pastors or Elders they are neither beleevers nor the bride nor a part of the bride but at best the friends of the Bridegroome Joh. 3. 29. especially seeing the Church as the Church and as using actually the keyes doth censure and judicially prescribe the qualitie and quantitie of the censure as they are directed Matth. 18. 1 Cor. 5. 2 3 4 5. yea and the Church judicially and authoritatively pronounceth the sentence and maner of the censure on the sentence for example of ten collaterall and coequall Judges if two of these ten bee skilled Juristes and shall direct the rest in the qualitie of the punishment to bee inflicted upon a malefactor that direction commeth from them not as Judges over the rest nor by any peculiar power that they have above the rest seeing all the ten are equally and joyntly Judges of a like power but that direction commeth from them as skilled Jurists So here though the Elders direct the Church anent the qualitie of the censure they doe not this by an authority above the Church seeing the Church with them have received the Keyes yea they principally as the Spouse of Christ and his mysticall body have received the keyes and
the Pastoes and Elders as such have the keyes not but as they are beleevers and a part of the mysticall body but as they are Pastors and Elders they have not received the keyes at all by our brethrens doctrine yea as Elders or officers they are not parts of the Church but onely adjuncts and ornaments thereof For the second to wit the execution of the censures of the Church if they doe it as Pastors and by vertue of their office execute the sentence of the Church as Pastors they are meere servants of the Church not collaterall Judges with the Church and are not as the Judge who doth direct the Jury for the Jury doth only cognosce of the fact but hath no judiciall power to pronounce the sentence or discerne the qualitie of the punishment nor can the Jury at all discerne any punishment But the Judge cognosceth both of the Law and the fact and authoritatively pronounceth sentence but the Elders have no authoritative power in directing the people to pronounce or not pronounce the sentence or what sentence to pronounce or what censure to inflict for if they have this authoritative power then we seeke Scripture to warrant this power 2. The Elders must then have the keyes in a more emminent manner then the people or Church of beleevers so all bee but blanke and emptie titles given to Elders hitherto Fiftly saith the Author The Elders have power to dismisse the people or Church and that with a blessing Numb 6. 23. to 26. which is an act of seperioritie Heb. 7. 7. An. This is but an emptie title also For 1. The Pastoronly one dismisseth Doctor Elders Deacons and the whole Congregation and so one is a Pastor of Pastors and an Arch-Elder of Elders hath authority by this over his fellow Elders and candismisse them therefore there is nothing peculiar in an officiall power here to the whole presbytery above the people 2. A majority or superioritie is one thing and a power of jurisdiction is another Blessing of the Church at their dismission is nothing but a prayer of the whole Church the Minister being mouth who blesseth all and is no act of superioritie of jurisdiction or power of the keyes of which wee now dispute And you cannot thinke that to obey those who are over you in the Lord and submit to them as it is Heb. 13. 17. is nothing but to receive a dismissory blessing from the Pastor And I much doubt if the Priests blessing of the people Numb 6. was morall and if it was not typicall hee not taking in himselfe but as a type of Christ pronouncing the whole visible Church blessed sorypifying Christ our Priest in whom all the nations of the earth are blessed Gal. 38. 14. And do not the people pay the Pastor home in his owne coyne for you make the Church of beleevers to ordaine their owne Elders and to lay hands upon them and blesse them so you teach 3. Nor is dismissing of the Church an act of authoritie or of officiall power for your preaching and unofficed professors may dismisse as well as they may publikely pray and preach 2. A dismission is agreed upon by the Church before hand and floweth from the nature of all publike meetings 3. Ejusdem est potestatis congregare dimittere caetum congregatum you know to conveene Christs Courts authoritatively is due to no man on earth the Church hath an intrinsecall power of herselfe to conveene being the Court of the Lord Jesus and so also to dissolve and this is the usurped power that the Antichrist taketh to himselfe to conveene the generall councells as Bellarmin Suarez Pighius and Cajetanus teach us Sixtly our Author saith In case of Apostasie of the Church or other notorious scandals or obstinacie thereof their Elders have power to denounce the judgement of God against the Church and withdraw themselves from it As upon the Idolatry of the Israeliâ—es Moses tooke the Tabernacle and pitched it without the camp Exod. 33. And Paul with Barnabas rejected the Jewes for their blasphemy and turned to the Gentiles Act. 13. 45 46. Answ. Here be two diverse things sewed together to make up one thing 1. to denounce the judgement of God is one thing 2. to separate from the Church is another thing the former is an act of authoritie being rightly taken the latter is an act of no authoritie But for the first to denounce judgement on a visible Church and that with a separation is â— nothing but an act of Pastorall teaching and so no act of officiall power of governing in the Elders above the Church is brought in all these six and so yet the difference betwixt the feeders and the fed the shepheards and flocke the watchman and the citie or the people who are to submit and obey these who are over them in the Lord who rule well is close everted and all the Churches are turned masters feeders governors rulers for Elders have no officiall authoritie by our brethrens doctrine which is not in the Church of beleevers 2. To denounce judgement to an Idolatrous and obstinate Church who by their Apostasie do declare themselves not to bee Christs body is a Pastorall act of Pastors exercised on those who now leave off to be Churches and this is to play the Pastors to that which is not a flocke and as unlawfull as for a husband to exercise the actions of a husband to one who is not his wife 3. To separate from an obstinate Church is by you thought lawfull to all private Christians who would not defile themselves with the pollutions of the Church how then do you make it an authoritative act of ruling Pastors 4. For Pastors to remove the Gospell and preach no more to an obstinate Church is not nor can it in reason be that wherein wee are to submit and obey those who are over us in the Lord. My reason is we are to be agents at least for most part in submitting and yeelding our selves to those who in teaching and governing are over us in the Lord because they watch for our soules But in their separating from us and removall of the Gospel wee are meere patients and cannot be agents 5. Moses his removall of the Tabernacle and Paul his turning from the Jewes was by another spirits warrant then Pastors now a dayes can dare to remove themselves and their Ministery from a visible Church for Paul turned from the Jewes for their universall Apostasie blasphemy and opposing of the maine and principall foundation of the Christian faith to wit that Christ Jesus came in the world died for sinners rose againe and ascended to heaven c. The 4. case to wit of any particular scandall or scandals and of obstinacie therein cannot bee the like ground for Elders to separate from a Church and never preach the Gospel againe to them CHAP. 6. SECT 1. Of communion of sister Churches amongst themselves I Here bee seven wayes saith
bee sometimes physice impossible because of the corruption of mans nature there being bloody warres in Christendome yet it is morally lawfull for many things may bee inconvenient through mans wickednesse and so hic nunc not expedient which are morally lawfull 2. Conclusion Every particular Pastor hath a power though unproper of dominion and authoritie even out of a Synod about the Acts of preaching and determining truth according to the word of God as Jer. 1. 10. See I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdomes c. 1 Tim. 6. 17. Charge them that are rich that they bee not high minded c. 2 Tim. 4. 1. I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ who shall judge the quick and the dead c. So any Pastor hath power of dominion and authoritie over a Synod and Paul as a Pastor might preach even before the councell at Jerusalem passed their Synodicall determination Act. 15. that circumcision was not necessary and that to obstaine from things strangled from blood and fornication was necessary and lawfull yea and in preaching truth the Pastor is subject to no Synod But the Pastor hath not full power of jurisdiction about his acts of preaching necessary truth 1. Because the Church may for just causes deprive him from preaching 2. Because hee cannot use the censure of excommunication against those who refuse to receive his true and necessary doctrine without the Church joyne her power of jurisdiction with him 3. He his alone cannot in a Synod determine ecclesiastically and in an authoritative Church power that same truth which as a Pastor hee determined and with the power of pastorall dominion hee pressed upon the consciences of the Church yea of the whole Synod because one man is not the Church or Synod and James his alone Act. 15. v. 15. could but say Wherefore my sentence is that yee trouble not them which from among the Gentiles are turned unto God though this was the very word of God which James as a Pastor even as an ordinary Pastor might have preached in the name of God yet is it not the decree of the Church which the Churches is to keep Act. 16. 4. while it bee determined by the Church An example wee may have possible not unlike to this A man hath a power of dominion over his owne proper lands and goods to use them in God for his owne use but the supreme magistrate and Parliament hath a dominion of jurisdiction in a judiciall sentence over those same lands to forfeit them for crimes committed against King and State or this may cleare it Samuel hath a power immediately from God to annoint David King and in this hee is not subject to the suffrages of the tribes of Israel hee hath a power of dominion here but suppose wee that Samuel live till Gods time when all Israel shall crowne David King at Hebron Samuel as a part of the Assembly of Israel his alone without the suffrages of Israel could not make him King at Hebron Hence wee may see how weake the assertion of our brethren is who say That Synods should have power to bind the Churches say they wee see not Bellarmine indeed holdeth so But orthodox writers hold that the sentence of councels is but a certaine inquisition of the truth and a ministeriall and limited sentence so that the decree of a councell is of as great force as the reason thereof so saith Amesius and Junius But certainly this is a meer mistake of our brethren as if they were not orthodox writers but conspirers against the truth with Bellarmine who hold the authoritie of Synods The essentiall end to speak so of Synods is unitie and the eschewing of schisme and wee doubt not but Peter Paul James had in their Sermons and doctrine determined that same veritie to wit that the Law of Moses and ceremonies was a yoak not to bee laid upon the Christian Churches yet it was not a decree for unities sake and fuller authoritie binding the Churches to observe these as Act. 16. 4. while it was determined in a Synod Act. 5. 24. 25. But truely wee hold nothing in this common with Jesuites and Papists for wee condemne not that in Bellarmine that hee holdeth that lawfull Synods for of such wee dispute with him do bind the Churches to obedience in God to their decrees not because they say it but because they say it authoritatively from Gods Word authoritie of Synods no orthodox writers deny authoritie officiall as the representative Church of Christ they have He that heareth you heareth mee hee that despiseth you despiseth me Where two or three are gathered together in a Synod say our Divines I will bee amongst them But authoritie objective they have not so as what they say because they say it therefore the very matter object and thing said by them is no lesse the Word of God then if the Prophets and Apostles by divine inspiration had said it at least it is not infallibly true because they say it for that wee disclaime and it is that authoritie of Synods which Bellarmine and Papists hold Councells saith Bellarmine and Scripture are both infallible and the Jesuits of Rhemes and Lorinus the Jesuite said councells are infallible the holy Spirit is there present Gratian said all the decretall Epistles of Popes and the Canons of the Councells are of equall authoritie with the Scriptures and their Gregorius said hee received with the same reverence and authoritie the foure generall Councells the foure Evangelistâ— it is certaine saith Suarez that a Councell is an infallible rule of faith and Turrecremata saith the same It is certaine saith Bailius Councells are â—â— the Oracles of God to us in difficulties so saith Cajetanus Canus and Gregorius de Valentia wee hold the authoritie of Councels but ascribe to them as much power over the conscience as there is reason in them from Gods Word and no more But 2. This is a weake reason councels have no power to command obedience because their Canons and Decrees are of no more force then they have reason from Gods Word For 1. Friends brethren equals by that have no warrant to rebuke because their rebukes have but as much force as they have reason from the word of God for the reason is alike in both lawfull Pastors cannot command obedience in the Lord your independent Congregations cannot command that which bindeth the Church to obedience because the word or a commandement of a Pastor or your independent Church is onely a commandement ministeriall and limited and hath as much force as there is reason in it from the Word of God yea the Church of Corinâ—h hath not then the power of the Lord Jesus to excommunicate the incestuous person nor the Church of Thyatira to cast out and condemne Jezabell the false prophetesse nor do these commandements of the Synod
review of the councell of Trent saith gravely It is but a theating of Christâ—ndome above board to leave the judgement of the necessitie of generall councells to the Popes will and no marvell then Popes decline councells for the councell of Pisan as Bellarmine granteth was convocated against Julius the second that wicked man and therefore was rejected by Julian the second in the councell of Lateran yet this councell and all the decrees thereof was approven and confirmed by Alexander the first who was accounted lawfull Pope and b Platina faith this councell was approved and that in it Gregory 12. and Benet 13. were deprived of their papall dignitie all nations assenting except neither Spaine the King of Scotland and Earle of Arminac who followed Pope Benet and for approbation of the councells of Pise Constance and Basil which censured Popes and deprived them and subjected them to a generall councell let any man read the Review of the Councell of Trent and Bellarmine is therein fully consuted Also generall councells have condemned the doctrine of the Church of Rome for which they thinke them not necessary as the councell of Frankford saith Bellarmine and Basil and Constance are not approved in all because they favour not the Roman Churches doctrine and the Popes supremacy above Councells yea and generall councells cannot bee simply necessary saith hee because the Catholick Church remained safe the first three hundreth yeers after Christ without generall councells and might have remained safe other three hundreth yeers and so a thousand yeers and faults may bee amended by the Lawes of Popes and by provinciall councells saith hee and their Costerus saith the Pope him selfe without councells hath condemned many heresies and this is a shorter and more compendious way then by councells for it is hard and laborious to conveene councells therefore the Churches salvation doth not depend upon them saith Bellarmine yea it is in vaine saith the Jesuit Pererius to doe that by many which may as conveniently bee done by fewer he meaneth councels may be wanted Our brethren rejecting councells and their necessitie at all in this sideth with Papists Though Calvin saith Nullum esse nec melius nec certius remedium that there is no better nor surer remedy to find out the truth then a Synod of true Pastors And Arminians and Socinians thinke that Synods are neither necessary nor profitable for as our brethren here give no authoritie to Synods but to counsell and advise the very same is taught by a grand Arminian Episcopius who saith Synods are not profitable for the establishing the truth or rooting out of errors and heresies but onely to advise sist examine and by reasons and arguments to perswade and therefore are not profitable either for the being or for the well being of the Church Synodici conventus nec ad â—esse nec ad bene esse ecclesiae absolute necessarii sunt ad veritatis divinae stabilimentum hereseon errorumque averruns itionem vel exstirpationem eo tantum casu utiles esse statuimus si ad deliberandum ventilandum examinandum rationibus argumentisque persuadendum congregentur litium finem facere circa religionis capita aliter quam persuadendo est tyrannidem in ecclesiam invehere libertatem conscientiarum si non omnino tollere saltem vehementer astringere ligare To â—nd controversies in the Church any otherwise then by perswading is to bring in a tyranny in the Church of Christ and to hurt if not altogether to evert the libertie of consciences of men And the Arminians in their Apologie teach us that a decision or a determination of a Synod obligeth not those who were not present at the making of that decision And so have I shown from Answorth and our brethrens doctrine that they teach people cannot assent without tyranny of consciences to the decrees of the Elders at the making whereof they were not present and present consenters 2. A Synods decision doth incline the mind to consider of the decision but doth not compell authoritatively to consent and obey 3. This is violence to the conscience 4. To setch expositions of the word from confessions of faith or decrees of councells is dangerous and this is the doctrine of Socinians for Theophil Nicolaides saith the Church in a Synod cannot decide controversies because shee may erre neither can shee take them away for that were to doe violence to mens consciences and Smalcius saith this were tacite quietly to leave the writings of the Apostles and commend humane traditions So our brethren give nothing but a power of counselling and morall perswading to Synods and no authoritie to command because say they in their answers to the 32. questions Synods may erre and their decrees have no more force then they fetch reason from Gods Word and truely our brethren with Socinians and Arminians here do fall in many foule errors For 1. all preaching of the Word and all power of authoritie of Pastors commanding in the name of the Lord faith and obedience is onely morall and to perswade and not authoritative to command because Pastors may as well erre in preaching as the Church may erre in Synods 2. Because what Pastors preach hath no more force over the conscience then they have warrant to speake from the Word of God as is cleare Ezek. 3. 7. Gal. 1. 9. 1 Thess. 2. 13. 2. All confessions of faith that are set downe by lawfull Synods are null 3. Libertie of prophecying and a Cassandrian licence of beleeving in things controverted any thing in this or on that side is lawfull 4. A perpetuall doubting of conscience except in two or three points fundamentall that all Christians beleeve yea and all hereticks is brought in in the Church 5. The Lords working with the word preached is but by way of morall perswasion 6. But our Divines hold the authoritie of Synods and of Pastors preaching the Word from the Scriptures but I find both our brethren and Arminians do misken the authority of the Church and of Pastors in both Preaching and Synods for they thinke to set up the authoritie of Synods is to cast downe the authoritie of the Scriptures because things to bee distinguished are confounded for wee deny that Synods or Pastors have peremptory absolute and illimited authoritie and power to determine as they please in Sermons and Synods their Power is limited according to the Word of God and their word is onely to bee beleeved in so farre as it is agreeable to the Word of God but hence it followeth not that Pastors and Synods have no power and authoritie at all to determine but onely to counsell advise and perswade for private Christians our equalls and inferiours have power to counsell perswade and advise in a private way by teaching admonishing exhorting rebuking conference They build upon the reproving of events of councells by
plant soules who were non-converts and branches of the wild olive in Christ Jesus and to make new visible Churches but it is certaine that the Apostles as Apostles and as Pastors by vertue of their office converted obstinate sinners to the faith of Christ and planted them in a visible Church consisting of professors of the faith partly converted partly not converted but the pastors by your doctrine have no power as Pastors or by any Pastorall authoritie to plant the Gospell where it hath never beene that pastorall spirit is dead with the Apostles and in this contrary to all reason and sense and contrary to the Scriptures you make private Christians the successors of the Apostles to plant Churches and to convert soules and to make them fit materialls for the visible Church of regenerate persons for Pastors as Pastors and visible Churches as visible Churches doe nothing at all to the multiplying of Churches seeing Pastors and visible Churches as they are such by your doctrine are but nurses to give suck to those who are already converted but not fathers to convert them for private Christians or pastors as Christians gifted to prophesie not as Pastors doe multiply Churches and convert men to Christ as you teach now wee all know that nurses as nurses doe not propagate or by generation multiply people in the Common-wealth that fathers and mothers onely can doe your Churches have no ministeriall breasts but to give suck to babes who are already borne but wee see by your doctrine no ministeriall power of Pastors or Churches to send forth members to enter in a Church covenant or to enter in a new Church relation of a daughter or a sister visible Church if they send a number to bee a new Church your Pastors or visible Church did not multiply them it is presumed they were converts before they were members of the visible Church which now sendeth them out and if they bee multiplied in the bosome of your visible Church and converted they were not truely members of that visible Church before their conversion and also that they were not converted by any publike ministery but by private Christians gifted to prophesie who are the onely successors of the Apostles to plant visible Churches but what pastorall authoritie have you to send them forth to bee a new visible Church none at all they have as beleevers power to remove from you and because of multiplication to make themselves a new Church and this ministeriall power of making themselves a new Church they have not from you but from their fathers who converted them so that you make a visible Church within a visible Church but not a Church begotten or borne of a visible Church as a child of the mother and wee desire a word of God either precept promise or practise of such a Church multiplication mans word is not enough 2. Wee hold that the sending of the Apostles to all the world was not in it selfe that which essentially distinguisheth the Apostle from the now ordinary Pastor who is fixed to a single Congregation but the gift of tongues to preach to all the world upon the Lords intention to send the Gospel to all nations that as many as were chosen to life might beleeve was that which essentially differenceth the Apostle from the ordinary pastor together with a speciall revelation of God to goe to such and such people to Macedonia and not yet to Bythinia And now seeing these two are taken away the ordinary Pastors which now are have as Pastors a sufficient calling to preach the Gospel to all nations to whom by Gods providence they shall come and can understand their language whether of their owne Congregation or not Neither is a Pastor tied as a Pastor by Gods Word to one onely Congregation for then it should bee unlawfull for a Pastor as a Pastor to plant a new Church but shall it bee lawfull for private Christians to plant new Churches who are not the Apostles successors and yet it shall bee unlawfull for Pastors who are the undoubted successors of the Apostles to plant new Churches I would think that admirable doctrine for so you give to private Christians that which you make essentiall to the Apostles and you deny it to the undoubted successors of the Apostles to wit to Pastors But we hold a lawfull Pastor is a Pastor in relation to all the world with this distinction hee is by Christs appointment and the Churches a Pastor to all congregations to plant and water and preach but by speciall designation of Gods providence and the Churches appointment designed and set apart for such a determinate flock just as the Apostles in generall were made Pastors to all the world Matth. 28 19. Go teach all nations but by speciall revelation and Apostolick appointment Peter was appointed the Apostle of the Jewes Paul of the Gentiles Gal. 2. 9. yet Paul was a Pastor in relation to the Jewes and Peter also in relation to the Gentiles so by speciall revelation Act. 16. they are forbidden to preach the word in Bythinia and commanded to preach it elsewhere and for this cause pious antiquity as Morton observeth called some learned fathers Pastors of the World Athanasius is saluted Pontifex maximus as Russinus saith and Origen magister ecclesiâ—rum master of the Churches so Hieronymus and Cyprian totius orbis praeses Cypâ—ian the Bishop of all the world yea and Pope so Nazianz. Hilarius is called by Augustine insignis ecclesiae doctor a renowned teacher of the Church and Nazianzenus calleth Basilius the light of the word and Damascenus the light of the whole world and Theodoret saith Chrysostome is called totius orbis terrarum doctor the Doctor and teacher of the whole world all which titles saith evidently that antiquitie beleeved never a Pastor or Bishop not to bee a Pastor onely in relation to the one single Congregation whereof hee is Pastor but a Pastor in relation to the whole visible Church though by designation of the Church his ministery bee appropriated to one particular Church Thus it is cleare that our brethren deny all communion of Churches while they confine a visible Church to one onely single and independent Congregation subjected in its visible government to Christ Jesus immediatly and to no universall visible Church or Synod on earth Quest. II. Whether the Magistrate hath power to compell persons to a Church profession Anent Magistrates sundry things are questioned to make presbyteriall government odious And first our brethren complaine that our Churches are constitute by the authoritie of the Magistrate Robinson saith it was a presumptuous enterprise that people were haled against their will into covenant with God to sweare obedience to the protestant Faith being a profane multitude living before in grosse idolatry and that by the authority of the supreme magistrate for the commandement of the magistrate say they can make no members of the visible Church or of
free act 2. because it is a supernaturall worke of God and so they are not under the stroake of the Magistrates sword for freewill in supernaturall acts is alike uncogible and free from all externall violence in both those who are baptized professors within the bosome of the visible Church and in Pagans and the truth is neither the Magistrate nor the Church can censine opinions even erronious in fundamentall points as they are opinions for no societie no humane authoritie can either judge of or punish the internall acts of the mind because as such they are indeed offensive to God but not offensive or scandalous to either Church or Commonwealth and so without the Spheare of all humane coercive power nor is Titus Tit. 1. To rebuke gainesiyers v. 9. that they may be sound in the faith v. 13. but in so farre as that faith is visible and as it commeth out of perverse mouthes which must be stopped v. 11. Also punishments either civill or ecclesiasticall do no other wayes worke upon the mind and heart but by a morall swasory influence for it is a palpable contradiction that freewil can physically be compelled therefore here saith Philip Gamacheus there is no need of an Emperours sword but of a Fishers Angle Let it goe then which is taught as a truth in this point by Covarruvias e Gregori de Valent. Gamacheus Tannerus Malderus that Princes have neither from the Law of nature or from any divine Law a coercive power over the faith of Pagans nor is Scotus in this to bee heard that the same divine law obliegeth all Princes and the Churches that did lie upon Israel to destroy the Cansanites Yet may it bee lawfull in some cases indirectly to force them in their false worship as Molina saith against Alphonsus a Castro if they kill their innocent children to their false Gods because it is lawfull to defend the innocent neither is that to bee regarded as a sufficient reason that these Infants doe not consent that they should bee defended because as Malderus saith it is lawfull to hinder a man who is willing to kill himselfe from unjust violence against his owne liâ— 2. It is lawfull as saith Aegidius Conin k Lorca Aquinas and Cajetanus to compell Pagans to desist from violent impeding of Pastors to preach the Gospell to some amongst them who are willing to heare because in that they are injurious to the salvation of those who are appointed to bee saved and doe manifestly hinder the Gospels progresse which the Church is so farre as is in her power to propagate even as her prayer is let thy kingdome come 2. Nor doe we thinke that Princes may compell Pagans who are under their dominions to the faith without foregoing information of their conscience or that simply they may compell them to embrace the faith except that here Princes have greater libertie indirectly to force them because they being now living as wee suppose in a visible Church they may infect the Church and therefore here should bee an indirect hindering of the exercise of their false religion in so farre as it is infectious to the Church of God ne pars sincera trahatur for to this by a certaine proportion the power of excommunication given to the Church by Christ may lead us 1 Cor. 5. 6. and if wee must live by Lawes and not by examples Paul the fourth his suffering of the Jewes Synagogues at Rome and their ancient feasts which faith Malderus of themselves are not evill is no law to us yea but to Christians it is a falling from Christ and his grace nor is Rome who tolerateth Jewith religion nor the edict of Honorius and Theodosius our warrant 3. Nor can wee beleeve that no other sinnes in opinion concerning God his nature attributes worship and Church-discipline except onely such as are against those points which are called fundamentall and the received principles of Christianitie should bee censurable by the Church or punishable by the Magistrate 1. Because Jesus Christ Mat. 18. ordaineth that every sin against our brother or a Church 1 Cor. 10. 31 32. in which the delinquent shall continue with obstinate refusall to heare the Church should bee censured with excommunication But there bee divers opinions concerning God his nature attributes worship and Church-discipline which are not against points fundamentall which being professed are sinnes against our brother and the Churches Ergo many opinions not against points fundamentall if professed are censurable by the Church and punishable by the Magistrate I prove the proposition because Christ Matth 18. maketh no distinction and exception of any sinne but saith universally v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if thy brother trespasse against thee c. and wee can make no exception against an indefinit and Catholick statute and ordinance of Jesus Christ. I prove the assumption because there bee many scandalous points of Arminianisme Pelagianisme of Poperic anent Church government traditions the power and â—fficacie of grace circumciâ—ion forbidding of marriages and of meates which are doctrines of devills comming from such as have consciences burnt with an hot Iron 1 Tim. 4. 1 2 3. many points of Anabaptisme Antinomianisme Socinianisme and of divers other sects are not points fundamentall because many no doubt are glorified who lived and beleeved in Christ and died â—gnorant of either opinions either on the one side or the other yet being professed preached and maintained especially wilfully and obstinately do wonderfully scandalize our brethren and the Churches Nor can I say that such as beleeve that marriage of Churchmen is unlawfull and defend it as many holy and learned men in Popery did and died in that error if otherwise they beleeve in Christ and the like I say of Chastising the body and abstaining from such and such meates which yet are doctrines of devills and offensive to our brethren 1 Tim. 4. 1 2 3. can bee points fundamentall so as the holding of these must bee inconsistent with saving faith Some doe yet maintain that circumcision is lawfull and yet beleeve all points fundamentall shall wee say that such are damned and wee read Gal. 5. 2. Behâ—ld I Paul say unto you that if yee bee circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing 2. Opinions in points not fundamentall are either sinnes forbidden by Gods Law or they are not sinnes the latter can by no reason bee asserted because God hath in his word determined all controversies not fundamentall as well as fundamentall therefore it is necessary necessitate praecepti by vertue of a divine precept that â—ee beleeve that to bee true what God saith in his Word therefore the not beleeving of it must bee a sinne and a transgression of a Divine Law 2. If it bee no sinne it must bee because the mind is under no Law of God except in so far as the minde is ruled and led
Church which I grant is true and the end of the Ruler should be onely preservation of peace and the externall tranquillity of the Common-wealth yea I say from the Word of God that externall peace is too narrow an end and it doth belong to the second Table the Kings end as Nurse-father and his a like care is to preserve the first Table and as a Nurse-father to see that the childrens milke be good and wholesome though the milke come not from his owne breasts and so his power hath a kingly relation to all the Word of God and not to externall peace and naturall happinesse onely And the King as the King his end is edification and spirituall good of soules also but alwayes by a kingly power and in a coactive way by the sword whereas the Church are in their care of edifying soules to use no such carnall weapons in their warfare 2 Cor. 10. 4. For which cause that learned P. Martyr and 〈◊〉 Parker and also the Professors of Leyden say that Ministers deale with consciences of men Quoniam Spiritus Sanctus inquit Martyr vim suam adjungit cum praedicationibus orthodoxis the holy Spirit conjoyneth the power and influence of grace with sound preaching and the Magistrate doth onely exercise externall discipline And Parker reasoning against Whitgift and 〈◊〉 proveth well that the Church visible though externall yet is Christs spirituall Kingdome and that Church discipline is a part of Christs spirituall Kingdome and that the externall government of Christ by discipline is spirituall every way according to the efficient 1 Cor. 12. 1. according to the end spirituall â—dification Ephes. 4. 12. according to the matter the Word and Sacraments 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. according to the forme of working by the evidence of the Spirit 2 Cor. 2. 4. 13. And this is the cause I conceive why great Divines have said the object of the Magistrates power as a Magistrate is the externall man and earthly things because he doth not in such a spirituall way of working take care of the two Tables of the Law as the Pastor doth and yet the spirituall good and edification of the Church in the right preaching of the Word the Sacraments and pure discipline is his end It is true whether the blasphemer professe repentance or not the Magistrate is to punish yea and to take his life if he in seducing of many have prevailed but yet his end is edification even in taking away the life for he is to put away evill that all Israel may feare and doe so no more but this edification is procured by the sword and by a coactive power and so the Church power and the kingly power differ in their formall objects and their formall ends But Spalato speaketh ignorantly of Kings Who saith as the internall and proper end of the Art of painting the Art of sailing c. is not life eternall but onely to paint well according to the precepts of Art and to bring men safe to their harborie though the persons who are painters and sailers may direct works of their Art to life eternall so saith he the end of the kingly Art is not life eternall but onely the externall peace of the Common wealth hence inferreth he that there is no subordinatim betwixt the power of the Magistrate and the power of the Church but that they are both so immediate under God as the Church cannot in a Church way regulate the King as a King but onely as he is a christian man the Church may rebuke the King while as he abuseth his kingly power to the destruction of soules and that the Church power as such is not subordinate to the kingly power onely the King may correct with the sword the Pastors not as Churchmen and Pasâ—ors but as men who are his subjects But 1. whereas it is certaine the King in respect of politick power is the immediate Vicegerent of God and above any subject in his Dominions so doth the Bishop make the Shoe-maker the Painter the master-fashioner immediate unto God and censurable by none as they are Artificers even as the King is censurable by none as King and so the King is dishonoured who by office is the Lords annoynted and a little God on earth Psal. 82. v. 1. 2 The intrinsecall end of kingly power is no more the advancing of godlinesse and the promoving of the Kings daughter towards life eternall by the sincere milke of the Word as the Lords Vicegerent and Nurse-Father of the Church then the Painter as a Painter or a Sea-man as a Sea-man is to advance godlinesse for this mans intrinsecall and is onely a safe harbour and shoare to temporall lives not the harbour of salvation to soules and his end is onely a faire Image of Art in Paper or Clay not the Image of the second Adam and by this the King as King is interdicted of any Church businesse or care of soules to be fed by the Word or Sacraments to keepe them cleane if he looke to any of these as an end that is not the eye or intention of the King as King but of the King as a godly Christian saith Spalato hence to care for the spirituall good of the Church and the promoving of the Gospel is as accidentall as to say an excellent Painter such as Apâ—ies intendeth in his painting life eternall so the King by this looketh to the Law of God to Religion and the eternall happinesse of the Church by guesse by accident and as King hath neither chaire nor roome in Christian Synods nor a seat in the Church 3. If the meaning be that the King as King that is rightly exercisng the office of a King is subordinate to no Church power that is he cannot be justly and deservedly rebuked by Pastors that is most true but nothing to any purpose for so the Pastor as a Pastor Jeremiah as he doth truly and in the name of the Lord exercise the propheticall office cannot be deservedly censured nor punished either by the Church-synodrie or the King and Princes of the Land but thus way all members of the Church an I any one single beleever doing his duty should be as immediate and independent and highest next on earth to Christ as the King and his three Estates of the Honourable Parliament are in civill matters and as an Occumenick Councell or in our brethrens meaning independent Congregation which is against reason But if the meaning be the acts of a King as aberring from justice not as a King but as a fraile man may be censured and rebuked deservedly by Pastors in a Church way this way also the Pastor as a Pastor is not subject to the Church but onely as a fraile man and so nothing is said to the purpose in this more then the in the former But if the meaning be thirdly that which onely maketh good sense that the acts of the King abstracted from good or bad or as kingly or
bestoweth lawfull Kings and Magistrates upon many Nations who know nothing of a Saviour I answer When I consider the point more exactly I see not how Kings who reigne by the wisdome of God Jesus Christ Prov. 8. 14. 15. have not their kingly power from Christ who hath all power given to him in Heaven and in Earth Matth. 28. 18. for they are Nurse-fathers of the Church as Kings Esa. 49. 15. they are to kisse the Sonne and exalt his Throne as Kings Psal. 2. 11. they bring presents and kingly gifts to Christ as Kings Psal. 72. v. 10. 11. and they serve Christ not onely as men but also as Kings as Augustine saith therefore are they ordained as meanes by Christ the Mediator to promote his kingly Throne Some of our Divines will have the kingly power to come from God as Creator in respect God giveth Kings who are his Vicegerents to those who are not redeemed and to Nations who never heard of Christ and others hold that the kingly power floweth from Christ-Mediator in respect he accomplisheth his purposes of saving of his redeemed people by Kings authority and by the influence of their kingly government procureth a feeding ministery and by their princely tutory the edification of his body the Church which possibly both aime at truth See the groundlesse carping at Cartwright Calvin Beza and others by that sharp toothed envier of truth the Author of the Survey of holy discipline of this hereafter more 4. Conclusion The King as King hath not a nomothetick or legislative power to make Lawes in matters ecclesiastick in a constitute Church nor hath he a definitive sentence as a Judge 1. All power of teaching publikely the Church or the Churches of Christ is given to those who are sent and called of God for that effect but Magistrates as Magistrates are not sent nor called of God to the publike teaching of the Church Ergo. The proposition is cleare from the like Rom. 10. 14. How shall they preach except they be sent Ergo how shall they publikely and synodically teach except they be sent Heb. 5. 4. No man taketh this honour upon him but he that is called of God as was Aaron c. Ergo if none be a Priest to offer a Sacrifice without Gods calling neither can he exercise the other part of the Priesthood to teach synodically to give out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees Acts 16. 4. that obligeth the Churches ecclesiastically but he who is called 2. Who so hath nomothetick power to define and make Lawes in matters ecclesiastick have onely a ministeriall power to expone Christs will in his Testament under paine of Church-censures and hath no coactive power of the sword to command these Lawes enacted and to injoyne them on the Churches But onely Church-men who are formally members of the Church as Pastors Doctors Elders and others sent by the Church have this ministeriall power without the coactive power of the sword and what ever the Magistrate as the Magistrate commandeth he commandeth it in things ecclesiastick necessary and expedient under bodily punishment I adde this because threatning of bodily punishment is not essentiall to Lawes in generall because some Lawes are seconded onely with rewards as the Judge offereth by law a reward to any who shall bring unto him the head of a Boar or of some notorious robber Ergo c. The proposition is cleare the learned Junius giveth to the Magistrate with our Divines an interpretation of Scripture as a Judge which concerneth his owne practise they are interpreters pro communi vocationis modo in a Christian way as private men but they have no power of ecclesiastick interpretation 2. Gul. Apollonius saith the Prince as a Christian hath an office to exhort the Svnod by word or Epistle as Constantius did the Fathers of the Nicen Councell and his Legates exhorted the Councell of Chalcedon ut Deo rationem reddituri See Ruffinus and the acts of the Councell of Chalcedon 3. The Magistrate hath a power judiciall as a Magistrate in so farre as his owne practise is concerned to expone the things defined but this expotition he useth non instruendo synodice non docendo ecclesiastice sed docendo seu potius mandando cum certa relatione ad paenam à brachio seculari insligendam contemptoribus not in an ecclesiasticall way teaching and instructing synodically but teaching or rather commanding with a certaine relation to civill punishment to be inflicted upon the contemners as he teacheth what is just or unjust in his civill Lawes not directly to informe the mind but to correct bad manners and this maketh the object of kingly power about Churches matters and the object of ecclesiasticall power formall objects different 3. Those who have a nomothetick power to define in Synods are sent by the Church to Synods with authoritative commission and power for that effect representing the Church which sent them as all who are sent with any ambassage doe represent those who sent them But Magistrates as Magistrates are not sent to represent those who sent them with authoritation commission of the Church Ergo they have no such power â—â—dâ—ine in Synods I prove the proposition from the Apostles practise Paul and Barnabas were sent as chosen men by the Church 〈◊〉 Antioch Acts 15. 2. 3. Acts 15. 6. the Apostles and Elders came from the Church to consider of this matter Acts 21. 18. Acts 22. 17. 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 8 17 18. if the Apostle with the Church sent Titus 〈◊〉 Brother whose praise is in the Gospel as chosen of the Churches to travell with us v. 19 in gathering the charity of the Saints for the poore at Jerusalem then by the like those who are sent to declare the minds of the Churches are also clothed with the authority of the Churches who sent them but Magistrates aâ— such are not sent but are there with the sword of Common-wealth and not with the mind of the Church as Magistrates except they be also Christians 4. The Apostolike Synods is to us a perfect patterne of Synods but persons defining in them are Apostles and Elders Acts 16. 4. Acts 15. 6. the Church Matth. 18. 18. defineth and 1 Cor. 5. 4. those who are conveened in the name of the Lord â—esus and the Apostles pastorall spirit those who are over us in the Lord and watch for our soules 1 Thes. 5. 14. Heb. 13. 17. but in these Synods there are no Magistrates yea there was at Câ—rinth a Heathen Magistrate 1 Cor. 6. 1. and in the Apostolike Church a persecutor Acts 22. 1 2 3. c. And the Magistrate as the Magistrate is not a member of the Church and is neither Pastor Elder nor Doctor nor a professor of the Gospel except he be more then a Magistrate 5. No Ecclesiasticall power or acts formally Ecclesiasticall are competent to one who is not an Ecclesiasticall person or not a member of the Church but a civill person
solos pertinent Episcopos Constantinus Magnus in concilio Niceno ut ait Ruffinus hist. l. â— addit Eusebio cap. 2. reâ—usavit ferre ju licium inter Episcopos Dâ—us inquit vos constituit sacerdotes nobis a dâ—o d â—ti isiis judices conveniens non est ut homo judicet deos Sâ—zomenus hist. l. 6. c. 7. Mibi inquit Ualentinianus senior qui sum in sorte plebis fas non est talia negotia ecclesiastica â—erserutari sacerdotes quorum ista curae funt inter seipsos quocunque voluerint loco conveniant Theodosius Junius epist. ad Fphesinum Synodum Deputatus est Candidianus magnificus Comes strenuâ—rum domesticorum transire usque ad sanctissimam Synodum testram ac in nullo quidem quae facienda sunt de piis dogmatibus quâ—stiones â—ommunicare illicitum namque est eum qui non sit ex ordâ—â—â—anctorum Episcoporum ecclesiasticis immisceri tractatibus Gregorius Mag. l. 5. Epist. 25. Notum est piissimos dominos dicipâ—inam diligere ordines servare canones venerari in causis sa 〈◊〉 â—ese non immiseere Distin. 96. C. satis evidenter illicitum est imperatorihus ecchsiasti â— sâ— immiscere tractatibus Constantius would not take on him to judge the Arrian cause but conveened a Councell and commanded them to judge according to the word So saith Eusebius de vita Constant. l. 3. c. 10. ad Theodor. l. 5. c. 9. Neither can it be said that Constantine judged with the Synod as Emperour as some affirme for though it be true yet he judged not in the Synod as Emperour but as Episcoporum conservus as he nameth himselfe and as Eusebius saith de vita Constant. l. 3. c. 16. ipse tanquam unus e vestro numero non recusabam Now Constantine as Emperour was not a fellow-servant with Pastors or one of the number but above them as the annointed of the Lord but he judgeth with them as one of their number as a Christian having one faith one baptisme one Lord with them and so as a member of the Church and so saith he in that same place Literarum divinitus inspiratarum testimonio res in quaestionem adductas dissolvamus And let this be our first distinction Emperours of old defined in Synods as Christian members of the Church not as Emperours for as Emperours they be politicke heads of the men of the Church Gerardus Tom. 6. de Magist. polit n. 175. pag. 586 587. who giveth also a nomotheticke power to Magistrates in matters ecclesiasticall furnisheth us with an argument here because the Magistrate is a principall member of the Church and all the members of the Church are to judge and try the spirits and to try all things now this proveth well as a member of the Church and so as a Christian he may judge and that in a meere ecclesiastick way as Pastors and Elders doth as private Christians may doe being called thereunto by the Church though the ground be weake for the Kingly power maketh not New Tiberius and other Emperours members of the Church onely grace faith and communion with Christ maketh Kings members of the invisible Church and baptisme and profession of the faith and not any earthly Prerogative of Scepter or Crowne maketh them members of the visible Church Our second distinction from Fathers is that Emperours have a Kingly power politicke to confirme and adde their civill sanction to Church constitutions but they have no power formally ecclesiasticke to define and make Church-lawes So Augustine as a man the King serveth the Lord vivendo fideliter by living the life of a sound beleever and as a King he serveth the Lord by adding the convenient vigour of a civill sanction to just Lawes as the King of Ninive did by compelling the men of Ninive to pacifie God And when Gaudentius the Donatist objected that the Emperour could not take course with the Schism made in the Church by their separation because God hath laid upon Prophets not upon Kings the Preaching of the word Augustine answereth not that Kings may either preach or define controversies in the Church but that sinco Donatists separate from the Church it should be the care of Kings to see that none rebell against the Church of Christ. Hence I reason thus no Synods ecclesiasticall can meddle with the blood and temporall lives of men nor can they forbid the beliefe and profession of heresies and erroneous doctrine or scandalls against pure discipline under the paine of bodily punishment as banishment imprisonment heading or hanging But Emperours and Kings either in a Synod or out of a Synod may lawfully forbid such things and that by a Kingly power therefore if Emperours in Synods make any Lawes of this kinde they are not Synodicall nor ecclesiasticall Lawes nor doe they make such Lawes jointly with the Church-Synod as some teach nor by any ecclesiastick power for coactive power and ecclesiasticall power cannot be joyned together as one power to make one and the same ecclesiasticall lawes Let any judge then if the ancient Lawes of some Emperours were any other things but civill and politick sanctions of Church-constitutions And judge of this Law which some call the ecclesiasticall determination of Heraclius the Emperour by the consent of Pope John he ordained that there is nâ—â—ther one nor two operations in Christ. Heraclius a Monothelite commanded this under the paine of civill punishment as is certaine But had Pope John as collaterall Judge with the Emperour in this that same coactive power that the Emperour had I thinke none can say it So three Emperours commanded all people to hold the doctrine of the Trinity and that those who hold not this be heretickes This is but a civill sanction of a Church Law So Martianus commandeth that the decrees of the Councell of Chalcedon be established and that no man dispute or call in question these decrees This is clearely the Emperours civill ratification of Church-lawes and Justinianus forbiddeth any publick service to be in the Church by laicks onely in the absence of the Clergie and commandeth the Bishops not to muttter in to themselves but to speake in the administration of the Sacraments with a cleare and distinct voice If Emperours did proceede any further as some say that Theodosius deposed the Nestorian Bishops though indeed he onely commanded them to be deposed their deeds are not Lawes a facto ad jus non valet consequentia Papists here are in two extremities For 1. they will not have Princes to meddle with Church-affaires whereas by office they are Nurs-fathers in the Church Charles the fift is rebuked by Paul the third because he conveened councells for composing of dissentions in the Church and he compareth him to Uzzah who touched the Arke without warrant as we may see Wolsius 2. Stapleton Bellarmine and Papists will have them to be brutish Servants to execute whatsoever the Pope and Councells
and prayed for as King by the people of God at Jeremiahs expresse commandement 3. So a pagan husband becomming a Christian should by that same reason acquire a new husband-right over his wife contrary to the 1 Cor. 7. 13 14 15. the Captains or Masters who of heathens become Christians should obtaine a new right and power over their Souldiers and Servants and they should come under a new oath and promise to their Captaines and Masters 4. If the heathen King have onely temporall Kingly power he had no power as King to take care that God were worshipped according to the dictates of the Law of nature and Law of nations had power to punish perjury Sodomie parricid as sins against the Law of nature and the heathen King should not by office and Kingly obligation bee oblieged to be a keeper and a defender of the tables of the Law of nature which is against all sense But if the power which a heathen King becomming a Christian King acquireth be onely a Christian power to use for Christ the Kingly power that hee had while hee was a heathen King then a heathen King jure regali by a regall right is the head of the Church though hee bee a Woolfe and a Leopard set over the redeemed flocke of Christ yea though hee bee the great Turke hee is a Pastor called of God the Church though for his moralls hee bee a Woolfe and a hireling yet by office and Law hee is a feeder of the flocke Talis est aliquis qualem ius offiâ—ii requirit And certainly it is impossible that a heathen King can bee a member of the true Church hee wanting both faith and profession which doe essentially constitute a Church-membership if it bee said hee is ex officio by his office a member that is nothing else but hee ought to bee a member of the Church so all mankind are members of the Church for they are oblieged to obey Christ and submit to him upon the supposall of the revealed Gospel and the heathen King is no otherwise a member by the obligation regall that layeth upon him as King yea when the Gospel is preached and the heathen King converted to the faith hee is not a member of the Christian Church as a King but as a converted professor and so Christianitie maketh him not a Kingly head of the Church but what essentially constituteth him a King that also constituteth him a Christian King Christianitie is an accidentall thing undoubtedly to the office of a King 2. They doe no lesse erre who make the King and the Church officers collaterall Judges in Church matters so as with joynt and coâ—quall influence they should bee Canon makers 1. Because perfect Synods are and have beene in the Apostolick Church without any influence collaterall of Christian Magistrates as being against their will and mind who were Rulers of the people as Acts 1. 14 15. Acts 2. 46 47. Acts 4. 1 2. Acts 6. 1 2 3 4. Acts 15. 6 7 8. c. 2. What the Church decreeth in the name of Christ standeth valid and ratified in Heaven and Earth Matth. 18. 17 18. Joh. 20. 21 22. whether the Magistrate assent to it or not so that he hath not a negative voyce in it by any ecclesiastick power for Christ saith not What yee bind on earth in my name shall be bound in Heaven except the Magistrate deny as a collaterall Judge his suffrage Now if he be a collaterall Judge by divine institution no Church act should be valid in Christs Court without him as excommunication not in the name of Christ or performed by those who are not the Church but onely in civill offices is not excommunication also what ever the Magistrate doth as the Magistrate he doth it by the power of the sword Ergo if he take vengeance on the ill doer as his office is Rom. 13. 3. 4. his acts are ratified in Heaven though the Church as collaterall Judges say not Amen thereunto 3. The coactive power of the King and the Ecclesiasticall power of the Church differ as carnall and spirituall spirituall and not spirituall of this world and not of this world and are not mixed by the Word oft as Joh. 18. 36. 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. 2 Tim. 2. 4. and therefore it in one and the same Church constitution the King and the Church be joynt and coequall Judges and joynt definers the constitution must both be injoyned under the paine of bodily punishment which the Church whose weapons are not carnall cannot command and under the paine of Church censures as suspension rebukes and excommunication the King must command Now the Canon should neither be an Ecclesiasticall nor yet a civill Canon but mixt for the Canon makers injoyneth with powers and paines which are not due unto them nor in their power Now to make a Law saith Feild is to prescribe â—â—aw under the paine which the Law-maker hath power to inflict but neither hath the Church the power of the sword 2 Cor. 10. 3 4. Joh. 18. 36. nor hath the King by Gods â—aw the power of excommunication See Calderwood And one and the same Law should be backed both by a carnall and worldly power and not by a worldly and carnall power 3. The King as King must have a mixt power halfe kingly â—â—â— halfe ecclesiastick and by the same reason the Church must have a mixt power partly Ecclesiasticall and partly civill and this were to confound the two kingdomes the kingdome of this world and the spirituall kingdome of Christ which is not of this world Joh. 18. 36. condemned by Anselmâ— and Hilarius and Bernard and Augustin Put if they say that every one hath their influence partialitate causae non effâ—cii according to the nature of causes then is not one and the same Church constitution from both King and Church See Apollonius But the Kings Canon is civill the Churches Ecclesiasticall and every one of them without another perfect in their one kind See what the learned Gerson Bucer and Amesius saith further to adde light to this point Those who maintaine a third that the Church Canons hath all the power of being Church Lawes from the King and all Ecclesiasticall and oblieging authority from him and that they have onely some helpe of consulting power from the Church are grosser Divines See Joan. Weemes for so the King is the onely Canon maker and the Church-men giveth advice onely as the Kings Proclamation speaketh having taken 〈◊〉 counsell of our Clergy we command such a worship â— and so the Canon runneth it seemeth good to the holy Ghost and the King as the Canon speaketh Acts 15. 2. the King is made an Ecclesiasticall and ministeriall Prâ—acher to expone publikely the Scriptures to the Church of God for all lawfull Church Canons are but Ecclesiasticall expositions of Gods Word and so the Emperours and Christian Kings are the onely lawfull Canon
makers and definers in Oecumenick Councels and Bishops and Pastors and Doctors have all a meere power of advising and counselling which certainely all Christians on earth sound in the faith except women have O whither are all the tomes of the Councels Oecumenick nationall and provinciall evanished unto 3. Kings justly by this are made Popes and more then Popes for Kings onely have a definitive voyce in councells whereas Papists give a definitive voyce to all the lawfull members of the councell no lesse then to the Pope Weemes hath a distinction to save the Kings invading the Church-mens place while as hee giveth to Pastors a ministeriall interpretation of Scripture in the Pulpit and to the King a decretive and imperiall power of interpreting Scripture in the Senat. But 1. there is no exposition of the word at all imperiall but onely ministeriall by the Word of God except that imperiall interpretation that the Pope usurpeth over the consciences of men and this is as Bancroft said that the King had all the honors dignities and preheminencies of the Pope as Calderwood observeth and yet Edward the sixth and Edward the eighth would neither of them take so much on them What difference betwixt a Sermon made by the King in the Senat and the Pastor in the Pulpit It is that same word of God preached only the Kings is imperiall and so must bee in his owne as King the Pastors ministeriall in the name of Christ the distance is too great The administration of the Sacraments may be imperiall due to the King also as a pastorall administration is due to the Pastors 4. In the government of Church there is nothing set downe of the King but of Pastors to feede the flocke Act. 20. 28 29. to edifie the body of Christ Ephes. 4. 11. to rule the house of God 1 Tim. 3. 2 3 4. 16. to feede the sheepe and Lambs of Christ John 21. 14 15 16. and alwayes this is given to Pastors and Elders I know that Kings are nurs-fathers to feed edifie and watch over the Church causatively by causing others so to doe but this will not content the formalists except the King command and prescribe the externall worship of God Tooker Bancroft Whitegift Laâ—celot Andreas Salcobrigiensis have a maine distinction here That Pastors and Elders rule the Church as it is an invisible body by the preaching of the word and administration of the Saâ—raments and of this government the foresaid places speake but as the Church is a politick visible body the government thereof is committed to the King Bancroft said all the externall government of the Church is earthly and Wâ—iâ—eâ—gyft and Bancroft two grosse Divines made for the court say tâ—e externall government of the Church because externall is â—â—spiâ—â—tuall and not a thing belonging to Christs externall kingdome â—aith Bilâ—â—n but this is 1 false 2. Popish 3. Anabaptisticall 4. â—yrannicall False 1. Because externall and vocall preaching and a visible administration of the Sacrament in such an orderly way as Christ hath instituted is an externall ruling of Church members according to the â—aw of Christ as King an externall ordaining of the worship is an externall ordering of the worshippers according to the acts of worship thus ordered as sense teacheth us but the externall ordaining of the worship to preach this not this to celebrate in both kinds by prayer and the words of institution and not in one kind onely is an externall ordering of Gods worship therefore as Kings cannot administrate the Sacraments nor preach so neither can they have the externall government of the Church in their â—ands 2. The feeding of the flocke by Pastors set over the Church by the holy Ghost Act. 20. 28. includeth the censuring by discipline even the grievous Woolves entring in not sparing the flocke but drawing disciples after them vers 29 30 31. and therefore Pastors as Pastors are to watch and to try those who say they are Apostles 〈◊〉 not but doe lie Râ—vel 2. 2. by discipline so this externall â—eâ—ding is externall governing committed to Pastors whereas inward governing is indeed proper to Christ the head of the Church 3. What doe not the Epistles to Timothy containe comman dements about externall government to bee kept inviâ—â—able by Timothy not as a King I hope but as a Pastor even 〈◊〉 the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ 1 Tim. 6. 14. and this taketh away that poore shifâ— that the externall government of the Church as Tookerus saith was in the Apostles hands so long as persecuting Magistrates were over the Church but now when the Magistrates are Christians the case is changed but the government of all suâ—â— as Timothy is must bee visible externall and obvious to men as 1 Tim. 2. 1 2 3 4. 3. 1 2 3 4. â— 16. 1 Tim 5. 9. 1 Tim. 5. 19 20 21 22. 2 Tim. 2. 1 2 3 4. 2 Tim. 3 5. all which must bee kept untill the comming of Christ 1 Tim. 5. 21. 1 Tim. 6. 13. 2 Tim. 4. 1 2. 4. If externall government were in the Kings power then were it his part to rebuke publikely to excommunicate and to lay on hands upon the Timothies of the Church all which are denied by the formalists and are undoubtedly the Churches part as the Church Matth. 18. 17 18. 1 Tim. 5. 19 20 21 22 1 Tim. 3. 14. 1 Tim. 1. 20. 1 Cor. 5. 2 3 4 5. 5. Parker proveth well that the keyes are Christ as Kings ruling in word and discipline 2. This is popish for so doth the Papists teach as Stapleton and Becanus that the Pope quo ad externum infiuxum according to externall influence of visible government is head of the Church and Christ according to the internall influence of the spirit is the head of the invisible body of Christ and here the King is installed in that externall government out of which our Divines by Scriptures have extruded the Pope which is a notable dishonor done to Kings and as Parkerus observeth Joan. Raynoldus answereth that from two offices of the head which is to give life and influence of motion to the members and also to guide and moderate the actions externall of the body wee cannot make two heads and because the King hath some civill government about the Church wee cannot make two heads over the Church Christ one and the King another under him 3. This is Anabaptisticall for because the visible government of the Church is externall wee are not to cut off all necessitie of the ministery to feed and rule with ecclesiasticall authority and because the Prince is gifted and a Christian to give all to him for a calling there must bee from God for the King to governe the Church of Christ by Lawes and prescribing externall worship therein for Christ hath left Ephes. 4. 1 Cor. 12. 1 Tim. 3. men to bee feeders and governours of his Church by office whose it is to bee
should call Christs doctrine blasphemy Caesar and his deputie Pontius Pilat as Judges civill are to judge it truth Neither would I â—â—iâ—â—â—ly here contend for whether the Kings knowledge of herese in the major proposition bee judiciall or the knowledge of discretion onely as some say wee agree in this against Papistâ— that the King is not a blind servant to the Church to punish what the Church calleth heresie without any examination or tryall but though the Kings knowledge of heresie in the proposition and in Law bee judiciall and kingly yet because hee is to cognosce onely in so farre as hee is to compell and punish with the sword not by instructing and teaching It would not hence follow that hee is to make Church constitutions as King but onely that hee may punish those who maketh wicked constitutions because the Canon maker is a ministeriall teacher the King as King may command that hee teach truth and hee may punish hereticall teaching but as King he is not a teacher either in Synod or Senate in Pulpit or on the Throne now if the King by office ordaine Pastors and deprive them by office hee is to know who are able to teach others aâ—d must bee able also to stop the mouthes of the adversaries and to rebuke them sharpely that they may bee sound in the faith and this is required in Titus Ch. 1. 5 9 10 11 12 13. as a Pastor and as an ordainer of other Pastors therefore that which is required of a Pastor by his office must also bee required to bee in the King by his office 6. It is admirable that they give to Kings power to deprive ministers but with these distinctions 1. He may not discharge them to preach and administer the Sacraments but to preach and administer the Sacraments in his kingdome or dominions because the King hath a dominion of places 2. Hee may discharge the exercise of the ministery but hee cannot take away the power of order given by the Church 3. Hee may deprive say some by a coactive and civill degradation because the supreme magistrate may conferre all honours in the Christian common-wealth Ergo hee may take them away againe but hee cannot deprive by a canonicall and ecclesiasticall degradation 4. Hee may causâ—tively deprive that is compell the Church to deprive one whom he judgeth to bee an heretick and if the Church refuse hee may then in case of the Churches erring and negligence as King deprive himselfe But I answer the King as King hath dominion civill of places and times as places and times but not of places as sacred in use and of times as sacred and religious for his power in Church matters being accumulative not privative hee cannot take away a house dedicated to Gods service no more then hee can take away maintenance allotted by publick authority upon Hospitalls Schooles Doctors and Pastors God hath here a sort of proprietie of houses and goods as men have Places as sacred abused are subject to regall power hee may inhibit conventions of hereticks 2. The Apostles might preach in the Temple though civill authoritie forbid them 3. Kings are as much Lords of places as sacred and publick as they have a dominion of civill places in respect the King may be coactive power hinder that false and hereticall doctrine bee preached either in publick or private places for this hee ought to doe as a preserver of both tables and a beare of the Sword for the good of Religion and if they may command pure doctrine to bee preached and sound discipline to be exercised they may command the same to bee done in publick places The second distinction is not to purpose 1. To discharge the exercise of a ministery saith Calderwood is a degree of suspension and suspension is an ecclesiasticall degree to the censures of excommunication and therefore the King may as well excommunicate and remit and retaine sinnes which undoubtedly agreeth to the Apostles as hee can suspend 2. As for taking away the power of order it is a doubt to formalists if the Church can doe that at all seeing they hold Sacraments administred by ministers justly deprived to bee valid Ergo they must acknowledge an indeleble character in Pastors which neither King nor Church can take away If then the King deprive from the exercise hee must simpliciter deprive by their grounds it is weake that they say the King may deprive from the exercise of a ministry within his owne dominions for saith Calderwood they all know well that the King hath not power to deprive men from the exercise of the holy ministery in ether forraine Kingdomes For the third way of deprivation it hath a double meaning also 1. If the meaning bee that as the King by a regall and coactive power may take away all honours either civill or ecclesiasticall as hee giveth all honours then this way of depriving Ministers cannot bee given to the King for the King may give and take away civill honours for reasonable causes according to the Lawes But in ecclesiasticall honours there bee three things 1. The appointing of the honour of the office to bee an Ambassadour of Christ. 2. To give the true foundation and reall ground of a Church honour that is gifts and gracious abilities for the calling neither of these two doe come either from King or Church or from mortall men but onely from Jesus Christ who ascending on high gave gifts unto men and appointeth both office and giveth grace for to discharge the office Yea since morall philosophy maketh honor to bee praemium 〈◊〉 a reward of vertue the King doth not give that which is the soundation of honour civill for civill vertue is a grace of God but in Church honour there is a third to wit a deâ—â—â—nation of a qualified man for the sacred office of the ministry and an ordination by the imposition of hands used in the Apostolick Church Act. 6. 6. Act. 13. 3. Act. 14 23. 1 Tim. 4 14. 1 Tim. 5.22 Whether imposition of hands bee essentiall to ordination or not I disput not it is apostolick by practise yet there is something ecclesiasticall as praying of Pastors and an ecclesiasticall designation of men or the committing of the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 22. No Scripture can warrant that the King ordaine Pastors by publick praving by laying on of hands or ecclesiasticall blessing or by such an ordination as is given to Timothy and the Elders of the Church Acts 13. 3. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5,6 7,8 9. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2. If any say the King hath a publick and regall power in ordaining of Ministers and so in dâ—priving them or a mixt power partly regall partly ecclesiasticall as hee is a mixt person and the Church hath their way of purely and unmixt ecclesiasticall calling or ordaining of Ministers or the Church and the Magistrate
both doth elect and choose the man yet so that he is not elected without the consent of the King or Magistrate in the Kings roome I answer many things are here to be replyed 1. That the King who may be borne an heire to an earthly Kingdome is also borne and by nature a mixt person and halfe a Minister of the Gospell is against Gods word ministers in whole or in part are made so of God not so borne by nature in Aaronâ— Priesthaâ—d men by birth came to a sacred office but that is done away now in Christ. 2. With as good reason may the King preach and administer the Sacraments as a mixt person as he may ordaine by ecclesiasticall blessing imposition of hands ecclesiasticall designation any person to the Ministery that same auth nity of Christ which said to Timoth Lay hands suddainly 〈◊〉 man said also to him 2 Tim. 2. 15. Study to be approved unto 〈◊〉 a workeman that needeth not to be ashamed dividing the word right that is both ordaining of Ministers and pastorall preaching of the Word or pastorall acts flowing from an ecclesiasticall power How then can the one be given to the King by vertue of that same mixt power especially seeing baptizing it directly called 1 Câ—r 1. 17. a lesse principall worke of the ministery then preaching It it be said as ordination is performed by the King is not an ecclesiasticall action but civill or mixt partly civill partly ecclesiasticall I answer by that reason if the King should preach and administrate the Sacraments these actions should not be called ecclesiasticall actions and Uzzah's touching the Arke should not be called an action by office incumbent to the Levites only and it might be said the person being civill the actions are civill And Uzziah's burning of incense upon the Altar of incense was not a Priestly act but an act of a mixt power he was partly a King and partly a Priest who did performe the action but he was a Priest by sinfull usurpation in that action as we know 2. This answer is a begging also of the question 2. Whereas it is said that the Church ordainech Pastors and the King also but divers wayes the one by a regall power the other by me elâ—siasticall power I answer this is spoken to make the people ad saciendum populum for ejusdem potestatis est saith the Law constituere destiâ—â—ere it is the same power to ordaine and to destroy The high-Commission by the Kings authority doth deprive Ministers without so much as the knowledge of the Church If then the King as King may deprive ministers without the notice of the Church then may the King as King also ordaine Pastors without the notice of the Church For the action of the instruments as such is more principally the actions of the principall cause 3 Election of a Pastor is farre different from ordination of a Pastor the whole multitude as Christians have voyces in the election of a Pastor and so hath the King or his Magistrate as a part and member of the Church but this giveth no negative voice to the Magistrate in election but ordination is not done by all the multitude it is a worke of authority done onely by the Church-officers 4. The coactive and civill degradation must have also correspondent thereunto a coactive and civill ordination of Pastors Now I ask what is a coactive ordination If it be the Kings royall and civill authority commanding that the Church officers ordaine Pastors at Christs commandement This we deny not they fight with a shadow or a night ghost not against us who contend for this But if they meane a coactive degradation by the Sword in banishing imprisoning yea and for just causes punishing Ministers to death with the Sword this indirect deprivation we doe not deny But so the King depriveth a man from being a Minister when he is beheaded or hanged or banished for civill crimes no other wayes but as he depriveth a man from being a Fashioner a Saiâ—â—r a Plower a Souldier or a Father to his owne barnes a husband to his owne wife for when the man is beheaded or hanged by the sword of the Magistrate he is dâ—prived from being a fashioner a sailer a father a husband and Solomen did not other way deprive Abiathar from the Priest-hood then indirectly by consining him for treason at Anathoth so as he could not exercise the Priests office at Jerusalem So after Junius Calderwood Gul. Apollonius Sibrandus yea Muketus a man for the times denyeth that the Prince can take away that ecclesiasticall power that the Church hath given And so acknowledgeth Wedelius the same That reasonlesse lyer Lysimach Nicanor in this and in other things hath no reason to say we borrow Jesuites doctrine to answer this argument for the Jesuite Becanus is not â—nacquainted with Jesuits doctrine against the power of Kings yet he answereth that Solomen as King had no power over Abiathar for treason or any other crime and therefore following Bellarmine and Gretserus saith that Solomon did this by an extraordinary propheticall instinct yet Abulensis a great textuall Papist and Bâ—naventura a learned Schooleman saith this pâ—oveth that the King is above the Priest and that Priests in the Old Testament were not eximed from the civill Judges sword and power this is very doubtsome to Suarez who â—aith that it was a tempâ—rall civill punishment of exiâ—e and that â—â—â—sitiâ—n from the exercise of the Priests office followed upon the other But we neede not this answer for Solomons sentence containeth in tâ—rminis a meere civill punishment and these words 1 King 27. S. Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord seem not to be words of the Kings sentence of banishment but are relative to the fulfilling of the Lords word and a consequent of divine justice relative to the prophesie against Elies house Though verily I see no inconvenience to say that Solomon did indeed deprive him from the Priest-hood by an extraordinary instinct of the Spirit as he was led of God to build the Temple 1. Because the text saith so Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest to the Lord and ver 35. and Zadok the Priest did the King put in the roome of Abiathar which is a direct deprivation from the Priest-hood but I contend not here But that the King causatively may deprive that is command the Church to cast out hereticks and to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others 2 Tim. 2. 2. wee confesse as for the power of convocating of Synods some thinke that the King may convocate Synods as men but as Church men they have power if the Magistrate bee averse to convocate themselves see Junius who insinuateth this distinâ—tion But certainly though the Kingly dignity be thought meerely civill yet let this be thought on it may be thought that the Kings power is divine three
on of the hands of the Elders 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 2. but by the authoritie of the Patron who doth nominate the man and may charge the Presbyterie by Law to admit him minister of such a flock Nor is it enough to say that the Patron doth present to such a benefit onely and doth leave all the ecclesiasticall part to the Church and the officers thereof for this would say something if the Patron were tied to the Churches free choise whereas the contrary is true that the Church is tyed to the Patrons free election of the man but this is nothing because the Patron being but one man onely and so the Church can have no lawfull proprietie right and dominion over the rents of the Church for Christ is onely Lord and proprieter and just titular of all rents dotted for the maintenance of the ministery and under Christ when the place vaiketh the rents recurre to the Church as the proper proprieter under Christ as the goods of Ananias and Saphira are the goods of the Church after they had given them in to the publick treasurie of the Church Ergo the Patron can give no right to any person to bee presented and ordained for no man can give to another that title and right which hee hath not in himselfe If it bee said hee may give in the Churches name as the Churches Patron those goods which are mortified to the Church well then is the Patron in the act of presenting the representative Church and hath the Churches power Ergo hee is but the Churches servant in that and to doe at the Churches will and the Church is the first presenter this is a new representative Church that wee have not heard of 2. This is against the nature of the Patrons office whose it is when hee foundeth and buildeth a Church to reserve the right of patronage to himselfe and never to give that right to the Church Ergo by his owne authoritie and not in the Churches name hee giveth title to the benefice to the Pastor of Minister 3. The Church hath not power to alien ate and dispose to one particular man those goods which are given to God and to his Church so as that one hath power in Law to dispose those goods to any without the Churches consent as the Patron may doe The Church may dispose and give power to one man to doe certaine actions in the Churches name but yet so as the Church retaineth power to regulate that her delegate or commissioner in these acts and to correct him in case of aberration but the Church hath no power over the Patron as Patron to limit him in the exercise of his power for the right of Patronage is his by birth he may sel it for mony to another to a Papist to an excommunicate person to a Jew or an enemy of the Church as hee may sell his lands and houses and hath a civill right thereunto under his Majesties great Seale therefore the patron doth here proprio suo jure by his owne proper right present and give title and Law to the Church benesice and doth not present in name of Church or as having from the Church a power 3. What ever taketh away an ordinance of Christ that is not lawfull but the power of Patrons taketh away the ordinance of Christ and the free election of the People because the people have power to choose out of many one fittest and most qualified for the office as is cleare Act. 6. 3. Act. 1. v. last Act. 14. 23. because the man chosen should bee one of a thousand as Didoclavius or Calderwood saith in that learned Treatise called Altare Damascenum Nor can it be said saith that learned Author that the Church may transferre her right of presenting to a Patron for that is in effect to transferre her power of election but that saith hee the particular Church cannot doe except by the decrce of a gener all assembly neither can that right bee transferred over to a generall assembly especially a perpetuall and hereditary right because as saith Cartwright it is a part of that libertie which is purchased by Christs blood which the Church can no mâ—re alienate and dispose then shee can transferre or dispose to another her inheritance of the kingdome of God to the which this libertie is annexed thus he 4. The discerning of the spirits and the knowing of the voyce of Christ speaking in his called servants is laid upon the flocke of Christ whose it is to elect but not upon the Patron which may bee a Heathen and a Publican and as such is no member of the Church 5. Every humane ordinance not warranted by Christs Tostament and abused to sacriledge rapine delapidation of Church-rents and Simoniacal pactions with the intrants into the holy ministery is to bee abolished and is unlawfull but the right of patronages is such as experiences teacheth to many and lamentable The proposition is above cleared 6. That calling in part or in whole which giveth no ground of faith and assurance of a lawfull calling to the Ministers entry to that holy charge cannot belawfull but the calling to the ministery by the good will and consent of the Patron as Patron is such Ergo. The proposition is cleare every lawfull meane and way of entry unto that calling is warranted by a word of promise or precept or practise the calling by the patrons consent hath neither word of promise or precept or practise in the Word and stayeth not the conscience of the man of God that hee did not runne unsent but a man is never a whit the more staid in his conscience that hee is presented by a Patron to the tithes and parsonage and vicarage of such a Congregation It is but a cold comfort to his soule that the Patron called him 7. What ever priviledge by the Law of nature all incorporations have to choose their owne rulers and officers this Christ must have provided in an eminent manner to the Church but all cities societies incorporations and kingdomes have power to choose their owne rulers officers and members as is cleare by an induction of all free colledges societies cities and republicks Ergo this cannot bee laid upon a Patron see for this also Amesius Guliel Apollonius who citeth that of Athâ—nasius Where is that Canon in the Word that the sent Minister of Christ is sent from the Court or the Princes Palaâ—e As concerning the other two this author condemneth Lands dedicated to the ministery because the New Testament speaketh nothing of such Lands Answ. This speaketh against Glebes of Ministers but the New Testament speaketh not of Manses or houses or of moneys for Ministers yet a wage wee know is due Matth. 10. 10. 1 Cor. 9. 8 9 10. Gal. 6. 6. and the Levites were not to bee distracted from the most necessary worke of the Tabeâ—â—acle and service of God more then Ministers yet they had Lands and Townes
cata-Baptistarum erroribus lib. 1. pag. 35. It is a vaine thing to say that teachers of all Israel remaining in Israel were non-residents that is Pastors not attending their charge a Iustific pag. b Confess of Separatists Art 21. c Bellarmin desacr ord lib. 1. cap. 9. d Concil Trident. Sess. 23. cap. 4. e Hosius in confes Polonica tit 50. f Martinus Ledesma in 4. quâ—st 36. art 4. ad 1. g Pet. a Soto de sacram ordinis Lect. 5. h Toletus com in Ioan. 21. an 21 i Cajetanus comment in Ioan. 21. ideo hoc loco instituitur promulgatur Sacramentum poenitentiae k Cyrillus lib. 112. cap. 56. l Chrysostome in Ioan. homil 88. m Joan. de Lugo tomo de Saram paenit disp 18. sect 1. n Suarez disp 7. de censura sect 6. not 6. o Sanchez in decalog lib. 2. c. 13. n. 13. p Aegidius Coniuk de Sacr. disp 24. n. 236. q Vasquez Tom. de excom dub 18. n. 9. r Panoâ—mit in dicâ— a nobis c. n. 10. s Avila de censur is part 2. cap. 7. disp 1. Dub. 9. t Sylvester verbo subsolvo 1. n. 8. u Ioan. Episcop Rossens de potest Papae in temporabus lib. 2. cap. 3. x Peoples plea pag. 42 43. Pag. 44. Pag 44 45 46. Pag. 46 47 48 49. Calvin Com. in Act. 11 21. Pag. 49. a Iunius annot in locum Apocalyps b Cooper on Revel 10. c Pareus comment in Apocalyps cap. 10. Pag. 52 53. d Iunius annot in cap. 14. e Paraeus in locum f Napper Comment on the Revel ch 14. Par. 54. 55. Pag. 97. pag. 59. and 63. Pag. 59. a Irenaus adversus Hares lib. 2 cap. 57. b Fusebius bistoria eccles l. 5. cap. 7. Tertullian Cyrill Chrysostom Theophylact. Robinson pag. 66 67. Parâ—us com ibi Pauls presbytery chap. 16. pag. 251 252. pag 69. 70. a Stapleton apud Whittaker de sac Script Authorit l. 3. c. 3. arg 3. sect Bellarmine Valentinian Gretserus b Transenius harmon c. 36. c Cajetan com in loan 5. in hoc ab hoâ—nine non accipio d Toletus in Ioh. 5. tom 1. e Rivetus tom 1. contrav trac 1. q. 6. f Whittakerus to 2. desac Scrip. authorit lib. 3. c. â—r 5. g Bucer in Ioan. 5. de testimonio Baptistae h Calvinus in art 17. v. 10 11. i Theaplâ—yâ— in aâ—t 1â— ibid. k Chrysost in Ioan. hom 39. l Beda in Ioan. cap 5. m Ambrosius in â— Tim. n Occam dâ—ale l. 5. ca. 2 par 1. c. 3. probatuâ— quod papâ— Canonice electus manens papa potest errare a fide bareticari quindecem rationâ—bus o Gerson de infallibilitat Papae consid 12 p Robinson Pag 70. 71. q Synod of England r Ambrosius com in 4 Eph. ut â—resecret plebs multiplicaretur omnibus inter initia concessum est Exangelizare Baptizaâ—e s Origenin Num. hom 11. cap. 8. t Hieronymus comment in Matth. in prcaemiâ— u Theophylact in art 20. x Augustin contr Faustum lib. 16. c. 12. y Coachman z Gerard. loc com tom 6. de Minister eccles c. 3. sect 1. n. 70 pag. 78 79. a Lutheâ—us tom 2. Com. in Ps. 8. fol 96 lat tradidiâ— quidem Dominus talenta servis sed non â—â—si â—â—catis expecta igitur â—u donec voccâ— is intereane ambâ—â—s b Fugeniâ— de 〈…〉 c Scotus in l. 4. d 24 q. 1. d Concilâ—i Tâ—i. dâ—ntine sâ—ss 14. cap. 1. e Lodo Meratius tom 3. trac de erdi disp 7. sect 1. Bishops preach not nor is it essentiall to their office and therfore Papists by contempt call our Ministers predicant preachers saith Gerard tom 6 q. 3. n. 294 pag. 336. f Bellarm. tom 3. de sacr ordin l. 1. c. 4. g Guliel Estius l 4. dist 24. s. 3. h Aquinas supplem q. 34. act 4. 5. i Canon Aposto lic 2. 9. 17 18. 25. 42. 43. k Clemens in Epist. 3. ad Iacob Manuscript The way of the Churches of Christ in New England In the Answ. 10 32. quest 9. 15. Answ. to the 15. quest Answ. to quest 15. a Arâ—in in declar sen. p. 57 b Armin. antâ—perkins pag. 224. quaâ—ndâ—u amâ—r Det in ipsoâ—uâ—n cordâ—bus vigebit impedâ—en ui ne â—ccedant â— Dâ—o c Remonstâ—an confess c. 18. Sect. 6. 7. d Episcopius disp 27. ch 9. e Socinus de justâ—â— â—â—l 10. quod si aâ— hac obedientia deficiamus c. f Smalcius 〈◊〉 7 in Ioan fol. 78. Answ to 32. quest q. 15. a Morton Grand Imposture Sect 5. Pag. 47. Arâ— 1547. 9. Sess. of Trent April 21. An. 1548. a Bellar. l. 1. de concil c. 12. b Harding 4. Article of Peters supremaâ—â—e as â—â—well saith c Suarez tâ— detriplâ—â— vitr disp 10. de sam â—onâ— Sect. 1. Num. 22. d Bellarm. de Pâ—nâ—â—f Rom. l. 1. c. 22. Peâ—â—us in concâ—lâ—â— primo 〈◊〉 lâ—quttur e Harding loco citaâ— f 〈◊〉 kerus tom 2. contrev 4 9 2 c. 14. Responde 〈◊〉 posse colligi ex hoc loco Petrum esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 citio primum naâ— constat ante 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis priâ—us 〈◊〉 su◠〈◊〉 evangelâ—sta tacuit g Gerson tâ— 4. in propos utâ—â—â— ad â—â—ter scbisma h Lyranus in 〈◊〉 i Carthusian in locum a Bellar. l. 1. de conc c. 12. b Suarez de tripl tra Theo. disp sect 3. c Pighius l. 6. c. 18. d Cajetan de â—uthorit Pap. â— 16. Also your unofficed Prophets may as well denounce judgement against an Apo staâ— Church as they may publikely preach mercy in the Gospel and sâ— this is no officiall act of authoritie The way of the Churches of Christ in New England a Answorth pag. 42. 43. in his Animadver b Best the Churches plea. pag. c Chap. 4. Ser. 5. d Chap. 4. Sect. 6. e Chap. 1. Ser. 2. Manuscript 6. It is true none should remove from one congregation to another without God goe before them nor can they change countries without Gods warranting 〈◊〉 Gen 12. 1. chap. 45. 4. but that such removall is a matter of Church-discipline and must be done by a ministeriall power is unwarâ—anted by any word of God a Fac de Almain de pâ—testa eccles et lav c. 15. est congregatio authoritate legitime facta ad aliquem locuâ— ex omni statu Hierarchico nulla persona fideli perente audirâ— exclusa ad nactandum ea quae concernunt publicam ecclesiae utilitatem et ipsius mares b Geâ—sâ—n de pâ—test eccles d Schola Paâ—sâ—râ— de poust Eccles. pag. 17. A Pastor may propone James the Apostles mind aneut fornication blood c. Act. 15. permodum consilii as a counsel to some other Pastor but it hath the power of a Synodicall decree not from Iames though an Apostle but from the joynt voyces of the Synod and it is not like that Iames as an Apostle said Wherefore my sentence is c. as an Apostle hee should have said as Paul doth what I received