be prevailed against but the whole shall not The place is meant of a Church future to be built which Christ then intended to set up which was the Evangelical Catholike Church consisting of Jews and Gentiles as one body and not Catholike as some take it for the Church past present and to come for those already in heaven are out of gunne-shot of assault but it is meant de Ecclesia vivorum de militante de Ecclesia quam Christus erat aedificaturus Object O but this place is meant only of the Church invisible for they that are only visible may be prevailed against Answ It is true that any particular meerly visible member may be prevailed against yet all shall not and even the invisible members which cannot be prevailed against so many as are left in any though never so general and fierce persecution shall remain as visible For Ecclesia nunquam definit esse visibilis Therefore Satan or men shall never so far prevail as to cut off all visible members And though heresies should come that deceive all but the elect which is not supposable yet as long as the Elect are not deceived there remaineth a Church Catholike visible still in their visibility But it cannot be affirmed that all are invisible members that are left or hold out in the hottest persecutions or subtlest heresies strong enlightnings and covictions and struglings of conscience and other by-ends may do much Latent members may not be invisible But the reasons which induce me to think that this text is meant of the Church visible are these two I finde in the context First because this Church is built upon this visible or audible profession that Christ is the sonne of God which Peter made The rock there spoken of is not an indefinite Messiah to come for so the Church from the beginning of the world was built on that work but the profession and doctrine that the Messiah is already come that this Jesus is the Messiah and this Jesus the Messiah is the sonne of God It is the confessing that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh 1 Joh. 4.2 3. And the beleeving that I am he saith Christ Joh. 8.24 And therefore the Jews that believed before in an indefinite Messiah to come were upon their conversion to the Christian faith built upon this rock and by a new Sacrament admitted into this Christian Church as well as the Gentiles Secondly Because Christ immediatly in the next verse affixeth officers to this Church by promising the keys of the Kingdom of heaven unto Peter and not to him only but to the rest also as appears in other places which keys are an Ensign of office in that Church which Christ would build Thirdly Because the admission into this Evangelical Church was upon a visible profession of their belief of this doctrine and a visible receiving of a visible external badg of baptisme Fourthly Because this Church is assaulted by visible adversaries viz. persecutors and hereticks and that visibly and though they shall never wholly prevail against it yet visibly waste great part of it many times And M. Hooker himself acknowledgeth that he doth incline to this judgement of this text viz. that it is the visible Church that is there meant Surv. c. 15. p. 278. Only he objecteth against a reason which I brought of it which was to this purpose If all the visible members should fail then all the invisible must needs fail also for none are invisible in the Church I mean but must be visible also His Objection against this is because an invisible member may be justly excommunicated and so cast out of all the visible Churches in the world and so be no visible member and yet remain an invisible member still for that membership cannot be lost Answ It is very doubtful to me how far excommunication casteth a man out of the visible Church it debars him indeed from the Lords Supper because it is a seal and from familiar intimate society with Gods people because he is an infected member and so doth a notorious sinne though the man be not excommunicated But I conceive it cuts him not off totally from the visible Church For first the seal of baptism remaineth on him and therefore is not iterated at his readmission Secondly he is admitted to hearing the word and prayer and conference with Gods people He is a diseased leprous member under censure shut from the most intimate actual communion until he be cured and cleansed That which is done to him is under consideration of discipline as to a member now diseased in order to cure not as to one that is damned or to one that is under the sinne against the holy Ghost as Julian the Apostate was And if any godly person through weaknesse of judgement concerning Churches not rightly gathered refuse to be baptized as M. Hooker suggesteth he is indeed no compleat member in that regard but he being converted by visible means and making visible profession he is an incompleat visible member of the Church-Catholike Entitive Again Excommunication in 3 Ep. Joh. ver 10. is called casting out of the Church What Church is that It cannot be the invisible Church for all the censures in the world cannot cast a man out of that if once he be in therefore it is the visible Church Then I would know whether a man truly excommunicated in one Church or Congregation is not thereby excommunicated from brotherly fellowship with all Congregations yea and Christians not gathered yet into Congregations Or whether the delivering up to Satan by the Officers of a particular Congregation be only within the bounds of one Congregation or in reference to their members only so that if he remove out of such a circle or circuit of ground to another or from those members to others he be out of Satans bonds again and may communicate there de jure This M. Hooker saith is per Synecdochen generis pro Specie that particular Church where Diotrephes usurped preheminence is understood For when a person is justly excommunicated from the Congregation in which he was it follows of necessity that all that fellowship he might enjoy by vertue of communion of Churches must of that necessity be denied unto him and he justly deprived thereof because in the vertue of his fellowship with one he gained fellowship with others Answ Whether the word Church be there properly or per Synecdochen generis or Synecdochen Integri I shall not now enquire but refer it to a Chapter by it self in which shall be enquired whether the Church-Catholike be a genus or integrum But I question much whether a mans fellowship with one Congregation be the ground whereby he gaineth fellowship and communion with others For then how came the Apostles and Evangelists by right of communion with any Churches seeing they were fixed members of none And how could the 120. and 3000. converted by Peter have right of communion and breaking bread together before
but most properly relateth to the union of an integrum Also it is called a Kingdom as I shewed before The Kingdom of his dear sonne Col. 1.13 The Gospel is called the Gospel of the Kingdom Mat. 4.23 And the word of the Kingdom Mat. 13.19 And such as are only visible members are called the children of the Kingdom Mat. 8.12 And this Kingdom hath a King and Laws and Officers in it now a Kingdom or society is no Genus but an Integral It is also called a Tabernacle Revel 21.3 which was a thing coupled together with tenons sockets loops and taches and so an integral no Genus nor could signifie any It is called also an house or building 1 Tim. 3.15 The Church which is the house of God 1 Cor. 3.9 Ye are Gods building Eph. 2.21 In whom all the building fitly framed together c. which is the Catholike Church visible consisting of Jews and Gentiles built on the visible foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the chief corner-stone And a houshold Gal. 6.10 Also it is called a Temple in the fore-cited Eph. 2.21 1 Cor. 3.17 2 Cor. 6.16 Now the Temple was an Integral Also it is called a city and the members thereof Jews and Gentiles are called fellow-citizens Eph. 2.29 Also an army terrible with banners Cant. 6.10 Also it is called a sheepfold a wheat-field a barn-floor a dragge-net a loaf of bread made up of divers grains 1 Cor. 10.17 Now all these and many more appellations have no analogy to a Genus but to an Integrum Therefore the Church-Catholike visible is an Integrum 9. It appears to be an Integral from the words which the Scripture useth to expresse the Church and union of the members of the Church-Catholike together As Act. 2.41 There were added about 3000. souls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They were put unto them as an encrease now a Genus is not capable of addition by numbers but an Integral only Also Eph. 4.12 The Officers general as well as particular are given to the whole external political body of Christ to use M. Hookers own words for the perfecting of the Saints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad coagmentationem sanctorum It signifyeth properly to make a thing perfect by filling of it up omnibus numeru absolutum reddere or as some render it to set in joint again All the significations agree only to an Integral And for the edifying of the body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the building up of the body relating to the whole Church This is proper only to an Integral A word also much like this and more significant for the purpose in hand we have Eph. 2.22 In whom also ye are builded together for an habitation of God c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifyeth a knitting together in a building Also vers 21. In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy Temple Here are three words note Integrality First the whole building 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. fitly framed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. groweth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Eph. 4.16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplyeth according to the effectual working in the measure of every part maketh encrease of the body unto the edfying of it self in love Here are divers words which properly notifie an Integral 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole body 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fitly joyned congruente proportione constructum vel connexum 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compactum compacted 4. by that which every joynt suupplyeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per omnem commissuram suppeditationis vel juncturum subministrationis 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in mensura uninscujusque membri 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 augmentum corporis facit 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in aedificationem sui The like we finde Col. 2.19 From whom all the body by joints and hands having nourishment ministred and knit together encreaseth with the encrease of God The words are most of them the same with the former in the Original There is 1. a whole body 2. joints 3. bands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and nourishment ministred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. knit together 5. encreaseth with encrease 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And though much spoken in these places seem to be applicable to the invisible company yet to them as visible receiving edification from their Officers and having visible communion one with another and the Apostle speaks indefinitely of the Church under their Officers without making any difference of kindes of believers Also Act. 17.34 certain men clave unto him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were glued unto him i e. Paul And in the Old Testament Isa 14 1. The strangers shall be joyned with them Israel and they shall cleave unto the house of Jacob. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 copulabit se 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adhaerebunt All which and many more words in Scripture about the Church shew it to be an integral 10. If the invisible Church be one body of Christ as in the primary sense they are then by the same reason the visible also as visible are one body for the only difference between them as to this purpose is in regard of the manner of communion the one invisibly and inwardly the other visibly in outward Ordinances The invisible are called Christs body in allusion to a natural body more properly the visible in allusion to a political body The invisible Church are only in reference to Christ their head and fellow-fellow-invisible members but have no Officers under Christ quà invisible the visible are one in reference to Christ their professed King and his written laws and fellow-fellow-visible members and indefinite Officers under Christ The invisible body might with better reason be called a Genus because their unity is only in the head and in one kinde of nature and in spiritual relation to invisible brethren and therefore if they be called one body then much more the visible Church whole union is in King laws the same qualifications and external relation to visible brethren under indefinite Officers M. Hooker takes much pains in Surv. c. 15. to prove that the Church-Catholike visible cannot be an Integral To which I shall answer under the several heads as they come in the Thesis His main Argument is because that an Integrum resulting out of the members is Symbolum effecti and so is in consideration after the members whereof it is constituted and out of which it doth result and so that crosseth the second part or predicate of the Question This I shall refer to the second part of the Question Secondly That it will then require one visible head over it This I shall refer to that Objection in Chap. 5. Sect. 6. Sect. 4. Thirdly That which he objects against the visibility of the Church-Catholike I shall refer to the next Chapter Cha. 5. An Objection may be raised here
Church-Catholike consist only of the elect redeemed ones called out of the world into a supernatural estate and yet the particular Churches which are similar and constituent parts of it consist of members that are 〈◊〉 of them only Saints in appearance and not in truth yea some whole Churches erring schismatical 〈…〉 maâ—tâ—â— as the particular visible Churches which are the members of the Catholike consist of such must the Church Catholike consist of which is the similar integral And though such as are only Saints in appearance and not in truth are said by M. Norton in his answer to Apollonius p. 87. to be equivocal members of particular Churches yet are they as truly members of the whole as they are of the parts and they are so for true as that their external communion and administrations if any such be Officers are true and valid both in respect of the particular Churches and the Catholike quond 〈◊〉 â—â—â—station And it is his own rule Resp p. 88. Quicquid inest parti inest toti that which is in the part is in the whole And again he saith Ecclesiae Catholica Ecclesiae particulares communicant essentiâ nomine Ecclesiae particulares pro varijs earum rationibus habent se ut partes ut adjuncta Ecclesiae Catholicae Ex naturâ ex ratione sunt ut res 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. similares ut mare appellatur aqua ita qualibet gutta maris appellatur aqua Resp pag. 87. therefore they must needs consist of the same kinde of matter as they are both visible A TABLE Of the chief things contained in this Tractate CHAPTER 1. The explication of the terms of the Question Page 1. Section 1. WHat is meant by Ecclesia or Church It is taken in a civil and theological sense In a theological sense 1 Primarily and properly for the whole company of the elect which is called the Invisible Church 2 2 For the company of visible beleevers 3 For the members as distinct from the Officers of the Church 4 For the Elders or governours of the Church as distinct from the body 3 5 For the faithful in some one family 4 Section 2. What is meant by visible The distinction of the visible and invisible Church opened The difference between visible visum The Churches mentioned in the N. T. were visible Churches 6 An Objection of the absurdity of wicked mens being members of the body of Christ answered by a distinction of Christs body The distinction of the Church into visible and invisible is not exact 8 The invisible members of the Church are also visible What a Church visible is 9 The description vindicated from some objections against it 10 Section 3. What is meant by Catholike universal or oecumenical 11 Four acceptations of the word Catholike and which of them suit the question What the universal visible Church is 12 Diverse descriptions of it and quotations out of Divines both ancient and modern about it 13 What a National Church is 15 Diverse proofs from Scripture for a National Church under the Gospel The description of a particular visible Church given by Gersom Bucerus scanned 17 Mr Cottons description of a visible 18 Four Quaeries about it propounded 1. Whether the matter of it consisteth only of Saints called out of the world 2. Whether every particular visible Church be a mystical body of Christ or but only a part of it seeing Christ hath but one mystical body in the same sense 3. Whether the form of a particular visible Church be a particular Covenant 19 4. Whether all the Ordinances of God can be enjoyed in a particular visible Church 20 Which for some of them seemeth very inconvenient And for others impossible M. Nortons description of a particular Church 22 A Congregational Church standing alone hardly found in the New Testament Section 4. What is meant by prima vel secundaria orta 23 The primity of the Church-Catholike in a threefold respect 24 The difference between this question and M. Parkers Chapter 2. Proofs by Scripture for a Church-Catholike visible 25 Section 1. Our Divines in answer to the Papists mean by Church-Catholike the invisible Church only 26 Yet is there also an external visible Kingdom of Christ as well as an internal and invisible M. Hookers acknowledgement of a political body or Kingdom of Christ on earth 27 D. Ames testimony of a Church-Catholike visible 28 Section 2. Diverse proofs out of the Old Testament for a Church-Catholike visible 29 Section 3. Diverse proofs out of the New Testament for a Church-Catholike visible 31 Act. 8.3 and Gal. 1.13 vindicated Act. 2.47 vindicated 33 1 Cor. 10.32 vindicated 35 Gal. 4.26 opened 37 Eph. 3.10 vindicated 38 Section 4. 1 Cor. 12.28 vindicated 39 Two answers of M. Hookers concerning this text considered 40 Diverse answers to this text by M. Ellis refuted 41 An Objection of M. Hookers about Deacons set in the same Church where Apostles were set answered 51 Section 5. 1 Tim. 3.15 vindicated 53 Diverse texts vindicated where the Church-Catholike is called the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of heaven 55 Mr Hookers answer to those texts considered 1 Cor. 15.24 vindicated 56 Heb. 12.28 vindicated 57 Section 6. 1 Cor. 5.12 vindicated 58 Eph. 4.4 5. vindicated 59 Mat. 16.18 vindicated 60 M. Hookers acknowledgement that this text is meant of the visible Church 61 3. Ep. of John ver 10. vindicated 62 Chapter 3. Proofs by arguments and reason that there is a Church-Catholike visible 64 Section 1. 1 From Gods donation unto Christ of an universal Kingdom 2 From Gods intention in sending Christ and the tenour of Gods exhibition of Christ in his word to the whole world 65 3 From the general preaching and receiving of the Gospel 66 4 From the general Charter whereby the Church is constituted Section 2. 5 From the generality of the Officers of the Church and general donation of the Ministry 67 6 From the general vocation wherewith and general Covenant whereinto all Christians are called 68 7 From the generality of the initial seal admittance and enrowlment 69 8 From the external catholike union between all visible Christians 70 Section 3. 9 From the individual system or body of laws proceeding frrm the same authority whereby the whole is governed 10 From the general external communion intercourse and communication between all Christians 71 11 From the general extension of excommunication 73 12 If there be parts of the Church-Catholike there is a whole Section 4. Many metaphors in Scripture setting forth the whole Church under an unity 74 Chapter 4. That the Church-Catholike visible is one Integral or Totum integrale Section 1. First Negatively that it is not a Genus 77 1 Because a Genus is drawn by mental abstraction of species but the Catholike visible is made up by conjunction or apposition of the several members 2 A Genus hath no existence of its own which the Church-Catholike visible
any Congregations were set up or setled Therefore I conceive the primary right to communion is gained by being of the visible body not by being of this or that Congregation By being within the general Covenant not by any particular Covenant And I conceive that Baptism and Excommunication run parallel herein for as by Baptism a man is admitted externally into the whole visible body and then may have fellowship with any part of the body so by Excommunication a man is cast out from communion with the whole and therefore may communicate with no part This is Apollonius his assertion Sicut per Excommunicationem legitimam excommunicatus non tantum ex hac vel illa particulari Ecclesia ejicitur sed ubicunque terrarum ligatur ex communione fraeternâ universalis Ecclesiae exeluditur Mat. 18.17 18. Ita per Sacramentum Baptismi sacrae Eucharistiae homini communio Ecclesiastica Chap. 3. non tantùm in particulari sed universali Ecclesiâ obsignatur Confid quarund contro c. 2. Art 3. And though the power of Excommunication lyeth in the particular Congregation where a person enjoies his membership under the Kingdom of Jesus Christ as M. Hooker saith yet the Officers of that particular Church dispense that censure in reference to the whole body whereof he that is so censured was a member as well as of that Congregation for being cast out of that let him be or go where he will he is under the Kingdom of Satan and all Churches should look at him as a Traitour against Christ and so deal with him as one uncapable of Church-communion Surv. c. 15. So on the contrary though Baptism be administred in a particular Congregation yet a man so admitted in any Congregation ought to be counted a subject to Christ and not to be denied fellowship in any other Congregation being a member of the visible body except he some way forfeit his right So that both admission into and ejection out of the Church though performed by Officers in a particular Congregation yet relate first to the whole body CHAP. III. Proofs by Arguments and Reason that there is a Church-Catholike visible Sect. 1. THe first Argument is from Gods donation unto Christ and it stands thus If the donation of a Kingdom by God the Father unto Jesus Christ be universal and Oecumenical then his Kingdom which is his Church is also universal and Oecumenical But the donation was of an universal Oecumenical Kingdom Therefore there is such an universal Oecumenical Kingdom or Church The major proposition is clear for whatsoever God the Father gave or promised unto Jesus Christ that he performed The minor or assumption is proved out of divers places of Scripture As Psa 2.8 Ask of me and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the utmost parts of the earth for thy possession Which is spoken of the donative Kingdome of Christ given to him at his asking and not the essential or natural Kingdom as God Psal 72.8 He shall have dominion from sea to sea and from the river unto the ends of the earth Where is mentioned the external worship and offerings given unto him The like promise we finde Isa 49.6 It is a light thing that thou shouldest raise up the Tribes of Iacob I will give thee for a light unto the Gentiles that thou maist be my salvation to the ends of the earth Also Dan. 7 14. And there was given unto him Christ dominion and glory and a kingdom that all people nations and languages should serve him his dominion is an everlasting dominion and his Kingdom that which shall not be destroyed Which is meant of the donative Kingdom given to Christ incarnate at his ascention answering to Eph. 4.8 where the officers of his Kingdom are set down And to Phil. 2 9. This is not only the internal Kingdom in the heart for that he exercised from the beginning but also an external Kingdom or Church politie over all nations after the ruine of the four Monarchies which should be exercised over those Kingdoms which formerly were subject to those Monarchies which Kingdom is that little stone cut out of the mountain without hands which became a great mountain and filled the whole earth which the God of heaven should set up visibly in the stead of those Monarchies Dan. 2.44 not in a civil power of this world but in spiritual and divine Ordinances which all Kingdoms that should be converted to the Christian faith should submit themselves unto And this one mountain filling the whole earth must needs be one Church-Catholike visible submitting visibly to Christ 2. If Gods intention in sending Christ and the tenour of Gods donation and exhibition of Christ and redemption by Christ in his revealed will be general to the whole world then the visible Church is to be Catholike But the former is true and therefore so is the latter I mean by general Generibus singulorum non singulis generum The donation of Christ and redemption by him was not to the Jews only as the Jews conceived but to the whole world Ioh. 1.29 Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sinnes of the world Joh. 3.16 God so loved the world not the Jews only that he gave his only begotten sonne that whosoever beleeveth in him should not perish but have everlasting life i. e. that whosoever in any part of the world of what nation soever should beleeve should have everlasting life That the world through him might be saved vers 17. The Antithesis is not between the elect and reprobate that whosoever of the elect beleeve as the Arminians make our sense of the words to runne ridiculously though I confesse the elect only do truly beleeve but it is between the Iew and the rest of the world So Ioh. 4.42 Ioh. 6.33.51 2 Cor. 5.19 1 Ioh. 2.2 a propitiation for the sins of the whole world 1 Ioh. 4.14 The Saviour of the world Now though many of the benefits purchased by Christ for his elect be spiritual and invisible and obtained only by the invisible company yet Christ himself and his death were visible his righteousnesse visibly performed his active and passive obedience were visible and multitude of benefits that the external Catholike Church receive thereby are visible 3. If the Gospel of the Kingdom the seed and means of converting and bringing in not only of the invisible company but the visible Church be Catholike and universally preached and received then the Church so converted and visibly brought in is Catholike also But the Gospel is a general gift and is scattered like seed indefinitely in all the world and worketh a visible conversion of the whole world in Scripture phrase Therefore the Church is Catholike also The major is clear of it self The minor is proved Mat. 24.14 This Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witnesse unto all Nations Mar. 14.9 Wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached
Oecumenical be one visible Church it is necessary that they should all meet together at some times Answ It is not at all necessary neither to the unity nor yet to the visibility of the Church It is sufficient that the persons be visible in their several places and that they be combined together under the same head by visible laws and profession under the same visible seal and enrowlment walk visibly in the same godly conversation before men pray one for another as fellow-members rejoyce in the wel-fare and mourn for the ill-fare one of another and contribute assistance one to another as occasion is offered As therefore it is not needful to the unity or visibility of a kingdom or Empire that they should meet together sometimes so is it not needful for the whole Church indeed there may be some conveniency in both ad benè vel optimum esse sed non ad esse simpliciter This M. Ellis excepteth against vin p. 55. First he asketh whether ever there were such a kingdom in the world that the members did not meet sometimes if it be not a meer visible monarchy as under Popery If there be any liberty left to the Subjects c. Answ Let him shew that ever the four Monarchies did meet together respectively either in their persons or deputies or delegates from every Province yet that hindered not their unity nor visibility And his answer implyeth that the Ecclesiastical Monarchy under Popery did never meet He makes it but a sign of liberty to meet not a sign of visibility And for the point of liberty inherent in the subjects as their proper right distinct from what is derived and given by Christ as their head there was never any Monarchy so meerly depending on the will of the Monarch as the Church-visible on Christ for the Church deriveth all its power from Christ and hath all its laws given and imposed only by Christ without any vote of the Churches in the making of them It is probable that the kingdoms under the four Monarchies had some enjoyment of their municipal laws only might have some imperial general laws superadded but it is not so in this for the whole Church as a Church hath no laws but of Christs arbitrary donation Christians are not subdued by Christ as Englishmen were by William the Conquerour viz. on condition that he would suffer them to enjoy their former rights and the Laws of Edward the Confessor but absolutely to receive Laws from him And yet this can neither be thought tyranny in Christ nor yet slavery in us for Christs Laws are more beneficial to us then any of our own making and his service is perfect freedom And yet we reade of general Councels of the Church by their delegates which were as it were a ministerial Church-Catholike which in former times of the Church under Christian Emperours were frequent and there is no intrinsecal let in the Church that they do not meet so still but only extrinsecal and extraneous by reason of the divisions among the civil Governours but even in our daies a great part of that great body hath met as in the Synod of Dort c. by Commissioners D. Whitakers and Apollonius acknowledge the meeting Act. 1. to be a general Councel The members were the Apostles who were Pastours of the Church-Catholike and brethren out of Galilee and Jerusalem The work was to elect an Apostle who was to be a Pastor of the universal Church and they that undertake and dispatch such a businesse which concerns the extraordinary teaching and government of the whole Church should represent the whole Church-Catholike M. Ellis vin p. 25. utterly denyeth that ever there was any general Councel which might be said to be the Church-Catholike viz. ministerially But I took general in the usual sense of it and not precisely considered He knows the four Councels are known by the name of The four general Councels And so himself cals them vind p. 15. l. 37. I took the term general in the sense that we cal the four Monarchies the Monarchies of the whole world and yet we know there were many countries that were never under them And as Luke Act. 2.5 saith there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews devout men out of every nation under heaven and yet there were many Nations where Jews never dwelt some of which were discovered lately But let him look into Euseb de vita Constantini lib. 3. and Socrates Scholast lib. 1. cap. 8. and he shall finde from how many Countries the first Councel of Nice was gathered There were gathered saith he together into one the chief Ministers of God inhabiting all the Churches throughout all Europe Africk and Asia That sacred Synod framed as it were by the handy-work of God received also both Syrians and Cilicians and such as came from Phoenicia Aegypt Arabia Palaestina Thebais Lybia and Mesopotamia There was also in this Synod the Bishop of Persis of Pontus Galaâ—ia Pamphilia Cappadocia Asia and Phrygia Moreover the Thracians Macedonians Achaians Epirotes Also of the Spaniards there was an eminent man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishop of the imperial city 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Rome by reason of his old age absented himself yet there were present of his Presbyters which supplyed his room Divers things M. Ellis excepteth against that Councel as some extraordinarinesse in the summoning of the members of it without election and delegation of the particular Churches And that Constantine was the visible head of it and that he called for Bishops chiefly if not only which will not be pertinent here to answer Something there might be extraordinary in the summons for the civil and Ecclesiastical State not concurring together until Constantine haply there could not be a regular election In extraordinary times and cases our brethren will grant something may be done extraordinarily as there is in the calling of this present Assembly as is acknowledged by M. Gillespy There were also others besides Bishops and Ministers Neither did Constantine either sit as President of it nor presume to be head but confesseth himself to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but by his civil sanction he did confirm their decrees and send them abroad Neither is there any ground that in that or any other Councel the members acted only each for his own particular Church that sent him as M. Ellis suggesterh but the whole for the whole as far as their delegation was I acknowledge there is power given to every particular Church to rule it self and exercise the discipline of the Church for the being and well-being of it ordinarily Yet so as it is a part of the whole Church into which also the censures there passed have influence And on some great occasions there may be cause to ferch help further as Cranmer appealed to a general Councel But if that extensive power cannot be had as now it is very difficult then must the particular
power or by immediate inspiration as in the penning of the Scripture but the matters were carried on in an ordinary Synodal way by disputes and discourses they deliberated about the true state of the question and the remedy thereof and after deliberation and disputes they decisively conclude and determine the matter and put forth all the three fore-named power First they exert their dogmatick power in confuting of the heresie and in vindication of the truth of justification by faith without the works of the law and their critical power in branding the false teachers with the infamous brand of troublers of the Church and subverters of souls and of belyâ—rs of the Apostles and Elders of Ierusalem and their diamctick power in ordering and framing practical rules or constitutions for the healing of the scandal They passed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 16.4 they imposed them for they are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 15.28 29. yet were not all the things they imposed necessary in themselves as abstaining from things strangled and from bloud they are called necessary not intrinsecally for then they are so to us but for that time because those things were so odious to the Jews who could not be so suddenly brought from all ceremonies It is true our Divines in their writings against the Papists do cry down the infallibility of Councels and the over-high esteem they had of them and the injurious and sinful decrees of their Popish Councels but they honour the general Councels and account Synods an Ordinance of God Calv. Inst lib. 4. cap. 9. sect 13. saith Nos certè libenter concedimus siqua de dogmate incidat disceptatio nullum esse nec melius nec certius remedium quà m si verorum Episcoporum Synodus conveniat ubi controversum dogma excutiatur Multò enim plus ponderis habebit ejusmodi definitio in quam communiter Ecclesiarum pastores invocato Christi Spiritu consenserint quà m c. Whitak de consilijs cap. 2. not only alloweth but commendeth Synods and Councels from the necessity and utility of them and marvelleth that Nazianzâ—n should say he never saw a good end of a Synod alledging the good end and profit of the Councel of Nice And citeth Augustine in Ep. 118. Conciliorum in Ecclesia Dei saluberrimam authoritatem esse And addeth further Etsi Concilia non sunt simpliciter absolutè necessaria tamen multùm conferunâ— valdè utilia sunt idque propter multas causas And then reckons up the causes And divideth Synods in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And bringeth Act. 15. for an example and warrant of them And Chamier in his Panstrat tom 2. lib. 10. cap. 8. De omnium toto orbe Ecclesiarum politia sheweth the lawfulnesse and use of Synods And lib. 5. saith Ad Synodos convocatos fuisse atque admissos omnes Episcopos nemo dubitat sedisseque judices suo jure prout fieri solet in Aristocratia And M. Parker in Polit. Eccl. l. 3. p. 355. saith Fundatur haec progressio a Presbyerio ad Classem a Classi ad Synodum in instituto Christi Mat. 18.17 ex proportione And p. 123. he foundeth them upon the same Scripture Per gradationem ratiocinandi a little after he saith they follow from that place per sequelam ratiocinandi per consequentiam Innumerable might be the citations of Protestant Divines in this kinde It is confest Sect. 5. that particular Churches are endued with the power of discipline within themselves if the matter doth particularly and peculiarly concern themselves and none others or if there be no others that can joyn with them they may do much alone but that case is extraordinary It is confest also that every single Congregation is equal in power to any other single Congregation considered as a Church only one may be greater and purer then another and furnished with more and more able officers And therefore how one sister Church by its single power can non-communion another that is of equal power with it I know not for it is a censure and no lesse then a vertuâ—â— excommunication and the other Church hath as much power to non-communion them and so there is a principle laid of perpetual and frequent division and splitting asunder of Christâ— political body and kingdom Such a principle in a Common-wealth between Town and Town in civil affairs would be very dangerous and bring deadly feuds and civil wars and at last ruine to the whole And though there be a subordination of particular Churches to greater Assemblies yet it is not absolute and arbitrary but in the Lord also it is a coordination because the Officers of the particular Congregations are there and help to constitute the â—lasses or if it be a Synod they are vertually there by their delegates or Commissioners as the Counties and Corporations are in a Parliament The subordination of particular Congregations to greater Assemblies consisting so of members taken out of the particular Congregations and the authoritative power and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of those greater Assemblies over them appears because we see the Church of Antioch was subordinate to the Synod at Jerusalem Act. 15. Also Christs direction to deal with an offending brother Mat. 18. ascends by degrees from private adâ—onition to admonition before two or three and from them if he amend not to the Church but what if the greater number of a Church or suppose a whole Church offend by the same rule of proportion they are to be brought before a higher Assembly else no remedy can be had for offending Congregations as well as offending persons But neighbour-Congregations or particular persons may be offended by a neighbour Church and there is no reason that that Church should be partee and judge also in their own case and therefore it is requisite that there should be a greater combined Assembly to complain unto And as the unity of the whole visible Church and political Kingdom of Christ requires this as the London-Ministers have well noted wherein all things are to be managed as between members and fellow-subjects and the greater part in coordination to rule the lesse in the Lord and the whole the parts so also there is the same necessity of Synods as of Classical combinations and otherwise there will be irremediable difficulties Also we may observe the like subordination and appeals in the Jewish Church the several Synagogues were subordinate to the great Assembly at Ierusalem and had their appeals thither in greater causes Deut. 17.8 12. 2. Chron. 19.8 11. Exo. 18.22 26. And this could not be a ceremonial Law for it did typifie nothing The appeals were not to the high Priest typifying Christ but to their highest Court and though it were judicial to them yet the equity of it remains and so far as it was grounded on common right it is moral Now the like difficulties and dangers that occasioned that Law then remain still as great among
observed by all sorts that by the Independent way power is given to 2. or 3. Officers in a Congregation or as others of them say if the particular Congregation joyn to censure yea excommunicate Parliament men Nobles and Kings if they judge there be cause and all the Churches in the world shall have no power to relieve them except that Congregation or those Elders please It makes saith M. Ellis every Minister one of the standing Officers of the Christian world to whom with his collegues not severally and by distribution but jointly and as one body is committed the government of the whole Christian world and managing the affairs of the son of God throughout the face of the earth And this is marked with as if these were the very words of the Presbyterians which are but his own paraphrase and collection and not their sense much lesse their words But I answer Every Ministers office is habitually indefinite but he is not actually a standing Officer of the Christian world But as a Physician by this calling profession and license is a Physician to the whole world habitually and may act upon the bodies and about the lives of men of what nation soever where and when he hath a call And as a Lawyer is a Lawyer to the whole Kingdom and hath power by his call to the bar to deal about any mans case or estate so far as the Law alloweth and his calling serveth where and when he is required and yet these are but professions not offices which would make the habitual power haply more reducible into act upon a lawful cal but Christs Ministers have an indefinite habitual office beyond their particular Congregations yet in regard of exerting and constant exercise thereof it is distributively over their own flocks which are as their constant Patients and Clients but if there be necessity just occasion and a call to be helpful to any others joyntly with them that have the same office they may exercise their power in any part of the whole body And so saith M. Ellis he is one of Christs vicars general and not particular only which I acknowledge every Minister to be in his place magnum surely memorabile nomen But this is but magnum memorabile scomma and so I passe it by M. Ellis knows that thâ—s power though habitually it belongeth to the office and so to the person that hath that office yet is not drawn forth in a general Councel for the actual immediate service of the whole Church once in many hundred years and divers generations of Ministers die and it is not called forth in their ages and when it is they are usually the most able and eminent persons that have that call and not one of many hundreds of them neither therefore that scoff might well have been spared But he confesseth every particular Minister in his place to be Christs Vicar as he terms him i. e. to act vice Christi and all distributively to be Christs Vicars general I see he is not sublimated so high as some are as to make the Ministers to be the Vicars or Stewards of the Congregation and to carry their keys for them But can they act vice Christi no where else in whose name doe they preach baptize administer the Lords Supper and blesse the people when they act abroad occasionally This ariseth from that principle disclaimed in all former ages of the Church that a Minister is a Minister but in his own Congregation and out of office to all the Church besides Sect. 7. But M. Ellis hath another Objection against it viz. If it be so saith he great reason it is that the Church of the whole world should choose these universal Officers and so the Church of a Nation the National Officers c. by whom they are to be governed in that which is dearest and of highest moment viz. the precious soul or else their condition is most sad Answ Is there not the same reason that the whole world should have a hand in the choice of every Physician and the whole Kingdom of every Lawyer And by the same reason it will follow that the whole Christian world should have a consent in the admitting of every member of the Church seeing they be members not of the particular Congregation only into which by particular association they are admitted but of the whole Church-Catholike visible But as every Minister is entrusted with the admitting of members into the whole and every Eldership with casting out of the whole so may every conjoyned Presbytery be also with the admittance of an Officer It is impossible that the whole Church should meet about admittance either of members or Officers but the particular parts are entrusted in the places where they live and if any man or woman can give in any just exception against either member or Minister that is to be admitted it shall debar their admission or procure an ejection The new Jerusalem Rev. 21. it said to have 12. gates and there was an admission into the whole city by every gate so is there admission into the whole Church by baptism in every Congregation The Temple spoken of in Ezek. 40. c. is conceived to typifie the Evangelical Church in general and the several chambers the particular Congregations now as those that were admitted into any chamber had thereby admission into the whole house so they that are admitted in any Congregation are admitted into the whole Church And though the admission of particular Officers or members is not done interventu totius Ecclesiae yet it is done intuitu totius Ecclesiae with reference and respect had to the whole But secondly I answer That when that habitual power is drawn into act in a partâ—cular Congregation as their particular Minister then that Congregation meets to give him a call and if an unworthy unskilful man get into the profession of Physick or Law for all his habitual power by license he may have patients and clients few enough to call his power into act the like may be said of an unworthy Minister if Churches have their right of calling or approving their Ministers Or if there be a call to act in a Synod so great a part of the Church as the Synod extends unto have a hand to call to that action Indeed in a Classis the whole vicinity of Officers may meet personally by their actual combination but if it be a provincial Synod every Classis in the Province chooseth the members thereof severally if in a National Synod every Province chooseth and calleth the members thereof and so there is a call of the whole Kingdom and if it be a general Councel of the whole Church all the Christian Nations elect and call the members thereof respectively and so this sadnesse he speaks of is salved And for unworthy persons intruding into the Church by a little learning to live idlely on the sweat and cost of others or that shall have a
is seated properly in the eye or reason is given to the whole man and yet is seated in the understanding Christ hath given all his Ordinances to his visible Church for the publike dispensation of which he hath instituted Church-Officers to whom he hath committed that power respectively these officers are distributed among and setled in their several Congregations and there actually and constantly dispense their Ordinances to them as by their office they are enabled according to the word and yet because there are some things of common concernment with other Congregations and of greater moment and difficuly then can be transacted by a few Elders in a particular Congregation therefore upon such occasions they make act conjunctim with the Elders of other Congregations and may also dispense both Word and seals occasionally to other Congregations upon a call by opportunity want or desire of other Congregations Yet do not the Presbyterians hold that the particular Churches or Officers act by authority of and commission from the one entire single Common-wealth Corporation and Congregation of the whole company of Christians on earth as M. Ellis is pleased to set it down to render their tenets odious but they hold that every Minister by vertue of his office hath an immediate habitual power from Christ to dispense his Ordinances but the conâ—tant exerting and exercise of this power is called forth into act by that parcel of the Church-Catholike which hath given him a call to take the particular immediate inspection and care over them in the Lord yet upon occasion for the honour of God the vindicating of his truth the suppressing of more general errours and scandals the propagating of the Gospel and the good of others as God gives opportunity it may be exerted and exercised in other places and to other persons so confusion and disorder be avoided Neither do the National Churches act by commission from the Catholike nor the Provincial from the National nor the Classis from the Provincial nor the Congregational from the Classis but every Minister acts by commission from Jesus Christ by vertue of his Office And the Congregational Eldership is first in acting though last in Christs intention in instituting the office Every drop of water is similar to the whole element and is cold and moist but receive not those qualities from the whole Element but hath them immediatly in its self and though it actually exerts them only where it is placed and applied yet hath an habitual power to exert them any where else if applied So the Church-Officers have their powder neither from the Church Catholike nor from their particular Congregation but from their office which they receive from Christ though ministerially admitted thereto by the Presbytery which power though ordinarily and constantly they exert in their own Congregation yet can elsewhere upon a call Neither do the Presbyterians say that the Church-Catholike or the whole campary of Christians on earth are in their ordinary and setled Church-constitution one entire single Common-wealth Corporation and Congregation actually but one habitual Common-wealth and Corporation made up by the aggregation of all the single actual Congregations of Christians in the world as an Empire of all the Provinces and Kingdoms under it and that beside the particular actual constant affairs of the Congregations which are properly to be managed by such as are the particular actual Officers thereof there are some things that concern more then themselves and those are to be transacted as such occasions arise by the Officers of so many Congregations as they concern they belonging properly to the cognizance of Officers as Officers and if those matters be of more general concernment then that all the Officers concerned therein can meet without confusion to transact them then they are to delegate some choice Officers from the several vicinities to transact them as hath been shewed before and as the call of the Congregation draweth forth the power of the Officers to act among them constantly so this delegation cals forth their power to act occasionally pro tempore in this greater meeting The case was once that Totus mundus ingemuit sub Arianisino this concerned the whole or the greater part and could not be cured by particular Officers as particular in their several Congregations divisim and therefore required a more general meeting of Officers to whom by reason of their office it did appertain to consider of it and suppresse it conjunctim by confutations and censures and these having done the work they were called forth unto then are to return to their particular charges again for this work is but occaâ—ional and these occasions fall out very rarely This makes not the whole Church-Catholike under one actual constant regiment Yet because in Churches that are near together in a vicinity matters of common concernment or that require the help of more Elders then one or two Congregations can afford will frequently and constantly occurre and if there be not a set time and place appointed by consent for a certain number of Officers of that vicinity to meet they will be drawn together with much difficulty charge labour trouble and confusion and with lesse certainty as appears by the case of M. Ward in the Netherlands who being unjustly cast out of his place could not under two years get a meeting of neighbour-Elders to hear and right his cause and when he had obtained a meeting it was â—ut of very few viz. the Elders of Aruheim as I have been enformed therefore it is conceived that there should be a certain time and place appointed for the Elders of such a vicinity as are in combination for mutual assistance to meet in M. Ellis mistakes the state of the question in saying the Ministers and Elders of the Catholike Church not taken severally but jointly as one entire College or Presbytery have the charge severally and jointly of the whole and every particular Church committed to them vind pag. 9. For they are not actually Ministers and Elders of the Church-Catholike nor actually one entire College and Presbytery nor have not actually the charge of the whole and every particular Church but habitually only by reason of the indefinitenesse of their office They have power in actu primo by vertue of their office but not in actu secundo sive exercito they have jus ad rem every where but not in re any where without a call They are the Ministers of Jesus Christ and thereby have right and power to perform the acts belonging to their office but for the execution of it either in a particular Church constantly or conjunctim occasionally with others there is required a call thereunto And the not observing of this distinction is the cause of this difference in this question The Levites were by their office consecrated to do the service of the Tabernacle and to stand before the Congregation to minister unto them Numb 16.9 And the Priests to offer sacrifice and
heart only and that but dimly and not apprehended by all in all the parts thereof alike through ignorance rudenesse barbarism or evil customes Secondly There are no Officers of the whole world as it is a society directed by the internal Law of nature but so there are of the visible Church and Therefore the visible Church is more then a society it is Christs external political Kingdom Thirdly There are several chief governours over the several Kingdoms of the world which are Gods vicegerents and Gods annointed ones in their Kingdoms and written municipal laws belonging to every Kingdom distinct from other Kingdoms and priviledges proper to the several Kingdoms wherein the subjects of other Kingdoms partake not But Christ hath set no such several supream annointed ones over the several Churches nor permitted the several Churches to make any different laws from his nor from those laws which are common to the whole Church And the priviledges of the Church are common to all the members of the several Churches and they have freedom to communicate together in the holy Ordinances whereever they dwell Fourthly The Law of nature is given by God as an invisible Creator the Laws of the Church are given by Christ a God man as a Mediator As he is God he hath an essential right to be governour of angels and men and all other creatures but as Mediatour he hath a donative Kingdom of grace and is a political head of an external visible Kingdom which is but one Fifthly All mankinde are not entred into one body by one external instituted sign badge enrowlment and initial seal not are entred into one explicit actual Covenant nor make an explicit actual profession of subjection to the same God or to the same systeme of written Laws And therefore that parallel which these two reverend Ministers M. Allen and M. Shepard whom I love and reverence much in the Lord endeavour to draw between mankinde and the Oecumenical Church in their Defence unto the nine questions or positions p. 79. will not suit and agree in all things 6. Yet as all men are one society though they want Officers as such yet are they bound to combine even from that internal union to preserve themselves and maintain the Law of nature Suppose there were some circumcelliones or some conjurers that sought to destroy mankinde in general not because they are of this or that Kingdom upon some particular quarrel but because they are men or that endeavoured to poison and infect the air or let in the sea to drown the earth or take away the light of the Sun if such things were possible or any kinde of wilde beast should multiply that would destroy all mankinde then all mankinde setting aside their particular immunities combinations Laws yea and quarrels ought and would unite themselves as men to preserve mankinde and oppose such common enemies of mankinde Forreign Nations will combine to vindicate Jus Gentium if it be violated All Nations combine against Pirates notwithstanding particular distinctions and oppositions yea so far as mens positive laws are general as the civil Law reacheth far over many Kingdoms if there be any oppositions or obstructions that hinder the exercise thereof for common good all that submit themselves thereunto would notwithstanding their particular distinctions joyn together to remove the same Much more then ought there to be an union and combination between the several parts of the Church which hath the same head and King over the whole of our own nature who hath given us one systeme of written laws and but one charter for the whole and made Officers for the good of the whole enduing them with an habitual power of office to administer all his Ordinances in any part of the Church upon a call And if they could meet together they might actually teach and rule the whole Church as one Congregation as M Ellis granteth and because they cannot so meet yet by the same reason if a great part of them meet together the Elders set over them may teach and rule them joyntly together as well as severally asunder For the greater number of Churches being considered as combined and consociated parts of the whole bear the same relation in a proportion to the lesse that the greater number in the same Congregation do to the lesse and therefore if the major part in the Congregational Eldership shall overrule the lesse by their votes so by proportion shall the greater number of any greater Presbytery whether Classical Provincial or National c. being in actual consociation and combination overrule the lesse if they dissent But because there are so many superstitions errours and heresies in the Asian African European and American Churches as M. A. and M. S. in their defence p 92. do take notice of which book I confesse it was mine unhappinesse not to hear of until this tractate of mine was transcribed for the presse and who have dealt exceeding candidly upon this question and seem to yield the fairest concessions toward the universality unity integrality and priority of the whole Church in some respects of reason pag. 77. though not so much as is contended for yet I say for these things sake I should be very tender in defining as the case now standeth what Churches or how farre the visible Churches may with convenience or safety enter into actual combination Quest 2. lest the truths of God or the liberties of the more sound and pure Churches should be prejudiced thereby The second Question I come now to handle the predicate of my Question which I may well call a second Question and that is Which of these two Churches is Prima or first and which Secundaria or secondary Sect. 1. BEfore I answer I desire it may be remembred that the comparison is not between the invisible and the visible Church but between the visible Catholike Church and the particular visible Churches And then I answer I conceive the Church-Catholike visible is priâ—â—a and the particular Churches are secundariae and in that sense orâ—ae as being ministerially converted and admitted by it But for our better understanding of this priority I shall first set down what kinde of priority this is and what not I doe not mean a priority of time as if the Church-Catholike should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 antiquius quid and yet the Evangelical Church was first set up in time before there were any divisions into particular Churches but now it is divided the members that are born in the several Congregations enter into the general and particular Churches simul tempore though not ratione naturei As a freeman in London takes up his freedom of the City 〈◊〉 of such a â—all or company at once But those that are born in it and converted to it finde the Church-Catholike already constituted before them even in time Also I do not mean in regard of constitution of the whole political Kingdom of Christ by
A VINDICATION OF THE ESSENCE AND UNITY OF THE CHVRCH CATHOLIKE VISIBLE AND The Priority thereof in regard of Particular CHURCHES In answer to the Objections made against it both by Mr John Ellis junior and by that Reverend and worthy Divine Mr Hooker in his Survey of Church Discipline By SAMUEL HUDSON Minister of the Gospel at Capell in Suff. LONDON Printed by A. M. for Christopher Meredith at the Signe of the Crane in Pauls Church-yard 1650. TO THE Reverend Assembly of DIVINES assembled at Westminster REverend and much honoured Fathers and Brethren it is a received Maxime that publike rights and interests are to be preferred before private and particular spiritual before secular divine before humane Now as the internal spiritual goverment of Christ in the invisible Church is farre more excellent then any other so also his external visible government of the visible Church hath the preheminence above all visible civil governments and Kingdoms of this world And if it be lawful even for private persons to vindicate by humane Laws the extents and rights of their particular civil inheritances and possessions and if it be accounted the duty of good subjects to vindicate the extents and rights of their civil Soveraigns Dominions with their Estates and Lives even by the Sword then much more is it the duty of Christs Subjects by disputes and argumentations to vindicate the extents and rights of Christs external political Kingdom the one being but of civil concernment the other divine the one tending but to a civil end the other a spiritual And therefore I hope none will blame me for appearing in publike to contend for the extent and rights of Christs political Kingdom in his Church here on earth My first Thesis on this Subject was composed for the private use of my self and some few neighbour Ministers in a monethly private meeting according to our custome But being made publike at the desires of others it met with opposition from two reverend Brethren first by M. John Ellis junior who undertook to confute it with other Tractates of divers of my betters that were 〈…〉 the same subject and secondly by Reverend Mr. Hooker who is since departed out of the visible militant Church into the invisible Triumphant the losse of which burning and shining light the Church of God cannot sufficiently lament Now because some things therein set down were by them mistaken and other things not so fully cleared as I desired I thought good to set it out again more enlarged and vindicated from the mistakes and oppositions that it met withall The reasons of my so long delay herein were First because I was the least and least concerned therein though the most tartly dealt withall by M Ellis And secondly because I desired to see some of my betters go before me in vindication of their own Tractates of the same subject And thirdly because I understood by M. Ellis's book and by common fame that there was an answer to M. Rutherford coming out wherein I should finde my question discussed by that eminent and worthy Divine M. Hooker which was indeed sent over but perished in the sea and so was retarded one year longer until it could be transcribed and sent over again And since that was printed the seat of the warre by the siege of Colchester coming so near us we were all in a fear and danger so that I thought it no fit time to attend to controversies and I had indeed almost laid it quite aside but that the importunities of some and the insultings of others excited me again to take it in hand And now I finde a fourfold unhappinesse hath betided me herein First The darknesse and sublimity of the Subject which I could no way make plain so as to be understood by vulgar apprehensions because the handling thereof put me necessarily upon the use of so many latine words and logical terms of art which are not usually understood by common people And therefore despairing to be understood but by those that had some skill in the Latine tongue and in Logick I have set down the words of such Authors as I have had occasion to cite in their own languages in which I found them lest otherwise this Tractate should swell too great A second unhappinesse is that this Tenet seemeth to crosse so many of our own Divines in their writings against the Papists But indeed it doth only seem so for it is manifest that the Church Catholike which they intend is not the same with this that I have to deal about For they speak of the Church Catholike consisting only of the Elect and I consent unto them that thâ—â— Church is 〈◊〉 â—â—le but my question is about the external state of the Church containing hypocrites as well as those that are truly godly in which Church the Ordinances of worship and discipline were set A third is that I am fallen upon a subject wherein I can finde so few going before me and therefore could have the lesse help from Authours A fourth is that I being a mean Countrey-Minister want both those abilities and opportunities to enable me to write of controversies having constant employment of preaching in mine own Congregation and frequently abroad lying upon me so that I cannot attend polemical Divinity as they must that undertake such a work My principal scope in this and the former Thesis is to prove that there is one Church Catholike visible on earth and that Gods intention and donation of the Ordinances of worship and discipline was first to the whole Church and secondarily to the particular Churches as parts thereof And yet I acknowledge the ordinary and constant exercise of those Ordinances is primarily in the particular Churches and a secondary and only occasional exercise of them in greater parts thereof and a very rare exercise of them in the whole conjunctim upon some general extraordinary occasion and that can be no otherwise then by delegated Commissioners from the several parts of the whole when convenible If it be conceived by any that some of the Arguments in this Tractate are multiplied more then is needfull and are laid down more singly then was meet I will not deny it Be pleased in the reading of them to consider them together and I hope they will prove conclusive I finde also by the review of this Tractate that some things are ofter touched upon then I was aware of be pleased to impute it partly to my forgetfulnesse and partly to mine endeavour to follow the method of my former Thesis and yet to answer what was objected against it by others who followed their own methods which occasioned some coincidency And since the transcribing of it for the Presse there came to my hands two other Tractates about the same subject written from N. E. the one in Latine by that reverend and worthy M. Norton Minister at Ipswich there in answer to Apollonius the other by two reverend Ministers viz. M. Allen and M. Shepard
in answer to M. Ball. It grieved me much that I saw them no sooner I have only inserted a few annotations upon those tractates because I was loth to make a Postscript and because I found that most of the material passages in them concerning this subject were already spoken unto in this book I have now shewed mine opinion on this question and submit it to your sage and mature judgements and should be glad that my betters would shew me theirs and either correct what I have erred or failed in or make more clear what I have endeavoured to prove and defend If I have herein erred I would not willingly be an heretick but shall be willing upon conviction and proof to retract the same but if I have defended a truth as I conceive I have I should be glad to be confirmed in it and gladder to have the truth confirmed that it may appear so to others Now God the Father who is the God of truth and Jesus Christ who is the way the truth and the life and the holy Ghost who is the Spirit of truth guide you and us into all truth So prayeth Your unworthy fellow-labourer in the Lord SAMUEL HUDSON Septemb. 8. 1649. AN EPISTLE TO THE READER THe Reverend Authour of this learned Tractate some few years ago did put forth a Book about the Essence and Vnity of the Church-Catholike visible and the priority thereof in regard of particular Churches This Book was written with so much ingenuity perspicuity and learning that Reverend and godly M. Hooker is pleased to passe his judgement upon the Authour and his Book in these words Survey of Church-discipline pag. 15. While I was enquiring and writing touching this Ecclesia Catholica visibilis an especial providence brought a book to my view which did purposely entreat of this particular subject The Author M. Hudson a learned man and a faithful Minister of the Gospel when I had considered his writing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I found his judgement sharp and scholasticall his spirit Christian and moderate his expression succinct and pregnantly plain to expresse his own apprehensions So that my heart was much contented with the acumen and judicious diligence of the Authour though I could not consent to what he writ yet I could not but unfainedly prize the learning perspicuity and painfulnesse expressed in his writing To this Book by him so much commended he returns an answer and before him one M. John Ellis junior And it seems there are two other Tractates about the same subject written from N. E. The one by M. Norton in answer to Apollonius the other by M. Allâ—â— and M. Shepherd in answer to M. Ball. For the truth is the â—â—â—tion there held forth if granted would utterly overthrow the grounds and pillars of the Congregational government For 〈◊〉 there be a Church-Catholike visible and this Church be not only a Church-Entitive but a Church-Organical and a Totum integrale having all Church-power habitually seated in the Officers of it which they have commission from Christ to exert and put into act upon a lawful call And if particular Congregations are integral parts and members of the Church-Catholike as the Jewish Synagogues weâ—â—f the Jewish Church And if the Ministry Ordinances and censures were given by Christ first to the Church-general-visible and secondarily to the Church-particular Then it will necessarily follow That the particular Congregation is not the first receptacle of Church-power And that all Church-power is not intirely and independently in a particular Congregation which are two of the chief foundations of the Congregational government I shall not at all speak to the first but as for this last That all Church-power is solely and independently in a particular Congregation it seems to me not only to be contrary to the Scripture a Act. 15. Mat. 18.17 Deut. 17.8 9 10 11 12. 1 Tim. 4.14 but to the very light of nature and to carry many great absurdities with it For 1. It takes away all authoritative appeals and all authoritative waies of uniting particular Churches one with another 2. Then the Churches of Jesus Christ should have no Church-communion in discipline one with another They may have Christian-communion but no Church-communion 3. Then no Minister could preach as an Officer out of his own Congregation but only as a gifted brother and as a private Christian 4. Then no Minister could administer the Sacraments which is an act of office out of his own Congregation nor as I conceive give the Sacrament to a member of another Congregation 5. Then when his particular Church is dissolved he ceaseth to be a Minister and must receive a New Ordination 6. Then a Minister baptizing a childe baptizeth him only into his own Congregation For if he be not an Officer of the Catholike Church he cannot baptize into the Catholike Church which is directly contrary to 1 Cor. 12.13 7. Then when the Officers excommunicate a person he should only be excommunicated out of that particular Congregation c. 8. Then Christ should have as many intire bodies as particular Congregations Christ should not only have one Body whereof particular Congregations are part but every Congregation should be a Body of Christ by it self 9. It would make way for toleration of heresies and blasphemies and let in as many religions as there are particular Congregations 10. It would make the Churches of Christ stand divided one from another in respect of government and thereby bring ruine upon one another Even as in a civil State if particular Corporations should be independent from the whole in point of government it would quickly bring destruction upon the whole For the removing of these and such like absurdities This learned and iudicious Authour in the Book fore-mentioned laid down a quite contrary Thesis That there is a Catholike visible organical Church to which Ordinances and censures are firstly given by Iesus Christ And that every Minister is seated by God in this Catholike visible Church and hath a virtual and habitual power to preach as a Minister in any place where he shall be lawfully called Indeed he is not an actual Minister of the Church-Catholike nor hath actually the charge of the whole Church as the Apostles had but habitually only by reason of the indefinitenesse of his office He hath power in actu primo by vertue of his office though not in actu secundo sive exercito he hath jus ad rem every where but not in re any where without a call He is a Minister of Jesus Christ and thereby hath right and power to perform the acts belonging to his office but for the execution of it there is required a call thereunto This position is opposed and confuted by the fore-named Authours And in answer to them but especially to M. Hooker and M. Ellis This Reverend Minister hath here written a Vindication which he hath done with so much meeknesse moderation ingenuity perspicuity and learning that
hath 3 It appears by the definition of a Genus both according to the Ramists and Aristotelians neither of which can agree to the Church-Catholike Section 2. Secondly Affirmatively that it is an Integral 79 1 Because it hath an existence of its own which no Genus hath 2 Because the particular Churches constitute the Oecumenical which hath partes extra partes 3 Because it is made up not only of particular Churches but of particular beleevers also 4 Because it hath accidents and adjuncts of its own existing in it 80 It is capable of being greater or lesse It is mutable and fluxile 81 It is measured by time and place Section 3. 5 Because it hath admission into it nutrition and edification in it and ejection out of it 6 Because it hath a head and Governour of the same nature as man and Officers on earth that are habitually indefinite Officers to the whole 82 7 Because it hath actions and operations of the whole 8 It appears by the several appellations given to it in the Scripture 84 9 It appears by the Scripture-expressions of the union of the members of the whole Church 86 10 Because the invisible Church may in some sense be called an integral therefore much more the visible 87 Section 4. An Objection from the possible contraction of the Church-Catholike into narrow limits answered Whether every essential predication will make the arguments to be Genus and Species 89 Whether the right to the Ordinances and priviledges of the Church arise from the common nature and qualifications in beleevers or from a Covenant 90 If from a Covenant whether from a particular Covenant between man and man or the general Covenant between God and man The variation of situation or accidents vary not the species 91 The method of conveyance of the right of Church-priviledges asserted 94 The particular Churches are similar parts and parcels of the Church-Catholike 95 As the several Synagogues were of the Jewish Church Meer cohabitation makes not a man a member of a Church Yet for a visible beleever to inhabit within the limits of any particular Church and not to be a member of it implyeth it either to be no Church or a very corrupt one 96 Chapter 5. That the Church-Catholike is visible 97 Section 1. There is an invisible company or Church of Christ But that is not meant in this Question Four distinctions of visible 98 What kinde of visibility is here meant Section 2. Arguments to prove the Church-Catholike to be visible 1 Because the matter thereof is visible 99 2 Their conversion is visible 4 Because their profession subjection obedience and conversations are visible 100 4 Because the Officers of the whole Church are visible 101 5 Because the admittance into and ejection out of the whole are visible 102 Section 3. 6. Because the Doctrine Laws Ordinances and Covenant of the whole are visible An Objection of M. Hookers against this answered 103 7. Because all the administrations dispensations and operations of the whole are visible An Objection against this answered 8. Because it is our duty to joyn our selves visibly thereto 104 9. Because the accidents of the whole Church are visible 10. Because the several parts of the whole Church are visible 105 Section 4. Some Objections of M. Ellis answered The Church-Catholike which our Divines in opposition to the Papists speak of is not the same with this which is meant in this question 107 Neither can that Church-Catholike be considered as a Genus which this is affirmed by our brethren to be 109 Section 5. An Objection against the visibility of the Church-Catholike because it wants an existence of its own answered 111 Another Objection from the necessity of the whole to meet together sometimes answered 113 Some exceptions of M. Ellis answered About general Councels and their power 116 Section 6. Another Objection from the necessity of a visible head of the Church-Catholike visible answered 117 How Christ may be said to be a visible head 118 Some exceptions against Christs visible headship answered 119 Another Objection viz. that the Church-Catholike is an article of our faith and therefore cannot be visible answered 121 Chapter 6. That the Church-Catholike visible is an Organical yet similar body Yea one Organical body 123 Section 1. That particular Churches are or ought to be organized Section 2. That particular Churches thus organized are similar integral parts of the whole 124 This assertion vindicated from M. Ellis's charge of a contradiction The similarity of the Churches asserted by D. Ames and M. Bartlet c. 125 It neither crosseth mine own scope nor Apollonius as is suggested 126 Section 3. The Church-Catholike is one Organical body 127 The distinction of the Church into Entitive and Organical Whether the Church or the ministry be first 128 An explication how the Church-Catholike may he said to be one Organical body and how not 129 Section 4. Arguments to prove the Church-Catholike one Organical body 131 1. From the metaphors whereby it is set out in Scripture It is set out by a natural body 133 By a political body as a Kingdom City Army By an Oeconomical body 134 2. Because a baptized person is admitted a member of the whole Also because excommunication ejecteth out of the whole Certificates indeed were sent from one Church to another to signifie the inflicting of the censure but no new act passed 3. It appears by the Identity of the Covenant Charter Promises and Laws of the whole 135 4. By the general communion that all the members of the Church-Catholike have indefinitely with other members or Churches whereever providence cast them 136 5. From the opposition which the adversaries of the Church make against it as one organical body 137 Section 5. 6. By the indefinitenesse of the Office of Ministers This Indefinitenesse appears 1. From the generality of the Donation Institution and Commission of the Evangelical Ministry 138 They bear a double relation one to the whole Church another to the particular 139 M. Rutherford M. Balls Crakenthorp and Salmasius cited 140 Section 6. 2. From the subject matter whereabout their office is exercised which is common to all 141 3. From the end of the ministerial function which cannot otherwise be attained 142 4. From the actions which every Minister doth perform by vertue of his office indefinitely 143 Section 7. 5. From the double relation which private members bear one to whole another to the particular Church 147 6. From the great absurdities which otherwise will follow 148 Section 8. Obj. Then ordinary Ministers differ nothing from Apostles and Evangelists answered 150 Chapter 7. About Combinations of particular Congregations in Classes and of them in Synods 151 Section 1. A double integrality of the Church First Entitive Secondly Organical A double combination one habitual another actual 152 Section 2. The combining of particular Congregations into a Classis 153 Scripture-proofs and Instances thereof 154 Reasons to prove the necessity of it 156
loins And by the same reason when a part of a National Church shall joyn in particular consociation and community in a City or Province or Classis they may receive denomination from thence the one containing a greater part of the Church Catholike the other a lesse For the Church Catholike being a similar body retains the name Church in what parts parcels or quantities soever it be divided into for convenient community until it be brought in minimum quod sic as the Philosophers say i. e. into the least parts that can enjoy publike communion in Ordinances which is a particular Congregation The division of the Church Catholike into particular Congregations seemeth to me to be no further of divine institution then as it fitly serveth for order and edification by cohabitation for enjoyment of Gods Ordinances together publikely as the Jewish Church was divided by Synagogues for their constant enjoyment of word praier and discipline which they could not constantly enjoy as a National Church by their National worship thrice in the year and the same reason will by proportion carry it for Classical Provincial and National divisions for community of a greater part of the Church Gersom Bucerus in dissert de Gub. Eccles p. 11. hath this description of a particular Church Nos particularem Ecclesiam intelligimus quem libet credentium caetum in unam vocationem divinam Evangelij praedicatione sacrarumque Institutionum observatione adunatum ac uni presbyterio subjunctum sacros verò conventus uno aut pluribus locis agitantem Nam paraeciarum in quibus convenitur numerus accidentaria res est nihil ad Ecclesia particularis essentiam pertinens Now this seemeth to me to be a description of a Presbyterial or Classical Church and so not to divide the Church Catholike into any lesse parts for the enjoyment of all the usual publike Ordinances then a Presbyterial Classical Church and so though it be a description of a particular Church indeed yet not of the least particular Church M. Cotton a reverend Minister in N. E. in his Catechism tels us that a visible Church is a mystical body whereof Christ is the head the Members Saints called out of the world and united together into one Congregation by an holy Covenant to worship the Lord and to edifie one another in all his holy Ordinances But with due respect to so grave and worthy a man much of this description seems to me to belong to an invisible Church and not to a visible First because the matter thereof is the mystical body of Christ consisting only of Saints called not only from Idols but out of the world and therefore truly godly but much of the world is in the visible Church Secondly Every Congregation though it be in some sense of the mystical body of Christ yet is not the or a mysticall body of Christ for Christ hath but one mystical body it behooveth therefore a particular Church to be defined with reference to the rest of the body and not to the head only it being but a part of the body It would seem strange to define the little toe to be a body made up of flesh bloud and bone of such a figure enformed by the head without declaring the reference of it to the rest of the body Or a Corporation in England to be a body politick whereof the King is the head or Soveraign without mentioning its reference to the rest of the Kingdom whereof it is but a part and so the King the head or governour thereof but secondarily it being a part of that Kingdom whereof he was Soveraign It is true the Apostle saith the head of every man is Christ. 1 Cor. 11.3 i. e. they are of the body of Christ So it may be said of every Congregation Christ is the head thereof and that it is of his body or kingdom visible Ecclesiastical but then we must adde that which the Apostle doth of the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 12.27 Now ye are the body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. members of a part rendred in the old English Translation Members for the part in the new Members in particular On which words saith Beza in his large notes upon the place Nam omnes Ecclesiae per orbem dispersae diversa sunt unius corporis membra And the English Annotations upon the Bible paraphrase it thus That is members of this Church of Corinth which is but a part of the Catholike Christian Church for all the faithfull wheresoever they are make the whole body you Corinthians are not the whole body but members only neither all the members but a part only of them Paraeus renders it partiatim Peter Martyr Vosestis pars membrorum Thirdly I dare not make a particular explicite holy covenant to be the form of a particular Church as this definition seemeth to do because I finde no mention of any such Covenant besides the general imposed on Churches nor example or warrant for it in all the Scriptures and therefore cannot account it an Ordinance of God but a prudential humane device to keep the members together which in some places and cases may haply be of good use so it be not urged as an Ordinance of God and so it be not used to inthral any and abridge them of liberty of removal into other places and Congregations for their convenience or urged as the form of a Church I deny not but mutual consent of persons within such a vicinity to joyn together constantly in the Ordinances of God under the inspection of such and such officers is requisite to a particular Congregation But it is the general preceding Covenant sealed by baptism and not this that makes them of the body of Christ they must be conceived to be of the visible body of Christ before they can be fit members to constitute a particular Congregation neither is it this particular Covenant that giveth right to the Ordinances of God but the general and therefore they must be judged to have right thereto before they be admitted as members of the Congregation Only this mutual joyning together and choice of such and such a Pastor or Teacher or ruling Elders giveth such Officers a call to take immediate inspection over them and administer the Ordinances of God belonging to their offices unto them to which they had right before their particular consociation which is but an accidentary thing and may many waies be dissolved and yet they not lose their right to Gods Ordinances by that dissolution Such a consent joyning and call of or submitting to a Presbytery giveth to those Elders right of exercising of their offices over or towards them rather then over others and to them to expect or require the Ordinances of God from those particular Officers rather then from others Fourthly For the enjoyment of all the Ordinances of God in one Congregation it seemeth to me very incovenient for some of the Ordinances and altogether impossible for others
quae per totum mundum extruenda erat quemadmodum Angelus apud Zachariam funiculum ejus ab Oriente usque in Occidentem extendit Again Eph. 3.10 To the intent that unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the manifold wisedom of God This Church was not a particular Congregatian neither was it the Church of the elect neither doth Beza so expound it as is alledged for he speaks hereupon of the government of it sub variatâ Oeconomiâ neither was the Church of the Gentiles only which yet is more then one Congregation neither can the circumstances carry it so beyond control as is alledged because of the mysteries here spoken of that were kept secret since the beginning of the world and the multifarious wisedom which was now made known by the Churches but were before made known to the Church of the Jews as M. Hooker conceives p. 271. For the mysteries revealed in the New Testament were never known to the Jews before Eye never saw them nor ear heard them nor entred it into the heart of man to conceive of them But he that is least in the kingdom of the Gospel knows more then Iohn the Baptist But it was the Church-Catholike under the Gospel whereof Paul was made a Minister as it is vers 7. It is that body of Christ the Church whereof Paul was made a Minister as himself saith more fully Col. 1.24 25. which must needs be the external visible organical Catholike Church of Christ consisting of Jew and Gentile Again it is said in 1 Cor. 12.28 God hath set some in the Church Sect. 4. first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers The Church here spoken of is not the Church Triumphant for that hath no officers but Christ the head there shall be no Pastors and Teachers quà such yet such are in this Church vers 8. neither shall there be any gifts of healing tongues miracles Deacons or ruling Elders Neither is it the Church as invisible consisting of the elect only for the invisible Church quâ invisible hath no Officers neither For though intentionally they are indeed given for the good of the Elect yet they are set in the visible Church For both the ordinary and extraordinary Officers were visible messengers and some of them but visible beleevers only for Iudas had obtained part in the Apostleship and ministry and was sent to preach and work miracles and many Prophets were not of the invisible number for many shall say Lord Lord we have prophecied in thy name c. and yet shall not be saved But to be sure they were sent to afford the Saints visible communion in Ordinances Again This is not meant of the Church entitive which is a similar and as I may say an homogeneal body every member as a member being equal and of the same capacity but it is meant of the Church Organical an heterogeneal dissimilar body because here are set down the Officers I mean dissimilar and heterogeneal in regard of the integral parts viz. the several Congregations because they all have or ought to have the same kinde of Officers and members as so many flocks of sheep under several shepherds Therefore the several particular Churches are called by some an Epitome of the great body now the Epitome hath no other parts then the great body hath Neither is here meant a particular Church but all collectively that were within the bounds of the Apostles commission which was the Church in the whole world Go teach all nations c. and all the Churches which have teachers over them which all Churches in the world have or ought to have and yet all these are called but one Church one body vers 20. And this whole is one Organical body v. 12. As we have many members in one body and all members have not the same office so we being many are one body in Christ and every one members one of another Rom. 12.4 5. M. Hooker hath two Expositions of or answers to this place First that the Church here meant is totum universale existing and determinined in its actings by the particulars Answ That cannot be for genus quâ genus can have no officers seeing it is a second notion abstracted only in the minde therefore the Church quâ totum universale is no existing politie if it hath Officers it must be considered as an integrum existens And as for totum genenericum existens it is nothing else as I conceive but integrum similare For genus existeth not as genus but only under distinct specifical forms and is abstracted from the species or individuals by the understanding Now that which hath no existence of its own can have no existing Officers Omne conporeum existens vel est integrum vel membrum Neither will it help the cause at all to say that Apostles Prophets Evangelists were extraordinary temporary officers First here are ordinary Officers inserted also given to the same Church as Teachers ruling-Elders Deacons Secondly a genus admits of no variations in regard of time or place or any other accidents nothing extraordinary can betide a genus but an integrum or existing being Genus ut est aeternae veritatis sic est aeternae identitatis Genus is abstractum quid non concretum but the Church-Catholike is concretum quid constatum aggregatum ex membris non ex speciebus as shall be shewed more fully afterwards His second Exposition is that the Apostle points at one particular but includeth all particulars by a parity and proportion of reason Answ This cannot be for this Church here meant is the political body of Christ as M. Hooker himself expounds it as I shewed before Now all the members of a particular Church as suppose Corinth are but members of a part of that body as I shewed before Secondly God did not set all these in every particular Church Had every particular Congregation Apostles Prophets miracles gifts of healing diversities of tongues yea take the constant Officer the teacher and ordinarily one Congregation hath not teachers but only one teacher therefore this parity of reason cannot hold except all these Officers were in the plural number in every Congregation And if the Apostles Prophets Evangelists were Officers of every particular Congregation quâ particular then all those incongruities which our brethren bring against Presbyterial government of choice ordination maintenance honour from the particular Congregations to them and their constant teaching watching over and ruling of them fall directly upon these Officers I suppose many Congregations never had all these kindes of Officers among them If it be meant distributively some to one some to another then it should have been said Churches not Church This place being a main fort that stood in M. Ellis's way he laies his main battety against it and gives many answers thereunto which yet are not subordinate or subservient one to another nor yet consistent one with another but if
he speaks as well of in particular Church as of the general And to avoid the dirt of this Fort or Aâ—bâ—â—â—â—â— is he taâ—â— it viz. 1 Cor. 12.28 He brings in two significations of the word Apostle which worth alone saith he is the ground of the Objection And saith if we take the word for such Officers as were sent out with commission from any Church upon special occasion which is the literal signification of the word and is so taken 1 Cor. 8.23 of Barnabas and Phil. 2.25 of Epapbroditum so the Argument hence were voided Answ But there is not the least probability that the Apostle in setting down the Officers of the Church both extraordinary and ordinary should set down occasional messengers first before Prophets and Teachers And in Ephes 4.11 keeping the same Order should preferre them before Prophets Evangelists Pastours and Teachers And leave out in both places the highest office in the Church viz. Apostleship especially considering that the Apostle there doth not set down the Officers â—aptim promiscously but addeth an ordinal numeral with them first Apostles secundarily Prophets But again If it be taken properly in that he applieth his speech particularly though not exclusively to the Corinthians ye are the body of Christ to wit ye are a particular body and members in particular and so Chap. 3.21 22. All are yours whether Paul or Apollos or Cephar or life or death all are yours and ye Corinthians Christs Where all are the whole Churches and each Churches in particular as their occasions require each in their order He might also have said and each particular member So that the sense is saith he he hath given or set in the Church i. e. in this Church of Corinth and so in that of Ephesus c. Some Apostles c. as their need shall require yet not therefore making them one external society among themselves As some general Officers make not England and Scotland one Kingdom Answ M Ellis goes upon a mistake in all his book The Presbyterians say not that the Church-Catholike visible is one external constant actual society but habitual or in actu primo or constantly and actually in actu secundo sive exercite the regiment is exercised in the particular Churches or vicinities yet hath the whole Church or some great parts of it some common interests that may require to be handled in Synods and Councels by their combined or delegated Officers occasionally and those Officers therein act not as private men but as Officers and may exert their indefinite habitual power annexed to their office for the good of the whole or of so great a part of the Church-Catholike as did delegate them And as for the parallelling Apostles and Prophets in this case with life and death it is not equal for God did not set life and death as Officers in the Church but they are general accidents to the whole world over-ruled by God for the good of his people All things work together for the good of them that love him But in that he grants the word Church to extend to Corinthians and Ephesians c. he must grant it to comprehend all the Churches as well as them and that they all are one Church habitually having then some general Officers over them viz. Apostles Prophets Evangelists and Teachers and the same Apostle the same Prophet and the same Teacher if need required in any of them But fearing he could not keep that battery he retreats to a fourth and saith that though by Church were meant the Church-Catholike visible yet it follows not that because it was so then and in respect of the Apostles that therefore it was to be so to the end of the world and in it self pag. 37. Answ it is true it was not Christs minde that the extraordinary office of Apostleship should continue there were to be no more such men of extraordinary gifts and divine immediate mission of an infallible spirit that had actual regiment over the Churches of the whole world without any delegation from others but by immediate commission from Christ But how comes that which was an integrum in the Apostles daies to be now sublimated into it genus and lose the integrality and so prove a second notion existing only in intellectu nostro Did it cease to be one body as soon as the Apostles were all dead seeing the same doctrine worship laws discipline enrowlment by baptism confirmation and communion in the Lords Supper continued still and the liberty of all the members of the whole Church to communicate in these in any place of the world where they become though but occasionally continue still And by the same reason the habitual power in actu primo which the Officers have to dispense the Ordinances of God may be drawn forth in any part of the Church in actum secundum upon an occasion and call according to their measure which the Apostles had habitually and actually every where both in actu primo secundo extraordinarily Yea but saith he the Churches were not one in themselves but one in the Apostles and that by accident as England and Scotland were one in the King because he governed both Israel and Judah in David the whole world one in Nebuchadnezzar But they are not therefore one considered in themselves Vind. p. 37. Answ I grant the Church was but accidentally and temporarily one in regard of the Apostles but integrally one in it self It was not one because that they were set over it but it was one in it self integrally because Christ is set over it and therefore they by commission from Christ were set over it extraordinarily for the present good and necessity thereof An Empire being made one under one Emperour hath imperial laws and constitutions which being divided under divers governours it loseth again and ceaseth to be an Empire but the Church hath the same laws under the same head that it had then and ever shall have The world was one Empire under Darius by imperial laws not because the three Presidents were set over it neither did it cease to be so by their death or ceasing So c. But fifthly saith he though we grant that while the Apostles were living there was one body of Officers over the whole Church and so in respect of them the Church might be said to be one governed body yet it was never one governing body for whilest the Apostles lived the universal governing power was committed to the Apostles only and not with them to any other Officers or Churches no not to all the Churches together but they with their Officers were all in subjection to them Answ I acknowledge the Church-Catholike was never one governing body although M. Ellis is pleased to set down that expression in capital letters in the frontispiece of his book and upon the top of every page and in divers other places as the opinion of the Presbyterians But where doth he finde any such expression in
acknowledgeth Primarily therefore these canons concern the whole Church The manner also of the Apostles speech is to be attended he doth not say the Churches houses pillars grounds to be ordered pari rattoni but in the singular number house church pillar ground 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if there were but one Church one house whereof Ephesus was but one room and that already furnished one seat one large pillar that hath the same truth written on every side of it which holdeth it forth unto others both Jews and Gentiles within the Church and without more forensi And as Timothy being an Evangelist conversed with many Churches so it is like did the members of the Church of Ephesus The English Annotations on this place are these As the Catholike Church is as it were the whole house of God so every particular Church as this of Ephesus was in which Timothy resided was a part thereof and by a Synecdoche totius may be called the house of God c. The words also of the following verse will lend us some light Great is the mystery of goâ—linesse God manifested in the flesh justified in the spirit seen of Angels preached unto the Gentiles beleeved on in the world received up into glory This is the truth supported by this seat and holden forth by this pillar Doth this concern Ephesus solely or particularly or primarily Is there not a larger subject expressed viz. Gentiles and the believing world All these are the family and houshold of God Eph. 2.19 and 3.15 Again it is the Catholike visible Church that is so often in Scripture called the Kingdom of God Mat. 4.26 30. And the Kingdom of heaven Mat. 13.24 31 33 47. Christ cals them not Kingdoms but the Kingdom And compares this Kingdom to a field of wheat mingled with tares This must be the Church visible in this world because it is where the sower ordinarily soweth his seed visibly and audibly vers 8. which is the preaching of the word And because here are good and bad wheat and tares and the tares visibly discerned after the wheat And it is the Catholike Church for Christ himself expounds it so the field is the world not of the Jews only but of the Gentiles also Joh. 3.16 and 17.11 15. And this must be the Christian world for the other is a field of tares only where there could be no danger of plucking up of wheat because none grew there They shall fever the wicked from among the just And in this field particular Churches are but as particular ridges enjoying the same tillage seed fencing watering It is a barn floor with wheat and chaffe It is a draw net gathering together good and bad It is a marriage where wise and foolish virgins some had oil and some only lamps of profession It is a feast where some had wedding garments some had none Now these things cannot be spoken solely or primarily of any particular Congregation but they agree to the Church-Catholike visible this Kingdom is here spoken of as one and to particular Churches as parts thereof and this is also an organical body therefore called a Kingdom Here are servants sowing and viewing this field proffering to weed it And this weeding must be by Ecclesiastical censures not the civil sword they were not so void of reason as to go ask whether they should kill all the world besides the godly with a civil sword then these tares must be members of the Church else they were not capable to be cast out if never in Here were fishermen officers that cast this net and servants that invited these guests every where in high waies and hedges Luk. 14.23 indefinitely without respect of Countrey or Town That which is objected against this by M. Hooker is that the Kingdom of heaven beside other significations as the Kingdom of glory c. it doth by a metonymy imply the word of the Kingdom and the dispensation and administration of the Gospel in the Churches and the special things appertaining thereunto And citeth these parables for that sense Answ I deny not the several significations of those words the Kingdom of heaven in â—everal places But they cannot signifie so in the fore-ceited places For it is said the Angels shall gather out of his Christs Kingdom all things that offend and them which do iniquity and shall cast them c. can this be meant of the word or Gospel Is there any thing that offends therein or doth iniquity that shall be cast c. Is there any tares any chaff any rubbish there Or can it be meant of the dispensation thereof Should sinful or erroneous dispensations of Gods Ordinances be suffered to the end of the world for fear of plucking up good dispensations Why do we then endeavour a reformation Doth not Paul say false teachers mouths must be stopped and wisheth such cut off It is clear the texts speak of a Kingdom consisting of persons the tares chaffe rubbish foolish virgins and evil guests are the children of the wicked one man that offend and doe iniquity that shall be gathered out of Christs Kingdom therefore they were in it And the wheat good fish wise virgins and good guests are the children of the Kingdom without respect to any particularities of Town or Countrey much lesse of any Congregation And when we say Thy Kingdom come we pray not only for the conversion of the elect nor only for the coming of the Kingdom of glory but also for the Church-Catholike visible that it might be enlarged and have freedom and purity of Ordinances which are things that concern it as a visible organical Kingdom because the dispensations thereof are by Officers Again in 1 Cor. 15.24 it is said Then shall Christ deliver up the Kingdom to God his Father This is not the natural or essential Kingdom which he hath with the Father and holy Ghost as God for that he shall never deliver up Neither is it the Kingdom of grace which he by his Spirit exerciseth in the hearts of the Elect for that shall continue for ever and be more perfect in heaven For the Kingdom of grace here and of glory afterward differ only gradis communionis as Ames tels us here the degree is imperfect then it shall be perfect both in graces and joyes But it is the Kingdom exercised in the visible Church-Catholike in the Ordinances of worship and discipline wherein our communion is mediate with God which shall then cease For as the Evangelical external service and manner of communion with God thrust out the legal and ceremonial so shall the heavenly immediate thrust out the Evangelical But this Kingdom saith M. Hooker cannot be the Catholike visible Church because that consisting of sound-hearted Christians and false-hearted hypocrites these are not delivered up into the hand of the Father that he might be all in all to them Surv. p. 276. Answ I do not conceive by Kingdom to be meant the children of the Kingdom but the
throughout the whole world c. Rom. 10.18 Col. 1.6 The Gospel is come unto you as it is to all the world and bringeth forth fruit Also Tit. 2.11 appeared unto all men 4. If the Charter whereby the Church is constituted be Catholike then the Church constituted thereby is one Catholike body But the Charter constituting the Church is Catholike Therefore c. The major is clear of it self One charter makes one polity The minor will appear by those places of Scripture wherein the right of all Nations indefinitely is set down Mat. 28.19 Go teach all Nations baptizing them c. Mar. 16.15 Ioh. 3.16 Eph. 3.6 That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same body and partakers of his promise in Christ by the Gospel whereof I was made a Minister When the partition wall was broken down between Jew and Gentile and then the Church began to be Catholike what second limits did God set unto his Church none except men would sever themselves by rejection of the Gospel but external vocation and submission gave right in foro Ecclesiae to be admitted members of the Church and that was universal If there be any particular Charter by which any particular Church was constituted beside the general let that be produced I know none For if there were then that particular visible Church could never fail or else a Gospel Charter must be lost But all particular Churches hold their priviledges by the general Covenant applied to themselves as all the twelve Tribes did theirs by the Covenant made with Abraham and his seed And all the several promises which are as appendices to the Covenant are made to the whole Church-Catholike and commensurable therewith respectively without any respect to any particular Congregation or membership therein 5. If there be Officers of a Church-Catholike visible Sect. 2. then there is a Church-Catholike visible But there are Officers of a Church-Catholike visible Therefore c. The major cannot be denied The minor appears by the donation of the Ministery to the Church-Catholike visible Maâ— 28.19 Go teach all Natons baptizing them c. They are not circumscribed or limited to any one place but are sent into the whole world to all Nations 1 Cor. 12.28 God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secundarily Prophets thirdly Teachers Eph. 4.11 He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastours and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the body of Christ These two last places M. Hooker himself confesseth to be meant of the external political body and Kingdom of Christ Now these extraordinary Officers Prophets Evangelists were Officers of the Church-Catholike visible for they had no limits of place but were over all the Churches and yet are said not to be set in the Churches but in the Church And this is granted by some of our brethren for Congregational Churches that they were Catholike Officers and therefore did not baptize in reference unto particular Congregations And this M. Cartwright also in his Catechism acknowledgeth The Apostles are usually called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 universal Judges M. Hooker in answer to this argument Surv. c. 15. pag. 272. First mistakes my words and meaning for whereas I proved the universality of their office from the unlimitednesse of it he conceives it of having no limits in their works and so set down but I meant no limits in regard of places And then he saith the reason of their unlimitednesse arose from their commission because it was general being immediatly called by God to preach to all nations and they had vertually all Church-power in them but this did not issue nextly from the Church in which they were firstly set Answ I confesse it did arise from their commission which commission being general made them general Officers for what more can be required to make a general Officer but a general commission it did not issue nextly from the Church I confesse neither doth the power of any particular Minister but his power is given him by Christ and not from the people but is annexed unto his office only the exercise thereof is drawn forth by the people pro hic nunc and so the necessity of the whole Church drew forth their Apostolical Office into execution and the necessity of a greater part of the Church may draw forth the exercise of any particular Ministers office beyond the limits of his Congregation occasionally 6. If there be a general external vocation wherewith all Christians are called and a general external Covenant whereinto all Christians voluntarily and externally enter and are therein bound up in an unity then there is a general external Catholike Church But there is such an external general visible vocation and external individual visible general Covenant c. Therefore c. I mean by general Catholike Universal Oecumenical in regard not only of kinde but of places The major appears by evidence of reason and experience for one Covenant with one King in any extent of compasse makes it one Kingdom So c. The minor appears as evidently For first there is but one external general vocation divine distinct from all other particular vocations not only civil buâ— Ecclesiastical which is usually called our general calling and this is external else none but invisible beleevers were members of the visible Church which is that we speak of And there is one individual expresse external Covenant not only on Gods part Act. 2.39 The promise is to you and to your children and to as many as the Lord our God shall call Which is an external Covenant and call relating to baptism which they were invited to in the former verse yet not excluding the inward Covenant or call but oft separated from the inward and yet the right to baptism remain in forâ— Ecclesiae But also it is one external visible Covenant on mens part which all Christians as Christians enter into by their professed acceptance and expresse restipulation and promised subjection and obedience though not altogether in one place or at one time 7. If the initial visible seal admittance and enrowlment be Catholike and Oâ—cumenical then so as the Kingdom into which members are so initiated But the initial seal admission and enrowlment by baptism is Catholike Therefore c. The major is clear without control be that takes up his freedom into a whole Corporation or Kingdom is free of the whole and in every part thereof and hath right to all the general priviledges and immunities thereof The minor also appears both by â—he patent for Baptism Go baptize all Nations And by the consequences and priviledges thereof they that are baptized in any Church are accounted visible subjects of Christs Kingdom in all places of the Christian world no new baptism is required of them upon any removal and also by the tenor thereof for they are not baptized into
the particular Congregation but into the whole visible body and into the general Covenant not into any particular Covenant 8. If there be an external Catholike union of fraternity between all visible Christians in the whole world there is one external visible Catholike Church But there is one external Catholike union of fraternity between all visible Christians in the whole world Therefore c. The consequence of the major appears because this fraternal union ariseth from the unity of the Church which is constituted by one Covenant into which they are all entred visibly They are not made brethren by being invisible believers only or in the same respect for then only invisible believers were brethren in the Scripture sense If any one that is called a brother be a drunkard railer extortioner c. 1 Corinth 5.11 Now few true believers are fornicators idolaters drunkards therefore this brotherhood is in regard of a visible profession and membership The minor appears because whereever the Apostles came if they found any visible believers they are said to finde brethren Act. 28.14 And it is the most usual term that the Christians were called by both in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistles not because they were of one particular Congregation but because of the Church-Catholike which are also called the houshold of faith Doe good unto all i. e. though heathens but especially to the houshold of faith Gal. 6.10 The houshold is commmensurable to the entertainment of the faith Not the invisible members only for they could not be known as such but all the visible members 9. If the same individual systeme or body of external laws under one command whereby all Churches equally should walk and be governed be Catholike then the Church is Catholike But there is the same individual systeme or body of external laws under one command whereby c. Therefore c. The major is proved by evidence of reason and experience of all bodies politick The minor is undeniable For the same individual systeme expressed in the Gospel totidem verbis governs and guides the whole Catholike Church It cannot be said the same in kinde only but the same for matter manner end method and expresse words unlesse we can say the several copies are several species and then we in England have so many species of laws as there be copies printed of our laws Neither is it the law written in the heart and put in the inward parts but the external systeme given to the Church as a body politick Neither is it the moral law quâ moral but that in the hand of a Mediatour with other positive laws added thereto Neither is this subjection unto these external laws arbitrary by the concurrent consent of divers Churches out of custome or because of the equity and conveniency of them vi materiae as divers Kingdoms now use the civil laws or for intercourse with forreign Churches but by vertue of the command of the authour of them Neither have particular Churches any municipal laws divine of their own superadded to distinguish them as England and Scotland have but are wholly ruled by this Catholike systeme 10. If there be a Catholike external communion intercourse and communication between all the members and in all the particular Churches in the world in worship doctrine and sign or seal of confirmation nutrition or commemoration of the same redemption visibly wrought by the same visible Saviour then all those members or Churches having this external communion intercourse and communication are one Catholike Church But there is such a communion c. Therefore c. The consequence appears because communion ariseth from membership there is an union presumed before there can be a communion admitted especially in the Lords Supâ—er which is a seal and if an union then a membership for thereby they are made of the body and if the communion be visible and external then so is the union from whence it floweth for qualis effectus talis est causa And though there may be an admittance of a heathen to be present at the word singing praier yet it is not an admittance into fellowship for then we should have spiritual fellowship with idolaters they may come and see what fellowship Christians enjoy with Christ and one with another but they are not admitted into that fellowship while heathens and idolaters but after conversion professed subjection and believing After the 3000. were converted by Peter and were baptized they continued stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread and praier Act. 2.41 42. And yet were not of one particular Church not as our brethren themselves tell us as I shewed before therefore as members in general And nothing is more usual then for members of one Congregation to joyn in the fellowship of the word read and preached in singing and prayer with members of divers Congregations together as at lectures or other occasions and frequently also at the Lords table even among our brethren in New-England members of far distant Congregations do communicate occasionally Also all the visible Churches on earth pray publikely and give thanks and on occasion may fast for the welfare of the whole Church on earth As for the evasion which some of our brethren have that this communion of strangers with them is by vertue of a particular present transient membership with them I conceive it of no force nor warranted in the word of God Then should those men be members of two Churches at once then ought they to contribute to that Minister then ought that Minister to take the charge of them then by some of our brethrens positions should the whole Congregation have a hand in their admission Also if there be any Ecclesiastical admissions or censures or transactions or contributions that concern that particular Congregation they also ought being members to have their vote and consent and hand therein And then by the same reason all that came to a lecture which is a Church-fellowship in divine Ordinances of singing praier preaching and blessing the people must so many times turn members of that Congregation where such a meeting is And then is it a dangerous thing to hear a lecture in a Congregation where the Minister or people are corrupt for we thereby make our selves members of that Congregation and so put our selves under that Pastour and those Elders for the present and thereby give our allowance of them It is not a subâ—tane occasional meeting that can make a person a member of a Congregation but constancy quoad intentionem saltem saith Ames in medulâ—a lib. 1. cap. 32. Sect. 21. And for communion of Churches I shall speak of it afterward And by this that hath been said I suppose the minor is cleared also 11. If the censure of excommunication of a person in one Congregation cuts him off from the Church-Catholike visible in regard of communion which formerly he had right unto then is there a
be drops in the whole element of water and so by consequence a hundred thousand species of water in every pail-full and as many species of wine as there are drops of wine and so many species of milk as there are drops of milk for it may be said of every drop of water wine or milk they are water wine or milk Can the variation only of situation or accidents vary the species This man is a man there is genus and species 2. This man is an English man there should be another subalternal species 3. This English is a Suffolk man there should be another inferiour species 4. This Suffolk man is of such a particular hundred there should be another inferiour species 5. This man is of such a Town in that hundred as suppose Ipswich there is another inferiour species 6. This Ipswich man is of such a Parish there is another species 7. This man of such a Parish is of such a street in the Parish there is another inferiour species 8. This man is of such a Family in such a street there in another inferiour species The like descention may be made of particular Churches By this reason man will prove a very large Genus that hath so many subalternal species under him and many more may be made by the same reason Yea the same man will vary his species as oft as he varieth his place I conceive this proposition Haec aqua est aqua will at best be but species infima individuum and the like of hic homo est homo but the predication of this man by the several particular divisions and subdivisions of the Kingdom will prove denominatio adjunctae personae à subjectis and this division of a Kingdom into more particular parts will rather prove a division of integri in membra then generis in species But suppose this should be granted which Logicians will not yet it must also be granted that as there may be such second notions of this man or this Church raised by logical abstraction so there must needs be an integrality resulting out of physical contiguity or political conjunction and aggregation of places persons and Churches But let it be supposed that by logical abstraction we may draw a notion of a genus from the similarity of all Churches or community of nature in all Churches though the Churches differ not from each other by any essential different specifical forms but only accidentally as individuals yet also it must be granted that by the unity of the Covenant and Charter wherein they are all bound up in an unity and by political combination which necessarily followeth thereupon we may raise an integrality for they are all members of the Church-militant of Christs external Kingdom on earth and so they become really and necessarily members of a political integrum And on this Integral were the priviledges of the Church bestowed primarily and on particular visible Churches but secondarily as members of the whole body Let it be granted that these priviledges are bestowed by God upon such a sort of men so and so qualified viz. visible beleevers and from their similarity of disposition may be drawn a community of nature or disposition yet the priviledges of the Church do not accrue unto them because so and so qualified but by vertue of that one external individual Covenant of God made unto such qualified persons by which external Covenant they are made externally one habitual external visible body And if the same company of men so qualified can make a Genus by abstraction though there be no specifical distinct subalternal forms and yet be an Integral because of the external visible Covenant under one head into which they are all entred which is the fountain of all their priviledges I shall yield the Church Catholike visible to be a Genus as well as an Integrum and call it with Ames Vniversaliter Integrale But if such an use can be made of that logical tenet that Individuals are species which yet most Logicians do deny that those individuals cannot be political members of one greater body I fear it will prove more prejudicial to policy then beneficial to Logick Again that which M. Hooker makes peculiar to an Integral from that which we call totum universale is that what belongs to this doth not belong to all its members Sur. c. 15. p. 256. Is true only of Integrum dissimilâ—re for it is not true of Integrum similare for as a whole pinte of water doth moisten and cool so doth every drop in its measure and proportion And so it is peculiar only to a dissimilar Integral I shall note also two things in that Chapter wherein M. Sect. 5. Hooker mistaketh my meaning First in the seventh proposition which he collects out of my Thesis set down pâ— 52 Every particular Church partaketh of part of the matter and part of the form of the whole Which p. 261. he makes use of againâ— and renders it thus Ecclesia Catholica gives part of the matter and part of the form to all particular Churches But my meaning was it doth consist of part of the matter and part of the form of the whole as a room in an house consisteth of and so in that sense may be said to partake of part of the matter and part of the form of the whole not as a species but as a member of the house A second mistake of my meaning is that he conceiveth I accounted the Jewish Church the Catholike Church because I defined the Church-Catholike to be the Whole company of beleevers in the whole world p. 263. And thereupon undertakes to prove that the Church was in populo Israelitioâ— and not in populo Catholìco But this never came into my thoughts but I acknowledge the Jews to be a national Church But my description of the Church-Catholike was of the Church as it is now since the partition wall is broken down for then it became Catholike I conceive there were beleevers of the sonnes of Keturah that did not partake of all the priviledges of the Jewish Church except they became proselytes It is the Evangelâ—cal Catholike Church which my Question is about into which the Jews themselves being converted were admitted by a new initial seal viz. Baptism and did not stand in it by their former national membership but received a Catholike membership by baptism And hereupon he undertakes to make out my method of conveyance of the right of Church-priviledges to crosse Gods method He sets down my method thus First when a man is converted to the profession of the Gospel and so becomes a visible beleever he is then a member of the Church-Catholike 2. He hath by this profession and membership with the Church-Catholike right unto all Church-priviledges 3. He then becomes a member of a particular Church but hath no right to Church-priviledges because of that but because of his former membership with the Church-Catholike I shall own
execution there if guilty So all Church-administrations are by the same laws and upon the same command and persons of any Church in the world may hear sing pray and communicate any where indefinitely upon occasion though constantly the particular members only enjoy those particular administrations from those particular Officers I answer further that the Church-Catholike may act visibly by their delegates as a Kingdom in a Parliament in a general Councel if they can convene though their power were wholly consultatory and suasory as some pleade but it is more All their debates arguings pro con all their advice and decrees are visible therefore the whole whose delegates they are is visible also The invisible Church as invisible send none 8. If it be our duty to joyn our selves visibly to the Church-Catholike then it is visible But we ought to joyn our selves to the Church-Catholike Therefore c. The Assumption none will deny As soon as the 3000. were converted by Peter they were added to the Church Christians may not stand alone independently Now that must be a visible Church that we must joyn unto for the invisible is within the visible and cannot be known God commands no impossibilities It is true indeed we must joyn to some particular Congregation as a forreigner coming over into England to inhabit being naturalized must dwell in some particular Town but to that Congregation as a member of the whole wherein we may enjoy the general priviledges of subjects of Christ first and the particular priviledges of that Congregation secondarily There is no particular command to joyn to this or that particular Congregation but the whole necessity compelleth to choose one Our particular joyning to this or that Congregation is not in obedience to the command for then had we joyned to another we had broken a command therefore that is arbitrary and limited by civil habitation necessarily 9. If the accidents of the whole Church be visible then so is the whole Church But there be visible accidents of the whole Church Therefore c. An invisible subject hath not visible accidents But so hath the whole Church as beauty strength order amplitude which may encrease or decrease and these are accidents of the whole arising and resulting from all the parts conjoyned and made up of the beauty strength order and amplitude of all the parts Also there may be general visible opposition against the whole Church not because in particular confederation but the general These persecutors are visible their actions are visibly managed by attachments prisons fire and faggot their effects visible fines imprisonments confiscation banishment and death and therefore the object hereof the whole Church must needs be visible also And all this meerly because they belong to Christ and have given up their names to him And because they will not visibly run to the same excesse of riot or worship the same Idols that they do 10. If the parts of the whole Church be visible so is the whole But the parts of the whole Church are visible Therefore c. By parts I mean not the particular persons only but particular Congregations Now none deny the particular Churches to be visible neither our brethren for Congregational Churches nor yet the separation And Gerard though he will not grant the Church Catholike to be visible yet saith Ecclesias particulares visibiles esse concedimus The consequence will necessarily follow for the visibility of the whole results out of the visibility of the parts An innumerable number of visible parts cannot make an invisible whole Against this M. Ellis vind 59. alledgeth that it is too lax a medium in so weighty a subject as this is Sect. 4. There is saith he great difference between natural and metaphysical or civil and politick bodies For in a natural body all whose parts and members are actually and naturally joyned together the whole is visible because the parts are visible but in a metaphysical body or totum or whole that is in Generals that are by the reason of man drawn from particulars the case is far otherwise Peter James and John are visible but manhood which is the universal agreeing to them all is not visible This being the same with my first Objection I set down in my Thesis one answer shall serve for both Answ M. Ellis knows I took not the Church-Catholike for a Genus but an Integral But let it be supposed a Genus for argument sake or as M. Hooker cals it Totum genericum existens which is something fairer then M. Ellis's grant for by M. Ellis's reasoning the Church-Catholike should be a Genus drawn by the reason of man and so existing only in intellectu nostro I say suppose the Church-Catholike to be a Genus and the particular Churches Species yet this is not sufficient to make the Church-Catholike to be invisible Will any man say that Animal est substantia invisibilis because it existeth only in homine bruto Indeed animality in the abstract is invisible but not animal in concreto so Ecclesietas as I may say is invisible but Ecclesia is visible Visibility is an accident belonging primarily to a higher Genus then animal viz. Corpus celoratum and though every Individual animal is visible as John and James yet not quà John or James but as coloured bodies and if a higher Genus be visible which is nearer Ens and further from Individuals then much more animal So in this case the Church-Catholike is a society of men and that M. Ellis denyeth not now every society of men is visible and therefore the Church which is a species of society must needs be so also for the visibility doth not betide it because it is a particular Congregation but because it is a society of men which is a higher Genus I mean this in a logical consideration Then he proceeds to deny a civil body or Corporation if great as an Empire Kingdom or large city to be seen in it self but in the parts Answ Here he confounds visibile and visum uno intuitu and by this reasoning he should deny the visibility of the world or any particular man for all his parts cannot be seen uno intuitu Attamen insaniat qui neget se videre hominem saith Cameron Yea the sun it self should not be visible by this reasoning because we can see but the surface of it He could not be ignorant that I did not mean that the Church-Catholike was actually seen uno intuitu And whereas I had said the whole is visible because the parts are so He saith it is untrue even in the smallest bodies but where the parts are actually united together not where they are thousands of miles asunder Answ It is true indeed in natural and artificial bodies whose being or integrality consisteth in a corporeal continuity or contiguity of parts for if that continuity or contiguity ceaseth the integral also ceaseth except in potentiâ But in political bodies joyned
national provincial classical or congregational Church rest in that intensive power that remains within its own limits or also if they stand so as that they cannot combine with neighbours or have recourse unto them Extraordinary cases cannot be regulated by ordinary rules And this I conceive is the reason why the Scripture hath not determined more particularly the Synodical Assemblies but only giveth general rules that may be drawn to particulars because all Churches and seasons are not capable of national or provincial Synods in regard of many things that may be incident In some cases also all civil power must rest in one Congregation as if it were in a wildernesse where there were no neighbour Towns or cities to which it might be joyned Yet it followeth not that it must be so in England or any other kingdom where there are Counties Shires Cities great Towns or a Parliament Yea I know not but a particular family may yea must be independent in such an extraordinary case both in Ecclesiastical and civil matters also yet it follows not that there is such an inherent right in every town or family all over the world and that therefore particular Towns and families in England are debarred of an inherent priviledge belonging to them because necessity may put such an Independency on some in an extraordinary case as by shipwrack or being cast into some Iland not inhabited Here M. Ellis chargeth me to say that the power of a general Councel or of a Church-Catholike visible is but extensive and only extensive and not intensive and the power of the particular Churches is intensive But Sir do as you would be done by It is not fair dealing to note them as my words which were none of mine nor my sense For first I never conceived a general Councel to be the whole Church-Catholike visible but only an oecumenical ministerial or representative body of Officers or Organs of the Church much lesse the prime Church to which the Ordinances and priviledges of the Church were first given of which I spake as appears in my second part Secondly I never said the power of a general Councel was only extensive for as the particular Officers have intensive power over their particular Congregations so hath a general Councel intensive power also but their power is larger in extension actually then the particular Officers is being Officers sent from a larger part of the Church-Catholike and intrusted by more and acting for more then one Congregation or one Eldership This distinction M. Parker de polit Eccl. lib. 3. p. 121. setteth down in these words Distinguo de potestate clavium quae intensiva aut extensiva est Intensivâ potestate caret nulla Ecclesia prima viz. particularis ne minima quidem extensivâ verò eâ—â— caret quam habet Synodus cum potestas ad plures Ecclesias extenditur And so it neither overthroweth my first nor second tenet as he inferreth Sect. 6. Obj. If there be a Church-Catholike visible here on earth it is fit it should have a visible head over them that so the body and head may be of the same nature Answ This was indeed used as a main argument by the Ponficians for the supremacy of the Pope The avoiding whereof made our Divines so shy of granting a Church-Catholike visible but it was not necessary that they should deny upon this ground as M. Hooker conceives Surv. p. 251. I say it is not necessary to grant a visible head to the Church-Catholike visible no more then to a particular visible Congregation which our brethren hold to be a body of Christ And though they call it a mystical and spiritual body yet that doth not imply it to be invisible The Sacraments are called mysteries and mystical and the Ordinances are called spiritual and yet are visible though the grace signified or conveyed by them to the Elect is invisible They are spiritual in respect of the authour God and the divine subject about which they are in opposition to natural and civil and so our Ecclesiastical Courts were called spiritual though indeed as they managed them they made them carnal and sinful The members of the particular Congregations are visible members and their union and confederation is visible and they are a visible body mixed of true beleevers and hypocrites as Gerard Whitakers Cameron and even M. Bartlet in his model confesseth And their communion is visible and yet there is no visible head on earth required for them and why then should there be for the Church-Catholike Such a head therefore whether visible or invisible present or absent as will serve a particular mystical body of Christ as M. Cotton cals a particular visible Congregation will serve the Church-Catholike visible I answer further that the Church-Catholike visible hath a head of the same nature consisting of body and soul who sometimes lived in this visible kingdom of grace in the daies of his flesh and did visibly partake in external Ordinances though indeed now he be ascended into his kingdom of glory yet ceaseth not to be a man and so visible in his humanity as we are though glorified and glorious yet not lesse visible in himself for that but rather more and ceaseth not to rule and govern his Church here below for it is an everlasting Kingdom Esay 9.7 As when King James was translated from Scotland to England and lived here he did not cease to be King of Scotland so neither doth Christ cease to be the head of his Church though he be translated and ascended to his other kingdom the kingdom of glory And as for a Vicar or Deputy here below it is not needful We confesse the government of the Church in regard of the head is absolutely Monarchical but in regard of the Officers it is Aristocratical This second answer is excepted against both by M. Ellis vind p. 56. and M. Hooker Sur. p. 258. It is insufficient saith M. Ellis for Christ is head invisible and thence our Divines affirm his body the Church to be mystical also and invisible taken properly I answer That Christ is not only head of the invisible company which headship and body allude to the natural head and body which is indeed the Church in the most proper and prime sense but he is head also of the visible company or Ecclesiastical body in allusion to a civil head or governour Christ not only affordeth invisible communion to his invisible members but externally by Ordinances to both invisible and visible members of the Church yet to both visibly For Christ by his Ambassadours and in his written word speaks externally to their senses and they speak externally to him in praier and singing And as he was once visibly on earth in our nature a visible head of his Church so also if the millenary opinion be true which some of this way hold he shall come again and shall sit and reign a thousand years visibly But whether that opinion be true or no
the former And indeed upon this hinge hangeth the whole question of the Organical integrality of the Church Catholike visible And turn the question which way you will it will rest on this center viz. Whether a Minister be a Minister to any but his own Congregation I finde M. Ellis affirming that a Minister is an Officer only to his own Congregation vind p. 8. And the answer of the Elders of several Churches in New-England unto 9. Positions p. 8. Their words are these If you mean by Ministerial act such an act of authority and power in dispensing of Gods Ordinances as a Minister doth perform to the Church whereunto he is called to be a Minister then we deny that he can so perform any Ministerial act to any other Church but his own because his office extends no further then his call So M. Best in his Church-Plea p. 30 saith Officers of Churches may be helpful to other Churches as Christians but not as Ministers To the same purpose M. Bartlet in his model p. 69. Hereby it appears they suppose the Ordination of a Minister to his office is limited to the particular Congregation that call him Indeed the call of the people exerts or cals forth the exercise of his office unto them in particular constantly but his Ordination to his office is more general and giveth him habitual power in actu primo to exercise and perform the acts belonging to his office elsewhere upon a call Christ giveth the office and hath annexed power of dispensing his Ordinances the Presbytery ministerially admit this or that man into it not as a Presbytery of that particular Congregation for they may none of them belong unto it but as a Presbytery of Christs Ministers having a call to give that Ordination in a regular way and the particular Congregation by desire and election give a call to the exercise of this power among them pro his nunc Habitu potestate omnes Episcopi sunt Episcopi cujusvis in orbo vel paraecia vel provinciae quia in quavis apti sunt habiles idonei exercere Episcopalia sua munera quando illuc legitimè vocantur ac mittamtur Actu verò quoad legitimum exercitium ibi solummodò Episcopi sunt ubi per missionem vocationem illam modiatam Dei c. huic illive Paraeciae c. praeficiuntur Crakenthorp Def. Eccl. Aug. c. 28. Now that a Minister is a Minister and so habitually in office to more then his own Congregation and therefore indefinitely to all the whole Church will appear by these proofs First because the donation of the keys and the institution and commission of the Evangelical Ministery was in reference to the whole Go teach all Nations and baptize them Whenas yet there was no distinction of Congregations God set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers 1 Cor. 12.28 So Eph. 4.12 As God gave the Levites to the whole house of Israel and they did at first in the wildernesse serve all the Tribes conjunctim as one body of Officers over one combined large Congregation but afterwards when the Tribes were dispersed in Canaan the Levites were dispersed among all the Tribes and exercised their office of teaching and judging in the several places where they dwelt yet this divested them not of their general habitual power this made not their office to stand in relation to the particular city or Synagogue vvhere they did constantly exercise and when they removed from place to place as the wandring Levite Jud. 17.8 did they still retained their habitual office and power and needed no new consecration but by vertue of their office did exercise the acts belonging to it where they had their particular station and call So is it with the Evangelical Ministery of the New Testament a Minister of the Gospel bears a double relation one to the Church-Catholike indefinitely another to that particular Congregation over which he is set for the constant exercise of his office And if he removes to another place he needs no new Ordination for that continueth and abideth still upon him it being to the essence of his office and not in reference either to the place from whence he cometh or to which he goeth only A Physician or Lawyer needeth no new license or call to the Bar though they remove to other places and have other patients and clients The Justice of peace who is in commission for the whole County though he exercised it in one part of the County while he lived there yet if he removes to the other end of the County he needeth no new commission to execute his office there where he never did before because it was habitual to the whole County though actually exercised where he lived so though a Minister removes he needeth no new Ordination but a new call to the exercise of his office there no more then a private Christian by removing into another Congregation needeth a new Baptism because neither Ordination nor Baptism stand in relation to the particular Congregation but the Church-Catholike As he that is admitted a freeman in any Hall of any Company in London is admitted a freeman of the whole City as well as of that Company and he that by reason of his birth hath right to be baptized in any Congregation is admitted a member of the whole society of the Church-Catholike visible as well as of that Congregation so he that is ordained a Minister as by the occasion of the call of a particular Congregation he is ordained their particular Minister so also is he ordained a Minister of Christ and the Gospel and Church in general Ordination saith M. Rutherford maketh a man a Pastor under Christ formally and essentially the peoples consent and choice do not make him a Minister but their Minister the Minister of such a Church he is indefinitely made a Pastor for the Church Ruth peaceab plea. 263. And to the same purpose it is that M. Ball saith A Minister chosen and set over one society is to look unto that people committed to his charge c. but he is a Minister in the Church universal for as the Church is one so is the Ministery one of which every Minister sound and Orthodox doth hold his part And though he is a Minister over that flock which he is to attend yet he is a Minister in the Church-universal The function or power of exercising that function in the abstract must be distinguished from the power of exercising it concretely according to the divers circumstances of places The first belongeth to a Minister every where in the Church the latter is proper to the place and people where he doth minister The lawful use of the power is limited to that Congregation ordinarily the power it self is not so bounded In ordination Presbyters are not restrained to one or other certain place as if they were to be deemed Ministers there only though they be set over a
the dust of their feet for a witnesse against them They are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under-suitors for the Bridegroom Joh. 3.19 to woo such as are of themselves unwilling and to make motions for Christ to such as either heard not before of him or had not before consented unto Christ Fourthly It appears from the actions which every particular Minister doth perform both in his own Congregation and out of it Every Minister doth in his own Congregation serve the Church-Catholike by admitting members into the Church-Catholike and by preaching the word to strangers that come to his Congregation both fixed members of other Congregations and such as are not fixed in any and administring the Lords Supper to members of other Congregations and in other Congregations by preaching or administring the seals there upon a desire And by excommunication they eject not only out of their own but out of the whole They also can keep lectures in other Congregations frequently If it be objected That this is occasionally done and a charitative act and not an act of office I answer indeed charity and necessity may be the occasion of the performance thereof pro hic nunc but that cannot enable them to do it if their office did not give them right and power habitually thereunto no more then to private Christians It is observable what M. Ball in his Trial of the new Church-way saith p. 80. That to suppose a Minister to be a Minister to his own Congregation only and to none other society whatsoever or to what respect soever is contrary to the judgement and practice of the universal Church and tendeth to destroy the unity of the Church and that communion which the Church of God may and ought to have one with another For if he be not a Minister in other Churches then are not the Churches of God one nor the Ministry one not the flock which they feed one nor the communion one which they had each with others Again p. 90. he saith If a Minister may pray preach and blesse another Congregation in the name of the Lord and receive the Sacrament with them we doubt not but he being thereunto requested by consent of the Pastor and the Congregation he may lawfully dispense the seals among them as need and occasion require That distinction of preaching by office and exercising his gifts only when it is done by a Minister and desired of none but Ministers and that in solemn set constant Church-Assemblies we cannot finde warranted in the word of truth and therefore we dare not receive it The Ministers are the light of the world and though they stand like a light upon a particular Candlestick yet are occasionally to enlighten all that they can either that come to them or that they occasionally go among Reverend M. Norton in his answer to Apollonius saith this is mediantibus candelabris Ecclesiarum His words are these cap. 7. pa. 91. Nobis ergo judicibus Ministri ordinarij virtute muneris Ecclesiastici sunt pastores certis Ecclesijs mediantibus candelabris Ecclesiarum ministri omni creaturae pro occasione data c. But this concession is too narrow for every Minister giveth light to others not only as he standeth in his own Candlestick viz. when others come to him but also out of his Candlestick when he goeth to them And when he preacheth or administreth Sacraments abroad he doth it not as the Minister of such a particular Congregation but of the Church-Catholike for the particular Congregation hath nothing to do to send an Officer to exercise his office in another Church if it be confined and peculiar to that particular Congregation only no more then a Corporation can send their Mayor to exercise his office in another Corporation no not charitativè It is therefore mediante officio sive munere by reason of the indefinitenesse of his office not of his particular station and relation that he can dispense the Ordinances to other Congregations M. Norton p. 80. acknowledgeth that a Minister hath potestatem exercendi actus officij charitativè modo debito in aliis Ecclesiis and that this ministerial power whereby he exerciseth such acts in an Ecclesiastical power p. 81. and that it is Ecclesiastical not only in regard of the dispenser and administrer as it is when he preacheth to heathens but in regard of the receivers or people to whom he doth dispense and that Churches non tantum sub ratione Christian â exercent communionem Christianam sed etiam quâ Ecclesiae exercent communionem Ecclesiasticam inter seipsas in seipsis ad invicen quare etiam Ministri praecipuè cum sint partes ejusdem totius organici etiam quà Ministri actus ministeriales officii in Ecclesiiâ— non exercerent And even from this concession of his as I conceive will necessarily follow that every Minister hath an indefinite habitual Ecclesiastical power by vertue of his office in the whole Church-Catholike visible in toto eodem organico which if it may be brought into act and exercise by charity then much more by necessity combination mission or delegation and if for the exercise of one key why not of another so it be in a due manner They are the Stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4.1 and though by particular assignment they dispense the Ordinances to a particular company of Christs family yet may not deny them to others of the family that have the same right thereto They are spiritual fathers and do not only beget their own people to Christ ministerially but strangers also They are Christs shepheards and are to neglect none of Christs sheep as opportunity is offered though they have a particular charge of a set flock When M. Ellis preached before the Parliament did he preach as a private Christian a gifted brother or as a Minister Surely they summoned him as a Minister and heard him as a Minister for they could have found many able Gentlemen members of Parliament Lawyers or Citizens who could have spent an hour or two in praier and exposition and exhortation but they never summoned any such to perform that work Or had they summoned him to have been a member of the Reverend Assembly would he have acted there as a private man or as a Minister Or do the dâ—ssenting brethren sit there as private men or keep Lectures in London as private men Indeed skill fitting endowments and willingnesse give a capacity to be called to the office but Ordination and mission giveth habitual power and a call giveth occasion of exercise thereof and of drawing forth that power and office into act A private souldier may have as much skill to leade a Troop as a Captain but he cannot do it authoritatively without a commission so haply many private Christians are able to preach and govern in the Church by reason of their skill knowledge wisedom and faithfulnesse but cannot do it authoritatively having no commission by office thereunto
the same reason in some cases for the censure of some private members So that by their tenet their right to Gods Ordinances neither ariseth from their being in the general Covenant for so they were before their confederation nor yet from their organicalness for they have power to organize themselves and disannul those Organs again and to perform some Church-acts before and without Organs but it ariseth meerly from their particular covenant and consederation 2. Neither is the Query saith he whether the several companies or Churches of this profession as they are one in nature so also in spirit and affection and thereupon in engagement of mutual care one of another and to take notice what doctrines are dispersed what conversation used among the Churches pag. 7. If by Engagement he meaneth anâ—amicitial or fraternal Engagement as he seems by his paralleling it with the Engagement of brethren of the same family indeed it cometh not up to the question in hand but if he meaneth an Engagement not only founded upon similarity of nature and unity of Spirit and affection but upon an expresse command of Christ to his subjects in their places and Offices to uphold his honour and purity of his Ordinances and watch over their fellow-subjects to keep them from prophanesse and errour or cure them if they be fallen thereinto and this not by advice and perswasion but by Ecclesiastical censures if they be stubborn and obstinate then it comes up to the question in hand And surely the case may be so that the key of doctrine will not serve but the key of discipline which our brethren acknowledge is commensurable with it must be exerted also Stroakings and lenitives will not cure all maladies in the natural body nor good counsel all the distempers in the Common-wealth nor yet in the Church there must sometimes be corrosives of censures applied Nor 3. is it doubtful saith he whether such Churches may voluntarily as occasion shall require associate together for mutual assistance and act in many things by common and joint consent c. This the Scripture and light of nature dictates If by voluntary he doth not mean arbitrary but such a voluntary and yet necessary obedience to the dictates of Scripture and the light of nature as is in the observation of Gods commands and as the voluntary joyning of members to a particular Congregation then it is the very ground of Synodical Assemblies And though it be but occasional yet these occasions falling out frequently and constantly so ought those meetings to be as frequent and constant which is all the Presbyterians contend for And the same Scripture and light of nature that dictates this voluntary occasional meeting dictates also that they should have power to act together when they are met else to what purpose should they meet no occasion can warrant them to do that which God hath not given them power to do And whereas he saith the testimonies alledged by Crakenthop in Def. Eccl. Ang. cap 28. are meant of an obligation of charity and not of office it is utterly mistaken for they speak of their power as Bishops â—ura omnium ovium quà Episcopi sunt ad omnes spectat And Episcopi omnes quà Episcopi universalis Ecclesiae pastores sunt jure Divino sic pastores sunt Nor 4. saith he is it the scruple Whether all or most of the Churches in the world may not possibly become occasionally one by their messengers in a general Councel But as I concieve this is the highest thing that the Presbyterians aim at in such a Councel and is the thing which himself makes question of vind pag. 8. lin 1. and yet four lines further seems to yeeld it again Then M. Ellis vind p. 8. comes to state the power of associated Churches whether lesse or more Sect. 2. and especially a general Councel And there he grants an authoritative power at least virtual from Christ to act and give not only advice but directions and rules to which the conscience is bound to submit unlesse special cause disswade us And this authority is more august and solemn though not greater the greater the number is and the more publike the manner of giving forth the precepts shall be And a little further he saith in doubtful cases or upon occasion of grosser errours and scandals God hath by Ordinance virtual appointed recourse to others especially Churches whose prescriptions not disagreeing from the Word are to be obeyed not only because they are materially good but formally theirs Here he granteth almost as much as the Presbyterians doe desire yet plucks it away again in the very next words in saying That their acting in giving such directions and rules is the acting of Officers but not as Officers for such they are only in their several Churches but yet by reason of that relation they are the more fit for that work c. But hereby he overthroweth the analogy of their acting with the acting of an assembly of Lawyers or Judges or a College of Physitians convened by publike consent which he there makes the parallel of this Ecclesiastical acting for their acting conjunctim is by vertue of their office and professions respectively as much as divisim and not meerly as friends or men skilled in those subjects and sciences for it by their office and profession becometh as he confesseth authoritative and to be submitted unto not only because materially good but formally theirs who by office and profession have power and authority to give it If he would have made his parallel to run to his minde he should have resembled the actings in Councels to the advice of understanding friends and neighbours in matters of Law and Physick who have no office therein or profession thereof but have some knowledge and experience therein and thereby are fit to give friendly and neighbourly charitative advice and directions How men can have authority to make rules which are to be obeyed because they are formally their rules and yet do this as men without office I understand not The Synod Act. 15. did make decrees and give commands he confesseth but did not impose any penalty but surely the making decrees and commands implyed an authority and that conjunctim so to do and the imposing of them implyed a power of office and that a coercive also else decrees and commands are to little purpose And to passe by his second grant what power the Church-Catholike may possibly have in unusual and extraordinary cases or accidents I come to his third gram viz. what power the universal visible Church might have if possibly convenable together as it was at Jerusalem in which case saith he we grant what is coâ—tended for but the Query is What power the parts have asunder and without endeavouring the joyning with the other For even in a Kingdom though all the Corporations gathered in one have power over all particulars yet not some of these much lesse a few of them asunder
When they were abroad if they were recalled they were to return to their own charge Conc. Antioch Can 3. Many other provisions were made directing how Ministers were to carry themselves when they were abroad but none of those provisions of them off from officiating abroad only they regulate them in their carriage to prevent disorders Many examples antiquity affords us of the dispensing of Ordinances of worship ordination and discipline beyond the limits of the Ministers 〈◊〉 particular charge 〈◊〉 of Alexandria was famous this way Tantum studij in Scripturâ— propaganda posuisse serunt ut praeconem Evangelij Gentibus Orianâ—â—libus Indis sese conferret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is said also that there were many Evangelists and faithful messengers prepared to promote and plant the heavenly word after the guiâ—e of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 5. cap. 9 10. Auiciâ—us Bishop of Rome granted leave to Polycarpus Bishop of 〈◊〉 for the reâ—erence that he owed him to administer the Lorde Supper in his Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 5. cap. 24. So Nicephorus relates â— 4. cap. 39. And the Centurists Century 2. cap. 10. Anicetus Pius Hyginus Telesphorus and Xystus Bishops of Rome gave the Eucharist to the Bishops of other Churches that resorted to them though differing from them about Easter Euseb ibid. Athanasius consecrated Frumentius Bishop at Alexandria and sent him into India and there he converted many to the faith and builded many Churches Socrates lib. 1. cap. 15. Athanasius travelling from Jerusalem by Peleusium the ready way to Alexandria preached in every city where he came and exhorted them to eschew the Arians and in divers of the Churches he ordained Ministers though it were in other Bishops Provinces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. lib. 2. cap. 19. 24. Basil Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia fearing that the Doctrine of Arius would creep into the Provinces of Pontus went into those parts and instructed men in his doctrine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and confirmed the wavering Socrat. l. 4. c. 21 25. Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum did the like in many cities and often went to Constantinople for that end Ibid. Paulus Bishop of Emisa came to Alexandria in the daies of Cyril Bishop there and there he preached a famous Sermon And Cyril writes of him in an Epistle to John Bishop of Antioch that he laboured there in preaching beyond his strength that he might overcome the envy of the devil and joyn together in love the scattered members 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evagr. lib. 1. cap. 6. Epiphanius Bish of Cyprus came to Constantinople where John Chrysostome was Bishop and in a Church not far from the wals of the City he celebrated the communion and made a Deacon without the leave of Chrysostome And though Chrysostome reproves him for it yet only for the breach of an Ecclesiastical canon Multa contra canones agis Epiphani primùm quod ministros Ecclesia ordinas in Ecclesijs quae sunt in meâ Diocesi Soc. l. 1. c. 13. Moses a Saracâ—â— by birth an eminent man being much desired by Mavia the Queen of the Saracens to be their Bishop was sent to Alexandria to be ordained and though he refused to be ordained by Lucius the Arian Bishop yet certain exiled Bishops ordained him in a mountain Socrat. l. 4. c. 29. Theodorit l. 4. c. 21. Origen being sent for by the Churches of Achaia as he was upon his journey to Athens he went through Palestina and was ordained to be a Presbyter by Alexander Bishop of Jerusalem and Theoctistus Bishop of Caesarea though he was a man of Alexandria and went to officiate in Achaia Histor Magd. Câ—n. 3. c. 10. cited also by M. Pat. Symson History of the Church pag. 268. Yea the dividing of Dioceses and the same we may say of Parishes which are the bounds of particular Congregations was but an humane prudential act And therefore in the Councel of Nice they pleaded no higher ground for it but Mos antiquus obtinuit c. And in the Councel of Constantinople consisting of 250. Bishops it was forbidden by canon that Bishops should leave their own Diocese and intermeddle with forreign Churches for until that time by reason of the great heat and storm of persecution it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indifferently used Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 8. And what frequent use the Church anciently made of Syâ—â—â—â— and Councel and how authoritatively they acted M. Ellis cannot be ignorant whole Volumes might be written of this subject And thereâ—â—re Reverend M. Cotton in Keys chap. 6. handling the Question Whether a Synod hath power of Ordination and excommunication though his judgement seemeth to inclinâ— to the negative yet saith we will not take upon us hastily to censure the many notable precedents of ancient and latest Synods whâ— have put forth acts of power in both these 〈◊〉 Thâ— refoâ—â—â— of all arguments this of novelty might well 〈…〉 may most justly be retorted upon the contrary 〈◊〉 〈…〉 answers M. Ellis giveth against the antiquity of Synoâ—◠〈…〉 â—â—ndling of things of common concernment doth not conclude them one Corporation no more then the common Treaties of Nations in things of joint concernment vind p. 10. But this common concernment arose from the unity of the head body charter and Laws and the mutual relation of members and therefore that parallel holdeth not 2. Saith he this it is certain was at some distance of time after the discipline of the Churches were corrupt and declined to worldly policy vind p. 11. Ans Surely this is not so of all For the first convention Act. 1. about the installing of a new Apostle and that before the Church was divided into particular Churches and for a thing that concerned the whole Church a meeting which our Divines usually account a Synod yea a general Councel though not in all formalities where there was a joint exercise of the key of order this I say was before the corruption of discipline or declining to worldly policy And that Synod Act. 15. where decrees were made and imposed on the Churches and that by Elders of divers Churches as well as Apostles and concerning things indifferent in their own nature some of them though necessary in regard of that present time that Synod was not lyable to this exception Nor those two Synods in Asia where John the Apostle sate President mentioned by M. Patrick Symson in his first Century of Councels pag. 482. out of Euseb lib. 3. cap. 20. mentioned also by the Magdeburg Centurists 3. It might be saith he by decree and judgement only not by actual execution Or 4. Each Church might act its own power though in union with others as so many several and distinct Churches united and Elders congregated and so they might excommunicate from their own heap or Congregation only Ans The history of the Councels doth abundantly confute this for they acted as one body jointly for all the Churches they
Congregational Church for there can be no appeals to that it being the lowest Church that can be The particular Synagogues were rather Types of the Congregational Churches for they are called by the same name Jam. 1.2 And the Ministers under the Gospel are called by the same names that the indefinite Officers of the Jewish Church were viz. Priests and Levites Isa 66.21 which place is spoken of the time under the Gospel And if it be granted that the Ministers of the Gospel be given to the whole Church as the Priests and Levites were indefinitely to the whole Church of the Jews notwithstanding any particular relation to the particular Synagogues and places they resided in and taught or judged in it is as much as I contend for And if by mystical he meaneth the elect only or entitively only it could not be a type of the Church-Catholike so for the Jewish Church was visible and organical His second proof is from Mat. 18. Tell the Church which saith he was a particular Congregation which was endued with entire power even to excommunication Whatsoever ye shall binde c. Answ This was not the Institution neither was there any donation of the keys but a supposal of the keys in the particular Churches which is a thing confessed by all and this power was also in the Jewish Synagogues But this is not spoken exclusively that this power is no where else If the rulers of the Synagogue had power to excommunicate to which it is like Christ alluded in that speech then much more the Sanedrim or highest Court and so I conceive it is in the Church of the New Testament If the least combination of Elders have this power given them for matters that concern that Congregation only then much more a greater company and combination for matters that concern a greater part of the Church under their combination and for matters of greater moment then can be transacted by the smaller company But the donation of the keys was to the Apostles together and they were general Officers and stood in relation to no particular Church and therefore the keys come to the particular Congregation or Ministry there as to parts of the whole company of Organs yet immediatly and not by commission from any Catholike Court. His third proof is because the first execution of the greatest act of entire power was exercised in a particular Church without consulting with the universal Church though the Apostles were then surviving 1 Cor. 5. Answ For ought that I know the Church of Corinth was a Classical Church and not a meer Congregational one for there were Churches in it 1 Cor. 14.34 Besides the probability that Cenchrea was a member thereof But Sir who requires the consulting with the Church-Catholike in admitting or ejecting members Or did the particular Synagogues consult with the Sanedrim or the whole Church of the Jews when they excommunicated any man Surely they had work enough to do then His fourth proof or argument is Because entire power was committed to particular men viz. the Apostles severally and to all jointly and therefore not to one visible governing Church Vind. p. 23. Answ By this argument it appears the power is given not to the Congregation but to the Ministers whose representatives the Apostles were in receiving the keys severally and jointly which is as much as the Presbyterians require viz. that the Ministers have power to exercise their ordinary power jointly together upon a call as well as severally in their particular Congregations as the Apostles did their extraordinary Their receiving the keys together signifyed their representation of the Ministers not multiplyed only as M. Ellis would evade it but conjoyned His fifth argument is from the reproofs given by Christ to the 7. several Churches in the Revelation and not to the combination of them though near one another Answ For ought appears they might be all Presbyterial Churches and not Congregational only The Church of Ephesus was one and that was of more Congregations then one as hath been shewed before But how doth this prove these Churches were nor or might not actually have been in combination if civil authority would have permited Were not the Elders of the several Churches worthy of blame for not doing their duty in their several Churches Or will combinations of Congregations now in Classes or Provinces free their Ministers from blame in neglecting their duâ—â—es in their particular Congregations A Classis or Synod is not to be blamed for the faults in a particular Congregation which ought to be censured in the particular and not there neither indeed can be except they had been brought before them The several Churches there had their several faults and therefore though the Epistle is written to the seven yet it was needful the reproofs should be applied to rhem severally And yet some think that the whole Epistle was writeen and sent to all the 7. Churches from Rev. 1.4 11. His second sort of Arguments are from the matter and members of the Church Sect. 9. and he makes it necessary that the whole Church should be gathered together into one place as the Jewish Church was and Corporations in their hals and Kingdoms in their Parliaments And this he saith I deny against all experience and reason Vind. p. 24. Answ This hath been answered before among the Objections I adde further that though usually it is so that there are some general meetings in worldly polities that are several actual governments yet it is not alwaies so as hath been shewed and where it is so it is a fruit and effect and token of liberty but ariseth not meerly from unity because there have been polities that had them not for this Kingdom was one a good while before there were any Parliaments and after they were granted they were but occasional and so there may be occasional meetings in general Councels only the vastnes of the Church and diversity of civil governments and governours render them very difficult in our daies But he saith that such an oneness as is in regard of kinde and nature in all the Churches and in relation to the same head and in order to and dependance upon one rule or Law the word of God is no actual or real onenesse but in imagination and conceit Ans It is not actual indeed but habitual as hath been said many times over yet it is real as well as the four monarchies were real monarchies and not in imagination only and conciet He might as well make the head of the Church and the Laws of the Church and the Covenant of grace and the seals of the Covenant to be but imaginary and in conceit as the Church-Catholike for they are the bonds of the unity and real visible bonds make not an imaginary integral but a real And where I pray is this onenesse denyed by the brethren as you alledge Vin. p. 24. The enlargement and confirmation of this argument A non existentiâ
the Deacons office may cease at the dissolution of the Church that chose them because the subject of their office viz. contributions cease with the contributers and so it may be said of the ruling Elders also because the particular object of their office ceaseth and yet both of them while they are in their offices may extend the execution of their offices beyond the particular Church that chose them to a greater part of the Church and possibly to the whole 4. There is a great difference between the Minister of the word and the ruling-Elder the first hath two keys viz. of doctrine and discipline the other hath but one viz. of discipline The superiour order is conceived to comprehend the power of the inferiour and so the Apostles had all the power of the inferiour even of Deacons the like may be said of the rest 5. The key of discipline cannot be exercised but in a combination and therefore must cease when that ceaseth which must be at the dissolution of the particular Church whether Congregational or Presbyterial which chose them but the key of doctrine with which the Minister of the word is invested may be exercised by a single person out of combination and therefore that ceaseth not at such dissolution Indeed the exercise of his key of discipline is suspended by such dissolution yet is reserved in him habitually in actu primo because it is annexed to if not comprehended under his key of doctrine And if there can be any use made of that position of dispensing Ordinances to other Churches mediantibus candelabris it is more proper to this key then the other because his particular relation to the particular Church lets him into the particular combination and so into a greater upon occasion of a call 6. And for ought I know this might be the reason why the Apostle changed the manner of speech from the concrete to the abstract 1 Cor. 12.28 from teachers to helps governments to intimate that they that have those offices cease to be Officers when they cease to be helps or to be emploied in government but the others are affixed indelebly unto their persons and may be exercised more at large in the Church and out of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and singly without actual combination Suppose a part of a County wherein a Justice of peace formerly dwelt and executed his office should sink yet if he be preserved he remaineth still in his office and may execute it in any other place in the County where he shall dwell because his office stood in reference to the whole County though he exercised it actually but in one place So is the Ministers office as a Minister of the Gospel general though they take but particular divisions and parcels of the Church to feed and watch over actually and particularly and do not ordinarily stretch themselves within anothers particular line and limits without a call by permittance or entreaty or combination And that a Minister is a Minister of the Church Catholike visible appears thus He that can ministerially admit or eject a member into or out of the Church-Catholike visible is a Minister and Officer of the Church-Catholike visible But every Minister by Baptism or Excommunication admitteth or ejecteth members into or out of the Church-Catholike visible Therefore c. This Argument I finde more fully laid down by Apollonius Pastor ut Pastor exercet multos actus ministeriales non tantum erga Ecclesiam suam particularem cui ordinario ministerio est affixus sed erga Ecclesias alias particulares Provinciales Nationales imò erga Ecclesiam universalem Nam per Baptismum membra in Ecclesiam universalem admittir per excommunicationem membra non tantum ex sua particulari sed etiam Provinciali Nationali Vniversali Ecclesia eijcit Matth. 18.18 19. Ex â—ffiâ—â—â—o pastorali preces Deo offert pro omnibus alijs Ecclesijs labo antibus verbum Dei in alia Ecclesia particulari praedicare potest non tantum virtute ratione donorum sed cum pastorali authoritate ita ut verbo suo liget solvat peccatores vomittat retineat peccata ut legatus mâ—ssus a Deo obsecreâ— homines ut reconcilientur Deo Of excommunication I spake before proving that it ejecteth a man from communion with the whole Church-Catholike visible This M Ellis saith is not formally but virtually done But I answer then it will follow that by Baptism they are not formally admitted into the Church-Catholike but virtually But into what Church were they baptized that were baptized by John Baptist and the Apostles before particular Congregations were constituted And now they are constituted it cannot be said they are formally baptized into them for haply the person baptized in a particular Congregation will never be a member thereof but of some other Our brethren hold that it is entring into their particular Covenant that makes them actually members of their Congregation and that the children of their own Church-members are by baptism but incompleat members of that Congregation Our brethren will not say I suppose that those persons that go from hence to them being already baptized are heathens and without though they have lost their particular membership Surely they account them subjects of Christ and under his seal why else doe they admit any of them members of their Congregations into which they may admit only Christs Subjects and set no new seal of Baptism upon them And as Baptism admitteth primally formally and antecedenter into the Church-Catholike and secondarily and consequenter into that particular Congregation so the same order is in ejection by excommunication If a finger were added to a mans hand the primary consideration is that there is a limb given to that man such a man we say hath recovered his sight or hearing though it be seated in the eye or ear And if a hand could be conceived to cut nip or sear off a gangreened finger it would not be conceived as an act of the hand only but as an act of the man and the man would be said to loose a limb primarily and the secondary consideration is that the particular hand hath lost a finger When D. Cranmer burnt off his right hand it was not the act of the arm only but of the whole man primarily And if this be so of members that are fixed and have their particular place and office in the body and cannot be removed and set any where else then much more of the members of the Church which were members of the Church-Entitive before they received their particular membership in any Congregation and may be removed from one Congregation to another as oft as occasion or conveniency serveth But because excommunication is an act of many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2.6 I will therefore insist more particularly upon Baptism which is an act of a single Pastor or Minister though passed with the knowledge and consent of
vipers and yet addeth I indeed baptize you with water Matth. 3.7 11. Indeed they confessed their sins and it is like promised amendment and so will the worst in our Congregations doe though they never perform it The ground therefore upon which this supposal is to be must not be any mans personal particular judgement built upon such evidence as may convince the understanding of a judicious experienced Minister or Christian that the persons are truly godly but an Ecclesiastical judgement in foro Ecclesiae raised upon such grounds as the Ministers of God directed by God have formerly gone upon which conditions if they finde they are not to deny administration of the seals unto which are the seals of the visible not invisible Church The same causes and rules are of admission that are of ejection vice versâ and as no man is to be censured and cast out of the visible Church because the Elders particular judgement makes them think the man hath not the true power of godlinesse and grace of God in sincerity except he commit that which deserves an Ecclesiastical censure so neither is admission to be denyed to any man that desires to dedicate himself unto God and will promise and professe subjection to Christ in all his Ordinances though it be suspected by judicious Christians that he hath not the true work of grace in his heart The Church of God in their Ecclesiastical judgement censureth only ignorance errour and scandal A Scholar that is admitted into a school is not admitted because he is doctus but ut fit doctus and if he will submit to the rules of the school and apply himself to learn it is enough for his admission the like may be said of the Church visible which is Christs school Iohn Baptist did not in his conscience think they had all actually really and compleatly repented and reformed themselves whom he baptized but he baptized them unto repentance Mat. 3.11 and they by receiving the same bound themselves to endeavour the practice thereof It were a sad case for Ministers if they were bound to admit none or administer the Lords Supper to none but such as were truly godly or that they judged in their conscience to be so or were bound to eject all that they judged were not so I fear the Elders in New-England do not in their consciences judge so of all their members It is not confederation that can give right to Ordinances if by Gods laws they ought not to have them There is a great difference between the visible and invisible Church the rules of the one will not serve for the other No Minister could ever administer the Sacrament without sin if he ought not to administer it to any but such as are truly godly neither hath God given us any rules to judge certainly of the truth of grace in any man but the most judicious Divine in the world may be deceived by a cunning hypocrite And to salve this by saying we ought to think in our conscience that they are godly is vain for as we have no such rule to go by in Gods word so it is very harsh to passe an Ecclesiastical censure upon that ground and the like may be said of denying admission thereupon and it is also a very doubtful rule for a Minister to go by for some men judge very well of him that others judge but slieghtly of and there will be a division among people in their communicating together according to their several judgements one of another still suspecting that they have fellowship with unbeleevers and both Ministers and peoples judgement very very much concerning the same man according to the variety of his carriage there will sometimes be hopes and sometimes fears but Ecclesiastical judgement is not guided by such uncertain variable rules neither in admission nor ejection but upon clear evidence and palpable grounds which must reach all and may be clearly known and proved There are some I finde that distinguish between the qualifications of the members of the Church-Catholike visible and of the members of particular instituted Churches For the former viz. the general membership they acknowledge that these forenamed qualifications will be sufficient and therefore will admit such and their children to baptism which say they is an Ordinance of the Church-Catholike visible and every Minister being a Minister of the Church-Catholike visible besides his particular relation to his particular Congregation may say they administer baptism to them though they be members of no instituted Churches but to make a member of a particular instituted Congregation they require evident signs of true grace and a consent and submission to the Ordinances of Discipline dispensed by the particular Officers But this distinction of qualifications I finde not grounded upon the word of God nor that any should be fit to be members of the Church-Catholike visible and not to be members of a particular visible Congregation If they be brought into Christs sheepfold they are fit to have some of Christs shepheards to take inspection of them if they be admitted into Christs Kingdom City Family they are fit to be under the regiment of some of his Officers If the Ordinances of worship yea the seal of the Covenant be administred to them I see no ground that these should be freed from the Ordinances of Discipline who in all likelihood will stand in most need thereof The great Objection which M. Hooker urgeth against this assertion that the particular Churches are ortae and whereby he would prove the Church-Catholike to be Orta is because if the Church-Catholike be an integral it is made up of the aggregation of the particulars oritur ex illis And every Integrum is in respect of the parts Symbolum effecti And the parts must have a being before the whole can result out of them Answ My main intention in the Question was to prove the Church-Catholike to be the prime Church in those respects which are enumerated in the explication of this part or the predicate of the Question to which I referre you and that the particular Churches are secondary in the same senses also And for the particular Churches being Orta I have already both in the explication of the terms of the Question Chap. 1. Sect. 4. and in this second part expressed my meaning thereof Sect. 1. c. My meaning is not in regard of the aggregation and combination of the particular Churches to make one aggregated combined integral for so indeed the Church-Catholike puts on the notion of orta But I meant it first in regard the particular Congregations are made up of and arise out of the members of the Church-Entitive or of visible beleevers which are the matter thereof And whereas it is objected against this that that Church is no political body haply never had the sight or knowledge one of another never entred into agreement of government one with another and are wholly destitute according to reason and
futurus quem praedixerant prophetae priore adventu Christi inchoatus c. Polani Syntag. l. 7. c. 7. Statuimus Ecclesiam quandam vniversalem externam per totum orbem dispersam nobis in sacris literis describi quae visibili quadam politia unicum Ecclesiasticum Organicum corpus constituit sub quo omnes Ecclesiae particulares Classicales Provinciales Nationales tanquam partes totius continentur Apollon p. 29. Vbicunque quandocunque fuerint homines Apostolicâ fide informati Christianam Electorum rem-publicam constituunt etiam fi dispersi in omnes orbis partes Sic Antoninus Philosophus civem Romanum dixit esse quicunque Romanis legibus viveret Ita quicunque Christiani◠legibus moribusque vivis ubicunque sit nihil interest civis est Christianus ad publicum de regendâ civitate Dei consilium adhibendus ut Ecclesiae Catholicae disciplina Catholica sit Ram de Eccles Against these testimonies M. E. saith pag. 5. that I bring the description of the visible Church out of several Authours none of which except Apollonius and Ramus take it in my sense Ans They all imply a Church Catholike and that to be visible and this Church Catholike visible to be one which is all I brought them for And whereas he seeks to blast Apollonius because he was pre-engaged I answer It is more then I know he is still alive and may answer for himself And against Pet. Ramus he alledgeth a clause out of Beza's ep before Aristotles Organ But I could cite much more in his commendation out of others but I write not to commend men valere quantum valere potest I am sure I have cause to blesse God for him Sometimes saith Bifield Church signifieth a company of men in one city or Province that did outwardly professe the true religion 1 Cor. 11.18 22. And so usually in the writings of Divines the company throughout the world so professing is called the visible Church Bifield on Art 9. Catholike in the most evident sense agreeth to the Church now under the Gospel since the partition wall between Jews and Gentiles was broken down and yet in some sense it may agree to the Church from the beginning Idem For particular Churches either single or combined either National Provincial Classical or Congregational it is not belonging to this question to discusse the Queries about them and therefore I shall only set down some descriptions of them positively as they are usually taken by others and give you my present apprehensions of them A National Church is where all the visible publike What a National Church is religious Assemblies of a Nation being parts of the Church Catholike living under one politick civil government are by the profossion of the same faith and communion in the same worship and government united into one body Ecclesiastick or Ecclesiastical Re-publike Two things as I conceive are required to make a National Church First National agreement in the same faith and worship Secondly National union in one Ecclesiastical body in the same community of Ecclesiastical government The Churches in Foance and the Netherlands have the same faith and worship and kinde of government but they are not in the same National community thereof See Apollonius consid cap. 3. Assert 2. Asserimus Ecclesiam visibilem in sacra Scriptura descriptam non tantum fuisse Parochialem seu particularem sed esse etiam Ecclesiam quandam Nationalem unius gentis aut regni quae constat ex diversis multis Ecclesijs Parochialibus uno regimine Ecclesiastico junctis mutuâ quadam communione societate Ecclesiasticâ visibili inter se devinctis See clear proofs for National Churches under the Gospel Isa 55.5 Thou shalt call a Nation which thou knewest not and Nations which knew not thee shall run unto thee It is spoken of Christ under the Gospel And there is set down both Gods call of a Nation and a Nations answer to that call And these two things are sufficient to make a Church Also Isa 19.24 25. In that day shall Israel be a third with Egypt and with Assyria even a blessing in the midst of the land whom the Lord of hosts shall blesse saying Blessed be Egypt my people and Assyria the work of my hands and Israel mine inheritance It is a prophecy of the times under the Gospel where Aegypt and Assyria are promised to be called in to be Churches as well as Israel and are preferred in order before Israel however it is clear those three Nations are owned and blessed by God as three sister Churches Also Psa 72.11 17. All Kings shall fall down before him all Nations shall serve him All Nations shall call him blessed i. e. Christ Mat. 21.43 The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof Rom. 10.19 I will provoke you to jealousie by them that are no people and by a foolish Nation will I anger you i. e. God choosing the Gentile Nations and giving them the priviledges of the Jews it should anger the Jews and provoke them to jealousie Isa 65.1 I said behold me behold me to a nation that was not called by my name The Commission of the Apostles was to go teach and baptize all Nations not Congregations only i. e. some of all Nations if they received the Christian faith and the whole Nations if the whole received it Mic. 4.2 Many Nations shall come and say Let us go up to the mountain of the Lord and he will teach us his waies and we will walk in his paths Isa 52.15 He shall sprinkle many Nations i. e. with his grace Jer. 4.2 The Nations shall blesse themselves in him and in him shall they glory And Rom. 4.17 Abraham is said to be a father of many Nations in a spiritual sense as well as a carnal In thee shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed He is said to be the father of us all Rev. 11.15 The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ The Ecclesiastical polities in converted kingdoms are said to be commensurable to the civil Rev. 21.24 The Nations of them that are saved shall walk in the light of it i. e. of the new Jerusalem Zac. 2.11 Many Nations shall be joyned unto the Lord in that day and shall be my people Whereby we see the current of the Scripture runs that God not only would convert Congregations out of several Nations but the whole Nations which also he performed and many whole Nations joyned themselves to the Lord and made Christian Kingdoms or Common-wealths though they proceeded not from the loins of one man as the Israelites did which some make the ground of the National Church of the Jews yet we know there were proselytes of all Nations that were members of that Church and had right to all the Ordinances as well as the Israelites and servants that came not out of Abrahams
And should such private man passe the censure against a scandalous brother that the Elders would do yet it is not Ecclesiastical binding yea though such a scandalous person should referre himself to them as arbitrators and promise to submit to their censure yet they cannot Ecclesiastically excommunicate him or restore him no more then private men in an arbitration can condemn and execute a malefactor or absolve him though he be innocent if indited Many times private men standing by and hearing the evidence at the Assizes against a malefactour will say he is but a dead man yet that is no judicial condemnation of him though it be materially according to the law of the land yet it is not formally for so is the act of the Judge only who is in office for that purpose Fifthly If private Christians bear a double relation Sect. 7. one to the Church Catholike visible as members thereof and another to the particular Congregation where they are particular members then so do the Ministers also The universality of private Christians membership necessarily requires an universality of the ministerial office for dispensing the Ordinances to them though but occasionally As particular members agree with other particular members in Christianity so particular Ministers agree with other particular Ministers in the ministerial office If particular private members can joyn with any Congregations in the Word Sacraments and praier and are bound to contribute to them as members of the same general body if there be need though in forreign countries then may also particular Ministers dispense the Ordinances of Jesus Christ as generally if there be necessity or occasion Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus ordained a Deacon and Presbyter at Bethlehem in monasterio Bethlemitico in the jurisdiction of John Bishop of Jerusalem when they were almost destitute of spiritual food and defended his action thus Oh Dei timorem hoc facere compulsi sumus maximè quum nulla sit diversitas in sacerdotio Dei ubi utilitati Ecclesia providetur Nam et si singuli Ecclesiarum Episcopi habent sub se Ecclesias quibus curam videntur impendere nemo super alienam mensuram extendatur tamen praeponitur omnibus charitas Christi It seems he accounted his office habitually generaâ— and though the order of the Church required him to keep within his own bounds ordinarily yet necessity the profit of the Church and the love of Christ might draw forth the execution of his office further He addeth further Non considerandum quid factum sit sed quo tempore quo modo in quibus quare factum sit i. e. if it be not done to make a schism in the Church as he expresseth himself afterward ne que feci quicquam ut Ecclesiam scinderem Afterwards he adds Multi Episcopi communionis nostrae presbyteros in nostrâ ordinaverunt Provincia Ipse cohortatus sum beata memoriae Philonem Episcopum S m Theopropum ut in Ecclesiis Cypri quae juxta se erant ad meae autem paraeciae Ecclesiam vide bantur pertinere ordinarent presbyteros Christi Ecclesiae providerent Epiph. Epist ad Johan Hierosol quam Hieronymus lutinam fecit Extat in Hieron Ep. T. 2. in Ep. Hieron ad Paumachum T. 2. Vide Baronium Anno Christi 392. Sect. 42. c. The universal pastoral care which lieth on all Bishops as Bishops saith Crakanthorp puts forth it self both in general Councels yea and out of Councels this universal care of the Church lyeth upon all Ministers that they provide for the safety of the Church as much as lieth in them consulendo hortando monendo arguendo increpando scriptis simul voce alios omnes instruendo cum vel hâ—resis ulla vel schismain Ecclesia grassari caeperit velut incendium publicum illud restinguendo ne latiùs serpat providendo Def. Eccl. Angl. c. 28. Sixthly There will follow divers great absurdities if the office of a Minister stands only in relation to his own Congregation For then he cannot preach any where as a Minister but in his own Congregation nor yet to any that come to his own Congregation occasionally much lesse administer the seals of the Covenant to them though they come never so well approved by testimonials or by their own knowledge of them which yet hath been the ancient custom of the Church and is practised still among our brethren in New-England by vertue of communion of Churches as they say but this being an act of office cannot be done except there be an habitual indefinite power of the ministerial office which by this desire of strangers and their testimonial is drawn forth into act Also hereby a Minister is rendred but as a private Christian to all the Christian world except his own Congregation and if his Congregation be any way dissolved he is but a private man again Also the censore of excommunication which hath been inflicted by such Officers in such a Congregation can never be taken off by any other Officers in any other Congregation after the dissolution of that for no Congregation can receive an excommunicated person to be a member before absolution and absolve him they cannot because he is none of their members Ejusdem est ligare solvere yea and if he be wronged by censures in any particular Congregation no Church in the world can relieve him except there be an indefinite habitual power of office which by such occasions can be drawn forth into act It maketh way also for any private man to preach publikely if he be able for Ministers themselves by this opinion should preach but as private men if they preach out of their own Congregation Also it necessarily implyeth that a Minister cannot remove from his particular Congregation though for the great advantage of the Church unlesse he will divest himself of his former Ordination which was in reference only to his particular Congregation by this opinion and take a new Ordination to his Ministerial office again as if he had never been ordained before And all acting in Councels must be the actings of private Christians And all the Lectures that are kept by neighbour-Ministers in combination or singly except by the particular Ministers of that Congregation where the Lecture is kept are performed by private men for so by this opinion they are to all the world except their own Congregations And so if any of their own members come and hear them preach at any such Lectures Funerals Marriages or Baptizings it is authoritative preaching indeed to them because of their particular relation to him but only a charitative exercising of gifts as a private man out of office to all men else And if this opinion be true what shall become of all the unfixed visible Christians in New-England who by reason of their unresolvednesse where yet to fix their civil habitations or of scrupulosity or want of ability utterance and boldnesse to expresse themselves so as
to obtain an admission into a particular Congregation or haply though visible Christians under the seal of the Covenant yet have not the inward true work of grace in them yet are neither ignorant nor scandalous but live inoffensively and willing to joyn in and submit unto all Gods Ordinances I say what shall become of them and their seed Shall they all be left without the Church in Satans visible Kingdom because they are no particular members and there is no extension of the Ministerial office beyond the particular Congregations Sect. 8. Object If every Minister be a Minister of the Church Catholike visible then what do they differ from Apostles and Evangelists for that was their especial priviledge that their commission extended it self to all Churches This Objection M. Bartlet hath in Model p. 69. Answ There is this difference Every minister hath by his Ordination power in actu primo to administer the Ordinances of God in all the Churches of the Saints yet not in actu secundo without a special call But the Apostles and Evangelists which were vicarij Apostolorum had both and the Evangelists power was called forth by the Apostles for they exercised their function where the Apostles appointed them The Apostles received their office immediatly from and by Christ The Evangelists theirs from Christ by the Apostles ordinary Ministers theirs from Christ indeed but ministerially by the Presbytery The Apostles and Evangelists were not fixed officers in any particular Congregation but itinerant from place to place ordinary Ministers are fixed in their own Congregations They served the Church-Catholike actually wheresoever they became and could draw forth the exercise of their offices without any mediate consent or call of the particular Churches or places but so cannot particular ordinary Ministers So that ordinary Ministers they are Ministers of the Church Catholike though not Catholike Ministers actually But if Ministers be Ministers only in their particular Congregations where they are fixed and to which they were called by the Congregation I marvel that our brethren of the Congregational way here in England are so desirous to have itenerant Ministers to be sent into all parts of the land that shall be fastned to no particular Congregations yea and also to have gifted men not ordained at all to be suffered to preach publikely and constantly in Congregations surely these things are not consistent with their principles CHAP. VII About Combinations of particular Congregations in Classes and of them in Synods A further question is about the combination of Congregations and Elderships in Classes and Synods Sect. 1. For though it cannot be denied but that particular Ministers in their particular Congregations do serve the Church-Catholike in their admissions ejections and other Ordinances as preaching to praying with and administring Sacraments to members of other Churches in their own meeting-houses and upon occasion in other meeting houses for the case is the same whether they come to him or he go to them yet it may be doubted whether the Ministers and Elders may combine together and jointly exercise acts of government c. And though this doth not necessarily belong to my question yet because it hath some reference to the integrality of the Church-Catholike I shall speak something of it Now there is a double Integrality of the Church-Catholike the first is Entitive whereby they are all bound together in the visible embracing profession of and subjection unto the visible doctrine covenant and laws of Christ whereby they become Christians in the genera◠whereby all Christians are bound as opportunity is offered to perform Christian duties one to another as fellow-members ex officio charitatis generali not only by vertue of the moral law but by the law of Christ and to Christ as the King and head of his Church As all dwelling within the kingdom of England are members of the Kingdom and bound to carry themselves as subjects to the governours and laws and as fellow-subjects one to another though they be fixed members of no Corporations nor Townships And this integrality is alwaies actual The second is as it is organical by combination as all the Counties and Corporations and Towns by combination make one kingdom so all the particular Christian Congregations Provinces and Kingdoms by combination make one Church-Catholike visible under Christ Chap. 7. and this is an habitual integrality Of this it is that Ames speaks the Church-Catholike in regard of the external state thereof Per combinationem habet suam integralitutem Am. med l. 1. c. 33. f. 18. There is likewise a double combination one habitual whereby all Churches and Christians are united and habitually combined into one political Kingdom under Christ and are obliged to be mutually helpful one to another as need requires as becometh fellow-subjects and fellow-members secondly there is actual combination whereby any particular Churches shall actually agree and so unite together for mutual help of each other and for transactions of businesses of common concernment And this is either a constant combination of vicinities in a Classis because there will be constant cause or occasional and more seldome as of a whole Province or Nation and may be of the whole Church-Catholike if convenible by their delegates This latter combination is fundamentum exercitij by the former they have jus adrem by this latter they have jus in re to act conjunctim for the good of those Churches so actually combined And of this second kinde of integrality and combination it is that we are now speaking which necessarily ariseth from the former as the organical integrality of a Kingdom ariseth from the Entitive For seeing all are fellow-subjects under the same Soveraign and Laws though they have particular Counties Corporations and Towns wherein they live and actually enjoy constantly the general priviledges of subjects under the King and Laws yet there will necessarily result a community and habitual integrality of the whole by coordinate combination The civil and Ecclesiastical combinations as they proceed from a parallel ground viz. subjection to the same laws and Soveraign I mean respectively so they must necessarily run parallel in things that are general and essential to combination Our brethren make them run parallel in the two first steps viz. in combining particular persons into families and particular families into Congregations of them that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dwellers together in some vicinity which is nothing else in English but Parishioners the English word comes of the greek The Christians dwelling together made one Church at Jerusalem Ephesus Corinth c. by Ecclesiastical combination as well as one city by civil combination respectively And I doubt not but if all the Inhabitants of any one Town in New-England were judged fit to be members of the Church they would combine them as members of the Church in that Town and that Town would give denomination to them all as the Church in or of such a Town And seeing
all rules of the Gospel of all Church-priviledges Surv. p. â—37 I answer the Church indeed so considered is no actual polity yet it is an integral and it is visible in regard of the persons covenant laws and profession As all the subjects of the Kingdom of England are an integral in reference to the King and Laws though they should for a time want inferiour Officers And though they be not in particular combination and so are destitute of the particular priviledges and have no particular Officers to dispense Gods Ordinances to them constantly yet have they right by reason and Scripture rules to all the Ordinances of God as well as baptism and they covenant to submit to all Gods Ordinances even those of discipline and are habitually under the habitual power of the Ministers office and are capable of censures as hath been shewed before only they want the opportunity of enjoying them constantly by particular Officers of their own The right of an English man to the priviledges of the Laws doth not arise by being actually under such and such particular Officers in a Corporation c. but by being members of the Kingdom So is the right of visible beleevers to Church-priviledges by being Christs visible subjects Secondly the particular converts are brought into Christs Kingdom by the Church-Catholike visible already in being and spiritually conquered and subdued by them to Christ they are the fruits and successe of their Ministry as Organical Christs Ministers are their spiritual fathers and they are children born to the Church and are added to the Church Thirdly The Church doth initiate them and ministerially convey the priviledges to the converts by enrowling them as free-men of the Church by baptism and ministerially ordaining officers over them and so maketh them organical also and adding them into combination with themselves and this cannot be done as they are particular Officers for so they are not to them Therefore as general and it is to be accounted an act of the Church-Catholike as hath been shewed before Ch. 1. Sect. 4. And though in a constant permanent or continuous integral whose particular members rise and fall together with the whole so that it cannot consist but of so many necessary integral individual parts whereof it is constituted There the whole and the parts whereof it doth consist as they stand in relation unto one another must be simul yet the Church-Catholike being as I may say a kinde of discreet successive indefinite integral alwaies transient and in flux some members being alwaies in their adding and some alwaies in departing so that in respect of the particular parts it is not one hour every way the same it was the former I say that in reference to the members that are to be added the whole must needs be accounted first because it is constituted and hath a being entitive and organical before the addition and the members born or converted must needs be first added to the whole before they can bear the relation of parts unto it And herein the Church is like unto a Corporation whose first members whereof it was constituted were simul natura tempore with the whole yet all the members that are added successively finde it a Corporation before their addition and so it is with the successive members of the Church-Catholike Object That which belongs to a similar body or integral quà tale it doth not arise from the integrality but from the nature which is common to the whole and so it agreeth to it primarily quâ tale nun quâ totum sive integrum so though such and such priviledges and Ordinances belong to the whole Church Catholike yet it is not primarily quà Catholike or quà an Integral but quà tale and so they may belong to the parts primarily and to the whole secondarily Answ Though the properties of a similar body do belong to it quà tale as such yet the whole being tale they agree to the whole primarily though they be found immediatly in the particular parts Secondly The priviledges and Ordinances of the Church do not belong to the Church primarily quâ tale for it might possibly have had such a nature and yet wanted such Priviledges and Ordinances but they arise ex institutione donatione divinâ and from the Covenant between Christ and his Church and flow from thence and that institution donation and covenant being first intended and given to the whole the priviledges and Ordinances belong first to the whole and secondarily to the parts though they be set immediatly in the parts also Now then seeing it is evident by the former Scriptures and Arguments that there is a Church-Catholike visible both Entitive and Organical and seeing the Names Nature and Priviledges of the Church the Promises and Ordinances of God the Offices of Christ the Signs of the true Church the Members of of the Church and Ministry of the word belong first to the Church-Catholike visible and that every particular Christian bears first and last relation thereunto which relation cannot be broken off by any removal or without sinne and that the particular Churches spring out of the members of the Church-Catholike I therefore conclude according to the light God hath given me That the Church-Catholike visible is Prima in Gods intention and by Gods institution and by Gods donation of Ordinances and Priviledges and in dignity and authority and in perfection and in nature and essence and in ministerial instrumental causality and in perfect cognition and nostibility and the particular Churches secondary or posterior in all the forenamed respects and likewise are Ortae in regard they are made up of the members of the Church-Entitive and are converted instrumentally by the Church-Catholike Organical and initiaâ—â—d and organized by them and added to them and combined with them Sect. 7. From this Thesis give me leave to propound to your further consideration these Corollaries or Conclusions Concerning Churches Catholike Particular Persons Publike viz. the Officers Private viz. the Members Concerning the Church in general 1. That there is a Church-Catholike 2. That the Church-Catholike is but one 3. That the Church-Catholike is visible 4. That though the Church-Catholike be alwaies transient and in flux by addition and substraction of the members thereof yet it shall never cease to be visible 5. That if the Church-Catholike be contracted into narrow limits yet the remaining part thereof conserves both the nature and priviledges of the Church-Catholike and puts on the notion thereof more properly then of a particular Church as a City burnt down or wasted into a few streets reserves the Charter and Priviledges of the whole and that which was accounted but a part of it before now puts on the notion of the whole 6. That the Church-Catholike is mixt of good and bad as well as particular Congregations are 7. That the Church-Catholike may be considered either as Entitive or Organical 8. That the Church-Catholike is one habitual organical body