Vindiciae Catholicae OR The Rights of PARTICULAR CHURCHES Rescued AND Asserted against that MEER but DANGEROUS NOTION OF ONE CATHOLICK VISIBLE GOVERNING CHVRCH The foundation of the now endeavoured Presbyterie Wherein by Scripture reason antiquity and later writers First The Novelty Peril Scandal and untruth of this Tenet are cleerly demonstrated Secondly All the Arguments for it produced by the Rev. Apollonius M. Hudson M. Noyes the London Ministers and OTHERS are examined and Dissolved To the Parliament of ENGLAND and Assembly of DIVINES By JOHN ELLIS Jun. Gal. 5. 1. Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made you free Si primatâ—m aliquâ—m unius â—â—â—is agnesceret Nonne iâ— medium afferre debuit unum caput ministeriale membris omnibus praefectum cujus auspicijs in unitatem colligamur certe aut Pauli oblivic excusari nequit qui imprudenter quod maxime appositum erat adeoque praecipuum in causa pratermiserit aut satendum est rem esse a Christi Institutione alienam imo APERTE FICTITIAM Calv. in Ephes. 4. 11 LONDON Printed for Henry Overton and are to be sold at his Shop in Popes-head-Alley MDCXLVII To the High Court of PARLIAMENT of ENGLAND To the Assembly of DIVINES To the Christian Magistrates and Reformed Churches abroad Honourable and Reverend ALL that shall be prefaced unto you is an humble sute for your prudent consideration of the sequele For if I have rightly collected the opinion contended with represents you all guilty of Schisme against the Catholicke Church yea and of a higher crime so many of you as have with hands lift up to Heaven of which number my selfe am one ingaged your selves in materiall points of Reformation not onely without the Authority or endeavouring to have the minde of the Catholicke Church but have also concluded and established contrary to what it hath determined in all those Assemblies which our Brethren stile the Representatives of it From which transgression the truth here pleaded doth in that respect absolve you in the comfort whereof I would here also leave you But seeing there are those who would not onely have the opposed Tenet embraced for a fundamental truth in Church Government and propound it as a ground thereof but that it should also be constituted and established an ARTICLE of FAITH and Confession thereof I crave leave to adde a supplication and with all submission doe beseech you that the expedient of a great man about these affaires in his advice for the restoring of peace in the Church may be diligently weighed The summe saith he of our Religion is peace and unanimitie of which there is little hope unlesse those things that shall be injoyned as matters of faith bee as few as may bee and that wee leave mens judgements free in many things by reason that the obscurity in a number of them is exceeding great c. How much lesse then such opinions as are not onely New in the sence now propounded and controverted but moreover appugned constantly also by the most eminent of our owne party and is as inconsistent with your Liberties as Episcopacy which you have condemned Withall I presume you will not disdaine the wisedome and practise of the most ancient Churches after the Apostles times we see all their confession of faith in that briefe called the APOSTLES CREED and afterward the Nicene Creed made by the first Generall Councell and for the explication of the former in how few words is it comprehended yea and the confessions of the Reformed Churches and our owne 39. Articles are but briefe and for the most part cleere Austin saies The Rule of Faith is common to the weak and to the wise Which Vsshers in the explication of one almost as great upon it inferring that therefore The Rule of Faith must containe such truthes ONELY as are GENERALLY agreed upon by the consent of all true Christians and without controversie Many things should not be rendered of the substance of Faith for the denyall of which the crime of Heresy and Schisme and for the doubt whereof the penalty of rejection from the family and worke of the Lord must be inflicted The great Apostle every where exhorts with all those who hold in the maine the forme of sound words and yet are in other things diversly minded to preserve the vnitie of the spirit in the bond of peace The Lord restore the Churches to their just freedomes and keepe them from using their liberty as an occasion to the flesh but by love to serve one another And the same God raise and uphold the spirit of all States and Magistrates to be Nuâ—sing Fathers to them and continue to returne this your work of Faith and labour of love seven fold into your bosome So prayes An unworthy Minister of Christ Son of the Church and servant of this State JOHN ELLIS Jun. To the Pious and Ingenuous Reader TOuching my Call to this undertaking I shall give account in the following Tractate But the occasion of my falling on it was my defence against Mr Edwards or rather the Authour of the Letters which hee hath published in the first part of his Sanious Gangrena where I being charged to have said in publique That Popery would come in again under Presbytery as well as under Episcopacy if the Magistrate did not intervene I distinguished of Popery Doctrinall and Rective or in point of Government which latter I shewed was very probable for the substance though not the formalitie of it to follow upon the Presbyterie on the ground that it is now endeavoured viz. A Catholique Visible Governing Church whereunto when I had written it seemed convenient to publish that argument alone and because one of the Authours of this opinion had invited mee to deal in the point I was obliged to reply to him but seeing others also had written on the subject it had beene an imperfect opposition if I had not taken in the rest also For I knew no prohibition from replying to any neither are the hands of any tyed from answering unto me if they shall see cause at least mediately And let no man be offended that so ordinary an instrument as my self deales with so many and so considerable Persons The contest of one Paphnutius and he a lay person with the whole first and best Councell of Nice is vulgar As also that of the Canon Law one Laique if he speak scripture his testimony is to be prefered before the decrees of a Councell What ever distances there may be in other respects as years learning name pietie c. yet in Point of truth hee is on the highest ground that hath the advantage of that as the example of the young man Elihu in Job instructeth us Now this I first publish rather then the former Answer delayed not for want of innocency but of opportunity somewhat else impedeing also as men assayled by an adversary and a Breach of sea
this Argument If it follow not when we say God hath set in the World some Emperours some Kings some Princes some inferiour officers and Magistrates therefore the whole world is but one Governing Kingdome and all particular Kingdomes do but governe in the right of the Kingdome of the world in Common the Officers whereof are the Kings of the severall Kingdomes who being gathered together or a part of them have the povver of giving Lavves to other Kingdomes according to the Lavv of God and nature which are the rules of all just Government and this also to bee done by the Kings and Princes themselves vvithout any authority from or any dependency on the people unlesse for quietnes sake and as far as they see cause If as was said this follow not neither doth it follow that because the scripture saith God hath set some in the Church Apostles c. Therefore the Church throughout the world is but one Congregation to whose Officers first as the generall Officers of the whole Church not by way of distribution but as a Notionally at least collected body of Officers the power of Government is committed by Authoritie whereof and dependence upon which common officers and body the officers of every particular Church do act and those without any dependency upon the concurrence of the people as co-operating and acting with them unlesse for peace sake By which means let it be observed by all sorts The power being given not to any one Church but to the whole Church as one body and not to the members with the Officers but to the Officers onely there is derived a very Transcendent power and Authoritie upon every particular Minister more then any Parliament-man hath yea more then a King who is limited to his dominion It makes every Minister one of the standing Officers of the Christian world to whom with his Collegues not severally and by distribution but joyntly and as one body is committed the Government of the whole Christian world and managing of the Affaires of the Son of God throughout the face of the earth And so hee is one of Christs Vicars Generall and not particular onely which I acknowledge every Minister to be in his place magnum surely et memorabile nomen But if this bee so great reason is it that the Church of the whole world should choose these Vniversall Officers and so the Church of a nation the Nationall Officers c. by whom they are to be Governed in that which is of Dearest and highest moment viz. the precious soule or else their condition is most sad If every one that can get a little learning and desires to live upon the Sweat and cost of others and to become a minister though I professe that calling to be most difficult on earth and also that the Lord hath appointed that those that preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel and so being willing to submit to such conditions as is required shall have a friend patron or a purse to make one and come into the ministery and a living which is the Kings Road in some Churches and is the way whereby many of those who now are to be Presbyters came in he shall become a Parliament man and joynt Governour of the whole Church on earth by whose one vote all the liberties and truth of Religion in them may be destroyed A glympe whereof we have seen in the Convocations or Synods in our owne Nation This I say is sad yea more sad then the condition of men in their Civil Liberties In our owne Kingdom where none attains the honour of being an universal Officer a Parliament man but by the consent formal or virtual of all or the major part of them there having been a precedent act by joynt consent of the whole Nation that persons chosen by the free Vote of the major part of Corporations c. should if loyal be Officers pro tempore to their owne Corporations and to the whole But such agreement hath not been made no not tacitely by the Catholick Church nor no such institution of Christ hath appeared yet And these answers also are applyable to what the same Author hath else where from the word CHVRCH as when he denieth a Particular Church to be the proper subject of the covenant of grace and priviledges of it because saith he the CHVRCH to which these promises are made is perpetual Jer. 31. 36. The strength of which reasoning lies on this that the word Church and not Churches is used in these places and so it is represented as one Answ. As if it were not common to call that perpetual which is so by succession of those of the like Nature and Kinde because the Lord saith Day and Night shall not cease to the Worlds end doth it therefore follow that all the essential properties of day or night do not agree to this or that particular day Is it not a rule in Nature and Reason that all the essential properties of general and common beings are really existent in the individual and partilars Man is to continue on earth to the end of the World does not therefore the essential properties of man agree to Peter or Paul because they were not to continue His second and third Argument there is That a particular Church cannot be the subject of the covenant of Grace and consequently of Church power for the reason is the same because the Church which hath these is sanctified is the spouse of Christ hath the Law written in the heart of it c. but a particular Church as it is particular cannot be said to be such Answ. But 1. It was never said that one particular Church is so the subject of these as that another is not Secondly To speak properly The Church not as visible nor as particular nor as invisible nor as universal is the subject of these things but as a Church i. e. A society of Beleevers and under that nation a particular Church considered as a Church hath right to all and is the subject of all these All are yours saith the Apostle to the Corinthians whether Paul or Christ c. So that this Author by adding this clause as particular hath praevaricated and altered the state of the Question His last Argument in that place is from the Testimony of the Professors of Leyden and Amesius To which I answer That the former say nothing but that the covenant and promises and priviledges belong to true beleevers and the invisible Church whether in a particular Church or dispersed through the world So that this Testimony seems rather to make against him The other is expresly against him and speaks our very sense yea and terms almost insomuch that I wonder this Author is brought in as a witnesse His words are even as they are cited by Apollonius himself These things agree not to the whole multitude that professe Christ but onely to those that are truly
yet under the command of the Parliament and Lawes Martiall published by them So Christ from the Father by the Spirit is the governour of all Churches which Churches have no necessary dependence further then that of mutuall love spirit and law one on another His 5th and last Objection is The Catholicke Church may bee by persecutions c. reduced to one Congregation His answer is It may be so but that in that one Congregation there remaines all the Essence and Priviledges of the Catholicke Church Visible though it be but one single Congregation at present yea that it hath then more properly the notion of the Catholicke Church then of a particular one yea though but of one family as it was in Noah's family in the Arke But we see what straights this Large conceipt of the universall visible Church doth drive into for this implyes what was denyed before namely That the Church Catholick is a species or lower kinde and the particular Churches the severalls of it for else confounds Vniversall and particular together making an universall thing reducible to a particular and this extendible to an universal 2. How could it bee Vniversall but as containing the Essence seeing in respect of its visible and present being it is particular In which sence every Single man is a Catholique and Vniversal creature because he containes in him the same Essence and nature that is in all men and Adam should have been so in a special manner as being the first 3. A particular thing doth not therefore become an Vniversall one because it is first in its kinde and others that are produced from it particulars Vniversalitie is a notion though founded in Nature not an existing thing to which any order of actual being can be attributed 4. If the first in each kinde have all the priviledges of that kind whilest it remaines alone it shall bee a looser when it hath company if it then part with them unlesse it hath somewhat as good in Lieu which here appears not but the contrary 5. It no way followes that because from one many of the same kinde may spring that therefore either this first suppose a Family must have government over them all or they over it or over one another whether joyntly or severally unlesse they so agree or there be an institution of one superiour to them all Now how should it appeare there hath been or ought to bee any such grant here seeing there is no such record in scripture and besides hath beene the occasion of the rise of Papacy as Mr Noyes acknowledges And thus much of the things to bee noted before his Arguments 2. Now the Arguments themselves follow to bee answered they are of two sorts 1. Certain places of scripture 2. One argument from reason But seeing the former almost all runne upon the word CHVRCH set downe indefinitely they have been replyed to before His argument is If particular Churches be visible then there is an universall visible Church for every particular or part belongs to some generall and whole and such as the particulars are such the Generall if those be visible then this also Answ. More â—are should have beene taken then to use so lax à medium in so weighty an Argument as Mr. â— in the Licence acknowledgeth this to be But to the matter There is great difference betweene Natural and betweene Metaphysicall and â—ivill or Politicke bodies For in a Naturall body all whose parts and members are actually and naturally joyned and united together the whole is visible because the parts are visibleâ— but in a metaphysicall body or totum or whole that is in Generalls that are by the reason of man drawne from particulars the case is farre otherwise the particulars are visible the Generall or universall invisible Peter Iames and Iohn are visible but manhood or mans nature animal rationale which is the Vniversall agreeing to them all is not visible It is not to bee seene with the eye So also in Civil bodies or Corporations though the severall men may be seene yet the Corporation if great an Empire Kingdome and large Cittie cannot be seene in it selfe but in the parts unlesse by way of representation as in Parliament Common-Councell c. But 2 The whole is visible because the parts are so It is untrue even in the smallest bodies but where the parts are actually united and joyned together not where they are thousands of miles asunder such a body as a body cannot bee seene with the eye but it may be conceived to be one in the minde by vertue of some agreement or other betwixt the members of it or of its union in some Visible head but it is visible onely in respect of the severall parts of it Now in this sence none denies the universall Church to be visible that is that all Christians who are one in respect of their Religion they professe are visible in the severall places where they dwell But this is to prevaricate and to prove that which is not in question So that this reason is not so much as probable if it bee taken in the former sence much lesse any necessary concluding argument and least of all a demonstration which was promised by the Authour And in the other sence it is besides the Questioâ— And thus much for Mr Huâ—son's first Question viz. â—haâ— there is a Catholique visible Church His 2d is That this Church is the first subject of Ecclesiastique Power But because the proofs are much from the same places of Scripture which are answered above and the reasoning wholly on the same foundation viz. that â—ivers things are spoken of the Church which cannot agree to a particular Church as particular which also was replyed to before I shall not after too large a discourse already adde any more here nor shall I need for if I have acquitted my selfe in the former discourse in opposition to the notion of one universall visible Church or Corporation I neede not contend whether it be the first subject of Church power for it having no actuall being and existence at all it cannot be the subject of any power or act as non entis nulla sunt attributa so non existentis nullae sunt operationes onely the Reader may observe that the root of all the mistake in the former this authour and the rest about these questions is â—ither the not distinguishing the Nature and Essence of the Church in which respect it hath the names and things they urge given to it from the relations of Vniversall and particular which are notions and accidentall to it and confounding the Essence and existence the nature and the actuall being of the Church together applying that to the particular being as Particular which is spoken of them being particular but in respect of the common essence and nature not as particular Or 2. Not differencing betwixt the mysticalâ— and visible state of it
safety may be the more so here 5. How are we slidden from one Integral entire body flowing from one Church at Jerusalem c. to a body made up of voluntary Associations The Kingdom of England is one entyre Common-wealth or body corporate of it selfe intrinsecally politically the Vnited Provinces are one by aggregations and voluntary Association But these two Reipublicks do greatly differ now the Church general is asserted by the Reverend Assembly to be one Common-wealth and Body corporate to whom as one yea and as first before all particular Churches The Officers Ordinances and Governement of the Church is concredited and committed Of like incompossibility is what is there added for illustration sake viz. That this joyneing is such as proceeds Ex charitate ex debito mutuae societatis colendae as is betweene Friends and Equalls Non ex debito inferioris conditionis ad praestandum obsequium As betwixt Masters and servants For what is this but Verba dare rem auferre The Honourable Houses of Parliament and Assembly of Divines Kingdome and Churches of England take their liberty now to reforme the State and Church as they judge agreeable to Law Reason and Religion This opinion by consequence makes this Kingdome but a Depending Member of the Vniversall Monarchy of the World and doth expresly affirme the Church or Churches in this Nation to act but as such in respect of the Vniversal Church Whence it inevitably and evidently follows that they ought to be in actuall association with all the rest of the Nations and Churches of the World these being an hundred times more in number have power at pleasure to over-vote them and to governe them and yet must the Parliament Assembly the Nation and Churches of this Kingdome even when actually so overborne perhaps against their minde and wills fancie and coneit themselves as free and enjoying as much liberty as now they do May wee not ascend by a predicamentall Ladder Classibus Vniversalium Kek. must it bee by a Transcendent even to Reason it self Another confirmation of this third Argument is taken from the Light of Nature which requires say these Reverend Gentlemen that the meanes for the edification of Particular Christians should be as applyable to whole companies of them unlesse Gods word hath some where forbidden it To which I return 1. That this Light of Nature should not be too much urged for it will plead hard for Episcopacie and a Pope {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} will bussle shrewdly here 2. That the method of the Light of Nature is to follow the Scriptures in matters of Christian Religion and not to move in them where the Scriptures stand still and are silent hence I note in the ranging of the Arguments of the Ministers of London in their divine right of the Presbyterie that they place the light of Nature first which though they do as intending it for the lowest step yet it is not justifiable to make it any at all in the things of Christ but where it hath some precedent hint from Scripture 3. The light of Nature I have shown before doth make a difference betwixt the necessity of associating of particular persons and of Common-wealths such as the Church is said to be and differenceth also the associations of the one and the other making the former a necessary onenesse and singlenesse of Corporation and Government but the other meerly an arbitrary and temporary friendship 4. The Scripture hath more to forbid all Churches to associate into one body Vniversal Politick then it hath that particular Churches should be entire body Politicks or Corporations of themselves seeing there is often expresse mention of particular visible governing Churches but none expresly of an universal one 5. I retort the way of reasoning the light of Nature teaches there is not the same reason betwixt particular persons and Common-wealths in this particular and therefore not to bee made all one unlesse the Scripture had commanded it The last particular which may seem to be though not brought here by them for that end a confirmation of this Tenet is by occasion alledged in page 61. from the parallel of the Church of Christ with the Church of the Iews to whom the whole Tribe of Levi was given as their Ministry 1. As to one body together when in the Wildernesse 2. To them as one body fixed and dispersed in Canaan This is replyed to before I repeat now That these being and living together in one small Territory and meeting all the Males three times a yeer in one place Jerusalem at one meeting house the Temple doth not argue the Church scattered throughout the World to be therefore one no more then because one Kingdom may be one Common-wealth and have Officers in common therefore all Kingdoms must be one 2. Besides this instance engages all the Churches to meet at some one place to have one chief Governour besides the Elders in common with such other inconveniences as are usually urged against this parallel We have done with the Arguments one passage or two I shall animadvert upon and with due respect take my leave Whilest they endeavour to maintain That it is not left free but is a duty of every Congregation to associate with others They say All are enjoyned to be of some Congregation but when they joyn to this rather then to that the mutual consent between them and the Congregation with whom they joyn is that which immediately gives them that special relation one to another c. From which I note That here is implyed a liberty in particular Christians to joyn to such Churches as they shall see cause If this be so how is it that the violation of Parochial limits is so insisted on though oft-times manifestly prejudicial to edification c. and those who keep not unto their Parishes presented and persecuted and those ministers that admit Christians of other Parishes resented as the destroyers of particular Congregations and such who novo inaudito exemplo gather Churches out of Churches Now it will not salve to say 1. That at the first constitution of Parishes there was such voluntary consent seeing 1. Which Parishes did so doth not appear And secondly In many 't is evident they were cast into parishes by those who were lords of those Mannors 3. Neither is it rationally probable that the whole Nation to one man did voluntarily receive the Gospel it self seeing fraud and force neither of which are voluntary motives were the tooles of Popery under which the conversion National was made 4. And though at first the union of such might be convenient yet afterward it may become an hinderance Yet am not I for the drawing of any Godly Able and faithful ministers people from him who is for the substance of Reformation though with many defects in lesser things Nor 2. will it be sufficient to say that when they choose to dwell in such parishes that then they consent to be
TO EACH BELEEVER THEN TO THE WHOLE CHVRCH which I desire may be observed Again He makes the authoritie of a general Councel to depend on that promise When two or three are gathered in my name c. And then saith That this as well agreeth to any particular company of Christians as to a generall Councel 2. It doth not appear to me in those chapters that hee ownes general Councells on any such grounds nor do I see how he can by what he saith on Eph. 4. 11. above cited 3. If these Councells he there approves did excommunicate c. yet he doth not mention his approbation of them in those things and wee may apprehend he might count such actions among those particulars of their failings which he there enumerates 2. After his Argument he makes the objection M. Hudson had done viz. The whole Church hath no visible head Ergo It is no one Visible Corporation or body He replies to this 1. Particular Churches are visible Churches though destitute of Officers But I Reply should they be so if they had not one common bond of particular laws administred by one person or one visible Society of Officers 2. They may all meet as one visible body the universal Church then must either meet so or else have some visible officers universal over the whole Secondly he saith Christ is supposed the Visible Head in some respect Answ. But that is not the question but what visible existent head there is on earth by whom it may appear one Visible bodie As we saw before out of Calvin on Ephes. 4. 11. 2. How can we contain Christ visible properly 3. He saith The Church is one so as to act ordinarily as one divisim dividedly and yet by reason of the mutual consent in all Churches one act of power done in one Church is by authority of the universal Church and reaches to all Churches as excommunication out of one is excommunication out of all But 1. There was never any Society or Corporation that acted as one dividedly and in parts unlesse it did first act as one joyntly together and in a body wherein power was given to such divided bodies to act so unlesse it were upon some sudden and extraordinary accident that required immediate action before the body could convene 2. Every Society though it may act in parts as a Kingdome in severall Corporations and a Corporation in severall Wards or Halls and Companies yet hath it withall one common ordinary and standing officer or officers visible to governe in chiefe to whom all maine causes are referred c. But 3. That the particular Church that acteth in the right of the universall Church by reason of mutuall consent in all Churches is not proved by that medium for mutuall consent may be voluntary and accidentall and so a figure onely whereas hee is to prove that all Churches are necessarily essentially by way of institution and for ever to be one body whether they consent or consent not But a particular Church acteth first In the right of Christ who is the first subject of Church power Matth. 28. 28. Secondly it acteth in the right of a Church that is of a Societie that hath embraced the faith of Christ which as a Church indefinitely and essentially is the next subject of Church power because we see such power committed to every Church so we heard even now Calvin to expound that promise Matth. 18. when tvvo or three are gathered c. which I finde also the forepraised Author to have said before me whom at the writing of this above I had not seene in the particular 4. That he that is excommunicated out of one Church if duely is excluded out of all is not because the whole Church is one visible body but because all the particular Churches agree in nature and essence of Doctrine Worship and Government so that he that is unfit to be a member of one is so of all because they all require the same essentiall conditions as he that is cut off by the hand of Justice for violation of the Lawes of nature in one Common wealth is cut out of all yet it doth not follow that all men are one Common wealth Or as hee that is out-lawed in one Corporation justly is outlawed in all Congregations virtually and upon the matter though not directly and formally till hee be so declared by them if those Corporations go all by the same lawes for substance and government though it doth not follow that these severall corporations are therefore one or under one generall body which as I take it is the case betwixt England and Scotland where by reason of union under one King though the governments remaine distinct yet one that is borne in either Kingdome is not an Alien but a Free-borne Denizon of both and so by consequence as I apprehend for I may be mistaken in a Law notion and I bring it but for illustration hee that is out-lawed in one Kingdome cannot remaine under the protection of the Lawes of the other and yet the bodies are distinct in power and government though not divided wholy but in some respect So in the Church In the third and last place he comes to authorities But here either he cites those who are nothing for him or when they dispute the point professedly are expressly against him as his first Author Chamier who though he say that if not every Pastor yet all of them are set over the whole Church yet when he argueth the point he explaineth himselfe to mean all distributively every one in his charge as all the Maâ—ors and Sheriffes governe the whole Kingdome but not joyntly but severally for hee denyeth such an one visible universall Church as Mr Hudson acknowledged and as we saw before The 2. Are other moderne Divines whom Mr Noyes would have not to consist with themselves whilest they deny an universall visible Church and yet grants Judiciall Power to Synods But it hath beene shewed before that this may be granted though the other be denyed c. The 3. Are the Fathers who he saith so predicated an universall visible Church they laid the foundation for an universall Bishop If so then let this Author take heed he lay not a foundation to raise him out of the grave againe in his Image as I have heard a Reverend Elder of New England called an universal visible Church in respect of the Papacy and to bury the liberties of all the Christian Churches in his grave The 4. Author is Polanus who saith the things of God are administered Synodali {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} by the determination of the Synod but are confirmed Regia {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} by the Kings authoritie Wee allow the Power of determining with Calvin above cited according to the word of God to Synods and are well content and thankfull that Kings will become Nursing Fathers to the Church
never for there never was yet any universal meeting of the Catholick Church nor its officers though some Councells have been called Generall because of the number of Bishops unitie of places from whence they have come and the Emperours latitude of Dominion that called them 3. From hence would follow that very many particular Churches would be in peril to be greatly damaged seeing in appeals they must be adjudged by those that are many thousand miles distant from them and could not have perfect * cognizance of the cause nor in case they wanted information for their guidance in judgement could by reason of distance have it in time 4. Great would be the vexation charges travel c. that would arise from such a Court as whereunto Appeals were to come and yet such there must be if the whole Church be but one Corporation 3. A third and fourth prejudice and probable exception against this opinion is T is Papal and Anti-Protestant 1. Papal not indeed in regard of the height of it as it refers the root and head of this universallity unto Rome onely but in regard of the opinion it self An universal visible Church a mayne ground of the former M. Hudson and so M. Noyes indeed would avoid this prejudice also but with Labour in Vain He saith he stateth not the question as the Papists do because they take Visible for Glorious Catholick for Romane and subject it to the Pope For 1. whatsoever the Papists add to the question yet the substance and substratum of it is the same In vain should they fix the seat of it at Rome and subject it to the Pope if it might not be in it self one Corporation and Republique 2. Again they do not take visible for glorious but for that which is obvious to the sense though they make Glorious an adjunct thereunto 3. They so fix the seat of the Church at Rome and subject it to the Pope severall of the most eminent of them as that it is onely in the absence of a general Councel which they make above the Pope as being the Church Catholick Representative as is shewed else-where But to return Bellarmine de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 11. haveing related the opinion of the Protestants and propounded the Romish in opposition thereunto viz. There is a visible Catholick Church He proves it by the same places that the Authors of this opinion do to wit Mat. 16. Vpon this Rock I will build my Church and Chap. 18. Tell the Church which though in that place he bring to prove it Visible yet it implies to make it universal also for both these joyntly Catholick Visible he was to prove in opposition to the Protestants for as they say this could not be meant of a particular Church So hee that it cannot be meant of an invisible And he defines it to be one visible Church or Congregation of men bound together by the profession of the same faith and participation of the same sacraments under the government of lawfull Pastors and especially of that onely Vicar of Christ on earth the Pontiffe or Bishop of Rome In the definition it is to be noted that hee makes all beleevers but one single Corporation or Congregation though divided in places under one single Governent under one visible head the Pope of Rome In all but the last clause which is not Essential to the thing though it be to those persons the definition agrees to the minde of the authours of the opinion here impugned And 2. It is Anti-Protestant being opposed generally by them Calvine disputing against the Papists about the unitie and visibilitie of the Church saith as was noted before The onenesse of the Church consisteth in the onenesse of faith And for the visibilitie he saith It is not necessary for the preserving of this unitie that we should see the Church with our eyes Chamier in his Answer to Hardings Argument against Jewell Art 4. Sect. 17. urging that Every multitude in it selfe one did stand in need of one Governour by whom it might be managed but the Church visible is in it self one saith The Church as it is Catholicke or Vniversall is not one in it selfe because it is one generall or universall gathered and aggregated of many particular Churches as if one should say the kingdome or a Kingdome not this or that Kingdome but Kingdome in generall the parts whereof are all particular Kingdomes the French Spanish English For SO the word CHVRCH being taken it is compounded mark not constituted of infinite particular Churches the Romane Constantinopolitane c. Now that which is one in that sence it is manifest that it needs no one governour for not as to every Kingdom there is a King so to all Kingdomes there is one King that that which is called Kingdome in Generall may have a being and therefore not in the Church neither as it is understood to be one collected of many particular Churches Is it necessary that one should be president He evidently both denyeth and excellently refuteth this Catholick union by this very thing because the Church is Catholicke therefore not really one but notionally only as all the Kingdomes in the world are one in the nature and notion of Kingdomes but not one corporation or one Government And so before him Bishop Jewell in answer to the same Papist proving the minor or second part of the former argument viz. That the Church is one visible Congregation or societie because as our brethren do there is one faith and Baptisme one calling so one Church as Saint Paul saith ye all are one body and members one of another and in our Creede wee all professe to beleeve one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church saith that whereas Mr Harding had proved the major also out of Aristotles 12. booke of his Metaphysicks out of Homer Never did Aristotle or Homer dreame of this NEW FANCY that one King should rule over the whole world And by consequence or that the whole world was but one Kingdome and so he implyeth it to be as ridiculous that all Churches should bee but one governing Church and hee addeth what is considerable in this Argument wherein reason is followed rather then scripture His reason were better if either Peter or Paul or any Catholick Father had used it and then citeth Austin de Doct. Christ l. 3. c. 28. who saith To attribute much to discourse of reason in understanding scripture haec consuetudo periculosa est this custome is dangerous per scripturas enim divinas multo tutius ambulatur It is far safer following of the Scripture So that Bishop Jewell conceiveth this against both scripture and Antiquitie Mr Rutherford also due right of Presbytery pag. 231. titleing the page thus How our Church hath been visible makes it out only by this That in all Ages there have been some who have held the same points with us in the main Implying the visibility
is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} depends upon and is referred to the Pope I answer 1. Besides what is said above The Popes themselves in some actions insinuate that they are not supreme in their owne personall relation but as the head president or chair-man of the Vniversall representative Presbyterie which are the Colledge of Cardinalls representing the Colledge of Apostles said to be the Generall Presbyterie representative of the Catholicke Visible Church Hence the forme of some Instruments in the Popes name is By the advice of the most Reverend the Cardinalls His Holinesse decrees such or such a thing In Imitation of Kingdomes which Christ forbiddeth his Church as being of an other nature where the Parliament represents the Kingdome and in their absence the King and Councel represent them both hence perhaps it is that in Proclaimations the forme often is Wee saith the King by the Advice of our Privie councell c. 2. Papists of chiefest note * yea Popish Vniversities yea Popish Councells does assert a Generall Councell which is nothing else but an Vniversall Presbytery to be above the Pope So that it may be really Popish though all do not depend on or bee referred to the Pope firstly and primarily Now that this Catholique Visible Church as our Brethren have represented it may degenerate or rather advance thereunto let it be considered that Papall Government it self had the like originall It is granted even by Bishops themselves That the Bishop at first was but the PRESIDENT or Chaire-man of the Presbyterie or assembly of Ministers Afterwards partly by the Ambition of those who were chosen to that place partly by the sloth flattery and slavishnesse of the rest of the Ministers and people all came under him So also at first each Church did all things among themselves as ordaine excommunicate c. Afterwards they associated with the great Churches in time what was of voluntary consent became a necessity and due subjection So the Bishops of Rome at first for civilities sake because it was the Emperours Seat had the Precedency for a time at length claimed it as due So here if an universall coporation there must be universall Officers over these one President or super-intendent or Chaire-man hee perhaps may have it for his life if an able man and may obtaine to act with a Committee as the representative of a Generall councell in their absence and what hinders but if another Boniface and Phocas An ambitious President and wicked Emperour meet hee may be made Vniversall Bishop Men are more loose in their Ecclesiasticall then Civil Liberties And if this Government bee not of God he will leave it to corrupt it selfe even as the other did But Thirdly Necessarily and of it self it tends to the depriving of all particular Churches of their Libertie yea though they should be Nationall Churches 1. Because In them particular Churches are not left to their choise but are Bound by this opinion to associate and to send Elders to the Councells and Presbyteries so the Reverend Assembly * 2. Though they should not doe it yet are they neverthelesse under the Government of the Catholique Church which is the first subject of Church power and so are bound to act according to the Letter or Plaine sence of the determinations of the Catholicke Church without adding altering or detracting in any Materiall thing especially which might concern the whole Church * And then what will become of the Reformations of all the Reformed Churches 2. In particular in respect of the Protestant Churches of Europe 1. Because they are much fewer then the other Churches of the world that are in the maine Orthodox as some whiles since a * Presbyterian Writer hath given in the account 2. Who shall exclude the Popish and other Heterodox Churches from being members of the Catholicke Visible Church till by a Generall Councell they be heard and excommunicated or Non communioned And whether the major part of the Churches in the world will consent to such an Excommunication or Non-communion is uncertaine and then they must VOTE also and so the Orthodox Churches will be the more over-borne Object 1. But it may be it will be said the throat of the cause is yet safe because it seems sufficient that the major part of those that are of the same judgement ought to governe the lesse To which I reply that in all Corporations and Common-wealths as our Brethren say the Vniversall Visible Church is not the major part of a Part but the major part of the whole body are to rule the rest and that not divided in severall places at a distance but convened together at least in some neernesse of place Object 2. If it be said that by reason of distance of place and multitude of persons this cannot be done viz. the collection of the Catholicke Visible Church I answer and say 1. Therefore such an opinion is not to be asserted which unavoidably and necessarily enforceth such a gathering 2. That in respect of the Commissioners general some for many Churches which the Authours of this opinion doe or must allow it may be done for matter of companie or number 3. Princes from one end of the world to the other hold leagues and correspondencies together as doth the Kingdom of England with Russia in the North and Persia in the East 4. Rome governs in all parts of the world as a single corporation notwithstanding distance of place 5. Lastly The Churches of Europe at least might have met for the Reformations they have endeavoured as many of them did in the Synod of Dort about Arminius CHAP. V. The Arguments for an Vniversal Visible Governing Church with the answers to them HItherto we have as it were battered and taken the Assailants Worke it remains that we seise on their Ammunition and Weapons the opposite reasonings produced by them And first to the Arguments of Appollonius who by the way I observe to give the cause in all particulars but one or two to those of the Congregational way and well he could not avoid it seeing that the Churches of Holland go by the same principles except that of the authority of Synods and baptizing of all children which latter how it stands with their denying Church-fellowship to all ipsi viderint But to his Arguments The first is taken out of 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath set in the Church some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers which Church there is said to consist of divers and heterogeneal members but the Ministry the Apostles c. are not given to any particular Church and the Apostles c. were the Governours of the Catholick Church Ergo The Visible Catholick Church is one Governing body under which all particular Churches are subjected and conteyned Answ. At the stating of the Question I premised the distinction of onenesse in Essence and mysterie and onenesse in
faithful or they agree to the Church militant in respect of its ESSENTIAL Nature which is proper to the truly faithful So then not to a Church as Vniversal or particular as Visible or invisible but as essentially a Church which a particular Church may be And the former replies also will serve unto what the other Authors urge from such like Scriptures and places as 1. M. Hudson from Act. 8. 3. Saul made havock of the Church Gal. 1. 13. I persecuted the Church 1 Cor. 10. 32. Give none offence to the Church of God 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath set some in the Church 1 Tim. 3. 15. That thou mayest know how to behave thy self in the Church of God Also when it is called the Kingdom of God a Barne a Draw-net a Marriage and because 1. Cor. 12. the Church is said to be one Body and one Woman Apoc. 12. one sheepfold John 10. one Dove Cant. 2. 2. All which and other places wherein the word Church is used are to be understood as hath been evidenced either of the Church in respect of the nature and essence of it as all beleevers and Churches have the same kind of Faith Doctrine c. or else as one mystical and invisible body of Christ but doth not at all insinuate much lesse prove that they are all one external and visible Corporation 3. M. Noyes who useth the same places of Scripture as the other as also Apoc. 11. 1 2 3. the Church is described as one City one new Jerusalem c. Answ. That place is taken by great Expositors to signifie such a state as is not yet in being what it will be when that shall exist is uncertain Secondly We grant it to be one City and Kingdome as a mysticall body 1. In respect of Christ the head 2. In regard that all Churches in their severall places walke by the same Laws c. i. e. as essentially agreeing together but not visibly governing as one body 4. The London Ministers part 1. pag. 3. who urge the forenamed place 1 Cor. 12. and that the Apostle maketh the whole Church but one Organical body a contradiction to their assertion Praefat. p. 11. That the Church is a similar body which overthrows their present Tenent for in a similar body all the parts together have no more internal power then single as in drops of water single Corporations as single though united in place So part 2. p. 66. where also they say that Eph. 4. 4. Christ is considered mystically not personally and if mystically not visibly Answ. First The Apostles scope and then the supposition he goes on are to be eyed The scope is to exhort to humility in great gifts to contentednesse in mean gifts and to love and edification by all gifts The supposition he grounds his Argument on is the relation wherein believers stand viz. of members of one and the same body sâ—il of Christ mystically considered as the Ministers speak but he neither expresseth nor implyeth the visibility of this body or the outward onenesse of it if he mean the Catholick and not the particular Church of Corinth 5. Lastly The Reverend Assembly who in the places above mentioned quote Eph. 4. 3. c. To which Answer hath been given above and may again when we come particulary to reply unto them And thus much in answer to the first Argument of Apollonius and others drawn from expressions that speake of the Church as one one body house Kingdome family sheepfold which is indeed the Achileum or Fort Royall in this Garison and which if I be not greatly overseene hath been by the former weapons out of Christs Armory absolutely taken and demolished The second Argument followes which is There is certaine Societie and Ecclesiasticall communion by divine institution and therefore a certain universall body for there is a certain internall fellowship and obligation to mutuall offices Eph. 4. 3 4 5 6. which doth require an externall and outward Society and Commuion Ecclesiasticall in exhorting reproving comforting edifying one another and that fellowship which the members of a particular Church retain among themselves in a due proportion Churches Provinciall and Nationall ought to keep by which communion Ecclesiasticall all Nationall Churches do grow up to one Vniversall Ecclesiasticall body Ans. This reason no way concludes the intended proposition I willingly grant there is a mutuall fellowship and spirituall communion which also requires an outward communion in many respects and particularly in those named by this Author viz. exhortation reproof c. And indeed this was all the combination that was in the most Primitive Churches and such inward and outward communion there is to bee betwixt all good men friends brethren nations c. But this argues not that therefore they must be one body in point of Government Neighbour Nations are to retain this inward communion and outward so farre as may make for mutuall good and there may bee a society or league betwixt them as betwixt Solomon and the King of Aegypt betwixt Solomon and Hiram King of Tyre So men of the same trade and profession in regard of the same art have an internall communion together and this requires some outward communion also as occasion serves but it no way concludes that therefore they must needs be one body or Corporation Suppose some dwell at London some at Yorke some in England and some in France 2. It is also granted that the same Vnion that the members of a Church have one with another the same have the severall Churches among themselves IN A DVE PROPORTION which are the words of the Author but this proportion is not IDENTITIE or samenesse of Relation that is it is not so neer a relation nor gives that power that the former relation doth As the same relation that the members of a Family have one unto another the same in a due proportion have particular families one to another but no man will say that what the members of a family especially some of them may doe one to another the same may a Corpoporation of Families do among themselves there is some neernesse but not altogether the same And this also is sufficient for the second Argument I shall meet with it again anon in the first Argument of the Reverend Assembly The Third There were certaine meetings in the New Testament which did represent the whole Church and wherein the businesse of the whole Church was transacted to wit the calling of an Apostle which was a part of Ecclesiasticall Discipline and there were the Pastors of the universal Church for they were sent unto all the world Matth. 21. 19. and therewere the brethren out of Galilee and Jerusalem Answ. 1. I deny with the Protestant Divines against the Papists that there is any Representative Church properly so called or that this was one it was onely at present a Particular Congregation whereof the Apostles were members though principall ones but not
one particular visible Church so all particular Churches by this association make but one Catholick visible Church Ministerial and Governing of right all the rest Answ God and Christ have disposed and ordered the Government of the World and the Church according to the severall conditions whereinto the providence of the one and the other hath determined to bring them When wee are Children God hath appointed one kinde of government for us viz. to be under tutors and governours until the time of age and then we are not so when afterward a man is disposed in marriage though he have a relation to his Parent yet not a necessary dependence on him in point of government So whilst a Family is but one it is gouerned as one body by one or more Parents of Officers who in point of government are one single body but as was said if this Family multiply beyond the bounds of that first house they are not now still to be fancyed to be but one Catholick Family to be governed in common Take for instance the Family of Adam or Noah The whole world was but then one Family and governed by one man c. shall we need to repeat the absurdity of the consequence if therefore we should conclude that the severall Kingdoms and Nations are not therefore to act as Independent Corporations but as parts of the body Politick of the World which is Gods kingdom general And yet there is a relation betwixt all societies of men as men by vertue whereof they are all to regard the common good of mankinde c. In like manner doth Christ in his Church when beleevers are babes he would have them the more absolutely to subject themselves to their spiritual Parents when growne up they have a greater freedom and are to be otherwise governed the Apostle bids Timothy not to rebuke an Elder but to intreat them as Fathers c. So when the whole Church was but one company they were governed as such and by one company of Officers that had charge over them all and every one particularly according to their several offices As the Pastors to teach every one the Rulers to watch over every one the Deacons to provide for every one c. But this Family of the second Adam and second Noah as Peter implies him to be spreading into many particular Families and Nations the Scripture never I say never represents them as one visible body in respect of their outward Association and Government but still speaks of them as many the Churches of Judea which yet under the Legal government was but one the Church Act. 7. pray why this difference of speech but to confute this onenesse visible of all Churches When they are called the Church it reflects upon them as one in Faith Spirit kind of worship and Government as the place alledged Eph. 4. 1. plainly expresses And yet I denie not that these particular Churches are to have a regard to the common good of all Churches and not to act as if they were in relation to none but themselves and for this end also it is convenient and sometimes necessary if it may be done to associate with other Churches for mutual assistance and to meet in Synods and Councels together as did the Church of Antioch and Jerusalem and the Churches in the Primitive times The kingdom of England and so other Nations are bound in some cases to associate with other Kingdoms and are actually associated with them as also was Solomon with the king of Aegypt and Hiram king of Tyre but is England not to act as an Independent Kingdom from France Spain Scotland or the Kingdom of Israel or Independent saving the Articles of Association for all * that They add in the same place as a prevention of an objection That as the mutual consent of particular men and families orderly into Churches gives them Power and Authority Ecclesiasticall one over another without destroying the liberty of such persons and families but helping of it so also in this association of Churches their mutuall consent orderly regulated gives them a sufficient call for their Elders to exercise their power of Elders over the Congregations in common without impeaching the liberties c. But 1. This similitude doth not truely represent these Brethrens opinion who hold that the Catholicke visible Church is before any particular Church and is the first subject of all Church Power and the mother out of which particular Churches spring whereas this similitude makes the particular Churches to exist First as mothers to the universall this being according to their expression now nothing else but a collection or aggregation of them Secondly This seems inconsistent with the former reasoning for if by Divine Right all particular Churches are but one universall and generall Church or Corporation and all particular men and families by Gods appointment are to associate with some particular Church then have the Churches right to this common government not from any consent but from Gods institution whether the members or persons consent or consent not yea and hence is it that Churches and Presbyteries may by our brethrens principles bee excommunicated for we may suppose some Churches will not consent to such associations Objection If it bee said This consent grounds the relation to this or that particular Church with which they shall associate I reply that this removes not the objection for in generall they are ingaged unto subjection to the universall Church and the particular Church to which they joyne is but a necessary condition that they may the better bee under the universall discipline 3. The case is not the same betwixt particular persons and Families joyning into some particular Congregation and the association of several Churches into one body much lesse of all into one generall Common-wealth For the former instance plainly confutes it A man or family is ordinarily bound to be of some Kingdom Common-wealth or State but it doth not therefore follow that all States or Kingdoms must needs be associated together into one general Common-wealth neither is the reason the same For a whole Kingdom State or Society is better able to defend it self against injuries and to accomodate it self with necessaries than a particular person or Familie and what is wanting may be sufficiently supplyed by meer Voluntary Arbitrary and Temporary Association in a Common-wealth which in a Family or Person is not so 4. It must not be said by rational men that 1. All men are bound to associate and so all Churches 2. They being associated are to be governed by others which are more then themselves and yet their liberty is not diminished but strengthned if the Reverend Assembly shall say that their security and safety may possibly bee thereby strengthened it might in some cases be admitted But surely as the liberty of a particular man or family is not the same before he is bound to others and afterward though his
The 5. and last are the Professors of Leyden who say that in the Synod is the top of Authoritie the unitie of the whole Church the establishment of order But they speake of particular Synods in particular Churches And do not subvert what was shewed out of them above In fine he acknowledgeth that the PAPISTS would build their Babell on THIS foundation which I thinke they well may or some-what like it and so I remit this Author to the Reverend Elders of New England who are much more able to deale with him and of some of whom hee will heare about this Argument I suppose very shortly The 5. and last that to my view have appeared in defence of this notion are the London Ministers Before I come to their arguments I shall after the example of a Reverend member of the Assembly do right to some of both sides Principal men there are in those waies and even of the Assembly it selfe whose judgements and practise have not beene truely represented by the Ministers in their Collation of the opinion of the Presbyterians and the Independents I will instance onely in one present question The Independents are said to hold no other Visible Church of Christ but only a single Congregation meeting together in one place to partake of all Ordinances But this is not their opinion That it is essentially required to the very being of a visible Church that it meet in one place they hold it de benè esse for conveniency not absolutely necessary now it is not ingenuous to fasten upon a way or man generally that which some such as wil be in any profession particular and perhaps weak or passionate men may hold 2. These brethren observe not that themselves are in the whole fault of that which the Independents owne in this charge scil. making no other a visible Church then a single Congregation for if the Brethrens opinion bee true the Catholique Visible Church is made but one single Congregation or Corporation though too bigge to meet together but in their Deputies For if it have the same visible Lawes under the same visible order of Officers and these Officers one visible societie or Colledge over each and over the whole then is it as much one particular and single Corporation as Stepny or Cripple-gate Now on the contrary for that opinion that is opposed to this and said to be the judgement of the Presbyterians viz. that there is one General visible Church of Christ on earth whereof all particular Churches and single Congregations are but as similar parts of the whole There is not onely no one Presbyterian could hitherto be shewed to be of that judgement till the sitting of this Assembly in favour of whom Apolonius wrote but also divers above evidenced to be against it and acknowledged so by the Authors of this opinion Plain dealing is the best policie But to their arguments 1. They urge the forenamed place 1 Cor. 12. and say the Apostle speaks of one Generall Church because he saith Church not Churches 2. Because he speaks of it in such a latitude as to comprehend all gifts of the spirit all members all officers ordinary and extraordinary which cannot agree to a particular Church Answ. 1. Wee have shewed that the Church taken essentially is one though Integrally and in respect of its existence and particular government it is as manifold as there are particular Churches Now to the Church in the former sence are those things given all men in essence and nature are one to man in this respects is given Governours and Government arts and gifts c. must all therefore be one Common wealth 2. Or else which I rather adhered to the Church is taken in that place mystically for the whole society or family in heaven and earth as was then evidenced 3. All these Officers and gifts were given to the Church of Corinth immediately though not solely and onely The light of the Sun is given immediately to that particular place on which it shines with all the brightnesse and influence of it but not solely 4. In this superintendency over the whole Church whether severally or joyntly the Scripture hath instituted no Successors to the Apostles 5. By Apostles might be meant the chief Officers of Corinth A second place and wherein they handle this subject more expresly is part 2. chap. 8. where their first Argument is drawne onely from those places that name the Church indefinitely as on this Rock will I build my Church He hath set some in the Church Apostles c. And their second taken from such places as compare all visible Professors to one Organical body which are some of the same places they used in the first Argument as 1 Cor. 12. We being many are one body so Rom. 12. 4. Ephes. 4. 11. Answ. 1. These have been replyed to above 2. They do not make the whole Visible Catholick Church one Organical but one Similar body in our Brethrens first assertion But Organical and Similar are opposite as was shewed in answer to M. Hudson whom in this inconsistencie opinion and expression they have either followed or he some of them 3. Next they endeavour to prove that the word Ministry Ordinances and particularly Baptisme are given to the generall visible Church the method Mr Hudson used Moses mother was his Nurse also whence it will follow that there is a Generall Visible or Catholique Church Therefore I shall take this for a third head of Arguments and Answer to it 1. The word Ministery Ordinances c. all of them are given immediately to every particular Church where they are and where there may be use of them though not solely and the first two places quoted speak immediately of the Church of Ephesus and the third immediately of the Church of Corinth the fourth of the Church at Rome 2. They are given to the Church as one Essentiall or Mysticall body But no way concludes they must bee one Visibly no more then the gifts of Reason Arts Speech the Government of Emperours Kings Princes the order of Inferior and superiour members given by God to mankinde doth prove that therefore all men are one Visible General Corporation or Common-wealth or Integral Organical Similar bodie consisting of parts as a similar body altogether alike and as an organical body of parts heterogene and nothing alike which even a plain Reader will perceive to be as uncouth Logick as Divinity CHAP. VI The Conclusion 1. Corrollaryes 2. A word to the Authors of this Opinion ANd thus by the assistance of God an answer hath been given though 't is like they will not so be answered to these Brethren And therein I hope I have spoken as the oracles of God both for truth and sobernesse Sure I am I have endeavoured though perhaps not without some failing to observe that of the Father Worthy saith one to be written on the chairs of all Divines and Disputants
at once first stop the inundation that will drowne all though the enemie in the mean time prevail the more The CONTENTS 1. THe Occasion and first Authors of the opinion of one Catholick Visible GOVERNING Church Together with the intent and scope of this Treatise as also the Authors call to this service Chap. 1. Page 1. 2. The State of the Question Chap. 2. page 4. 3. The just prejudices and strong probabilities against the former Notion Chap. 3. page 10. 4. Demonstrations against it from the efficient cause of Church Government from the material from the formal and final Chap. 4. page 19. 5. Answers to the Arguments produced for it Chap. 5. 1. By Apollonius page 33. 2. By M. Hudson page 51. 3. The Reverend Assembly page 60. 4. M. Noyes page 70. 5. The London Ministers page 78. 6. The Conclusion Chap. 6. page 83. 1. Illatory or by way of Corrollary 2. Hortatory to the Brethren of this opinion To the Reader Whereas I have reckoned chap. 1. Mr Randal in his treatise of the Church among mine Adversaries in the Argument I handle upon better search I finde him not to be so but to hold the Catholicke Church as others did and my selfe doe as by a marginall quotation I have made appear CHAP. I. The occasion and first Authors of the Question Together with the intent and scope of this Treatise As also the Authors call unto this service SECT. I. GOD having put it into the heart and hand of the Parliament of England to set upon Reformation of the Church as well as of the Common-wealth they for that end conveened an Assembly of such Learned and Godly men as they adjudged meet for their direction in that work and those of known different Judgements Episcopal Presbyterial and Congregational that they might by their opposition the better discern what way of Church Government and Reformation they should countenance and strengthen with their Authority Now the Episcopal way â—aving rendered it self odious by its imperiousnesse and otherwise the contest remained betwixt the other two whereof the Presbyterian being practised in some things in certain Reformed States and Churches who were partly constrained thereunto there being some hints of Scripture also that might be apprehended to look that way Some other things withal concurring got place either in the interests or affections of a great part of the Assembly Parliament City and Ministers in the Country Hereby also they were eyed the more by the Churches abroad that were of that way and had the opportunity to improve their endeavours for their assistance The Congregational way in the mean time though it wanted not Assertors very learned and godly and of great name in the Church and had the advantage of an amiable pattern of it in the new-English Plantations and withall the daily accesse and addition of the most knowing and conscencious sort of Professors Yet by reason of the former disadvantages it was not rendered so considerable among the Churches abroad as to depart from received Principles or neglect to appear in the defence of the former for consideration of it Hereupon the Walachrian Classis in Holland among others being sollicited by the Presbyterian partie here for their assistance they appoint G. Apollonius Pastor of the Church at Middelburgh to take on him this province and having according to his principles acquitted himself of that service in a Tractate intituled A consideration of certain controversies which concern the Government of the Church of God agitated in England the approbate of the Classis is added to the book and published 1644. both in Latin and English This Author observing as it seems that the assault on the way of the Presbyterian Government was like to be strong and fearing that the former basis and foundations of it viz. That the Government of the Church was to be by the Elders and they in equal povver 2. That it is alvvaies convenient if attainable and sometimes necessarie that Churches be associated and act in combination vvith joynt consent 3. That as Princes and States have an Independent povver within their owne limits so Churches under the Government of one Prince or State have no absolute or necessary dependance on other Churches in point of Ecclesiastick Power and Government c. These grounds as was said being doubted whether defensible the Author in the third Chapter of his discourse which treates of the Visible Instituted Church betakes himself to a larger medium and of all men that I know of the Presbyterian and almost of the Protestant judgement he first layes down this conclusion That there is a certain universal outward Church dispersed through the whole World described in the Scriptures which in a certain visible Government doth make one onely Corporation Ministerial Church-body or Political society under which all particular Churches Classical Provincial and National as it were parts of the vvhole are conteyned Apollonius is followed herein by M. Hudson in his Book written on this Subject Intituled the Essence and Vnitie of the Church Catholick visible also by the Reverend Assembly of Divines as we shall see afterward Again by M. Noyes a Minister of New-England in his book intituled the Temple measured and lastly by certain London Ministers in their Tract of the Divine Right of the Presbyterian Government by which it seems the Notion is so amiable that there is as it were a kind of Ambition who should appear first in being the Authors or Owners of it Though the truth is this conceit for substance hath been before all these the Tenet of some others whom it is not any great honour to be followers of in this as first the Papists generally also a few Episcopal men as Crakanthorpe M. Randall and perhaps some others And it may be by some absolute Royalists for that spirit must needs work in Church affairs to some such opinion I remember one of them being in conference about Church-government acknowledged indeed the Church of Rome to have abused its power that way but conceived that it was necessary for the Catholick Church to have some one standing Court and place of residence whereunto to have recourse on all occasions and which might have authority over and influence upon the vvhole to this effect was his discourse which opinion cannot be avoyded if the notion of one Catholick visible Church be granted as shall appear hereafter Now the scope of this Treatrse is not to unfasten the ground of all Church combinations and to lay a foundation for absolute Independencie The conveniencie and somtime the necessity of Classes and Synods for direction and determination and that by Divine Authority is freely acknowledged though not with power properly juridical yea I add that Episcopacie it self was and might be maintained as also Presbyterie if confined to a particular Church and not subjected to superior Ecclesiastical power which was the most ancient way of it without the notion
case of his owne otherwise unavoidable peril of life Or 2. Ordinary which is that which it is actually and constantly endued with and which it is daily to exercise as occasion serves And this againe is 1. Imperative or by way of command and imposition of truthes or duties in the name of Christ 2. Coercive and executive by censure by admonition and excommunication or cutting off from the body of Christ And thus far of the explication of the termes now we come to the stating of the Question And 1. negatively what is not the question The doubt then is not 1. whether there be a company of persons in several or in all parts of the World that diuisim and in their several places do visibly outwardly and openly professe for substance the same faith seals worship and Government and so may be said to be one company one society one congregation in Nature and Essence i. e. Acknowledgement of the same Faith as we say the Turke or Turkes are one company of men because their profession of Religion is one though those of Constantinople and of Persia have no dependance one on another either Civil or Religious in point of Government Nor 2. is it the Quaere whether the several Companies or Churches of this Profession as they are one in Nature so also in Spirit and affection and thereupon in the engagement of mutual care one of another and to take notice what doctines are dispersed what conversation used among the Churches Brethren of the same first Family are bound to do this though they be every one master in his owne house Nor 3. Is it doubtful whether such Churches may voluntarily as occasion shall require associate together for mutual assistance and act in many things by common and joynt consent as it was at the first in the Church of Geneva This the Scripture and the light of Nature dictates even then when the same Scripture and light of Nature reserves entire and distinct liberties to the particulars as in the present conjunction of England and Scotland And so in the conjunction of the Apostles and Churches at Jerusalem Acts 15. nothing was done there of particular Jurisdiction as the decreeing of Excommunication or the like to those that should be refractory this was left to the particular Churches Now to these two latter and not to the point of Government properly so called belongs those testimonies out of the Ancients alledged by Crakanthorp to prove that all the Bishops joyntly and severally are set over the whole Church in common and not the Pope onely for these Testimonies expresse onely a generall obligation of duty and charity not of special office 4. Neither 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 though such a thing never yet was nor perhaps ought to be of which hereafter Thus of the first four termes In regard of the last viz. the Power of the Church the question is not 1. whether an Association of Churches lesse or more and especially a general Counsel have not a power more then barely consultative or by way of meer Counsel and advice and whether they have not so far as the object of their Commission reacheth an Authoritative power at least virtual from Christ to act In all Faculâ—ies there is a certain power given both by God and man to the allowed Professors of them to give Authoritative not advice only but directions and rules to which the Conscience is bound to submit unlesse special cause disswade us and this Authority is the more August and solemn though not greater or more or lesse vary not the kind the greater the number is and the more publicke the manner of giving forth the precepts shall bee As for instance an allowed Lawyer or Physician have not onely ability to give advice in point of estate or health by vertue of their skill which others possibly may doe materially as well but have authoritie and legall power from God and man to appoint direct determine and prescribe rules and waies to be observed in both to which the person ought to be obedient that seeks advice and this the more if it shall be done by an Assembly of Lawyers or Judges or Colledge of Physitians by publick consent convened for that purpose though neither the one nor other have power to compell the clyent or patient to follow their directions nor obtain they any new and superiour power by being gathered so in the affaires of the Church of God In doubtfull cases or upon occasion of grosser errours and scandalls God hath by or dinance 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 that is the determinations of many of those who are appointed by God for such offices in their severall places so that their acting is the acting of Officers but not as Officers for such they are only in their severall Churches but yet by reason of 〈◊〉 relation they are the more fit for that work but do not act in another and superiour right and relation when assembled and therefore have not any power coercive more then before to constraine by Church-sure Excommunication c. to their decrees Neither do we find that the Apostles themselves when holding such a Councel in our Brethrens opinion did more then in the Name of the Holy Ghost Decree and command but did not impose any such penalty by authority of the Councel upon the disobedient in the particular Churches 2. Neither is the question properly what power the Catholick Church may possibly have in unusual and extraordinary case or accident and which in ordinary it cannot do nor is the proper subject of such power as we saw before in the instance of necessary self defence 3. Yea further ad hominem in respect of the practise and condition of most of those Bretheren who plead this Catholick visible onenesse of the Church The question would not be what power the Vniversal visible Church might have if possibly convenable together as it was at Jerusalem in which case we grant what is contended for as what the parts of it 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 which is the way our Bretheren now practise None of these is the point in controversie But Secondly It is positively this viz. Whether the whole company of Christians on earth are in their ordinary and setled Church constitution so one entire single Common-wealth Corporation and Congregation as that of Right and by the will and appointment of Iesus Christ it is the first subject of all Church power by authority
whereof and commission from which all particular Churches act and to the determinations of the major part whereof they are to yeeld obedience if not apparently contrary to the Word and the Catholick governing power whereof resides immediately as in its proper subject under Christ onely in the Ministers and Elders and they not taken severally but joyntly as one entire Colledge or Presbyterie to whose charge severally and joyntly the whole and every particular Church is committed c or more briefly Whether the whole be one Corporation whereof the Elders joyntly are Governors and the members gouerned CHAP. III. Just Prejudices and strong probabilities against an universal visible Governing Church IT is the custome of warre to skirmish first and to begin with the lighter armed Souldiers this method shall be here followed and first such things as render this opinion vehemently suspicious and questionable Whereof the first is The NOVELTY of it The saying of Tertullian is received Quod Antiquiss Veriss Truth is Ancient and error Novel but M. Noyes would avoid this prejudice where he saith that the Fathers so predicated the unity of an universal Church that they laid foundations for an universal Bishop I shall therefore endeavour to shew the Novelty of it and first absolutely considered in it self Secondly relatively and that first in respect of the Protestant and then of the Presbyterian party 1. Absolutely If we credit the * Centurists the particular Churches in the first hundred of years after the Apostles did exercise all Church-Gouernment within themselves * They did ordain and depose Ministers admonish and excommunicate obstinate offenders held Synods or meetings wherein they determined the affairs of their own body In doubtful cases they consulted with other Churches not by reason of their superiority but upon the ground of common charity But no hint of this Catholick Governing body among them Object But in occasions which concerned many Churches they held that they should be transacted in Synods and Councels and they did accordingly in such meetings exercise superior power in the particular Churches as excommunication ordination deposition of Ministers determining of controversies c. Besides several expressions of the Ancients imply as much To which I answer First To the Synods and Councells That what concerns many should be debated by many c. doth not conclude them a Corporation no more then the common Treaties of Nations in things of joynt concernment Secondly Their exercising the acts above mentioned in their particular Churches and their acting these things in Synods were it is certain at some distance of time and seeing the former way of Government is mentioned first it may well be that the latter came in as the discipline of Churches began to be corrupted and decline to WORLDLY POLICIE which happened in this first age also say the same * Authors 3. It might be by Decree and judgement onely not by actual execution of such things as 1 Cor. 5. I haue determined that when ye are gathered c. and John 4. 2. Christ baptized more Disciples then Iohn though Christ himself baptized not but his Disciples 4. Howsoever their practise in this if it were at the same time and not after Discipline declined must be expounded to be consistent with their other practise within themselves whereby they owned entire and of right Independent power from any other Church or Churches So that in such united Synods or Councells each Church might act its owne power though in union with other and all act as so many several and distinct Churches united not as one entyre universal body in the nature and notion of it different distinct and superior to the particular Churches So that being gathered they had a larger power but not a greater nor another power as a general Councel but as so many particular Churches or Elders congregated They acted not as a Parliament but as a Dyett of so many Free-States Or to take M. Hudsons owne similitude As a heap of stones have no more inward vertue because they are an heap then if they were each one by themselves they have a larger but not a more excellent one or of another kind neither doth the power of working what ever their vertue be agree to them first bebecause they are an heap but because they are stones of such and such a nature So here They might excommunicate then but it might be from their owne heap as we may so speak or Societies onely not as out of the Catholick Visible Church also unlesse per accidens in as much as he that is rightly excommunicated out of one Church is really excommunicated out of all because they are essentially and mystically one and to go by the same rule though formally he may not be so As he that is justly condemned for a Traytor in one of the Kings Dominions is really and vertually condemned in the rest because these Domions are politically one in their head yet may they be Independent one from another in their proper Governments and Rights as was said above concerning England and Scotland Fifthly It was but a voluntary association or by right of Fraternity only and not of onenesse of Corporation which appears by astringing and confining even in after times in some Councells the power of Bishops and Ministers to and within their owne Diocesses and Churches so as to pronounce all the acts they did elsewhere unlesse by call or permission void and of none effect Whether it were judgement ordination excommunication it shall be say they of no force As the Councels and Canon Law are cited by Crakanthorp himself one of our adversaries in this cause So Cyprian saith that Stephan Bishop of Rome put his sithe into other mens Harvest when he endeavoured by authority to restore two whom the Bishops of Spain had deposed Now if they had apprehended the whole Church to be but One Corporation or great Congregation and all the Bishops and Ministers to be over this one Church in common why then though in regard that each man was assigned by the Church to his particular place for the avoyding of confusion such acts out of their owne Churches might be disorderly and irregular yet could they not be formally void for that the whole Church being committed to each and to all they had been within their charge seeing they had an habitual and fundamental right thereunto as being Officers per se and properly of the whole Church and not of any particular Church but by accident onely And let it be remembred that these Constitutions were much later then the Churches we spake of before This for Churches and Councells We come now to particular and those the most eminent persons Let us hear themselves speak First CHRYSOSTOME The Sacrifice or Passeouer was to be eaten in one house and not to be conveied out that is the house is one that hath Christ and the
and by consequence the onenesse also to consist in onenesse of Faith and doctrine But he hath a little before pag. 206. a considerable passage at this time about the call of our first reformers and saith that any enlightened by the spirit of God and members of the Catholick Church should teach informe and help their fellow members being seduced and led by blinde guides is agreeable to the law of nature Also that In extraordinary times men may go beyond the ordinary path so the thing done be materially good But this by the way Lastly the Professors of Leyden cited for this opinion by Apollon. which is much to be wondered at doe distinguish betwixt the Church Catholick and particular and say that The former is one in doctrine and faith but the latter one in discipline and government also Evidently implying the universall Church not to be one in Gouernment or not to be one Corporation And thus of the third and fourth inconveniences of this opinion and so much also for the first generall head of exceptions against it viz. the just prejudices and suspicious appearances of it as being Novell dangerous Papall and Anti-Protestant CHAP. IIII. Demonstrations against an Vniversall Visible Governing Church HItherto have been handled the lesse Artillery and as 't is hoped not without successe The main Batterie now follows by Arguments demonstrative and such as necessarily conclude against this opinion and that this may be done I premise as granted these principles 1. That the Author of all Ecclesiastick power in the Churches is Iesus Christ for unto him all of it was committed and from him derived 2. That he expressed plainly enough whatsoever was of great consequence for the well ordering of his house as for all other things concerning the salvation of his people 3. That the Apostles were appointed by him to perfect by themselves or Deputies whilest themselves were living either by precept or practise whatsoever concerned the Churches in such particulars 4. That they accordingly did faithfully discharge this trust 5. That Christ and his Apostles in those their precepts and practise are a rule to all Churches to the end of the World I am with you viz. in observing these things which I have commanded you unto the end of the World 6. That they are our rule both negatively and positively i. e. what they did not in such and such cases when they had opportunity we may not in the like and what they did we must do so also as occasion requires and opportunity serves The former particulars are plain enough the last not difficult if these places following and the like be considered Act. 15. 24. The Apostles charge the urgers of Circumcision upon the Gentiles not onely because they taught such Doctrine but also because they taught it having received no such Commandment unlesse we understand those words as having reference to what those Teachers it may be boasted viz. That they had Commission from the Apostles for that Doctrine Again The Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews insinuates it to be sufficient proof that the Priesthood did not at all belong to the Tribe of Iuda but of Levi because the Scripture speakes nothing saith he concerning the former in that respect The speech of Balaam implies as much and that other of the Prophet if the Lord have not spoken who can prophesie We know how the Lord thundereth against those who prophesyed and the Lord had not spoken to them which yet we would have understood as was said before with this caution viz. not spoken neither expresly nor by neer consequence in things of special concernment to the Church 7. That the Government of the Church of Christ it being his house and the knowledge of the first subject or chief trustee to whom the keys of that house is committed is of very great concernment and therefore to be laid down in Scripture at least by such evidence as with moderate opening to godly knowing and impartial men may comfortably be perceived These things premised we come to the Arguments The first whereof is taken negatively from the Author and Founders of the Church viz. The silence of Christ and his Apostles touching one Catholick Visible Governing Church This I conceive is not to be found in Scripture unlesse by such strayning of reason as we saw before Austin saith is dangerous in the things of God What is brought on the contrary out of Scripture shall be examined in another place to wit in the fifth chapter when the Arguments for this opinion if God permit shall severally be discussed onely for methods sake this being the joint for this Argument naturally to fall into 't is here mentioned The second Argument is from the same persons positively to wit the contrary Institution of Christ and his Apostles gathered plainly from their Teaching and Practise 1. If the keyes of Government were given first and fully with entire power immediately to a particular Church then there is no universal visible Governing Church because that is therefore contended for as the first subject of Government but the first is true therefore the latter The former is thus proved All Church power was given first and fully to the Church of the Jews But the Church of the Jews was a particular Church not the universal unlesse by accident because so it was that there was no other Church state in the world at that time unlesse we shall hold as * some do that there were other societies of Beleevers that were not united to the Jewish Church as Iob and his family c. but this is doubtful I therefore omit it The Church of the Jews was a particular one 1. It is every where called One congregation 2. All the Church in the chiefest Sex of it met together to solemn worship at one place in the Temple three times a year constantly and oftner as occasion served in Fasts War Thanksgiving Consultations c. neither had they any thing to do with those that joyned not themselves to their body as Cornelius Act. 10. A beleever and yet one that Peter might not go to And though it be granted to have been a Type of the Church of the New Testament yet not as Catholick but as Congregational as it self was or else as mystical for even our Brethren denie that order of Governours to bind under the Gospel though the Papists contend for it 2. The first Institution of the Church under the new Testament by Christ does give entire power of Government immediately to a particular Church Matth. 18. If thy Brother offend thee c. Tell the Church if he hear not the Church let him be as a Heathen c. Now this was a particular Church for it was such an one as one might complain to and it was endued with entire power even to excommunication 2. If the power and presence of Christ be so with a particular Society
that Whatsoever they binde on earth shall be bound in heaven c. and this be given immediatly to a particular society of Christians then the assertion is good but so it is in that Chapter When two or three are gathered in my Name I am in the midst and so as that what they binde on earth shall be bound in heaven c. As by the coherence may be gathered Object But this is meant of the Jewish Church Answ. 1. If so the former Argument takes place But 2. It is not * likely for where is the Jewish Consistory called the Church it is called by Christ Matth. 5. the lower Assembly a Councel the greater Sanhedrin a Iudgement but not a Church 2. He had chap. 16. spoken of his Church and it is like had explained himself more fully about it for all could not be written as Iohn informes us chap. 21. ult. 3. In the former chapter Matth. 18. 18. he giveth the greatest Ecclesiastick Power to a Congregation of Christians Whatsoever ye shall binde on earth shall be bound in heaven c. it is added immediately upon his precept of telling the Church as the reason of it and to corroborate it he assures them in the same place that what they should aske in his Name should be done and to strengthen that he promiseth that when they were gathered together he would be in the middest of them By all which it appears that he speaks of a particular Christian Church and which is to be noted without any mention of appeal to a higher Judicatory if right should not be done there 3. The first execution of the greatest act of entire power was by admonition and command of the Apostle himself but not by his power exercised in a particular Church without appeal to or consulting of the universal Church which they might have done according to this opinion the Apostles then being surviving viz. delivering one over to Sathan the Apostle saith when ye of Corinth are gathered and my Spirit consent and approbation or the holy Ghost acting in you and me by the power of our Lord Iesus Christ not which he hath committed to me but which is among you for besides that Paul according to this opinion being but one of the Catholick Ministers could not orderly have excommunicated this man without consulting with or by authority of the rest of the Apostles Representatives of the universal Church if the Catholick Church be the first subject of Church power It is certain that Ecclesiastical Power iâ—herent in any cannot be delegated or transmitted over to another but of transmitting Apostolical power we read not 4. If entire power were first committed to particular men then not to the Catholique Church and so it was not the first subject of Church power and so not one visible governing Church but entire power was committed to the Apostles severally and to all joyntly as hath been hitherto confessed by all Ergo c. Object But the Apostles represented the Catholick Church Answ. 1. Not in all the power they received for they might do that which all the Churches cannot as constitute Articles of Faith c. 2. They represented the Church not as united but as multiplyed for Paul had as much power as any and yet he was not personally united to them as appears Gal. 1. 17. 3. Howsoever they had no successors in Apostolick power as neither had Moses in his At the first planting of a Church more power is to be used then afterward is needfull as our Brethren of Scotland alleadge both for their having at the first and for not reteining Generall Visitors still 5. If the first reproofe from Christs own mouth for the englect of exercise of Church power was directed to particular Churches alone by themselves and not to the combination of them though neere one the other much lesse to the universall Church then particular Churches had entire Independent Ecclesiasticall power as single Churches and not as parts of one visible Catholicke but the former is true from the second and third chapters of the Revelation where Christs reproofs are directed to the particular Churches and not to the Presbytery over all or to the Catholicke Church though some of these Churches were but 8. or 10. miles one from the other and the furthest but two hundred being all in the lesser Asia and this after Christianity had been about 70. years in the world so that they had time to have combined or united into an Vniversall or at least into a Nationall or Provinciall societie or Classis if it had been so taught them by the Churchfounders Christ and his Apostles 2. Sort of Arg. From the matter or members of this universall Governing Church laying for ground what was noted before viz. That every subject or agent that hath reall and actuall properties and effects must some time or other have existence and being as one if one Naturall then so if one Civil then must they be as one body gathered into one place as the Jewish nation as we said before Corporations in their Halls Kingdomes in their Parliaments This being undenyable though Mr Hudson deny it against all experience and reason because It is sufficient saith he that they are under one King and governed by the same Laws but how should they be so if they never met at least by their Deputies formally or virtually to yeeld to such a government not as was proved before any cleare institution left by Christ for such incorporation The 1. Argument is That which never had an actuall being and existence in the world that neither is nor is the subject of Church povver much lesse the first but this Church Catholick as such never had a being because it was never together gathered into one place neither in its members nor in its Deputies and therefore can bee one not actually or really in it self but by * imagination onely and conceit Either in regard of the same onenesse of kinde and nature that is betwixt Churches or of relation they have to one head and in order to and dependance on one rule or law the word of God As several Armies to use M. Hudsons similitude gathered by Commission from one Generall in severall parts of a Kingdome or of an Empire or of the world and never yet brought together nor intended so to be but to abide under their severall particular commanders one perhaps in England another in India might be called one Army in Regard of one Commission and one chief General Yet such a similitude will not here so properly serve because the Onenesse of the Church is denyed by our brethren to be such as is of an Army where all are under the command of one the whole Church and its Officers are by them said to govern all particulars Object But Mr Hudson saith 1. That it is sufficient that the Church Catholick have existence and a
all Churches must act from the Authority and by vertue of Commission from the Catholick Church for they act in the name of the Catholick Church So the Assertors of this opinion Expressely but then it follows unavoydably that all particular Churches whether National or Congregational that shall innovate change and alter any material thing in Doctrine Worship or Government without the consent of the Catholick Church are Schismaticks and if they be resolute in it against what might be said to the contrary they are HERETICKS as those have done that have changed in part Doctrine Worship and that Government which those general Councells did owne and establish much more those who have sworne to such alterations expresly against such things as the universal Church in those Councels did decree 5. Then all Magistrates are deprived of power of Reformation within their Jurisdictions before authority derived from the Church either in General Councel or from their Committee And hence is that cited out of our owne Lawyers Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus approbari debet That which concernes all must be allowed of all viz. That are of the same visible corporation 6. Lastly That I may add no more There must be a solemne meeting for the election of such general Officers as are to governe the universal Church in the absence of the universal Ministerial Representative Church For if one Corporation should choose Burgesses that should vote in the businesse of the whole Kingdome it would not be valid if there had not been first an agreement of the whole Kingdome in Parliament gathered that these so and so chosen should be Officers General and have votes in the publick Object If it bee said that Christ himselfe hath appointed such Generall officers by appointing Ministers in every Congregation and then Synods for publicke occasions It is answered This follows not 1. Because an Officer chosen in one particular Corporation as a Major or Alderman is not an Officer in the whole Kingdome No though all the Majors in the Kingdom were gathered together are they Officers of the whole Kingdome unlesse by way of distribution and as in relation to their severall places and but remotely and by accident only to the whole Kingdome so though all the Corporations of the Kingdome were gathered yet are they not a Parliament and supreme Court simply because they are meerly gathered together but it must be on former consent according to such Lawes whereby they become a New and a Superiour body to all the Kingdome both joyntly so long as they continue a Parliament and severally much lesse should they have any more power because they are many but dis-joyned farre asunder So it is in the Church 2. They may be officers of Synods and Councels though never so generall and yet not be officers generall of the whole world in point of jurisdiction as one entire body Because their meeting doth not make them a New body nor give them as such a body any superiour juridical power but onely Consultative and Decretory whether we look on any Scripture Precept or Practise of the Churches in the New Testament 3. It is denyed that Christ hath instituted any such Catholicke Visible body or the Representative thereof An Oecumenicall or Generall Councell much lesse the abstract of it a Catholick committee or Presbyterie and there is reason for it for the multitude of persons difference of spirits Languages c. danger and want of ground to Delegate from hand to hand Ecclesiasticke Power would occasion great confusion and such as God is not the Authour of The fourth and last sort of arguments are taken from the end the Authours of this opinion aime at from the Issue of the opinion it selfe and from the true scope of Church Government The former seems to be either to found the Right of such Presbyteriall Government as is now endeavoured and to deprive particular Churches of intire power in themselves or at least of Independency in their Government from other Churches or else it is to lay Groundwork of a more effectuall cure and remedy then hitherto for all distempers of particular Churches whether nationall or other Touching the first What will it profit if they gaine by this notion the jurisdiction of the whole world for a while and afterward loose their own and others liberty and perhaps souls also for the former being lost truth will be soone oppressed as is to be seen in the Papacy of which straightway Again Absolute Independency so as no other Church shall have any thing to do with an erring or delinquent Church is disavowed both in Doctrine and Practise by the greatest Patrons of that way in this Kingdome and beyond the seas * Concerning the second All distempers of Churches as farre as the Apostolicall Churches were cured of them have beene healed sufficiently without this opinion yea and better then by those who have owned and practised this principle for they have cured some but made others greater and stronger then they were before as we see in the Church of Rome 2. But whatsoever their aime be they should remember that the true end of Church Government is not only to avoid Confusion and Disorder c. but also to preserve the Rights and Priviledges of particular Persons and Churches to prevent Tyranny and invasion that way evils that are as dangerous to the Church and as introductive to Heresie as the former unto which this opinion in the Issue of it opens a wide gappe My Baynes whom the London Ministers quote with Honour saith Dioces Triall Q. 1. pag. 21. That those who subject themselves to a Presbytery as being under it by Subordination may in effect as well be subject to an Episcopall and by consequence I say to a Papall Consistory For if the Church universall be one visible Governing body a man will readily conclude it must have universall Officers and among many there must be some one chief and Christ that hath ordered this hath surely designed by some intimation or other who this should be and where the seat of the Vniversall Church should reside and then how readily will that place of Matthew 16. Thou art Peter c. be understood to place it upon him and his successors and then the question is where hee was Bishop and because the scripture saith nothing therefore * Ecclesiasticall Writers must be credited and then the place is Rome and the rather because 1. Their Faith was spoken of throughout the whole World 2. There was the seat of the Empire c. So that this opinion if not in the end of the Authours yet in the Issue of the things leads a man by the hand back to Egypt and Babylon again as it hath done many If it bee replyed No For that in this Vniversall body politique all Churches and their Elders shall be Equall and so in the Generall Councell conveened whereas in the Papacy all
nor were sent to so farre as is related and then it will fall out either that they did conclude and injoyne onely Doctrinally though with authority or else that a particular and ordinary Church or two or three Churches by ordinary power may prescribe and by authoritie injoyne Lawes to all Churches in the world by way of Jurisdiction It will not be easie to get safe from betwixt the hornes of this argument 5. But it will not prejudice me to yeeld it an ordinary Assembly for it is granted to any Assembly of one Church or more to do as much as is here expressed this councell to have done viz. 1. To meet for the discussion of any Doctrine that afflicts the Churches especially if they bee sent unto as these were 2. To conferre scriptures together which concerns those points 3. Light appearing by the spirit of God and Scripture they may represent their results as the will of God and minde of the Holy Ghost and so may 4. MINISTERIALLY IMPOSE and enjoyn to all other Churches what appears to be the clear mind of Christ as Paul did 1 Cor. 7. having no expresse command and as any of our Brethren do when they preach the Word Do they not injoyne obedience in the name of Christ but withall they disclaim having sole Jurisdiction so as to Excommunicate any alone by themselves if they obey not and yet they do the former by Authority because the Ministery of the Word is an Ordinance of God Object But it was an Assembly representing the Catholick Church because of the Apostles who were the Catholick Officers and the whole acted by the ordinary power of the Catholick Church Answ. 1. The Reason overthrowes the Argument For if it was therefore an Assembly of the Catholick Church because of the presence of the Apostles Then if the Apostles had been absent it had been but the Assembly of a particular Church And the Apostles when assembled alone had made an Assembly of the Catholick Church So the universality or Catholicisme of the Assembly depended wholely and solely on the Apostles Or else secondly The Apostles if alone out of this Assembly neither severally nor joyntly should have been able to determine and do what was here done Or else thirdly The Apostles in this Assembly did denude and strip themselves of their Apostolical power or at least suspend it it for that time and acted onely as ordinary Elders of the Catholick Church but then it would follow either that that particular Church of Jerusalem was the Catholick Church as Rome is said to be for there were messengers from few if from more then one other Churches Or that the Apostles though laying aside their being Elders of the universal Church for that was their Apostleship did yet act as Elders of the universal Church all which are {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} crasse interferings I thinke this Church acted 1. As the mother Church 2. As having an accesse of Authority by the presence of the Apostles 3. As being the Church from which the scandal enquired about was conceived to arise Neither doth the joyning of the Elders and Brethren wholy take off the eminency and authority of the Apostles above the rest for their speeches onely are recorded no more then Paul's joyning others with him in his Epistles though it do argue that the Church of Antioch had not that esteem of them as infallible alone And thus much also for that other place brought for confirmation of the third Argument A Representative Catholick Church in Scripture The fourth and last Argument is from the Testimony of some Reformed Divines viz. Walaeus and the Professors of Leydon But the first speaks nothing for him but what all acknowledge and was granted above scil. The Church saith he may be considered two waies 1. Vniversally for the Church which by the preaching of the Gospel is called out of the world throughout the world which in a certain sense or in some respect may even be called Catholick or for a particular Flock tyed unto one place In which sense I know none denie a Catholick Church it being one of the Articles of the ordinary Creed that there is a Catholick Church that is that the Church is now no longer bound to any one place as under the Jewish Government But that the Church in respect of the several members and societies of it is dispersed over the face of the earth But this doth no more conclude that therefore they are one Visible Corporation then when we say Mankinde is spread over all the World that therefore all men are one company or body politick 2. The Professors of Leyden are against him for they distinguish betweene a Visible and particular Church and betweene the Invisible and universal and say That a Visible Church is considered two waies 1. As a company or Society of one Towne City or Province which are united not onely in the unity of Faith and Sacraments but also in the Forme of outward Government or else it is considered as a certain Oecumenical and Vniversal body dispersed in several places throughout the whole World Although THEY DIFFER IN THE EXTERNALL FORME IT SELFE OF CHVRCH-GOVERNEMENT and circumstantial Rites very much yet agreeing in the ESSENTIAL VNITY OF FAITH and of the Sacraments Whence that is common in Cyprian Episcopatus unus est cujus à singulis in solidum pars tenetur Wâ—ich words evidently destroy this opinion For first they make the Essentialunion or forme of the Society and onenesse of the Church to consist in the onenesse of Faith and Sacraments Secondly They imply That Government is one as it is in Christ but divers as it is in severall Churches and in the hands of severall Officers for so Calvine in Ephes. 4. 11. expounds that of Cyprian The Episcopacie he gives to Christ alone in the administring whereof every one hath his part Thirdly And which chiefly assaulteth the heart of the cause for which it is brought by this Author They make the very difference betwixt the universal Church and a particular Church to be this That they disagree in the outward or visible forme of Church-Government therefore in the sense of the Professors of Leyden the Vniversal Church is not one Governing Body for then the Government must be one not only in Essence Nature and Kinde but one in Number Existence single and Indivual being And thus much for answer in particular to Apollonius who indeed hath the substance of what hath been said for this opinion others that follow having taken his grounds and dilated them a little but not much strengthened them thereby as will appear in the sequele 2. The next Defendant of this opinion is M. Hudson cited in the first chapter his sense is the same his words and expressions not so distinct as the former Before I come to his Arguments such as seem to differ from those before 1. note that the
taken as single men have no more or higher authority then one man nor all families then one family nor all Corporations then one Corporation Wee see that 't is not one sort of men onely that are obnoxious to contradictions both verball and reall Besides the Author he seemâ— to folloâ— viz. Apollonius enterprets that place Eph. 4. 16. The whole body fitly joyned together to be meant of an Organicall Ministeriall body differing in members which Mr Hudson expounds to be meant of a Similar and body whose parts are all alike Wee see here also that even persons of this opinion cannot agree among themselves shall wee therefore say they know not what they would have seeing one would have one thing another another We must then reach out the same ingenuity unto others differing in like manner that we stand in need of our selves About his answers to the objections he brings against his opinion we may note severall things as first in his answer to the 1. Objection he saith That the dwelling in one Towne where there is a Church and being member of another Church is a kinde of dis-churching that Church which is in the Tovvne where he dwells But the answer is ready according to his opinion for they remaine still of the same integrall body if the whole Church bee but one visible Congregation and so we see what way by this opinion is made to the scattering of particular Churches seeing men may remove though not in dwelling yet in relation at pleasure without danger of Schisme for they remaine still of the same single though larger bodie as a man may dwell in one Corporation and be a member of another yet he still abides a member of one and the same single Kingdome His 2d Objection is That if all particular Churches bee all one Church they must all meet some times His answer is 1. No It is sufficient that it have the same King Lavves Spirit c. But was there ever in the world such a Kingdome or Corporation that the members of it do not meet sometimes if it be not a meere visible Monarchy as under Popery If it have any liberty left to the subjects they must meet sometimes at least by their Deputies as the Kingdome of England in Parliament the Empire of Germanie in the states of the Empire c. His 2d answer is That the Church Catholicke visible hath met in Generall Councells as a ministeriall Church and mark it is now ministeriall and heterogeneall which was before similar and homogeneall but this is replyed to above where was shewed 1. That the most primitive Churches did not so act 2. That the whole Church did not meet in them 3. That they either acted as a similar body acts in the name of those and within the Churches that sent them each for their owne and all for all those whose Deputies they were for ought we have learnt yet or else that they acted much by Regall power as by Constantines in the Councell of Nice and others by other Emperours and they acted also in late Councels by Episcopall Archiepiscopall and Patriarchal power and not as a similar body 4. If those were the Catholick Church visible representative How dare any particular Churches at most but if national abrogate and sweare against the Ordinances and government established by the Catholicke Church Let him minde this Againe he saith The power of a general Councel or of the Catholick visible Church is but EXTENSIVE and the power of particular Churches INTENSIVE but 1. This overthrowes his tenet for then the Catholicke Church hath no more power in it selfe and properly but meerely by accident then a particular Church And 2. This plucks up his second Tenet viz. That this Catholick Church is the first Church to whom power is given for if its power be extensive onely and not inward It cannot be the first subject of power The 3d. Object Hee moves against himselfe is A visible Catholicke Church must have a visible Catholicke head His 1. answer is That it is sufficient that Christ is the head though in heaven But this is altogether an unsufficient answer For Christ is the Head invisible and thence our divines affirme his body the Church to be mysticall also and invisible taken properly 2. He saith that The Church in regard of the head the government of it is absolutely Monarchicall but in regard of the Officers it is Aristocraticall But this answers not the objection for be it Monarchicall or Aristocraticall yet if the body bee one visible Corporation then must the Governours of it bee one visible either person or company of men usually or at sometimes ordinarily meeting together or at least to be considered as one body or Colledge of men by whom this body is joyntly and together and not asunder to be governed And this is the force of Calvins reason on Eph. 4. 11. though applyed to the Papacy For if wee must bee one visible corporation there must bee one visible governour either person or society which the Apostle omitting in that place where it was necessary to have been mentioned it if it had beene an ordinance cannot saith he be excused His 4th Objection is That if the Catholicke Church bee one visible body it must have a visible existence and being as it is universall and Catholicke but universalls have no beeing of their owne but they exist and have their being onely in particular as Mankinde in generall hath no being a part by it selfe from single men but hath its being in them onely His Answer is That all gathered aggregated or collected bodies do exist and have their beings so As a heape of stones hath its being only in the particular stones the water in particular drops particular Churches consist of particular families and families of particular persons and an Army in the severall Brigades which yet are one though they should never meet But this reply amounts not to an answer For no collected body that is made up of severall things hath its being in these things severally considered and apart but as united altogether it is not a heape of stones if one lye at Yorke some at London others in France Spaine c. So a Church is not a Church or one companie as the families are severall but as met together in one Assembly and so an Army Brigades may be sent out of it but if that part were never united to the Army by 1000. miles nor intended to be and if they be not governed either by one visible head or by one visible Councell of Warre no man will say they are one Army especially if one be in England and the other in America Do wee not say The Parliament hath had severall Armies under severall distinct commanders in cheife who had no dependence one on another as it was a good while after the Earle of Essex had his Comission and
uncialibus literis in Capital Letters We pursue not saith the Ancient our opponents with reproches and contumelies as the most do sheltring the weaknesse of their Reasons and Arguments with revileing speeches not unlike the fish SEPIA which * they say casts out a black inkie matter whereby she avoids the fisher But that we make war for Christ we evidence by this Argument that we contend after the MANNER OF CHRIST who is meek and peaceable and bare our infirmities Now from the precedent Tractate when I have inferred a Corollary or two and breathed out a Word of love into our Brethrâ—ns eares and bosomes I have done As to the former 1. If there be one Visible Vniversal Governing Church â—hen the now endeavoured Presbyterie consisting of the Presbyteries of the whole World as one entire body and claiming so by Divine Right as on the ground of one Catholick Visible Governing Church hath no foundation in Scripture and so is in that respect * Ens Fictum A DIVINE NOTHING 2. There is no Visible Church or Corporation Ecclesiasticall properly so called and as the immediate Receptacle of Church-power but a particular Church i. e. the Church of one place though not as particular but as a Church indefinitely essentially and absolutely considered 3. Then there are no universal GOVERNING Officers at large that being ordained in one Church are Governours every where no more then a Major of one Corporation is so in another or that a Ruling Elder or Deacon of one Church hath the same power in another though perhaps in combination with the former Whence it will follow First That no Minister can do an act properly of Power Ministerial out of the Church whereof he is an Officer that is formally valid i. e. as from him being an Officer 2. That the Ordinances administred by ministers either of no Congregation or out of their owne are void formally and uneffectual 3. That Churches destitute of Ministers must remain without Ordinances c. The three first main inferences I acknowledge to be consequent to the foregoing discourse But to the conclusions drawn from them I must speak something 1. Some distinguish betwixt power purely Ministerial and properly Governing because we finde the Apostles did preach and baptise whilest Christ was on earth and before they were endued with power from on high to administer discipline and government and they say Ministerial power is of larger extent and Governing power restrained to a political body or Corporation 2. Others say that by vertue of the communion of Churches all officers are common amongst them quoadusum non quoad dominium to use though not to owne as theirs But secondly to avoid dispute I shall omit these and what else might be replyed more exactly and adhere at present to another answer viz. Factum valet fieri non debuit That the Vulgar Axiome holds here Things that are in themselves right i. e in the Essential causes matter and forme good and according to institution though not proceeding by standing rule in some externalls as in the outward efficient or minister or circumstantial manner of doing are not therefore void formally For instance first in natural things Those creatures that are begotten both by generation of their Dammes and also by putrefaction and heat of the Sun as divers creeping things are though the latter differ in the outward instrumental cause yet are they as true in their kinde as the former so the Serpent the Lice the Froggs c. that Moses made before Pharaoh and the Wine that Christ made at the Banquet were as true in their kinde as those wrought by ordinarie causes So secondly in spiritualls Zipporahs circumcising her child though M. Mead gives another Interpretation of it The Circumcision administred by the Idolatrous Priests Jehojadahs and afterward the Maccabees administration of Ecclesiastick and Civil power to wit The Kingdom and Priesthood together was valid The high Priests in the time of Christ had no orderly power as being not the persons designed by God for that office as not being of Aarons line nor coming in by a lawful way c. yet their Acts were valid and Christ present at them 3. To the third particular I say 1. This is no greater inconvenience then that a Corporation must be without many those acts which onely Officers may doe whilest they are destitute of them 2. There would bee ordinarily Ministers enough and a succession of them in every Church if the Congregations or Parishes were divided and limited by Scripture and reason that is according to the number of Christians and conveniency of Habitation And not according as the bounds of Lordships accidentally fell or superstition prompted to get Offerings or merit Pardon or Wealth and pride suggested when some grown rich would not sit so low as before which are the common originalls of the multitudes of Parishes especially in Cities and great Townes Thus of the Corrollaries 2. In the next place for our brethren the Assertors of the opposed Tenet As a Bishop must be apt to teach so hee must bee willing to heare also for he must not bee self-willed nor soone angry with those that pâ—t him in remembrance On these footings and the evidence of the truth now pleaded I take liberty with due respect unto the Persons and places of them with whom I deale to advance a step or two neerer to them and speak in os ipsum as the saying is mouth to mouth There is a general and sad complaint and that not without cause of Novelty variety and danger of opinions I shall not injure ye Brethren if I put you in minde that the opinion in your sense at least is â—ew Light and cannot but increase the differences and disputes exceedingly especially when men shall be engaged to subscribe it as an Article of Faith or else be secluded from emploiment in the Church of God which occasioned so many controversies about Liturgie Episcopacie Ceremony c. formerly That it is like also to prove of the greatest danger to the Churches and their Reformations even your owne was shewed above Now how incongruous is it that those persons who have with so much zeal inveighed against others for like things should have the beam of that in their owne eye And how imprudent would it seem to be if men of repute for wisdom and piety should be so far transported either with distaste to any party or fear of danger to their owne as to admit a forraigner with intent to evert their adversary and secure themselves who will prey on both Now if ye will needs maintain a litigious Title can ye not live on the inheritance of your Fathers Presbyterie hath stood without this proppe and it is not safe to remove a building from its old foundation this NEW peece put to the old garment is like to make the RENT it proved so in the late Church-government