really a God but because he may not or cannot be seen i. e. with mortal eyes SECT III. Visibility applied to the Church We may apply this distinction of visibility briefly in three particulars 1. In the latter sense onely visibility is given to the Church in the subject of the question viz. as it seemes to be what indeed and truth it is otherwise there appeareth contradictio in terminis I meanes in the terms of the question for then the question would be whether that Church which onely seemeth to be and is not really so may be considered to be really a Church of Christ therefore the forme of the question heeded supposeth this viz. that the visible Church is truely and really a Church of Christ and onely questioneth whether it may be considered to be so without respect to saving grace indeed a member or part of the visible Church may be such either really or onely in shew and seemingly but this cannot be said of the whole 2. Visibility is usually given to the Church by divines by Prop. 2. a Metaphor from sense to Reason The sight of the Church as they conceive being rather rational then sensitive and 't is rather termed visible quia rationabilis because it may be known and discerned it not being seen so much by the eye quam intellectu mente ratione as Divines speak Though I humbly conceive that this must rather be understood of the Church as true or of God or Christ then as a Church for as it is a Church or a Congregation of men professing religion so it is also evident to sense visibilis as Ames visu scilicet vel sensu externo Medul p. 165. Though visibility be opposed to invisibility it followeth not that because the question specified a Church visible therefore Prop. 3. we grant a Church invisible also properly so called no more then because there is a white swan therefore there is a black Yet I intend not to deny the Church invisible onely the subject of my question is not this but the Church-visible SECT IV. The nature of the Church I shall now as briefly as I can offer my notion of this visible Church so far as I conceive the present debate requireth viz. touching the nature and the common distribution of it into visible and invisible 1. The nature of the Church I conceive to be 1. Integral 2. Aggregative This distinction together with the application of both parts of Medul p. 167. sect 5. it to the Church may be easily collected from Ames himselfe and Trelcatius also teacheth that the Church both as visible and invisible hath integral parts and is consequently totum integrale Instit p. 214 â—um p. 220. and yet that the Church is in the number of those things which Logicians call aggregative 1. Then first the Church is an integrum and consequently The Church is an Integrum of an individual and singular and not an universal nature it containing plura membra constituentia ipsum realitèr whereby it doth actually exist extra animam or in it selfe The Church is integral for it hath a plurality of parts these parts are integral and these parts are united and consequently 't is singular for by a union of integral parts 't is unum and doth really exist and omne quod est vel existit eo ipso quia est singulare est and consequently 't is not universal in a Metaphisical or logical sense for universale doth not exist as such out of the minde and totum universale is distinct in kinde from totum integrale therefore the universal Church is not properly a genus nor particular Churches the species thereof but rather as Ames Ibid. hath clearly taught us members of the Catholick quae habet rationem integri Indeed Ames saith that a particular Church is species ecclesiae Ibid. in genere but let us first note the difference he there puts betwixt ecclesia in genere and ecclesia catholica and secondly the Ames his difference twixt ecclesia in genere and ecclesia catholica ground or reason assigned by himself of this assertion and my position will be still found to stand firm 1. His difference betwixt ecclesia in genere and ecclesia catholica is most apparent in his own words saith he a particular Church is species ecclesiae in genere but respectu ecclesiae catholicae 't is membrum c. so that nothing can be gathered from these words to conclude the Catholick Church to be a genus or a totum universale but indeed the contrary that it is not so but that as before was noted the Catholick Church habet rationem integri 2. The reason upon which Ames asserts a particular Church to be species ecclesiae in genere is that common nature which is found in all particular Churches but is this reason sufficient to denominate the Church a genus or particular Churches species thereof I humbly conceive not for then all those things which partake of the same common nature must specifically differ and every drop of water partaking of the common nature that is in all other drops of water must be species aquae Indeed everything which partaks of the common nature or genus Things may partake of the common nature of one another onely then they specifically differ or of their differences also and then numerically only onely of another thing doth differ specifically from that other thing and is species of that common nature or genus but if a thing partaketh not onely of the common nature of another but also of its difference it is granted thereby to have both its genus and differentia and consequently the same definition which cannot competere with things specifically differing Thus I conceive a particular Church partaking not onely of the common nature of all other particular Churches but also of their differentia they ought to have the same definition and having the same matter and the same forme too they are the same essentially and differ onely as Logicians speak Numerically But so farre as I understand this controversie 't is wholly spent about the true meaning of logical termes and wholly issues in this notion whether Ramus doth well to assert homo to be genus or not worthy of any much lesse an eager contest in Divinity unlesse we could descry some more dangerous consequences attending upon either conclusion then are yet discovered For my part while Ames maintaineth this difference 'twixt Ames asserteth both the Catholick and particular Church to be Integrum ibid. ecclesia in genere and ecclesia catholica as before was noted and grants that ecclesia catholica hath rationem integri and a particular Church est etiam integrum I am sure my position stands that the nature of the Church is integral and then whether the notion Church be a genus or not is hardly worth a dispute seeing that it existeth not out of the integral i. e. universal
when it is not seen by the world in its wonted splendor and glory by reason either of a cloud of persecution from without as the Church mentioned Rom. 11. 4. was or of a cloud of confusion thtough the spreading of error and the rents and breaches of schisme within whence many take occasion to pretend that they cannot tell where the true Church is as we have sad experience this day in England Hence Doctor Fulk on the Rhemist Testament Dr. Fulk â—n Rhet. Test Rom. 11. 4. granteth that we do conclude the true Church may for a time be hid or secret which our Divines do sometimes render by the terme invisible Yea Beza saith that the Church is oft-times brought to that estate that even the most Beza in Rom. 11 2. watchful and sharp-sighted Pastors think it to be clean extinct and put out The second of these senses of this distinction is the most usual in Authours and that wherein the visible Church is generally meant in this Treatise SECT VIII The visible Church most properly a Church Once more if I may have leave to digresse a little I shall humbly adde that it is my present opinion that the visible Church is most properly the Church of Christ though I dare not assert it with much confidence knowing that some later eminent Divines seem at least of another mind Yet I desire it may be heeded that I do not say that the visible Church is more truly much lesse more soundly and savingly a Church of Christ then the Church invisible but onely that the visible Church is without comparison or in it self most properly a Church of Christ And thus I hope to escape the challenge of the reformed Writers Of which at large hereafter chap. 16. Indeed they sometimes say that the invisible is the onely true Church but first they never questioned but that this onely true invisible Church was also visible in our sense and againe we may hear them explaine their position in Doctor Fields Field of the Church p. 12 13 14. expression When we say none but the Elect are of the Church we meane not that no others are not at all nor in any sort of the Church but that they are not principally fully and absolutely I presume therefore I may present my reasons for this my opinion without just offence to my Reader which are these Arg. 1. The Church of Christ is most properly visible therefore the visible Church is most properly the Church of Christ That the Church of Christ is most properly visible appeareth thus 1. Such as the parts of an Aggregative body are most properly such the whole is most properly as if the stones be precious so is the heap if they be vile so is the heap if they be black so is the heap if they be visible so is the heap and if they be most properly visible so is the heap for if the parts be so in themselves how can they be lesse visible in the whole 2. Now the Church is confessed to be an Aggregative body and yet the parts or members are doubtlesse visible in most proper speaking whether we consider them as Men or as men Called 1. The members of the Church are Men and who can doubt but that men are visible in the highest propriety of speech that runnes not against his own sense yea should we yeeld that saving grace alone doth unite men to the Church yet seeing 't is not the grace which is invisible that is the member but the man who is invisible the members of the Church are visible still For as Peter du Moulin saith those that are of this invisible Church are visible as they are men but not as they are His Buckler p. 264. elected 2. The members of the Church are as truely and properly visible as they are men called for 1. All the members of the Church whether they be elect or reprobate fall under the called Yea as Ames hath excellently noted the very elect are members of the Church not qua electi Medul p. 161 but qua vocati as they are called yea the very elect are not members of the Church invisible but as they are called the Church of the elect lying hid in the Church of the called as before was noted 2. Now all that are called are as such most properly visible for in their very state of calling the called stand most visibly distinguished from all other societies of men viz. in their profession of the name and worship of Christ before all the woâ—ld wherein the elect-regenerate or called are doubtlesse as eminent and open actors as the reprobate can be and consequently do as truely help to constitute and render the Church to be visible as they Therefore if that part of the Church which in one regard beareth the name of invisible be as properly visible as the other which is onely visible who can doubt but that the Church in general is most properly visible But as Doctor Field saith it cannot be but they that are of the true Church must by the profession of the Feild of the Church p. 14 15 truth make themselves known in such sort that by they profession and practice they may be discerned from other men And again the persons of them of whom the Church consisteth are visible their profession known even to the prosane and wicked of the world and in this sort cannot be invisible neither did any of our men teach that it is or may be Arg. 2. The whole Church doth most properly deserve the name Church for though both the visible and the invisible Church should be truely and properly a Church of Christ yet if in a strict consideration one of these is but a part and the other as the whole containeth that part that which containeth the other as its part must needs be the whole and best deserve the name of the whole Now the invisible Church hath beene found to be the part of the visible and the visible to be the whole containing that part seeing all that savingly beleeve do equally share in the Churches profession and visibility with the externally called Yea and they that is the sincere beleevers as Master Baxter asserts are His Rest p. 137 a part of the externally called who are the visible Church therefore as Master Blake reasons the invisible is onely one part and so His scals p. 157 not the Church in its most proper signification Arg. 3. The Church of Christ never ceaseth to be visible therefore the visible Church is most properly the Church of Christ for 1. The Church of Christ must needs import his Church in its most proper signification for he that speaks of the Church must either mean the onely Church or the Church emphatically so called in either of these senses the Church signifieth the Church properly so called 2 Again that which never ceaseth to be visible must needs be visible and indeed most properly
their opinions with those that directly and in very termes renounce it so neither savours it of much charity or indeed justice that wicked men that directly professe the faith both vocally with their mouth and really by attending on the Ordinances of God be equally condemned with Apostates and Hereticks that rase the very foundation of all religion though in works they deny him Therefore such as stand baptized into the faith of Christ and yet remaine in visible Communion with the Church and do not renounce the faith of Christ either with their mouths or in the intent and purpose of their hearts cannot onely by their disobedience or wicked lives as I shall anon labour to prove unchurch themselves or declare themselves as some would rather say to be no true members of the visible Church There are in the Church such as 1. Seem and are not 2. Are and seem not 3. Are and seeme and Distinct 6 are none visi not seen 4. Are and seem and are seene also He that is and seemes not is a David in desertion he that seemes and is not is a Judas betraying with a kisse he that is and seemes and is not seen is a Saint in a cave he that is and seems and is seen also is I presume not onely the man savingly qualified professing the same before men but our ordinary professour and Church-member that usually attends upon visible communion with the Church though wanting saving grace The same persons in divers respects may seem to be what They are Distinct. 7 They are not Or the same persons may be said in one respect to be hypocrites and in another respect true beleevers so that though we are wont to condemn all for hypocrites that professe Religion without real holinesse yet I suppose I shall not erre if I say we ought to do it not without caution and limitation I confesse that if not all that thus professe Religion without saving grace yet most of them are hypocrites in that they pretend if not seem to be what they are not viz. savingly qualified and I humbly offer whether it be not in this sense that Divines generally charge such professours as have no saving grace with the sin of Hypocrisie even because they pretend to have that Mr. Perkins speaking of temporary beleevers on Luk. 8. 13. saith these though they are not sound yet they are void of that grosse kind of hypocrisie Their mindes are enlightned their hearts are endued with such faith as may bring forth these fruits for a time and therefore herein they dissemble not but rather shew that which they have His Ep. to the Reader before his Treatise tending unto a declaration of a mans estate grace and interest in Christ or as they would say in the true mysticall invisible Church which indeed they have not But let us seriously consider can either they or we with any colour of reason or justice adjudge men to be hypocrites farther then they are so or for professing themselves to be what indeed they are though also they should professe themselves to be what they are not may not men be so far illightened as to know and beleeve the Scriptures really and yet not be so far sanctified as to believe effectually to salvation and may he not professe this faith which he truely hath though he also professe and pretend to more and is he not a true beleever and a true professour so far as he hath though false and hypocritical in professing more and to be accounted a true Beleever as to the Church visible though a hypocrite as to the Church invisible A hypocrite is one that pretendeth or seemeth to be what he is not but when men that have no saving grace pretend or seeme to be visible Church-members relatively holy Gods Covenant-people common believers c. they pretend and seeme to be what in truth they are therefore thus farre they are no hypocrites but true beleevers so far as they truely beleeve and true men so far as they professe But what they thus truely believe and what they truely are The devil is an hypocrite while he professeth himself an Angel of light but when he acknowledgeth what he truely believeth that there is a God and that he is a fearful avenger of wicked spirits and that Christ is the Sonne of God c. in this the devil is no hypocrite so what is good in wicked men is still good and what is true in them is still true notwithstanding all the evil and falshood that they are guilty of Their hypocrisie in one respect cannot destroy their reality and truth in any other In a word a hypocrite as such cannot possibly be truely a member of any Church whether it be visible or invisible for that which is false as such can never be true so he that pretends to saving grace and interest in the Church invisible if his pretence to that saving grace be false his interest in this invisible Church cannot be true and likewise he that pretends to the common faith and yet doth really renounce it cannot possibly be a true member of the visible Church yet one that is an hypocrite as to the Church invisible may in another sense be a true beleever and have a real interest in the visible Church accordingly CHAP. IV. Arg. 1. From the Etymology or the Name of the Church HItherto of the Termes of the question and the sense thereof by what I have already intimated I am bound to adhere unto the affirmative part which turneth it selfe into this Thesis The visibly Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace Thus I shall now proceed as the Lord shall assist me to prove from these five considerable places or heads of Argument viz. the Etymology of the Church visible Causes of the Church visible Definition of the Church visible Testimony on my side Absurdity on the contrary First then as method requires we shall set down the Etymology of the Church and argue from it The name or word signifying Church in the Greek original which is generally allowed to be argued from is known to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which primitively derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and more immediately from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contained in it both Calling and calling out a right improvement of each of these I presume wil help us with its Argument SECT I. My first Argument then ariseth from the calling that we find Arg. 1 included in the name and is indeed inseparable from the nature Primum illud quod actu eccle siam constituit est vocatio unde nomen definitionem suam accepit ecclesia enim est coetus hominum vocatorum Med. 161 162 Inter Orthodoxos qui ecclesiam definium coetum electorum vel per electos intelligunt secundum electionem vocatos vel non ecclesiam quae actu existit Medul 161 of the Church thus Arg. 1. The Church
this profession till they die which he largely proves as indeed most of the reformed Divines do from all the parables of Ut jam nihil addubitarc possumus Judam non fuisse membrum internae Sanctae dei ecclesiae licet esset membrum exterioris ecclesiae Quam superius appellavi ecclesiam militantem strictius consideratam aliam vero visibilem illam bonos malos comprehendentem latius consideratam Dec. page 355 the Kingdome of Heaven in the Gospel at length concludes that hypocrites are members of the Church visible largely taken containing the good and the bad but not of the Church invisible not true and living members of this interiour Church or the Church so strictly taken Yet this doth not infer two distinct Churches for if we take the Church strictly then hypocrites are no part of the Church and if we take it in the large sense then the strict Church is but a part thereof to instance in the material Church if taken in a strict sense it signifieth the body of the Church exclusive of the chancel if largely for both together and then the Church strictly taken is but part of the Church largely taken This is clear while we distinguish the Church qua Church but when we consider it as visible and invisible it faileth us We say well that the Church taken strictly is part of the Church taken largely and the Church largely taken containeth the Church strictly taken but it would be hard to say the Church invisible taken strictly is part of the Church visible taken largely to say a thing as invisible is part of a thing as visible is contradictio in adjectio 'T is evident then that invisible and visible are opposed here in the accident not in the subject i. e. 't is not meant that as some persons are invisible so others in the same respect are visible as if saving grace was not seen in some and yet seen in others but thus some persons having saving grace not seen are said to be invisible and others having profession visible are said to be visible Moreover this subject of these accidents is rather the faith Bull. Dec. 355 Invisibilis interna dicitur non quod homines sunt invisibiles sed quod hominibus non appareat qui vere ficte credaut then the person they are applied to the person but intend the faith or the truth thereof as 't is saving 't is invisible as 't is professed so 't is visible and not because the men are either visible or invisible Lastly the Church largely taken may be considered Either Asolutely Or Comparatively In it self or in comparison with the Church strictly taken and accordingly the reformed Divines may be thought to meane that the Church largely taken if it be considered absolutely and in it self is a true or at least truely a Church of Christ but when the Church largely taken as it includes the bad the good together is compared with the Church strictly taken for the company of the Elect or savingly called then as they say the latter is the onely true Church and the former in comparison thereunto is not a true Church that is not so truely in the favour of God and union with Christ Object 3. I confesse that Ravanellus and Calvine with others haply affirme that the Church thus largely taken is the Church improperly and the Church strictly for the Church of the Elect onely is the Church properly taken But Answ 1. I humbly conceive that their difference with the Papist did not exact their assertion from them for the Papist denieth the invisible Church altogether and not that it is the Church properly or improperly taken then this remaineth as a lawful controversie among us Protestants whether the visible or invisible Church be most properly the Church of Christ 2. Neither do I think this assertion of theirs doth necessarily flowe from this strict and large acceptation of the Church the larger acceptation of a thing doth not alwayes imply the most proper acceptation thereof nor è contrà God of Abraham not of the dead the man as Abraham taken from the soul onely is not the largest nor yet the preperest acceptation of man The Church taken exclusive to the chancel is not the largest nor I think the properest acceptation thereof a denomination from the better part is not the largest nor I think the properest denomination of a company this is figurative therefore the other viz. the larger acceptation should be the proper as opposed to figurative 3. How ever this toucheth not my conclusion which is that the Church in this large acceptation may be considered to be truely a Church and not properly much lesse more properly so then the Church invisible or strictly taken 4. Yet I humbly crave that my former arguments for the contrary part in my state of the question may have the justice of consideration if not the charity and honour of a confutation Object 4. I confesse once more that Ames hath placed reprobates and hypocrites out of the essential and within the accidental form of the Church But Ans 1. I humbly conceive that this is his peculiar language we find divers of the reformed Divines distributing the form of the Church into internal and external as they also do the state society Vid. Cameron praelect de eccl cap. de natura conditione ecclesiae in prin cipio circa medium caput and communion of the Church 2. I have ventured before to manifest the inconsistency hereof with his own concession that hypocrites and reprobates while they remain in the communion of the Church are membra ecclesiae yea that this very expression that they onely partake of the accidental form hath a contradiction in it self For if there be no essential forme besides this then cannot be an accidental forme seeing this viz. the accidental forme is opposed unto the essential and must needs suppose an essential Accidens hic est accidens non praedicabile sed praedicamen tale quod opponitur substantiae distributio enim est in formam substantialem accidentalem or substantial forme to give being to the subject of this accident all whose being is in the subject of it if there be no substantial forme there is no substance and if there be no substance there can be no accident for the definition of substance requires that it do substare accedentil us and therefore as Schibler saith the reason of an accident requires that it do in haerere in subjecto Or if the Church have another forme viz. essential or substantial besides this accidental as indeed he allows then I cannot yet see but that interest in the accedental forme is necessarily founded in interest in the forme which is called essential and that by granting that hyrocrites and reprobates do partake of the accidental he necessarily implies that they also partake of the substantial forme and therefore to say that such or any persons
whether there be a Church invisible i. e. such in the Church as are in a higher sense the children of God the members of Christ and in a state of salvation then others who may also be called a Church in a distinct consideration to the rest of visible professors which the Church of Rome denieth and the reformed assert and maintain against them Neither indeed is the controversie so much about the nature of the visible as about the being of the invisible Church every one knows that there is a vast difference about the head about the succession and about the visibility of pomp and multitude and about the infallibility of the visible Church betwixt us and them yet about the nature and definition of the visible Church the difference is but small the whole burthen thereof resting upon the nature being and definition of the Church invisible I shall presume to give my reader one famous instance of this from the great late controversie of the present point in France betwixt Mons Mestrezate and Cardinal Perron as is to read at large in an excellent Treatise written in French by that Learned Monsieur whereof please yet to take this short account He begins his book with a necessity of distinguishing â—he Church before he cometh to the definition of it his distinction is founded in divers respects viz. 1. â—he internal 2. The external state of the Church he gives us the notion of the Church in Scripture viz. 1. For a visible society of Christians 2. The invisible condition of Christians The first he builds on these places Col. 4. 16. 1 Cor. 14. 12 19 23. Acts 14. 22. Gal. 1. 13. Act. 8. 3. 2 Cor. 8. 1. Gal. 1. 1. 2 Cor. 1. 1. 2 Thes 1. 1. Apoc. 1. 4. and 2. 23. The second he builds upon Eph. 5. 25 23. Eph. 1. 22 23. Eph. 5. 29 30. Heb. 12. 23. According to this distinct acceptation of the word Church in Scripture he proceeds to distinguish of the Church more properly which he saith is the nuptial body of Christ and the Church lesse properly is the outward communions visible societies of Christians then he addresseth to his definitions of the Church thus diversly considered The first saith he is the body or multitude of those whom God according Lib. 1. cap. 4 to the eternal counsel of his election hath drawn out of their natural corruption and perdition by the Minstery of his word and the power of his Spirit incorporating them into Jesus Christ by true faith and sanctification unto life eternal now upon this rests the dispute for the last viz. the visible Church he agrees in most part with the Cardinal in this definition The Church is a society of those whom God hath called unto salvation Lib. 2. cap. 1 by the profession of the true faith and a sincere administration of the Sacraments by lawful Ministers Whence we conclude that the difference betwixt us and the Papists is not much about the nature of the visible Church both are agreed that it is a Church and that it is such a Church for the most part as the Monsieur hath here defined but chiefly about the Church invisible But before I close here methinks I am tempted to cry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that I have now hit the very sense of the reformed Divines touching the nature of the Church invisible and visible they clearly hold that there is but one Church and yet they do so distinctly consider this one Church in its strict and large acceptation For the militant and Catholick Churches are not all one in state by reason whereof they may be in one which are not in the other Whites way to the true Church or as visible and invisible that any one that gives the lightest observation thereunto must needs confesse that their definitions thereof do more then accidentally differ and therefore essentially which two things are reconciled onely by granting that when they define the Church strictly taken they define but one part of the Church when largely taken and when they define the Church largely taken they conclude the Church strictly taken under some general attribution which equally or at least joyntly admits both of the Elect and reprobate which are Heterogeneous matter yet united in one society the visible Church as before is explicated Yet would I with all modesty submit this and what else I have or shall conceive and write to the judgement of my abler brethren knowing that the spirit of the Prophets is subject to the Prophets CHAP. XVII The first Argument from Scripture God calls a wicked people his people and his Church THe arguments usually termed artificiall with their objections have been hitherto insisted on we shall therefore descend in the next place to take the evidence of testimony both divine and humane of God and the Church The records of divine authority and testimony are the holy Scriptures Whence our first argument is offered thus God is pleased in the Old Testament to own such a people for his people and Christ in the new for his Church which at the very same time he himself universally brands as wicked rebellious evil-doers back-sliders c. and taketh no notice at all of any good thing in them therefore surely a people may be considered to be truely a people of God and a Church of Christ without respect unto and upon other terms besides saving grace Here now what I have writ I read over againe and againe yet must I seriously professe that I cannot foresee any colourable answer that is to be given to this Argument He that hath but a slight knowledge in the holy Scripture must needs confesse the antecedent and he that hath but a very slight reason me thinks cannot but yeeld the consequence 1. For the antecedent viz. that God and Christ do thus acknowledge a wicked people at the very same time when such their wickednesse is charged upon them for their own people and Church is so legible in the whole course of the Scripture that truely to heap instances and proof upon it would be to weaken it I shall onely therefore fix my reader upon one undeniable instance in each Testament according to the parts of my proposition That in V. T. is Isa 1. 2 3 4 5 6. where the Lord himselfe doth very eminently and above all kinde of contradiction both charge and acknowledge a people as before is asserted 1. Then observe how he is pleased to charge them And 2. To own and acknowledge them The charge is observable In 1. The matter of it 2. The extent of it the charge in the matter of it is that they are ignorant and inconsiderate ver 3. rebellious against the Lord that nourished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them and brought them up v. 2. or magnified and exalted them as the Interlineary translates it or brought up and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Arabick exalted as the vulgar Lattine
the very ground of the question is gone Indeed here is practice contrary to profession but not profession contrary to profession and practice contrary to profession may consist with profession for they professe to know God though in works they deny him If it be replied that a scandalous life is contrary to the faith professed and so the profession appears counterfeit I crave leave to ask once more whether faith here be taken objectivè or subjectivè if objectivè for the doctrine professed or the Will of God revealed to be beleeved then it may still be affirmed that the profession of the Scripture or an outward owning of the Will and Word of God is not inconsistent with a conversation contrary thereunto then why may not such whose practice is contrary either to their profession or to the Scripture which they yet professe be received by the Church if no other reason but this be assignable If it be said that a scandalous life is contrary to the faith in sensu formali vel subjectivo and that a wicked conversation declareth that the Professor doth not believe as he professeth and is to be rejected therefore as a counterfeit Once more I demand whether this faith professed be considered as saving or as common if as saving then Mr. Wood his cause is yeelded who is now opposing Reverend Master Baxter with this assertion that wicked men are not to be rejected formally because their wickednesse is a signe of unregeneracy but materially because it is contrary to the profession of the faith if as common or as other historical or dogmatical then though I grant that all those whose wickednesse is such as cannot consist with a real common or historical faith ought not to be admitted yet I deny the hypothesis that all wickednesse is such as is inconsistent with such a real common faith that common faith is in its kinde a true faith and that this true common faith is consistent with a wicked heart and life are two Propositions as little doubted by most Divines as much confirmed by sad experience and largely discoursed in the Treatise following Sunt in eo coetu viz. ecclesiae visibilis multi electi alii non Sancti sed tamen de verâ doctrinâ consentientes Phil. Melanct. part Sept. p. 33. Others may have leave to think that such scandalous persons ought not to be admitted into the Church because of the scandal that would come to Religion thereby and because that in this sense scandal is contrary to the profession of the faith the Church thus drawing a blot and disparagement upon her selfe as if she was ready to open her bosome to any vile unclean unreformed persons and truely I humbly conceive there is very much in this for if the Church ought to have a care that those already within cause not the wayes of God to be evil spoken of why ought she not to have the like care touching those she is about to let in or why should those be admitted into the community that now appear to be such as are presently to be cast out of communion but I presume this is not all For 3. From the premises it seemes at least probable to me that the Church is to have some kinde of respect unto the saving condition of the person she is about to admit into communion though I donbt not to assert with our brethren N. E. and Reverend Master Baxter that a sober and humble profession of faith and repentance with a desire of Baptisme is as much evidence of this saving condition as the Church is bound to expect without any farther positive proofs of conversion 4. Yet I humbly conceive that more then a bare outward profession is requisite to give real interest in the visible Church and the previledges thereof before God though no more is requisite to give visible interest before men and that there is sufficient ground for the trite distinction of right here Coram Deo ecclâ—sia for the Churches judgement of mens right must passe with her administrations upon visible or appearing signes by their outward profession but Gods upon real for the visible Church is really a Church with God as well as the invisible though the Church is bound to believe a profession that is made upon designe as the Jews at New Castle was yet God knows his wickednesse and count him a dogg eating the childrens bread out of the hand of Church deceived by his falsnesse but not erring because profession is her onely rule in the case If it be demanded what is more required besides profession to give real interest in the visible Church I Multi enim sunt non renaâ—i vel hypocritae consentientes tamen de doctrina ritibus extcrnis sen est coetus consentientium de doctrina habens multa membra mortua sen non regeneratos Maâ— 7. 21. Mat. 13. 24. par in Urs cat 343. have at large answered in the Treatise that in Adult persons about to be admitted a real actual and not fained consent but in persons borne in the Church and baptised in their Infancy and now at the adult estate a non-dissent a not dissenting from or a not rejecting of the truth and wayes of the Lord at least for all that are of the visible Church must be one of these ways either negatively or positively consentientes to true doctrine as Melancton before as wel as outward professors of it 4. Yet I must still hold my maine Proposition till I see more reason to let it go that unregenerate persons once received into the Church are notwithstanding their unregeneracy or their want of evidences of saving grace really or truely members of the visible Church till they cut themselves off by Heresie Schisme or the perfection of both Apostasie or at least are cast out by Church-censure what reasons what authorities from the Scriptures and the Church I shew for it and what absurdities I alledge against the contrary opinion must be left to your censure in the reading of the Treatise Onely that it may passe here a little the more freely I cannot but adde the remembrance of one or two late most eminent and full Testimonies Mr. Hooker of New England saith Survey of Church discipline p. 36. that externally those are within the Covenant and consequently the Church who expressing their repentance with their profession of the truth engage themselves to walk in the wayes of God and the truth of his worship though they have not for the present that sound work of faith in their hearts and may be never shall have it wrought by Gods Spirit in them Master Norton also a Minister of N. E. to this very question whether truth Against Apol. p. 3. of grace be required to visible Church-membership answereth one may be admitted into the Church-communion of the external or visible Church that is not endowed with the real inward holinesse of regeneration and justifying faith in Christ or that
upon a strict examination shall not give signes of true faith and inward holinesse which may convince the conscience touching the sincerity of their faith c. Master Cobbet also of N. E. more plainly saith that albeit a mans own personal faith uniteth to Christ in respect Hisbook of Infant baptism p. 57. of saving and invisible union yet the profession of faith before a visible Church uniteth to Christ as Head of the visible Church whether the party be sincere or not and those that are so admitted being unregenerate or destitute of saving grace continue so to be viz. members of the visible Church notwitstanding until they justly deprive Cottons holines of Church-members p. 1. themselves of the priviledge of that fellowship as Mr. Cotton affirmeth I know not why I may not here adde those penitent words of our most Reverend and Learned Master Baxter This saith he is the other cause of the Schismatical Disputations p. 38 39. inclination of some godly people viz. the great mistake of too many in confining all the fruits of Christs dead and the mercies and graces of God to the Elect and so not considering the difference that ever was and will be between the visible Church of Professors and the invisible Church of true beleevers Now if there be indeed a difference the visible Church of Professors is larger then the invisible Church of true beleevers and consequently there are some in the visible that are not in the invisible i. e. the unregenerate to whom those fruits of Christ death and the mercies and grace of God belong that are not to be confined to the Elect. 5. Therefore it follows that to be truely regenerate is onely a necessary duty of Church-members but Though we acknowledge such onâ—ly to be sincere Christians who serve God with upright hearts yet those are not to be denied to be Christians who make so much as a general profession of Christ Mr. Ho. Catech. p. 75. Holinesse of members p. 1. not a condition of their membership I meane visible that is all Church-members ought to be inwardly holy but yet men may be and doubtlesse thousands are truely members of the visible Church that are destitute of such holinesse this is so happily and fully expressed by Mr. Cotton that I shall make bold to give you my full sense of it in his most clear and excellent words Christians saith he truely regenerete are the members of the invisible Church it is the duty of the members of the visible Church to be truely regenerate such are members of the visible that are destitute of spiritual grace plainly intending that to be regenerate is the condition without which men cannot be members of the Church in invisible 2. To be regenerate is the duty of all the members of the visible Church also 3. But to be regenerate is onely the duty and not the condition of visible Church-members for they may be such without it And truely those that do affirme these two Propositions 1. That we ought to expect a profession of saving faith in all we admit 2. That the visible Church hath some hypocrites that are its members must needs allow the distinction viz. that saving grace is the duty because themselves require the profession of it but not the necessary condition of visible membership seeing they also acknowledge that persons may be members thereof without it 6. Further I affirme that no person being once Holiness of the Churches of N. E. p. 89 admitted is to be ejected or cast out for any thing but scandal for we saith Master Cotton proceed not to censure but in case of known offence and such offence as cannot be healed without censure Yea scandal qua tale or as it is offence to others and not as it is a signe of unregeneracy therefore Ametius saith proprium adequatum objectum de consc p. 252 hujus censurae est scandalum viz. fratris from Matth. 18. 15. Si peccaverit in te frater 't is the sinne that offends not unregeneracy 't is the offence that is admonish'd for and not unregeneracy satisfaction is required for the offence and not for unregeneracy the offence indulg'd is the leaven that would spread and sowre the lump of the Church and lastly 't is the offence that is onely to be known and proved and not the want of grace or unregeneracy for as Reverend Master Baxter 'T is a matter of such exceeding difficulty Disp 3. 340 341 to conclude another to be certainly gracelesse that it is not one of the multitudes nay 't is but few of the commonly scandalous grosse sinners that we should be able to prove it by Yet 1. We must censure all the scandalous if scandal be the adequate object of censure 2. We must censure for none but known and proved scandal for the other is not properly or legally scandal Known offence as Master Cotton before 3. Therefore we are not to censure for unregeneracy which we can prove or know by but very few of the scandalous and grossest sinners as Master Baxter notes for how unreasonable is it to punish men with so great and certain a penalty for an uncertain and presumed crime or as the same Reverend man hath it be so heavily Disp p. 34 35 punish'd before they be judg'd and heard I shall put an end to this in those apt and full words of Reverend Master Hooker of N. E. If any saith he Survey p. 42. after they be received shall be found not to be added of God because they be not regenerated yet we are not to cast them out for non-regeneration even known 7. But with your favour I must now needs note that all that hath been said hath not punctually expressed our own case our common concernment in England who generally come into the Church in our Infancy and are not admitted thereinto upon our personal profession at yeares of discretion as Heathens are to be and of which most of our controversies about the way of admission now are For my part I humbly conceive there are but two maine questions about Church-membership that need much trouble us 1. Whether the Infants of Church-members are borne in the Church and to be baptized 2. What is that which unchurcheth them afterterwards It cannot but be heartily wish'd that any heat that is or may be spent about the conditions of admitting Heathens into the Church might be saved till a practical occasion requires it viz. till such a Heathen shall sue for baptisme whose profession or right is truely disputable I must freely professe I cannot like that way of reasoning The parent if he were not baptized should not be baptized himself therefore his childe should not be baptized for in all cases that will keep out that cannot cast out whether Civil Military or Ecclesiastical Positive consent is required upon admission but a negative a non-rejecting the Gospel is sufficient to retaine in the Church distraction of
quid 108 the truth of the Church consisteth not in consideration only 20 Mr. Timpsons abuse of Mr. Humphrys distinction of do not and cannot examine our selves and his own distinction of natural and rational incapacity c. examined 239 Truth of Word and Sacraments is the one only true note of the true Church 77 V Visibility opposed to reality and to invisibility 2. but given to the Church in the question as opposed to invisibility onely and not reality and that by a metaphor 2 3 To assert a visible Church doth not suppose a Church invisible 3 4. three exceptions against the distinction of the Church into visible and invisible 10 11 Visible Church most properly the Church of Christ argued p. 12 to 19. though the stresse of the controversie resteth not here 18 The grounds of the distinction of the Church into visible and invisible enquired for 8 'T is not properly distinctio but discrimen inter totum partem 9 10 W God calls and ownes a wicked people for his p. 120 c. and giveth many titles equivalent to Church-members to wicked men 126 to 134 Wicked men not excused from though not permitted to receive the Supper as Church-members they are obliged as wicked they are prohibited if they receive not they sin twice if they do receive they sin thrice 226 We may proceed against wicked members but by discipline 373. viz. first admonition and then excommunication ibid. Truth of the Word revealed and communicated is the onely true note of the true Church to which truth of Sacraments are inseparably annexed 76 The World is the terme from which the Church is called 40 41. this may be considered without respect to saving grace 40 The Reader is desired to excuse some litteral errors not noted and to correct these following BEfore the Epistle to the Ministers and over the head of it for Dedicatory read Presatory Ep. â— 7. l. antipen penitent r. pertinent Book Pag. 7. Line 1. for constitue and by read constitute by p 9. l 5. Church visible r was visible and l 22 p 10 l 24 other r. otherwise p 22 l 4 longer r. larger p 25. l 27 word r. work p 28. l. 20. object beleeving r. beleeved and l. ult on r. or and l 20. passions r. professions p 31. l 25. none visi r. non visi and l 30 add onely to after not p 37. l. ult câ—lled r. calling and l. 18. add God before doth p 46 l 20. leave r. have p. 59 l. 19 we r. who p. 60 l. 18 add Church after visible p. 61 l. 8 blot out should p. 65 l 11. add Church after visible p. 69 blot out from these to same in l. 7 8 9 10 p 78 l. 14 blot out not and add grace after the first saving p 80 l. 7 definition r. definitum p. 82 l 17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and l. penult add Faith after in the p. 86 l. 22 and r. as p 105 l. 28. visible r. true p. 107 l ansep thought r. though p. 111. l. 25. their r. this p. 122. l. 18. change r. charge and add this before for p. 140. l. 3. add ouâ— after with p. 209. l. 5. Rable r. rubble and l. 9. the first for r. forth p 217 l. 11. add not before upon p. 267 l. 12. or r. but p. 289 l. 25. deserve r. desire for Mr. Morris always r. Mr. Morrice Note that by Copula in the Analisis of the question is not intended for an exact Logical Copula but onely that which fitly serves to joyn the subject and the main thing questioned together in the question and if the Reader would be more accurate he may take may be considered in to the predicate questioned and if he had rather the words abstractly and concrâ—â—â—â—â— p. 2 l. 15 16. may change places though as it is it best liketh the Authour Quest Whether the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace CHAP. I. Of the subject of the question the visible Church SECT I. The Analasis of the question WE must have leave to speak something largely of the termes before we venture to resolve this intricate and famous question The termes are three First the subject of the question Secondly the predicate questioned Thirdly the copula or that which joyneth the subject and the predicate in this question together The subject of the question is the visible Church the predicate questioned is contained in the words truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace wherein we may further observe the thing which is more directly questioned in these words truely a Church of Christ together with the condition or limitation thereof in the words annex'd without respect to saving grace Lastly that which coupleth this predicate questioned with this subject of the question is to be noted in the words may be considered to be c. SECT II. Visibility explained and distinguished The subject of the question then is the Church as it is specified with the quality of visiblensse for we do not consider it here in any other capacity either an entitive or organical as catholick or institute as universal-visible or particular-visible nor yet abstractly as a Church or concretely as visible but in a conjunct compounded and united sense as it is the visible Church or the Church which is visible For the better opening of this terme three things may be undertaken First to explaine the attribute visible Secondly to apply it to the Church and then to make my Notion of this visible Church as plain as I can so far as may concern the question in general To begin with the first Visibility seemeth familiarly to be used Visible is 1. that which seemeth what it is not in two distinct significations 1. Visibility is somtimes taken for that â—ffection of a thing wheâ—by the thing seemeth to be what indeed it is not as one that seemeth to be a sincere member of Christ when in truth he is not so may yet be said to be so visibly or as we more ordinarily use to say to seeme to be so Thus Visibility stands opposed to Reality 2. Visibility is also sometimes taken for that affection of a thing 2. What it is whereby the thing seemeth to be what indeed it is and shewes it self ad extra to be such Now here visible is nothing else but that which may be seen Whether it be actually visum seen or not as a regenerate person evidencing the truth of his grace by a sound profession is truely said to be so visibly i. e. appearingly or a visible Saint Thus visible stands opposed not to real but to invisible that is that which may not or cannot be seen a man is said to be visible not because he seems to be a man and is not but because he may be seene thus likewise God is said to be invisible not because he is
so but though the Church may be sometimes obscured it never loseth its visibility or ceaseth to be visible So Ames ecclesia nunquam planè desinit esse visibilis Med. p. 166. 39 quamvis enim aliquando viz usquam appareat ecclesia tam pura c. ecclesia tamen aliquo modo visibilis exist it in illa ipsa impuritate cultus professionis which we may take in English in those pertinent words of Master Fox the right His protestation before his Acts and Monuments Church saith he is not so invisible in the world as none can see it The Scripture-Church is most properly the Church of Christ this none can well deny But now the visible Church is the Scripture-Church as appeares from the Doctrine of Scripture about the Church the examples the parts the Ordinances and number of Scripture-Churches First the Doctrine of the Scripture about the Church is generally such as agreeth onely with the Church-visible viz. as made up of tares and wheat good and bad Elect and reprobate c. Yea the very word Church in Scripture as some affirme is not more then once taken for the Church-invisible which is Heb. 12. 23. though that very place is by some Reverend Divines understood of the Church-visible also for it was already come into by persons then alive ye are come therefore the Church on earth and it was a Church that had Ordinances in it v. 25. therefore the visible But if it should be granted as Master Blake observes that in this place and in two or three more the Scripture meaneth the Church invisible which is as much as can be pretended unto yet doubtlesse that which is the ordinary language of the holy Ghost which he useth most often and almost always is that which is most proper 2. It also appears from the examples of Scripture-Churches De quâ solâ ecclefiâ praesumptivâ c. Dav. Detern p. 218. ex spalatensi for have not even all these a mixture of corrupt and wicked members and is such a mixture compatible with the Church invisible or what Churches can such be but visible therefore saith Davenant all such Scriptures and assertions of the fathers as speak of this mixture of good and bad in the Church are to be understood of the presumptive or visible Church 3. It further appeares by the parts of the Scripture-Church which are generally such as are onely to be found in the visile Church that the Scripture-Church is the visible Church The parts of the Scripture-Church are generally Priest and people Pastors and flock the Rulers and the ruled the Catechisers and the catechized and the like as both the Old and New Testament abundantly testifie Now in the Church invisible there are no such parts no such relations no such officers but all are members but Christ the head therefore the Scripture-Church wherein these parts and officers as such are viz. Priests Prophets Apostles Bishops Pastors Elders Deacons Rulers Cetechizers c. must needs be the visible Church Fourthly that the Scripture-churche is the visible Church appears moreover by the dispensation of Ordinances fixed therein which is proper and peculiar to the visible Church in all the Scripture-Churches we finde a dispensation of the Word Sacraments discipline the dispensation whereof is in the hands of men who are onely capable of dealing with the Church as visible yea the dispensation it self is visible and all will readily grant that these Ordinances are all of them peculiar to the visible Church the attendance of the Church upon them being the most eminent and remarkable meanes of rendring the Church her self to be visible Lastly this yet farther appears from the number of the Scripture-churches they are many the Church at Rome Corinth Galatia Ephesus Colosse Philippi Thessalonica Pergamus Thyatira c. Whereas the invisible Church is also indivisible 't is but one and not to be divided into any more therefore the Scripture-church which is thus actually divided must needs be the visible Church Arg. 5. My last Argument is taken from the Name Church and may be this The visible Church in its nature doth not properly answer to the name Church therefore it is most properly the Church for that thing which doth in its nature most properly answer to such a name must needs be the thing most properly which that name doth signifie Now the nature of the visible Church may be observed to answer to the name Church in a most proper signification both in English Latine Greek and Hebrew 1. In English the word Church doth in a true and direct propriety of speech signifie nothing but that which is the Lords and may be conceived to imply the Lords people or the Lords house Die Kyrchen nuxcupant ipsum Dei populum Domum in quo hic congregatur ad cultum Dei Vid. Bul. Dec. p. 135. it seemes to be taken from the German word Kurch which also alludeth haply to the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominica which as Bullinger observes they used to understand both of the people and the house of the Lord where the people of the Lord used to assemble and indeed of both as they have relation one to the other Now if the name Church intend the people of the Lord meeting together in one place to attend on the worship of God we need not much trouble our selves for its proper application to the visible Church 2. In Lattine the Church is called Congregatio the Congregation or the people gathered together answering haply to the Hebrew which may also be here taken notice of Katial 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Congregavit Now doth not this name also most properly agree with the nature and reason of the visible Church is it not a local gathering together that most properly constitutes a Congregation and is not this most proper to the particular and consequently to the visisible Church therefore is she also called an Assembly a body a City a Kingdom none of which but most properly resemble the Church as visible 3. Lastly the Church in Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which most directly imports a people called out of the world as anon more largely Indeed the term from or out of which the Church is called is not expressed in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet all agree that it is as necessarily implied in it Now this sense of the word Church most properly and exactly intendeth the church-Church-visible this being most apparently and properly called out of the world as easily appeareth For the world here must be understood to be either the world of the ungodly or the world of infidels but it cannot be understood of the world of the ungodly because there is still a mixture of the Church and the world in this sense according to that of our Saviour I pray not that thou shouldst take them out of the world then if the world out of which the Church is called be
the world of Infidels viz. of such as live without the pale of the Christian profession I think it will be easily granted first that such as own the said Christian profession are most properly opposed to and called out of the world in this sense and secondly that such are most properly the visible Church But enough if not too much of this 't is time to take up with this item that though haply this discourse may tend to some insensible advantage in the main question yet the stresse of it resteth not upon this point For we may prove that the visible Church is truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace whether the visible Church be found in the issue to be most properly a Church or not therefore the sense of this word truely in the question we shall now make bold to enquire into CHAP. II. Of the terme truely or the Church truely so called WE now proceed to the predicate in question or that which is questioned of this subject the visible Church contained in these words of the question truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace Wherein we have before observed First that which is more directly questioned in these words truely a Church of Christ Secondly the condition or limitation thereof in the words annex'd without respect to saving grace To begin with the first I humbly conceive that a good and cleare understanding of this terme truely or how the Church may be said to be truely so may have a strong subserviency to a happy decision of the main controversie wherefore I shall take the liberty to enlarge my sense and notion thereof to as much plainesse as I am able 1. Truth as predicable of the visible Church is sometimes expressed by vera and sometimes by verè By vera ecclesia is usually meant the Church not onely endued Ecclesia vera with the truth of being but endowed also with the truth of goodnesse or the goodnesse of well-being and under some excellency of doctrine or manners or both By verè ecclesia is usually intended the being of the Church Verè alone and not the quality unlesse so farre it intend the evil qualities of any Church as to secure its being against them Accordingly Divines use to say that such a Church as is very corrupt and yet retaineth the essence or being of a Church of Christ is verè or truely a Church of Christ but not vera ecclesia or a true Church that is a pure or an holy Church as an honest man is said to be verus homo a true man and a thief who is not properly said to be a true man is doubtlesse verè homo and as truely a man as any other verè serving to expresse truth as natural and vera as moral Yet with leave though this distinction may serve to explain The distinction excepted against our meanings I adde that 't is well-known to all that are schollars that both these termes vera and verè may be lawfully applyed to the Church or any thing while the physical being thereof is not wholly perish'd though the defects in morals be never so notorious if we speak of the subject under that notion and of truth as attributed thereunto in its physical acceptation A thief is doubtlesse a true man as well as truely a man if we speak of a thief quatenus homo as a man and not as a good or bad man morally true or false Thus also the Church may be said to be as well a true as truely a Church of Christ while its essentials remaine in it and it hath not yet lost its natural being be it never so corrupt in moral concernments or never so much to be censured or condemned in any such respects for if the Church hath its Ens it must be allowed its verum also 3. But it appeareth that the question carrieth the weaker terme viz. truely as that which is likeliest to be yeelded unto by such as are likeliest to dissent upon the whole whereby it easily The terme applied to the question appeareth to the Reader what is enquired after in the question namely not whether the visible Church may be considered to be a pure or a perfect Church or a true Church in a moral capacity but whether it may be considered to be truely a Church that is to have all the essentials of a visible Church or its natural being without respect to saving grace or whether the beiing of the visible Church have a necessary dependance upon saving qualifications 4. It may be also heeded that though the question run whether it may be so considered the reason whereof may appeare hereafter yet the question is not whether the truth of the Church consist only in consideration for the weight of our question resteth upon the truth of the Churches being in it self and not in our minds or conception onely this nature and truth of the Church without our mindes cannot be so quoad nos without an act of our minde viz. consideration but the question properly is de veritate ecclesiae visibilis as the Metaphysicks speak in essendo Veritatem in Rebus ipsis quae ab illâ denominantur verae Suar. disp 8. which is defined truth in the things themselves by vertue of which truth the things themselves are said to be true which is such a truth as agrees with the Church without the operation of the mind and therefore such as states the Church a real thing thing seeing competere alicui atra mentis operationem is the known definition of Reale esse Lastly this common expression truely a Church is desired to be kept unto to keep out those troublesome and disputable termes of ecclesia aequivoca and ecclesia presumptiva which are wont to perplex this controversie to both of which this verè ecclesia or the truth of the Churches being in it self stands in as evident as direct opposition for the aequivocal Church in the sense of most of those that dissent from me hath no truth of being at all and the presumed Church dependeth upon the charity of the mind of those that consider it and hath not that being that is to be certainly knowne and considered by us as it is here in question but more plainelie 1. The evasion of ecclesia presumptiva is thus anticipated whether it import the visible or invisible Church 1. If by this presumed Church be meant the visible which in favour and charity we presume to be a Church as Spalatensis and after him Davenant seemeth to some to imply though we know not who are true members thereof because we know not who among them have saving grace then who seeth not that this presumption begs the question it being evidently built upon that supposition which is mainly in controversie viz. that one cannot be a true member of the visible Church without saving grace this acceptation of the Church taketh up that respect to saving grace which
is questioned and therefore can claime no place in the controversie 2. But if by this presumed Church be meant the invisible Church or the Church of the saved which seems more proper seeing we can onely presume and conjecture as * Insibili credimus esse electos aliquos etiamsi qui illi sint non novimus scientia perfecta sed conjecturali duntaxat Col. Theo. p. 4. disp 13. Thes 7 Maccovius saith who are the true members thereof Yet thus it concerneth not us at all who are now debating a question about the visible and not the invisible Church 2. In like manner the term aequivocum is struck out of this controversie for if the question be as ours is whether the Church be truely so without respect to saving grace and the answer be this that such are onely members of the Church aequivocè that have no saving grace the thing in question is evidently begg'd if aequivecè be opposed to truly as usually herein it is 6. But there being so much noise at present about the termes univocum aequivocum analogum about this thing I think my Reader will look for some longer account of my minde therein which though I am loath to do yet I humbly offer in a few particulars 1. If we shall be able to prove that the truth of the visible Church doth not necessarily suppose saving grace and that such as have no saving grace may truely be said to be of the Church I humbly conceive we need not trouble our selves at all whether they be so univocè equivocè or analogicè 2. Yet although I presume it might safely be asserted that wicked men may be members of the visible Church univocally I should for peace and quiet sake be very well satisfied with this that they are most properly so per analogiam wherein I humbly conceive we may almost meet with both those Reverend and eminent men Mr. Blake and Mr. Baxter as appears under both their hands in print Vid. Br. Apol. p. 99. and Blakes seals p. 150 151. 3. However if I may make my own choice I had rather reduce the membership of hypocrites unto that branch of Analogy which Bueerwood calls Dignitatis solius which truely methinks if I may be plaine should fit the notion of most men that trouble themselves in the point and are loath to be Brownists 4. The analogy of dignity onely saith he is when one member of it is more worthy then the other and instances thus homo and Brutum are Analogous of the name Animal though to satisfie us how unworthy this is of an eager dispute with Divines when we see such a difference among Logicians themselves Stierius and other Logicians bring us the very same instance of univoca but if we keep our selves to this branch of analogy on which we have pitch'd it may help me to explain my meaning thus 1. Both man and beast are animal so both the hypocrite and the Elect regenerate are Church-members 2. The beast is as truely and properly animal as well as the man so the hypocrite is truely and properly a Church-member as well as the Elect regenerate 3. the man however is the more noble animal so the elect regenerate is the more noble Church-member 4. Lastly therefore the man and the beast are analogous of the name animal and the hypocrite and the Elect regenerate of the name Church-member 5. I might subjoyne if it be worth the paines that if we would speak logically in logical termes as we speak of one member of the division so we must speak of the other and not as some affect to do to say that true beleevers are univocal members and hypocrites aequivocal for they are both membra dividentia of the same head and if the one be univocal so is the other and if the one be aequivocal so is the other as the living dogg and the dog-star are both aequivoca with respect to the name Canis and man and beast are either both analoga or univoca of the name animal CHAP. III. Of the respect we owe to saving grace in the consideration of the visible Church HAving hitherto laboured in the Explication of the subject of the question viz. the visible Church and of its attribute directly in question viz. truely a Church of Christ we proceed to the condition or limitation thereof contained in the words annex'd without respect to saving grace which for the sake of dispatch we shall look upon together with the Copula which serveth to joyne the subject and the attribute in the question together containe in these words may be considered to be which that we may the easier receive our explication of we shall sent the question at full once more before us viz. Whether the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace Where that we may further observe the reason as well as the sense of the termes I humbly beg my readers patience yet carefully to heed 1. That it is not questioned whether the visible Church may be without respect to saving grace but whether it may be considered c. that would have sounded very improperly For respect doth not flow a principio essendi but a principio cognoscendi and naturally answers onely thereunto Respect is but a looking upon or unto which requireth an eye either real viz. bodily if the discourse be of sensible objects or metaphorically viz. of the minde if the discourse be of intellectual or rational objects as this that is before us here viz. saving grace is Here we have a rational object viz saving grace and a rational sight or a looking upon or unto it viz. in the word respect and therein therein is plainly rational eye and act supposed as fit to be expressed which here is done by this terme in the question Consideration Had the question been of the truth of the visible Church in general without respect it might have been thus expressed viz. whether the visible be truely a Church and no more Or had the question been onely and simply of the Churches dependency upon saving grace and not of our respect thereunto it might have beene expressed thus Whether the visible Church be truely a Church without saving grace and no more But seeing as we shall presently finde that there is a necessity of the latter words without respect to saving grace there is also a manifest necessity of such a kind of copula as here we have viz. may be considered or conceived or thought or imagined to be or the like and the meaning thereof is briefly but thus Whether we may take a true apprehension conception or consideration of the visible Church in the being or nature thereof without an eye or respect unto saving grace or whether we must necessarily take saving grace into our thoughts to a right and true understanding of the visible Church to be truely a Church of Christ 2. That the question is not
a thing for before any thing hath its forme it is not that thing and so soone as ever hath its forme it instantly hath the being and justly challengeth the name of that thing Yea it is the very reason and principle of the being of a thing yea it s very essence as Aristotle saith and ipsum quid sit But now the forme of the visible Church being not essentially Forma 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 depending upon saving grace may be considered to be truely such without respect thereunto whether we intend it systatically the forme by which the visible Church is constituted such or diaretically by which the visible Church being constitute is distinguished and knowne to be a true from a false Church The consideration of each of these will afford us its Argument 1. From the constituent form of the visible thus The visible Church may be considered to have a real constitutive forme without respect to saving grace therefore also to be truely a Church of Christ without respect thereunto The consequence must needs be yeelded me because its contrary implies a contradiction for to say that any thing hath a real constitutive forme is as much as to say that it really and formally is therefore to deny that any thing hath not really or truely a being is formally to contradict its having a real constitutive forme Then nothing but the minor requires proof which is that the visible Church hath a reali constitutive forme which hath no necessary dependance upon and may consequently be considered without respect unto saving grace which I presume will appear upon a short and easie debate Trelcatius who in some other of his passages seemeth not to favour this opinion overmuch yet assignes to the visible Church as it is distinguished by himself to the Church invisible as all the other causes so this of the forme and calls it by this very terme of the forme constituting the visible Church 2 Neither can it be thought that he intended such a form as did imply saving grace for he termes it externa vocatio as it stands opposed by himself to that effectual call which he accounts to be the forme of the Church invisible 3. Nor yet can any imagine that he thought it not a real call because he addes quam mediatè Deus efficit which God himselfe works though mediately Yet I must needs enter my exception against this forme assigned to the visible Church by Trelcatius and others viz. external vocation I shall easily allow it taken in an active sense to be an efficient or taken in a passive sense to be a necessary condition as before in the matter of the visible Church but in no sense at all to be the form thereof For 1. If this external calling were the forme of the Church then every particular member would be a formal Church for every particular member is externally called and where the forme of a thing is there we may truely say that thing it self is 2. Persons qua called seem rather to be matter of the Church and external vocation to be onely a condition requisite in the matter of the visible Church being near the same with external profession or outward worshipping my reason is because that persons externally called may pre-exist a Church informed as also remain when the forme of the Church is lost for when two or three are called out of the world by the preaching of the word we cannot presently say there is now a Church formed though these be good stones to begin the building withal and a Church may be possibly consumed even to two or three or dissolv'd and scattered and so loose its forme though persons called still remain which according to the rule should rather be accounted the matter of the Church for si forma perit manente aliquo Col. Conim br materiam illud esse necesse est 3. For which Amesius seemeth directly faith saith he Fides ut insiugulis fidelibus existens distributive est forma vocatorum sed in omnibus collective spectata est coetus vocatorum i. e. forma ecclesiae Medul 163. as it is existing in single beleevers distributively is the forme of the called who are the matter and not the forme of the Church Amesius teacheth that the forme of the visible Church quoad externum statum or as it is distinguished from the invisible is internae fidei externa professio Which external profession is either personal or ecclesiastical if personal then every professor as it was reasoned before having the forme of the Church would be a true Church and if ecclesiastical yet this external profession seemeth rather a formal â—ction or an action of the Church presupposing its being and existence and flowing immediately from the form of the Church which it self is not for before there can be an ecclesiastical profession or the profession of a Church there must be ecclesia or a Church in the order of nature at least which could not be if this profession were the forme thereof for forma est ratio essentiae and rather before or at least simul natura cum composito However if this external profession be the forme of the visible Church it will serve my turne well enough For 1. It will not be denied to be a real thing by Amesius himself who allows it power to interest a person in the external state of the Church 2. Nor yet to consist without saving grace as his own words directly expresse illi autem qui professione tantum sunt fideles Medul 168 c. I confesse that Amesius accounts this externall profession to be but the accidental forme of the Church and that it is in terminis distinguished by him from the essential forme thereof Yet he acknowledgeth that some persons who do not at all partake of that essential forme which is distingushed by him to Illi autem qui professione tantum sunt fideles dum remanent in illa societate sunt membra illius ecclesiae sicut etiam ecclesiâ— Catholicae quoad externum tantum non quoad internum statum aut essentialem Med. p. 168. this accidental forme do yet truely partake of this accidental form of the Church are by consequence in his own words membra ecclesiae the sense of which he limits in the next words according to the external and not according to the internal or essential state of the Church If I may be modest and yet bold I should be bold to say that Amesius seemed here in a strait betwixt two he was loath to say that external professours wanting true grace were true members of the Church of Christ therefore saith he they are not so quoad statum internum aut essentialem and yet as loath to say they were not truely so and therefore saith they are membra ecclesiae quoad statum externum the Papist held the one and the Brownist the other how then dare he or we hold either the Papist was
is invisible and visible this distinction is a distribution of the adjuncts of the same subject in divers respects the one internal the other external I confesse the reformed Divines I mean many of them do affirme that the invisible Church is onely revera ecclesia the true Church but their meaning I humbly conceive must be taken with a great deal of caution which with all humility I shall labour to unfold in a few distinctions as neere their owne sense and with as much of their spirit as I am able The Distinctions which may help us herein may be either of the Epithete true or the subject the Church 1. Truth as applicable to the Church is taken Respectu Naturali Vel Entitatis Morali Vel Status Vel Finis Now I humbly offer whether the reformed Divines asserting the invisible Church to be the onely true Church can possibly be though to exclude the visible Church from being true in the first branch of this division viz. in that natural sense whereby a thing is said to have the truth of being and existence why then do they still define the visible Church and give it all its Profession and preaching of the true doctrine is the only proper and certain note of the true Church Hildersham on Joh. 4. p. 161 This was the meaning of Wickliff Husse and others who therefore define the Church to be the multitude of the elect not for that they think them onely to pertain to the Church and no others but because they only pertain unto it principally fully effectually and finally Field on the Church p. 13. Distinct 2. real causes why do they tell us of the marks of the true visible Church why do none of them assert that the visible is not truely a Church or that the invisible Church is alone the Church truely so called yea in that they assert it to be visible they conclude it to be real seeing we cannot see that that is not Therefore they may be granted to meane onely that the invisible Church is onely true with respect to her state in the favour of God and to her end salvation that is the members of the invisible Church alone are certainly and infallible instated in the love of God and to be saved their controversie with the Papist engaged them to both these in their defence of the invisible Church and perseverance but no further for though the question was whether all in the visible Church were in a state of grace or whether all that were in a state of grace should persevere therein to the end yet we never read that they ever came to question whether the visible Church might be truely said to be a Church of Christ or not the centrary being indeed acknowledged on both sides The Church invisible then is the onely true Church in this moral sense it onely being truely in the love and favour of God and sure of salvation but the visible Church is also true in a natural sense it being really and truely a Church of God Or 2. Truth as applied to the Church is so Simpliciter Secundum quid Truth as taken in general large or simple acceptation may be easily conceived to be granted by the reformed Divines even to the visible Church 't is true in its kinde with such a truth as is agreeable to the nature of a visible Church I think none will deny this nor affirm the invisible Church to be the onely true Church in this sense Yet there is a restrained sense of truth in order to some particular determination of it which belongs onely to the Church invisible and which our Divines must needes meane whatever it be yet generally they explaine themselves as Bullinger doth himselfe revera ecclesia saith he viz. fideles Electi Dei viva membra connexa Christo non modo vinculis externis notis sed spiritu fide In which words he plainly expresseth that there is a double way of being knit to Christ 1. Fide spiritu 2. Vinculis externis notis The first of which he intends when he speaks of the true Church viz. that the invisible Church is the onely true Church in this respect of being knit unto Christ by faith and the spirit leaving room for any to conclude besides that such as are knit unto Christ by outward bonds alone are yet so farre truely knit as to be truely members of the visible though not of the Church invisible Vnion with Christ is true outwardly externis vinculis by which the visible Church is truely his Church and true savingly whereby the invisible Church is the onely true Church in that respect The subject of this questioned truth may also be distinguished for the better discovery of the minde of these Divines herein The Church is taken Strictly Largely Consisting of the Elect regenerate Distinct 1. Hac autem ecclesia latius accepta quatenus bonos malos continet Zanch. de eccl p. 65. Militans ecclesia rursus consideratur dupliciter vel enim strictius considerata vel latius malos complexa Bul. Dec. 350. Vox ecclesia ambigui stricte latissime minus late in quo electi hypocrite Ravanel c. Objicis sat scio hypocritas me numerasse c. Dec. p. 347 Good and bad This we may the bolder insist upon because it is of so frequent use amongst the reformed Divines themselves upon the same occasion and as they themselves explaine it the Church strictly taken is the Church invisible consisting onely of the Elect as Trelcatius Bullinger c. or of the Elect-regenerate and called as Ames and others and the Church largely taken consisting of the Elect and reprobate Beleevers and hypocrites good and bad as their general language is To apply it when these Divines affirme that the invisible Church is the onely true Church can they be understood in any other sense then this viz. that they onely are the true Church in this close strict and saving sense as the Church is taken strictly and is it not as evident as any thing in the world that they intend only to shut hypocrites out of the Church in this strict and saving sense and as plaine that they allow them a place in the Church as it is largely taken which large acceptation of the Church is by themselves generally expressed to be ecclesia bonos malos amplexa Bullinger frames an objection on purpose that he may have an occasion to declare his minde to this point his objection is How can hypocrites being members of Satan be members of the Church He answers by distinguishing of hypocrites Some saith he confide in their own righteousnesse as the Pharisees did these are not others do not so but neither hating nor flying from nor persecuting the Church do outwardly joyne with it and professe the same faith a while with it c. these are members of the Church till they fall away and much more those that continue in
beast being an animated creature as well as a man without the specification or essential quality of reason added However indeed 't is such a soul that is the forme of man not a soul in general nor yet reason in abstract consideration from soul but the soul as such or the reasonable soul so in the case before us the forme of the Church lieth in a society so qualified or intended or as such yet still a community though as Ames saith a community that looks at communion in the worship of God Yet lastly that I may not seem to acquiesce in my own sense and also that I may if possible attaine the genuine notion of the reformed Divines in the point I shall not stick to say that Essential here is not the attribute of totum or opposed to integral but of forma and opposed to accidental Essential forme is also used here in a large sense for the substantial form of any real thing and accordingly applicable to compositum agregativum as wel as essentiale strictly taken In all visible assemblies many bad are mingled with the good and therefore of necessity we must allow another Church wherto they properly belong which can be none but an invisible Church White his way to the true Church I yet perceive no great absurdity to be incurred if one should assert that a double acceptation of an aggregative body may make a supposition of a double forme and they both essential Give me leave to explicate my meaning by the former distinction of the Church as largely and strictly taken each of which acceptation I conceive will bear its distinct definition and consequently may be supposed to have its distinct essential form so far as this diverse acceptation will hold A heap of stones wherein there are many precious stones may be taken strictly for a heap of precious stones and largely for a heap containing both the precious and the common Now if this heape be defined exactly according to both these acceptations who would not see a formal difference betwixt them the one must be exclusive of all the common and the other must generally agree unto and receive in both the common and precious Thus if we define the Church as consisting onely of the Elect and againe if we define it as such a society as agreeth to both the Elect and reprobate must not the definitions differ as much as the Elect and reprobate i. e. specifically for in the latter the Elect and reprobate are found to agree in one common bond or fellowship which by the former is utterly dissolv'd Yet this doth not make two distinct Churches farther then in our consideration the reason thereof is plaine because the Church is a society made up of heterogeneous parts or parts specifically differing in their proper natures and this various acceptation thereof doth strictly consider and define onely one part or largely takes the whole together yet all the while there is no real separation of these Churches but the one still remaineth the whole and the other is but a part if largely considered we may consider the precious apart and the common apart and we may define it as a heap of precious stones and as such a heap as containeth in it stones both common and precious and yet there is but one real heap and the heap taken strictly is but part of of the heap taken largely This matter may be plainer understood thus an aggregative body is such as not one thing absolutely but such as containeth Trelcatius de eccles in it self two things one of which is like to multititude and matter dispersed the other is like to unity order and collection So that we see ground 1. To consider such a body in one respect In an aggregative 1. Matter dispersed like to multitude or matter divided now this matter thus divided may be either of the same kinde or nature which is called Homogeneous or of different which is called Heterogeneous If this matter be Homogeneous i. e. of the same nature then if you define a part you define the whole or at least you define the whole in part i. e. you define the whole matter of this body though you do not define it with respect to its forme in collection but if this matter thus divided be of different nature so farre as the nature of the matter differs so farre will the definition of one part differ from the definition of the whole because the definition of the whole must be so general as to agree to both parts but the definition of the one differing in nature from the other must distinguish it from all things else of a differing nature and so consequently from the other part of this compositum and consequently from the whole which as was said must have a definition so general as to take in all the parts in some common reason Efficacitas vocationis duplex una salutaris electorum propria altera non salutaris ad vocatos communiter spectans Trel p. 114. and do not these specifically differ or bond agreeing to all Ex. gr the Church strictly taken is defined to be coetus electorum this now is specifically exclusive of the reprobate and as differing from that definition of the Church is which to take in the reprobate which by Wallebaeus is said to be coetus communiter vocatorum The Elect are commonly called and more as more they are defined by themselves and specifically differ from such as are onely commonly called as they are commonly called they agree with those that are onely commonly called and fall into the same definition with them which definition must differ specifically from the former suppose we should frame such a definition as takes in both man and beast would not that specifically differ from the definition of man as distingushed from bruits wherby he is said 〈…〉 not onely animal as they are but animal rationale as they are not Yet we have still evident ground in the second place to consider There is also a unity of this matter in an aggregative body this matter in the unity of this collective body the parts though never so different in nature are not divided in state but united so farre as to agree together in the same body homo and brutum though specifically differing in themselves yet they are the same generally and united together in animal the Elect and reprobate they are specifically differing in themselves yet both agree in their genus of visible Church-membership by common calling the like might be said of tares and corne chaffe and wheat c. these being also specifically differing in themselves yet they visibly meet in the same heap and agree to stand together in the same field Let us lastly observe that this notion of the Church is sufficient to maintaine the reformed sense from that of the Romish For the controversie betwixt us and them was not whether there be a visible Church but
is yeelded that these Jews were not onely nominally but really members of the visible Church and then my desire is granted viz. that persons void of saving grace as these Jewes were may be considered to be real members of the visible Church 3. Indeed if we take Abrahams seed here in the last sense viz. spiritually or savingly such then the opposition is most evident for thus they could not be Abrahams seed and the children of the devil also and our Saviour plainly staves off from the first by so sharp a charge of the second q. d. you think because you have Abraham to your father that you are the heirs of salvation and heaven but alas ye are the devils children and must look for your place and portion with him Secondly we may distinguish also of these Jewes as they are here affirmed to be the children of the Devil The children of the devil are so in nature or habitually or in conversation or service or so in state condition profession and visible shew nor though such as are in nature and service the children of God and in grace and works the children of Abraham cannot be in state profession or outward shew the children of the Devil yet on the contrary it is too evident in sad experience and plaine in the Scripture that such as are the children of God and our father Abraham in profession and condition may yet be the children of the world the flesh and the devil in heart and life and service as these Jews were who though they were so notoriously eminent in the service of the devil against Christ and his Gospel are yet acknowledged by our Saviour here to have Abraham to their father and by Paul Rom. 9 4. to be the adopted children of God Object 2. He is no Jew that is onely so outwardly Rom. 2. 28. therefore he is no real Church-member that is onely so in profession Answ 'T is confest that he is no Jew in the Apostles sense that is onely a Jew outwardly and that this by analogy will conclude from Jews to Christians but the great question yet resteth viz. in what sense the Apostle meaneth that the Jew outwardly is no Jew 1. He cannot mean that he was no Jew carnally this is confessed while the Apostle termes him a Jew outwardly 2. He cannot mean that he is no Jew ecclesiastically or with respect to visible Church-membership for that also he allows in the very next words ch 3. 1 2 c. what advantage then hath Quum enim cos circumcisionis symbolo insignitos suisse tra dit quo filii Deâ— haberâ—ntur non eas fatetur suo aliquo meri to excelluisse sed Dei beneficiis Bul. in loc Rom. 9. 4. the Jew as if he had said if he be in some sense no Jew what then is his advantage above the Gentile he answers himself much every way and wherein but in Church-priviledges and how but as this outward Jew is a Church-member 3. Then thirdly there is no sense left for these words of the Apostle but that spiritual saving sense before mentioned so that here is a Jew and no Jew a carnal Jew and an outward Jew a member of the visible Church to whom belongeth the adoption and the glory of the Covenants c. and yet no Jew spiritually and savingly as the very place interprets it self if any thing heeded where the Jew outwardly is onely asserted to be no Jew in that he is not a Jew inwardly and what 's that but such a Jew as God expects accepts or gives praise unto whose praise is not of men but of God the conclusion is that some are outwardly Christians or members onely of the visible Church who are not spiritually or savingly so or that shall finde no praise or acceptance with God which was never denied Object 3. Some in the Church have onely a name to live when indeed they are dead Rev. 3. 1. therefore there are some that are onely nominal and not real members of the Church Answ I have before confessed that there are some persons mingled with the Church and people of God that are of his Church onely nominally and not really that have the name alone and not the thing whether we respect the visible Church or the invisible such as pretend contrary to their direct intentions as the Jew at New-castle to joyne with the Church upon any corrupt or treacherous designe may have the name but that is all of a visible member thereof Again all hypocrites that cover their rottennesse under specious professions of the truth of their grace from the eyes of the world have the name and shew of the members of the Church invisible or of the Church of the saved when they have nothing at all of the truth or being thereof 2. But 't is most evident that our Saviours words now urged reach onely the latter sort of these pretenders and lay us a ground onely to distinguish of nominal and real members of the Church of the saved so far is it from troubling the course of our question at all for if we mark the Text saith not that this Church hath a name to be a Church but to live to have spiritual and saving life in her in opposition whereunto she is alone said to be dead Againe this life doth not seeme so much as to pretend the life of outward grace or that which is the principle of the state and condition of the visible Church but onely the life of habitual and inward grace or that which is the principle of good works and a holy conversation as is very evident from the very Text I know thy works thy works are not perfect before God v. 1 2. 3. Yea to put all out of doubt the same mouth that thus chargeth her to be dead doth also acknowledge her to be a Church and her Ministry to be an Angel to the Angel of the Church in Sardis v. 1. and concludeth this Epistle v. 7. as he doth the rest Let him that hath an eare heare what the Spirit saith unto the Churches it is also called a golden candlestick as well as the rest yea and by name said to be one of the seven Churches ch 1. 11. and 20. Object 4. To the wicked God saith what hast thou to do to declare my Statute or that thou shouldest take my Covenant in thy mouth c. Psalme 50. 16. therefore wicked men are not in Covenant and consequently not in the Church Answ This passage may be thought to be spoken of wicked Ministers 1. From the context in the verses preceding which chiefly treat of the work of Ministers viz. sacrifices and offerings and burnt-offerings as the special matter of the present discourse from v. 8. to v. 14. 2. From the Text it self which supposeth the persons here reproved to be such as used to declare Gods statutes to others I should not lay much weight upon this interpretation but that it seemeth to have been
non profecto veniet Antichristus ex Judais quod quidam credunt neque ex Turcis sed ex Christianis Naogeorge in loc Hereticks that were never of the Church in the Apostles sense were yet of the Church in the first sense numero nomine titulo ex Apostalorum societate Christianorum and thus Christiani as Bullinger saith Christiani olim fuerant quos hic vocavit Antichristus they were Apostolorum discipuli though ficti and fratres though subdoli and falsi as Naogeorge saith but thus as before was noted the Text concerneth not our question at all 2. Yet I grant that some of these Hereticks might formerly have owned the true Religion without these Heresies or any purpose and designe to promote the same or themselves by them but that they came on as in our age men usually do thereto by degrees and that though they were not of the Church in the Apostles sense yet they were of the Church according to the second branch of the distinction before explained viz. of the Church of the called though not of the Elect. Tertii vivam habent fidei radicem ac suae Adoptionis Testimonium penitus fixum in cordibus gerunt de his loquitur Jobannes cum impossibile esse dicit ab ecclesia alienari Calv. in loc Therefore the Apostle meaneth that these Hereticks did make it appeare by their departure from the Church upon so damnable an occasion that they were never of the Church to be saved or elected to salvation though yet they were once of the visible so ciety of Christians or of the visible Church from which otherwise they could not have departed and that really though not effectually finally fully or savingly they were not of us saith Oecumenius that is of the lot of them which are saved yet they were truely of us as Augustine fully and clearly distinguisheth the place his words are these such as will not tarry in the Church but finally forsake it to the end in the prescience of God and respect of the small benefit they shall have by their temporal and small abode there be not of or in the Church though according to this present state they are truely members thereof which words are quoted and sealed to by Fulk against the Rhemists in Vindication of the Protestant judgement aspersed by the Papists as more fully anon in this point those other words of Augustine used by Fulk upon this Text likewise are yet more clear these men therefore were of the many that were called but of the few that are chosen they were not And this double sense of being of the Church at which some seeme to be offended is clearly grounded upon the Scripture those that are of the visible Church and not of the invisible are as well said to be of Israel though not Israel by Paul to the Chap. 9. 6 Romans as those are here said to be of us that are of the Church invisible also Therefore I conclude with Fields apt and pertinent words by that which hath been said that none but the Elect are of the Of the Church p 14 Church in that principal and high degree before mentioned we may easily understand the Truth of their meaning who say that hypocrites wicâ—â—d men and cast awayes are in but not of the Church Object 6. The titles that are proper to the savingly beleeving as Saints Gods children people c. are communicated by Scripture to all Church-members therefore all Church-members are by Scripture supposed to be truely and savingly beleeving and those that are not savingly qualified are but equivocally so called by Scripture Answ To take it for granted that such titles as these are proper in Scripture to such onely as savingly beleeve is too plainly to begge the thing in question or rather that which hath been wholly put beyond all question by the Scripture it selfe before Had not we already found the holy Ghost almost throughout the Scriptures when he doth not onely suppose but expresly charge a people to be notoriously wicked to own such a people at the same time and in the same place to be Gods people children holy c. this might have seem'd a plausible and handsome argument but seeing it is indeed thus a very easie reply may serve it until our former arguments from Scripture against it are answered How such titles as these became so generally received as proper and peculiar to such onely as savingly believe I dare not presume to guesse however give me leave to fear that the too frequent restrain'd or ambiguous application thereof shall I say unadvisedly from our pulpits hath had some influence into that sad and schismatical perswasion and errour of the Anabaptist as well as others CHAP. XXI The Authority of the Church searched after and first in Augustines age LEt us now at length descend from the consideration of Divine authority to that which is called Humane and from the Scripture to the Church But if we would indeed discerne the clear and distinct opinion of the Church in this famous controversie we need not be so much busied in drawing consequences or offering snatches from what she hath scattered by her worthy hands up and down upon other occasions but rather seriously to fix and ponder upon what she hath delivered about it when called by some eminent and special providence to speak punctually to it Before this controverting age of ours there have been three remarkable periods of special occasion exacting the sentence and judgement of the Church in the present case upon all which we now proceed briefly to examine what judgement she hath made The first eminent occasion hereof was urged by the Donatists Aug. Tom. 7. Gram. l. 2. c. 3. 4 there was indeed as Austine observeth some slight motion of it by some Schismaticks in Cyprians age before but Donatus was the first great stickler in it who held that none but the godly were true members of the visible Church the very point I humbly conceive that we have all this while been arguing against but was this indeed the opinion of the Donatists if St. August may be believed doubtlesse it was illud ostendere tentaverunt inquit August Donatistae prolatis multis testimoniis Divinarum Scripturarum Aug. Tom. 7. Col. cum Donatistis quod ecclesia Dei non cum Malorum hominum commixtione futura praedicta sit though driven by dispute at length they evaded by limitting their opinion to openly wicked as Augustine testifieth also Malos in ecclesia permixtos esse confessi sunt Donatistae sed occultos eos esse dixerunt Now this worthy mouth and champion of the Church in his age hath noted this opinion as an errour and therefore not his own opinion and as an errour of this sect of the Donatists and therefore not the opinion of the true Catholick Church of God in his time as abundantly appears by his set and purposed large disputation in most of his volumes
they say that wicked men are not of the Church that they are not of the Church so fully effectually and savingly as the righteous and elect are not but that they are so really Therefore there is plaine Scripture ground to distinguish of being of the Church viz. savingly as they that fell away 1 Joh. 2. 12. were not 2. In a visible outward and common sense as those were Rom. 9. 6. that were of Israel to whom belonged the Covenants and glory of the visible Church though they were not Israel to whom belonged the absolute promise of salvation But to silence all possible objections I shall now undertake to conclude from several principles undoubtedly owned by all the Churches in all ages that they have ever denied saving grace to be essential to visible Church-membership and consequently must needs have ever held that wicked persons may be of the visible Church and that really and not equivocally onely if it be opposed to really Arg. 1. To believe that relative holinesse is really sufficient Fidelibus sunt annumerandi tanquam ecclesiae membra fidelium corum liberi qui sunt in ecclesia 1 Cor. 7. 14. participes enim ejusdem foederis ejusdem professionis cum suis parentibus Medul Am. p. 168 169 to interest in visible Church-membership is to believe also that saving grace doth not onely do so unlesse relative holinesse and saving grace be all one a Paradox that no Protestant asserts but the Church hath ever beleeved that relative holinesse giveth real interest to visible Church-membership For first she never doubted but that children borne within the visible Church were really in Covenant and Church-members Nor secondly that their title thereto is founded not upon personal much lesse saving grace but upon parental or relative holinesse Arg. 2. The constant unscrupled practice of baptizing the children of all such as remaine within the pale of the Church can truely proceed from no other principle but this viz. that Church-membership may be really considered without respect to saving grace this is demonstrated by two considerations 1. That it was never the practice of any Church constantly and ordinarily i. e. without the Adoption of such children unto Christian Parents to baptize the children of Pagans or of such as are no Church members 2 That it cannot be imagined by any that are serious in the case that all that are within the pale of the Church make evidence satisfactory of saving Epist 12. Infantes pontificiorum similium possunt baptizari quia non sunt plane alicni a foederi professiâ—ne Am. de consic p. 248 grace But now it cannot be denied me that such hath been the constant unscrupled practice of the Churches of Christ in all ages viz. to baptize the children of all such as lived within the pale of the Church Indeed Calvine writes against the baptizing of the children of the Papists But 1. Papists live not within the pale of our reformed Church 2. And his reason given against it is not because the Papists have no grace or because they are hypocrites but because they want sound doctrine and are judged Hereticks Yet 3. The ecclesiastical Colledge of Geneva plainly Against Knox p. 88 tell us that wheresoever the profession of Christianity hath not utterly perished and been extinct Infants are beguiled of their right if the common seale be denied them I confesse that Amesius Hildersham and some others haply would have us put a difference in sealing the children of the wicked i. e. such as do apertè in the face of the world violate the Covenant But 1. They never questioned the right of Ab allis piis eorum educatio suscipiatur Qui foedus Dei Aperte violuat corum infantes cum aliquo discrimiâ—e debent he doth not say non debent Baptizari de consc Am. p. 247. Distinctio debet ad conectionem malorum ibid. such children to Baptisme 2. Nor denied the actual administration thereof unto such wholly onely in prudence urged the great use of Sponsores viz. godly persons to undertake for children in such a case 3. This reacheth not our case for the reason hereof was not because they had no saving grace but because their open wickednesse was a present blot and scandal to Religion for which they ought by this suspending the seale from their children to be made ashamed and brought to repentance 4. However this is but the judgement of particular men and contrary to the judgment and practice of the Churches in general as our present argument extends it self yea howsoever our Congregational brethren have of late taken up the contrary Master Rutherford hath noted that Best a famous Brownist denied baptisme to belong to the children of the excommunicate onely which yet he doubtlesse did not because such were supposed to have no grace but because they were by the sentence of excommunication cast out of the Churches clearly yeelding that the children of all Church-members are to be baptized Yea though our Congregational brethren are yet so charitable as to allow our Churches to be true Churches and yet so severe to deny our Infants the first seal we suppose this is not because they judge us all to be void of saving grace or out of the general Covenant of God but as Master Cotton Master Norton c. affirme because we are not within their ecclesiastical particular Covenant and that in their practice in their own Congregations they are more favourable to the Infants borne therein and their application of the seals is as large as their Church and Covenant Arg. 3. Those that in their constant course of preaching still supposed that men might violate their Covenant with God cannot but be thought to hold that men may be truely in Covenant with God and consequently in the Church without saving grace especially considering 1. That if men do break Covenant with God it is by great and notorious wickednesse 2. That to men who are now the Judges such as are guilty of notorious wickednesse and do as Ames expresseth it Aperte violari foedus Dei give no evidence of saving grace and lastly that as it was before observed men cannot break that bond they are not under or violate that Covenant in which they cannot be said to be But now none can have the least ground of doubting whether such hath not been the constant course of proaching yea and writing too by the whole cloud of the men of God in all ages that hath the least communion or converse therewith Arg. 4. Those that hold that notoriously scandalous persons are within until they be censured and cast out must needs be granted to hold also that persons void of saving grace may be real members of the visible Church that is de facto if not de jure the reason is because one that appeareth notoriously scandalous appears thereby to have no sincere or saving grace and according to the rule esse apparere sunt equipollentia in
it is a genus or a compositum of Heresie and Schisme 203 204 The onely ebjection Artificially framed against my main conclusion answered 105 c. Augustines judgement about the point discovered 151 152 Authour of the Church viz. God may be so considered without the bestowing of saving grace p. 43. Amesius asserts both the Catholick and particular Church to be integral p. 6. his difference 'twixt ecclesia in genere and ecclesia Catholica 5 B Baptisme the right of some gracelesse parents children p. 212 213. as also of the openly profane p. 213 to 217. as also of the excommunicate and such as receive not the Supper 217. Baptisme enters into some kinde of right unto all other Ordinances proved 257 258 259 Beleeving is Virtual Actual p. 29 30 Bound some are passively whom they do not actively binde themselves 97. The Brownists held that saving grace was essential to the visible Church which our Church adjudged an error in them 156 157 The Brownist objection against our Churches answered p. 208 209 210 C What Censures are 284 Censure are two Admonition and Excommunication 285 Before Censures are past we may not account the scandalous to be without 289 290 We are bound to proceed against the scandalous in a way of Censure 291 292 Members are froward to censure 292 The great hindrance of reformation 293 The Called and the Church are of equal latitude The Elect are members of the Church onely as called 36 Some non-Elect yet called in Christs account 36 and 38 Calling is Active direct Passive reflex Partialis this Totalis 65 How the common call is effectual with an Apology for the terme 36 37 38 The common call a true call proved 38 The Causes of the Church have no necessary respect to saving grace 42 c. The summe of the Argument from the causes 97 The Church is an individual integrum p. 4. and totum aggregativum The Churches being consisteth not in consideration onely 20 The onely true Church the reformed sense about it 105 c. The excommunicate are of the Church and have both habitual and actual communion with it 194 Communion in Ordinances fitter to define the Church by then personal qualifications 87 to 92. shewn by seven considerations Community yet more necessary 93 94 95 96. proved by six Reasons Conference why desired with all our people 279. and why before the Sacrament rather then at any other time 280. why not before every administration 280 Consent is given by seeming dissenters that the command to receive is mediate 236 237 Consent how far necessary to ones being in Covenant 187 Consent negative keeps men in Covenant 188 What is constitutive of visible membership Mr. Cottons and Mr. Hudsons answer to this considered The Covenant of the Church considered 96 97 98. little reason to dispute much about it 98 Covenant is implicite or actual an actual Covenant is mental or vâ—cal called expresse 98 Knowledge dark and general consistent with being in Covenant 188 189 Church is taken strictly largely the Church largely taken is so comparative and absolute by the Reformed Divines 109 111 Confirmation not used as a new admission into the Church 138 Ours are true Churches and rightly constitute 204 c. In what Court is self-examination to be held Our Churches are made up of three sorts of people a middle and two extreams 296 D Denying the Supper to some the negative and positive grounds of it 259 to 271 Definitions of the visible Church given us by the reformed Divines take not in saving grace 100 c. One definition may be given to the Church as largely taken and another as strictly taken and yet there may be but one Church 116 117 118 Divorce is given by God to men either mediately or immediately and both two wayes 196 197 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 1 Cor. 11. 28. largely examined 241 to 249 Dogmatical faith meerly is not sufficient to entitle to membership 118 Dogmatical faith is the proper principle of profession of faith yet none ever really professed the Doctrine of faith but he hath something of an Applicative faith common or saving 62 We may not proceed against wicked members but by discipline 283 E Ecclesia aequivoca shut out of this controversie 21 22 The Efficient of the visible Church may be considered without respect to saving grace 42 c. The proper end of the Visible Church is cultus gloriae Dei and is attainably without saving grace 46 47 48 49 Evidence of Church-membership what giveth it to others 181 182 226 Evidence of saving grace not necessary upon the examining our selves to warrant our coming to the Supper proved 245 to 249 The Excommunicate are members more then potentia or conditionaliter 192. they have both habitual and actual coÌ„munion with the Church 194 They may be known to be Church-members 182 183 Self-Examination what it is not p. 240 241. What it is p. 241 In what court it is held p. 242 243 244 245. What is the necessary issue of it p. 246 247 248 Who are to be judged not to examine themselves 268 269 270 Saving grace not of the Essence yet of the excellency of the visible Church 32 33 F Faith is True and saving True and not saving p. 28 Faith true and not saving proved 81 to 86 Faith is Virtual Actual p. 29 Some do not actually beleeve others renounce the faith 29 30 Some do formally and some onely by consequence deny the faith 31 32 Faith is Relative Qualitative p. 83 Relative or foederal faith is seated in the childe and not in the parent 83 84 The visible Church hath a real constitutive form not depending upon saving grace 65 1. This forme is not external vocation 65 66. 2. Nor external profession pag 66 67 3. Nor faith 70 But community respecting communion in Gods worship 70 to 74 That which partakes of the accidental Forme of any thing must needs partake also of the essential forme of that thing 68 69 G God himself is pleased to give many titles to wicked men equivalent to Church-member 126 to 133 God the Authour of the Church may be considered to be so without the bestowing of saving grace 43 44 H Heresie cutteth off from the Church and when 198 199 200 Heresie how it differs from Apostasie 200 201 Hildershams Reasons pretended against the Baptizing of the children of wicked men examined and he found to hold that such children have a right to baptism 214 215 216 The Head of the visible Church viz. Christ may be considered to be such without respect to saving influence proved 45 c. and explained and Objections to it answered 51 52 53 54 Hypocrite what he is 32 We may not say that wicked men are hypocrites further then they are so 33 No Hypocrite as such can be a member of the Church either visible and invisible 33 Holinesse of life is a separable accidental note of a true visible Church 78 Foederal holinesse
or particular Church Yea might we thus understand Ames to intend genus and species in a grammatical sense and not a logical in this place I think any one might say after him that ecclesia particularis est species ecclesiae in genere that is the word or notion Church is generally predicable of all Churches this way also the Church may be said to be universal as well as respectu loci and temporis as ursine or personarum and partium as Trelcatius addes but not naturae the Church is a totum and universalis but not a totum universale 't is a totum integrale and universal in the respects specified but not universal quâ totum But any further scrutiny into this matter may be pardonably waved seeing our maine question considers not the Church either as universal or particular or as universal-visible or particular-visible but onely as it is the visible Church as at first was noted Now all so farre as they own the visible Church to be really a Church make no question of its integrality that ever I yet heard of and therefore those that deny the universal visible Church to be an integrum do equally deny it to be really a Church who do also acknowledge the particular visible which they allow to be a Church really to be also totum integrale 2. The Church is also in its nature Aggregative that is 't is The Church is Aggregative of the number of those things which are constitute and by aggregation or collection this is applicable to the Church I conceive as it is that species of integrum that hath its parts united per modum colligationis but this bond by which such parts are held together may not be thought to be real as sticks are bound together in a fagot but metaphorical or political as Companies or bodies or societies of men are bound together by some tie or bond so the Church hath her joynts and bands whereby it is held and knit together as the Apostle speaketh Ephes 4. 16. onely with this difference that civil societies are under civil and the Church is under spiritual bonds What these spiritual bonds of the Church are is largely enquired hereafter Aggregative bodies are so familiar that indeed we finde them in every classis of the creatures and accordingly they are either inanimate as piles of wood heaps of stone c. or animate and these are either irrational as a flock of sheep a shole of fish c. or rational and these againe are either civil as a family a corporation a Common-wealth c or ecclesiastical as the Church Aggregative bodies are either occasional as many times flights Aggregatives are inanimate and animate these irrational and rational these civil and ecclesiastical these occasional and fix'd Their essential state of birds are and that rout we read of Acts 19. was or fixt and settled as the Church of God is Aggregative bodies are distributed secundum statum essentialem vel integralem according to their essential state they are distributed into their matter and form as Trelcatius intimates * Tales quae non sunt eo nunquid absolute sed continent in se duo quonum alterum est simile maltitudini materiae dispersae altorum vero unitati ordine collectioni Instit therl p. 214. Professio visibilis Communio visibilis Am. Medul p. 165. s 28. Integral state they are such saith he aâ—â—ontaine in them two one of which is like to multitude and dispersed matter which is as it were the matter the other to unity order and collection which is the forme Now such are the essential parts of the Church the matter whereof is persons professing Religion or called and the forme the collection or Congregation order unity society or community of persons as at large hereafter By the way give me leave to hang two queries upon this observation 1. Whether an aggregative body and consequently the visible Church which is such have not its essential forme as well as every other thing that hath an essence 2. Whether an aggregative bodn made up of visible parts and consequently the visible Church which is such have not an essential form which is visible if the matter or parts be visible why is it not the union or aggregation of this visible matter or parts visible also if the persons and the profession of the persons be visible what hinders the society or fellowship of them to be visible also or what should render it invisible but of this also more largely anone According to their Integral state aggregative bodies are distributed into their parts qua integral and according to the nature of them which are sometimes similar sometimes dissimilar 1 Cor. 12. 28 29 30. Now the parts of the visible Church I conceive are both similar in that all are called dissimilar in that some are Elected and some not similar in that all are professours dissimilar in that some are also officers and some not But we are now I humbly conceive very neer unto the ground of the common distribution of the Church into visible and invisible which was proposed to be next considered SECT V. The ground and meaning of the distinction of the Church into visible and invisible This aggregative body the Church is usually distinguished into visible and invisible I shall briefly shew how I understand it and wherein I except against it and thus my notion of the Church visible will furthèr appear 1. I conceive it cannot be a distinction of the essential totality of the Church as if the visible were the matter and the invisible were the form of the Church then the invisible Church being also visible visible in profession as invisible in faith should be both forme and part of the matter of the same Church which is absurd Wherefore I dislike that distinction that hypocrites are materialy but not formally of the visible Church for indeed if hypocrites be not formally of the visible Church they are not of it at all if forma dat esse nor may be said to be so if forma dat nomen 2. Neither can it be distinctio generis in species as Ames observes as if there were one Church visible and another invisible specififically differing for properly there is but one Church as all consent and that one Church is therefore not a genus for then its species would make more then one 3. Neither again can it be distinctio integri in membra as Ames also teacheth as if one part of the Church visible and another part invisible seeing the whole is in its profession visible but this I humbly conceive is nearest to it 4. Therefore lastly I conceive it to be distinctio integri non Una numero duplicem mododicunt pro conditione membrorum ipsius in partes sed à parte and to result not from the totality of the integrum as such but from a diverse consideration of the nature or disposition of the
parts of it as similar and dissimilar as before was hinted for the Church as Junius is but one in number and two in manner because of the disposition of the members thereof For the whole professing is the visible Church and a part of this Paraeus whole also savingly beleeving is called the Church invisible the whole is visible as men called a part of these are invisible as men elect and regenerate Whence that common but most useful distinction ecclesia vocatorum and electorum Therefore saith Pareus between the visible and invisible Church there is even the same difference as is between the whole and the part for inuisible lieth hid in the visible which appeareth from that of Paul whom he hath chosen them he hath also called Exp. Urs cat p. 283 284. Polanus confirms it with his authority and reason too the invisible Polanus Church saith he lieth hid in the visible ut pars in toto as a part in the whole If we consider both as the company of the called by external vocation which is common both to the invisible and visible Church Synt. c. 9. l. 7. Osiander hath the same words also in coetu visibili ecclesia latet Osciander invisibili Encherid contra p. 126. which indeed is no other then that which in other words is asserted by even all our reformed Divines in their most common and known distinction of the Church as strictè and latè strictly and largely considered who intend generally by the Church strictly taken the Church invisible or the elect or elect regenerate and by the Church largely taken the Church visible or of the called comprehending good and bad the elect and reprobate as they do still explain themselves giving very differing definitions of them as will more fully appear anone Yea one greater then all these our Saviour teacheth that the wheat the corne the good fish and the elect are but part of the Church or the Kingdome of God which hath tares chaff bad fish and such as are not elected in it Whence Paraeus hath well collected ecclesia electorum in coetu vocatorum est SECT VI. Exceptions against this distinction of the Church Having shewed the ground of the distinction of the Church into visible and invisible and how I conceive it should be understood I shall now crave leave to shew my exceptions against it 1. My first exception will shrowd it self under those words of Field of the Church p. 14. Doctor Field We say saith he there is a visible and an invisible Church not meaning to make two distinct Churches though the forme of words may serve to insinuate some such thing Certainly that forme of words is not very commendable that may serve to insinuate that which we mean not by them if we change the instance haply this may be more notorious if one should say there is a heap of precious stones and an heap of common stones would not the hearer of these words rather imagine that there are two heaps one of precious stones and another of common stones then that there is but one heap of stones in all of which some are common and some precious and in the present case who would understand Bullinger other if he were not prepossessed with a better meaning then his words should insinuate his words are non sine causa gravi dixerunt alii ecclesiam Dei aliam quidem esse visibilem Bul. Decad. p. 355. aliam vero insibilem who can well make aliam and aliam ecclesiam to be but one Church 2. I am afraid also that the ill uncertain sound of this distinction in the ears of the world hath been a means of troubling us with those many intricacies wherewith the doctrine about the Church is still cumber'd we finde this distinction not of so frequent use either in Scripture or in the Church before the reformation from Rome and then how quiet was the Church about this point all concluding that there is but one Church how natural is it from this distinction of a Church invisible and visible for the Papist to reject the invisible to maintain his visible and for the Brownist to maintain his invisible by rejecting the visible while if we look on the Church as one entire totum or the Church of the called wherein the elect as part are contained without any more distinction we might enjoy with lesse controversie 3. 'T is indeed a difference without distinction 't is no true distribution for whereas as Master Hudson hath well observed all distributions should have their parts distinct and different and the more opposite the members are the better the distribution is it is nothing at all so here for either the one part viz. the visible comprehends the other viz. the invisible and thus the one part becomes the whole as indeed it is or else this one part viz. the visible being distinguished from the invisible as of necessity it must be in this dâ—stribution hath no being at all and so the distribution hath lost a member and consequently it selfe for nothing can be distributed into one part SECT VII Three other lawful senses of this distribution of the Church yeelded to But least I be thought to reflect too much upon this distinction of the Church I cannot let passe three other ancient uses of it which I cheerfully allow 1. By the visible Church hath been sometimes meant the Church united in outward and actual communion together and by the invisible such as though gracious yet were not in actual fellowship with any particular Church Thus the Papists urging that none could be members of the Church but such as were in fellowship with the Church of Rome our Divines answer them that we must distinguish some say they are in actual communion with the Church these are members of the visible and some though not in fellowship outwardly with the Church yet if gracious they are members of the invisible Church among whom they usually ranked the Catechumeni and the Excommunicati if truly gracious accordingly Trelcatius saith Inst theol p. 231. Catechumini sâ—cundum externam ecclesiae formám ad quam quia non pertinent propriè de ecclesia non esse censentur licet ecclesiae in visibilis sunt 2. Again by the visible Church hath been usually meant as before the Church as professing by the invisible as sincerely or Vid. par in Ursin cat p. 475. pet du Moul. Buck. p. 264. Exp. of Eng. Art 39. p. 67. savingly beleeving or regenerate We may know who professe they therefore are visible We cannot know who are regenerate therefore they are invisible as Jewel God hath always a Church invisible i. e. known onely to himself God knew them but Elias knew them not to the judgement of men they were invisible Defen p. 361. Lastly the Church is frequently said to be visible when its profession is prosperous pompous and glorious in the eyes of the world invisible
whether the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without saving grace but without respect to saving grace For if the Church neither ever were nor yet is nor ever shall be or exist without this i. e. true saving grace it will not help or profit us much to finde whether it be so in our Consideration or not yet if it shall be proved that saving grace is verily Quarto modo neither of the essence or property of the Church it will thence easily follow that there is no contradiction in considering a Church to be truely such without it yea I suppose it will further follow that this visible Church so considered without saving grace hath not its being onely in reason or consideration but hath some foundation of being in re and is at least ens rationis ratiocinatae and so considered conceptu objectivo as the Metaphysicks speak Yea I know not but that happily it may claim one step further and be termed ens reale if we mean ens real potentiâ non actu but 3. The question lastly is not whether the visible Church may be i. e. actually without saving grace but whether it may be considered to be truely a Church without respect to saving grace that is whether saving grace be either of the essence or property of the Church or so neere unto the nature and being of it as that it cannot be conceived to be but respect must be had to saving grace this is the very sense of the question before us yet concerning this which is denyed to be our question viz. the actual being of the Church without saving grace I shall crave leave to expresse my self in a few particulars which I humbly conceive may have yet some further and direct subserviency to the cheering of my mind touching the question with which I shall conclude that word I readily grant that though saving grace be not of the essence or property of the visible Church yet saving grace is of the excellency bene esse of it but even therefore saving grace is denied to be necessary in our consideration of the nature and being of the visible Church A symmetry of part strength of body lively colour consistency of braine quicknesse of fancy soundnesse of minde retention of memory and good discourse all these are of the excellency and glory of a man yet not one of them require a necessary place in one consideration when we would conceive of his nature and property quatenus homo as he is a man for he may be a man without all these and therefore he may doubtlesse be conceived a man and truely without respect to any of them the application hereof to our present discourse is easily left to my Reader 2. I further grant that as it cannot be but that many individual men among the rest of the kinde will be thus excellently qualified as before so neither can it ever be but that many individual members of the visible Church shall be endued with saving grace according to that of Vrsin in ecclesia semper sunt aliqui Catech. p. 408 non omnes electi sancti 3. Yet I humble offer whether the cause of this impossibility may not be thought to lie rather in the will of God so determining and consequently be a thing extrinsecal to the being of the Church then in the nature of the Church or any thing intrinsecal thereunto and whether the visible Church might not for any thing in the nature thereof to the contrary be truely a Church of Christ though there should not be one member in it for a time savingly qualified though it be still granted that for the glory of grace the Lord hath so ordained that it never shall be actually so Even as to follow my present similitude it is impossible but there should be many wise and judicious men in the world yet this necessity lieth not in the nature of man but rather in the will of God that hath so ordained for the glory of his own name and the good of society in the world And if at last it issue thus I see not but that we may safely conclude the visible Church without saving grace to be in the former sense Ens reale id est potentia if he define ens reale well that saith it is quod habet esse ex parte Rei actu vel potentia seeing such a Church hath its being ex parte rei potentia and the onely reason why it hath not the same actualitèr is not ex parte rei sed ex parte Dei 4. Yet once more I humbly offer that seeing there may be a Corporation of men without one wise or learned man amongst them why may not there be a particular Church in the world without one member savingly qualified at least for some certaine space of time c Indeed Ames concludeth and doubtlesse soundly maximè probabile esse nullam dar◠c. that it is most probable that there is no particular Church where the profession of the true faith Medul de ecclesia flourisheth but that there are some therein that are true believers yet none can construe maximè probabile impossible to be otherwise and if it be most probable 't is not necessary and then the being of the Church dependeth not thereon but it may be without it for he that saith any thing is most likely to be even thereby intimates that that thing is not certaine to be and then it may not be and that is all I querie for Neither can those words of God to Paul for I have much people in this City inforce any such thing though we grant that much people to be the Elect for 1. These words carried extraordinary encouragement against the Vid. Act. 18. 9 10 extraordinary trials which that City had for Paul and therefore will conclude onely that in the like case where a Minister is called to much suffering he shall be an instrument of grace to much people 2. However much people might have been first wrought upon to an outward profession before this much people had been savingly converted and yet have been a true particular visible Church though it 's very unlikely that it was so SECT II. What grace is necessary to visible Church-membership There now seemeth but one intimation more requisite for the due explication of this last terme viz. that it is not question'd whether the visible Church may be so considered without respect to any grace but without respect to saving grace for it rather seemeth to imply some kind of grace is necessary and questioneth onely of that kind which is saving The question then here is how farre any kind of grace may be thought necessare to visible Church-membership or with what cautions we exclude that kind of grace which is saving there-from wherein I shall now betake my self to expliate my minde as plainly as I can in the following distinctions and conclude
it for me it was noted before Apol. p. 88. that he allowed us the former branch of the distinction viz. vocation unâ—ffectual as common to Pagans and again in terminis he affords the latter viz. vocation which is effectual only to bring men to an outward profession which he also saith is larger then Election 4. Lastly I acknowledge 't is the sense of the distinction and not the terms I contest for and if I may be granted that let these be censured as my reader pleaseth 2. Now that this external or more properly common call is truely a call and that those that are called therewith are truely called though not savingly appeareth thus 1. This was the called which our Saviour affirmeth the many were called withal For first these were called not with the calling common to Heathens onely nor with that calling which is proper to the Elect therefore they were called according to that only branch remaining viz. the common effectual call which brought them into the visible Church 1. This Call cannot be meant of the uneffectual call common to Heathens these words of Christ many are called are the close of two Parables Matth. 20. 16. and 22. 14. the one of labourers called to the vine-yard the other of guests called to the feast and in both applyed to them that answered to the call that came and laboured in the vine-yard that came with other bidden ones to the feast and not to those that refus'd 2. Neither yet can it be meant of the saving effectual Call for we see it is applied by Christ unto more then are capable of saving vocation more then are Elected as before was noted therefore it must needs be meant of that which is termed an effectual call opposed to that which is ineffectual and a common call opposed to that which is more then common viz. saving 2. This must needs be truely a call because it is the same call which the Elect partake of I grant rhe Elect partake of an higher call viz. a saving which the reprobate never enjoy yet the Elect have the same call which the reprobate have as seemes clearly to be collected from the words before us for the few chosen are apparently included in the many called they were all called and but few of them chosen 3. This common Call is a true effect therefore also truely a call yea a divine effect a work of God himself and that he is Vocatio communis est actio Dei Instit p. 109 pleased to efficere as Trelcatius speaks who further and more expressely termes it Gods action therefore doubtlesse not counterfeit but true in its kind 4. This common call is also a true cause and therefore it must needs prove it self to have a true being to be truely a call in its kinde for nihil agit quod non est It is a true cause for it worketh true effects persons by this common call are truely brought out of the world of infidels and united to the visible people and Church of God to own and professe Jesus Christ to attend upon the wayes and Ordinances of his worship to see some necessity of faith and repentance and of yeelding obedience to the Gospel of Christ as Trelcatius aptly asserts vocatio communis est Actio Dei gratiosa qua homines ab infidelitate ad fidem evecat Instit p. 109. 5. In this common call are both the necessary parts of a Duo enim haec concurrere necesse est ut vocatio sit efficax vocationem Dei nostram ad illam vocationem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seu relationem p. 222. true Call truely and really therefore the totum also Trelcatius teacheth that two things concurre to make a call effectual or true the call on Gods part and the answer on ours so that all those that do answer the call wherewith God calleth them truely and really in aâ—y measure are so far truely and really called of God though not fully and savingly as the Elect regenerate are But now none can doubt but that men by this common call alone may and do answer the call of God truely and really in a great measure as before is noted therefore the common call is truely and really such CHAP. V. Arg. 2. From the Etymology or the name of the Church WE now descend to the second Argument offered us from Ecclesia ab 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the name of the Church as it is more immediately derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and denoteth a calling out But that we may lay the foundation well before we begin to build there are three things to be truely premised before we fix the Argument 1. That this Etymology of the word doth not in the least contradict but most evidently perfect and compleat the former for by the former the Church is concluded to be called in a general and simple sense and by this the Church which was thus before said to be called is in a more strict close and respective sense said to be called out where we have plainly intimated to us that there is some special term place or state out of which or from which it is called 2. That this Etymology is generally allowed by those that we Etymologicè ecclesia est coetus publicaÌ„ autoritate evocatus de eccles p. 214. finde most accurate upon this subject Etymologicè saith Trelcatius the Church is a company called out by publick authority and pasor doth not onely derive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 evoco but even renders the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine by Caetus Evocatus which is in plaine English a company called out 3. That this calling out which we finde in the name of the Church doth not so properly or exactly note the inward state from which as the outward caetus or society out of which it is called which will be easily granted me to be the world therefore we finde the Church set in opposition to the world out of which and not to sinne darknesse or Satan from which we are called according to that of our Saviour I have chosen you that is by calling as we know he did his Disciples out of the John 15 19 world Whence as the Learned Master Baxter seals with a certainly all Divines in their definitions of the Church are agreed that it is a society of persons separated from the world to God or called Against Tombs out of the world and therefore no society the calling of whose members hath not the world for its terme from which hath persons Nullus coetus cujus membrorum vocatio non habet mundum terminum aquo habet sanctâ— voâ—atos pro proximâ mateâ—iâ Norton in â—eâ—p ad totam quest syllâ—g p. 1â—5 of a holy calling for its next matter or by consequence can be a true Church as another argues who cannot be imagined possibly partial to my cause namely that learned and
Scholastical Divine Reverend Master Norton of New England These things thus premised the Argument hence is this As the visible Church may be considered to be called out of the world so it may be considered to be a Church of Christ. What hath beene said hath put this out of doubt But the visible Church may be considered to be truely called out of the world without any respect to saving grace Therefore the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace The minor here which is all that is left questionable is easily evident if we distinguish of the world as we are wont to distinguish of the Church viz. to be visible and invisible the visible world is the world of infidels and such as openly detest the true Messias the invisible world is the world of ungodly which being as tares amidst the what of the godly cannot be discerned by men The first is opposed to the visible Church the latter to the invisible out of the visible world the visible Church is called and out of the invisible world the invisible Church or the Church of the saved is called Againe the visible Church is as truely called out of the visible world of Pagans and Infidels and such as live without the pale of the Church as the Church of the saved is called out of the world of the vngodly doth not the eye of the whole world see this and bear witnesse to it viz. that the visible Church is by the calling of God in this sense effectually in that it is really separated Vocatio communis ab infide litate ad fidem evocat Trel ut supra from and stands in distinction and opposition unto the whole world of Infidels Pagans Turks and Jews and all other societies and parties of men in the world as the called of God his lot and portion and peculiar people all which and a great deale more Master Baxter as well as many others is pleased to acknowledge that the Scriptures attribute to the visible Church CHAP. VI. Arg. From the visible Church in its causes and first as it is of God HItherto of the quid nominis proceed we now to the quid Rei and to seek for that thing and nature and truth of being in the Church which the name we have found doth import I shall put my self and reader into the way of this search by an offer of this general Argument taken from the causes of the visible Church As we may consider the causes of any thing so we may consider the thing it self But we may consider the causes of this Church to be real causes without respect to saving grace Therefore the Church to be truely a Church without respect to saving grace I think the major will not be question'd by any seeing whatsoever any thing is in it self it is the same first in its causes Quicquid est in effectu prae existit in causis Causatum quod ex causa suum esse habet yea the very definition of the effect is that it is but the result or that which hath its very selfe of the cause and depends by its cause and therefore it is called effectum or a thing done or standing as it is by it cause and causalum that is a thing caused that is such a thing as is Causalitas sive causatio est influxus ille seu concursus quo unaquaequc causa in suo genere actu influit in effectum Suarâ—z no more a thing then what it hath from its cause or as it is caused and causality or causation which is but the formal reason of the cause is nothing else but that Influx or concurrence whereby every cause in its own kinde doth actually flow into the effect The minor onely then resteth upon proof viz. That the visible Church may be considered to have its true and real causes without respect to saving grace which I shall labour to maintaine by a particular induction and examination of the several causes of the visible Church in order the efficient the end the matter and form thereof Here now are two things to be joyntly enquired after First what these causes are Secondly whether they may be considered to be real causes of the visible Church without respect to saving grace Let us first then begin to consider the efficient cause of the visible Church thus namely what it is and what kinde of effects it worketh without respect to saving grace 1. The efficient cause of the visible Church is Principal Instrumental The principal efficient of the visible Church is secundum Efficient Constitutionem Ordinationem The principal efficient in the constitution of the Church is God Rom. 2. 29. in the administration or ordination of it is Christ thus God Rom. 12. 5 1 Cor. 3. 11 Col. 1. 18. is properly the authour and Christ is properly the head of the Church The instrumental cause of the Church especially in its constitution Acts 2. 41 2 Pet. 2 23 1 Tim. 2. 15 is the preaching of the word for how can they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and how can they hear without a preacher this distribution needeth no proof seeing it is generally allowed 2. Let us now come to our task and examine whether these efficient causes may not be considered to have a real influence into the visible Church which yet doth not include saving grace As for the instrument the preaching of the word we need not insist particularly thereupon partly because the instrument is but subordinate to its principal efficient in the same operation and therefore if the work of principal efficient be real so is doubtlesse the same work relating to the instrument of it and partly because the influence of this instrumental cause the preaching of the word into the constitution of the visible Church is reserved to be largely handled in answer to a great objection against cur Churches in England at the latter end of this discourse Therefore we have but two things here before us whether God may be considered to be truely the Authour or Christ to be truely the head of the visible Church without respect to saving grace and of these in order I shall humbly signifie my opinion by forming the same into Arguments The Argument from God as the Authour of the visible Church If God in the constitution of the visible Church by the preaching of the Word may be considered really to effect the same without the bestowing of saving grace then he may without doubt be considered to be the real Authour of the visible Church without respect to saving grace But now God in the constitution of the Church by the preaching of the word may be considered really to effect the same without the bestowing of saving grace Here is nothing to be interposed but these foure things Mr. Perk. speaking of temporal beleevers saith 1. They have knowledg 2. they
give assent 3. they give assent to the Covenant of Grace 4. They are perswaded in a general maÌ„ner that God will perform his promises to the members of his Church Ep. to his declar of a man estate And ads Mark here is a true faith wrought by the holy Ghost yet not saving faith either First that the calling whereby men are brought to leave the world to renounce Idols to embrace the true religion Hystorically to believe the Gospel to see a necessity of depending on Christ repentance and obedience to salvation are no real works but this would be against common sense for we see the contrary with our eyes Or secondly that these common works are also saving works but this would be against experience which sadly tells us that men may go so farre and yet no further in the way to heaven or else against the doctrine of perseverance Or Thirdly that these common graces do not really constitute a visible Church but this would be against what we have formerly proved Or Fourthly and lastly that God is not the worker of these common effects by his Word which would indeed be against Religion I shall therefore conclude this Argument with those known and pertinent words of Amesius hence saith he even visible Hinc ecclesiae etiam visibiles particulares ratione fidei quam profiteutur rect è dicun tur esse in Deo paTre in domino Jesu Christo 1 Thes 1. 1. 2 Thes 1. 1. Medul p. 168. and particular Churches by reason of the faith which they professe as also I might adde by reason of the grace which they have received from God are rightly said to be in God he doth not say ratione fidei qua but ratione fidei quam profitentur that being the faith of God which they professe through the work of the common grace of God upon them they are rectè or truely said to be in God without any further consideration of any saving grace by which they believe received from him CHAP. VII The Argument from Christ as the head of the visible Church THe second Argument from the efficient is taken from Christ as the cause efficient of the visible Church according to dispensation or as he is the head thereof Thus Christ may be considered to be truely the head of the visible Church without respect to saving influence therefore the visible Church may be considered to be truely his body without respect to saving grace The reason of the connexion here is most evident but I must needs confesse that the antecedent requires as well a modest inquisition as strong demonstration seeing it is easily noted to crosse many plain expressions of eminent Divines In this antecedent there are two distinct branches First that Christ is the head of the visible Church this passeth Secondly that he may be so considered without necessary respect to saving influence this is my task which I shall humbly undertake after I have gotten a faire understanding with my reader therein For I desire it may be heeded that I do not affirm that Jesus Christ doth performe the office of a head fully without saving influence but as it is expressed truely i. e. in some measure truely 2. It may be also observed that truely here stands not in opposition to mystically but to falsly or to seemingly onely for though our Divines do usually mean by the mystical body the Church invisible yet doubtlesse Master Cotton as is well noted of him by others also doth not speak improperly when he termes a particular visible Church a mysticall body and if that be granted the visible Church though not particular may also challenge the same title and if the visible Church be granted to be the mystical body of Christ then Christ may be said to be its mystical head Besides if Christ be indeed the head of the visible Church as none do doubt and if he be not the head thereof as it is Physically or Mathematically taken which none will affirme who can deny but that he is so Mystically 3. Further may it be noted that it is not said that Christ doth performe the office of an head to the Church truely without saving influence in any other consideration but as it is the visible Church for if any will assert a Church invisible I am not bound at all to follow him and say that this Church invisible also hath true influence from its head Christ which is not saving a thing not to be imagined 4. Lastly neither do I offer to say that Christ is the head of his body visible without saving influence but that he may be so considered without respect thereunto seeing there are influences not saving which yet descend from Christ as the head upon his body the Church and upon many of the members thereof that shall never be saved and this is enough for my present purpose because in whatsoever sense Christ may be said to leave the influence of a head upon his Church the Church may in the same sense be said to be his body and if it shall truely be made to appear that Christ doth really performe the office of the head when he doth not give saving grace it will thence easily follow of it selfe that the Church may be consideâ—ed to be truely his body without respect thereunto Now that Christ may be considered to be thus truely the head of the visible Church without respect to saving grace I think appeareth thus Arg. 1. Christ truely dispenseth gifts and graces not saving to the visible Church and to many particular members thereof Arg. 1 that shall never be saved as he is a head therefore he may be considered to be truely the head of the visible Church without respect to saving influence The Antecedent which is alone to be proved hath three parts 1. That Christ doth truely dispense gifts and graces not saving to the visible Church which none that know what the gifts of prayer preaching healing c. or what the graces of illumination conviction common faith and common love are will offer to deny 2. That Christ bestoweth these both gifts and graces upon some particular members of the visible Church which shall never be saved this also will be easily granted me 1. Concerngifts in Judas and in those that are reserved to cry out another day we have prophecied in thy Name and in thy Name we have Mat. 7. 22 cast out devils and Secondly concerning graces if we but once shall think upon that sad catalogue the Apostle recordeth Heb. 6 4 5 6. 3. That Christ bestoweth these gifts and graces not saving Profession of saith before a visible Church uniteth to Christ as head of the visible Church whether the person be sincere or no cobbet of Inf. Bapt. p. 57. as a head which is also very evident 1. Because they are gifts and graces abound in the Church alone 2. Because they are conveyed to the Church by the dispensation of Ordinances which
all in this case it is that which giveth life and being to every member united to his body so as whosoever maketh this profession and useth this submission being knit to this body and not cut off by excommunication is in and of the visible Church Dayrel of the Church pag. 36. But if life here be intended to signifie such as is essential to ones being a member of the Church of the saved as it seems to be I answer that either unlesse it be proved that the Church visible and the Church of the saved are of equal latitude which I wholly despair to see there are four terms in the argument the major intending the visible and the minor the invisible Church or else there is the fallacy termed ignoratio elenchi discovered in it the conclusion being onely that life is essential to a member of the Church of the saved which was never questioned when it should as easily appears have been that this life is also necessary to visible Church-membership to which it carrieth no aime at all Object 2. The second great objection against this Argument is taken from those known words of Zanchie de eccles 534. Membra sunt Satanae non Christi Hypocrites and reprobates are members of Satan and therefore they can be no members of Christ Answ In answer hereunto I shall first consider the sense of Zanchy in these words and then his reason 1. I conceive that Zanchy did not intend by these words that they were not members of the visible but of the invisible Church which I have observed to be the general meaning of our reformed Divines when they speak of the members of Christ insomuch that there is almost ground to think for one that is well accustomed to their writing they distinguish betwixt the members of the visible Church and the members of Christ as they also generally attribute two other termes viz. Catholick and Mystical as if they were peculiar to the Church invisible whereas I presume hardly any of those same Divines but would upon a little consideration thereof allow all the three viz. Mystical Catholick and members of Christ unto the visible Church also for if the visible Church be not a natural 't is a Mystical body and if it be unversal which they did not deny it must needs be Catholick and if it be not the body of Christ whose is it yet I say 't is of most easie observation that seldome either of the three are given by them to the visible Church and therefore not likely to be so here and if he meant of the Church invisible 't is nothing to our question Again another reason why Zanchy may be thought here to speak onely of the Church invisible offers it self from the scope of the place for he is evidently striking at the Papists excessive errour touching the members of the Romish Church as if every one that had the honour to be a member thereof was thereby a member of the Church of the saved which Zanchy seemeth to anticipate as other our Divines in the like case asserting that there are reprobates and hypocrites in the visible Church and these are not to be thence concluded to be real members of Christs invisible mystical body or in a state of salvation and thus membra sunt satanae non Christi quoting that place that is seldom if ever interpreted of the members of the visible Church viz. they were not of us 1 John 2. 19. for confirmation thereof and that his secret bent is against the Papist as I have said is more then intimated by his next words quicunque spiritum habent non Christi sed Antichristi Thus much for his sense now for his reason here that one cannot be both a member of Christ and a member of Satan but wicked men are members of Satan I answer 1. By concession for it is most true one cannot be both a member of Christ and a member of Satan at the same time and in the same respect one cannot be a member of Christs Is it then possible that the self same men should belong both to the Synagogue of Satan and to the Church of Jesus Christ Unto the Church which is the body mystical not possible howbeit of the visible body of Jesus Christ c. Hook eccles polit p. 84. visible body and of Satans visible body that is a Christian and an infidel a beleever and an unbeleever at the same time and in the same respect this is a plain contradiction But Secondly by way of exception I answer further that the same person may at the very same instant of time be both a member of Christ and a member of Satan in divers respects he may be a member of Satan internally and a member of Christ externally and yet both really a member of Satan habitually a member of Christ relatively a member of Satan by obedience a member of Christ by profession a member of Christ by Covenant a member of Satan by service Lastly a member of Christ his visible Kingdome and a member of Satans invisible Kingdome and both really and truely so as a man that is openly and really the husband of an honest wife may yet the member of an harlot by a close and reserved course of uncleannesse with her even so one that is really and openly in Covenant with Christ and truely a member of his body may yet by a secret course of unfaithfulnesse to him be also a member of Satan CHAP. VIII The Argument from the End of the visible Church HItherto of the efficient causes of the Church and the Arguments thence arising next proceed we to the end thereof and argue thus As a thing may be considered to have its end so it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plut. Nihil potest esse causa nisi in quantum est ens Si medium non existit non producitur finis considered to have its being for nothing can be further a cause then it hath a being therefore not negation or privation an possibly be a cause of a real and positive effect but that which is a cause of a real and positive effect must needes be something real and positive in it selfe 2. If the meanes do not exist the end is not produced and therefore if the end be produced the means is thereby certainly discoved to have its existence But now the visible Church may be considered truely and really to have its end without respect to saving grace therefore also its being There are three things which may tend by a briefe dispatch to the clearing of this Assumption 1. To assigne the ends of the visible Church 2. To prove the same to be real and proper ends therefore 3. To shew that the visible Church as it is a means thereof may be considered without respect to saving grace First the ends of the visible Church is ultimately the glory of God in the world and more immediately his worship in the world the
great meanes of the former viz. his glory as Szegedine exactly teacheth the end of the Church is the true Finalis causa ecclesiae est verus Dei cultus ordinata enim est ecclesia ad verum Dei cultum ad glorificandum Deum Szeged p. 2â—6 Theol. Instit p. 215. Quae causa finalis ecclesiae verus Dei cultus Bucan de eccl lo. 441. p. 477. worship of God for the Church is ordained for the true worship of God that he might be glorified which Trelcatius hath handsomely couched together saying that the visible Church is instituted ad cultum gloria Dei for the worship of the glory of God now as that which is suborainate hereunto the visible Church is made the seat and subject of all visible administrations whereby also the wicked in the Church may be left without excuse the Elect converted the converted edified the visible Kingdom of the Devil vanquished Christs visible Kingdom advanced and the Nations of the earth openly gained to a visible subjection thereunto in due season Secondly these are the real uses and proper ends of the visible Church For 1. The visible Church as such hath a neer aptnesse and kindlinesse Medium est aptum utile fini in it and is per se and sua natura useful hereunto viz. for the keeping and upholding the glory and worship of God in the world as none will deny seeing God is herein truely owned visibly professed submitted unto obeyed and worshipped according to his will and that with such a smooth and easie tendency as naturally Quod sua natura utile est ad aliquid efficiendum propter illud esse videtur â—ows from the visible Church as such Now it is a maxime that that which is apt of it selfe and according to its own free nature for the effecting of any thing seemeth to have its being for that very thing and by consequence that thing is truely and properly the end thereof 2. The visible Church as such is necessary for the obtaining of these ends without it what glory would redound to God in the world or what worship where else would visible Ordinances be fixt and dispens'd how would the visible Kingdome of Christ be advanc'd the visible Kingdome of Satan subverted How would hypocrites in the Church be inexcusably judged or the Elect be ordinarily saved if there were no visible Church Quod alio quo piam indiget vt acquiratur hujus finis est Sinâ— quo quicquam existere non potest in naturâ id est illi necessarium atque propter illud factum Now the Rule is that that which wants another thing for its own attaining is the end of that other thing but these particulars want the visible Church for their obtaining therefore they are the ends thereof which is evidently grounded by Scaliger upon that necessity that there is of the means in order to the end which is the thing I am urging for saith he that thing is necessary for another when that other cannot exist in nature without it and therefore this was made for that other and consequently that other thing for which this was made is the end thereof Here is a double necessity of the visible Church for the ends specified Necessitas â— Of the means i. e. without which these ends cannot 1. Medii be attained this hath been now spoken to 2. Of the ends i. e. where this means of the visible Church is there these in some true 2. Finis measure do of necessity follow which might serve us another evidence that the ends before are true and proper ends of the visible Church for quo existente necessario prâ—ducitur aliquod bonum hoc est aut videtur esse illius finis 3. God himself hat ordained the visible Church for the ends specified Praecepti vel institutionis therefore 't is yet further necessary for them viz. with a necessity of divine ordination and institution and then there is no ground of doubting left but that they are true and proper ends thereof Hath not God ordained the visible Church to put his name there to be the ground and pillar of his truth that he might have a praise and a name in the Earth and in one word that those that worship him might glorifie his Name Psalme 89. Finis rei est sua operatio Operatio est usus vel actus ad quâ—m ordinatur now if so are not these the ends for which God hath ordained the visible Church the end of a thing is but its operation and operation in this logical sense is but that use or act for which any thing is ordained by God in nature or by God in Scripture the latter of which we are now upon and therefore I shall rather choose to expresse iâ— in the worâ—ds of a Divine lately cited the Church is ordained by God for his true worship that he might Szâ—gid p. 226 be glâ—rified and therefore the end of the Church is the worship of God Thirdly as these are proper ends of the visible Church so the visible Church is truely a means of them and may be so considered without respect unto saving grace for what necessity of saving grace can we imagine to the attaining of the foresaid endâ— the glory of God in his visible worship before the eyes of men much lesse what possible necessity is theâ—e for our having respect unto saving grace when we truely consider thereof doth mens attending upon publick Ordinances essentially depend upon their saving grace or cannot we truely consider thereof but we must suppose the men savingly gracious do not the common effects of the spirit in illuminating conviacing of sinne and of necessity of attending on the means of grace for peace and salvation work men out of conscience to a constant and solemn dependance thereupon and yet none will say that any particular thus expressed doth necessarily suppose a saving work yea the end which is neerest and most generally allowed to the visible Church viz. the worship of the glory of God may doubtlesse be obtained by a great deal lesse viz. by a visible profession of and submission to that way of worship that the Lord hath ordained which doth not of necessity require such a great degree of common grace as before was specified True grace is indeed necessary to work out our own salvation But we are wont to say that gifts which do not necessarily suppose true grace are onely necessary to work on others especially in the way of the worship of God for the advancing of his name and glory thereby to the world 'T is also true that saving grace is necessary to the acceptance of our worship before God I mean to a plenary acceptance for some we read of that found some measure of true acceptance in their serving of the Lord though without saving grace But yet not necessary for the effecting of Gods glory before men that
can judge onely according to appearance in his visible worship saving grace is an invisible thing then what necessary use can there be thereof in such visible effects as may be done without it and such as in their present consideration respect only such creatures as cannot discern things invisible I grant that saving conversion of visible Church-members is one great end of the visible Church and that therefore the promises of first grace do most especially belong unto them but this if well heeded rather helps then hinders my designe for it evidently supposeth the visible Church and visible Church membership to have its being before his conversion or saving grace of Finis est postorior medio in executione which the visible Church is said to be a means for the Rule is that the end is after the means in execution CHAP. IX The Argument from the Matter of the visible Church HItherto of the external causes of the visible Church and the Arguments thence arising let us now consider the causes thereof remaining which are called internal viz. the matter and forme From matter of the visible Church in general I argue thus The visible Church may be considered truely to have the matter of the Church of Christ without respect to saving grace Therefore to be truely a Church of Christ without respect thereunto This consequence simply taken I confesse is not so warrantable because the matter doth prae-exist before and remaine sometimes after the forme yet take it respectively to the forme afterwards to be maintained and to the question in controversie which is chiefly concerning the matter of the Church and especially to the opinion of my present Opponents we readily affirm that all the question is about the matter of the Church that if this be fained so is our Church and if this be real so is our Church and I doubt not but it will passe without interruption However the thing that I am dispatching doth not engage me for the consequence though the other causes have been found so pregnant as to bear such a particular improvement onely to assigne and maintain to the visible Church all its causes and therefore its existence truely so in our consideration without respect to saving grace which I presume hath been done already as to the Authour the Head and the End of the Church to which I now proceed to add the matter thereof affirming as before in the antecedent that the visible Church may be considered to have the true matter of the Church of Christ without respect to saving grace The matter of the Church habet rationem Partium Subjecti 1. The matter of the visible Church having the reason of the parts is the Ministers and the people the pastors and the flock ecclesia utens and ecclesia docens as some speak and as we read 1 Cor. 12. both making up the compositum the Church and this Church must needs be the visible Church for there are no such organical parts no Minister but Christ himself in the Church invisible Now may we consider both these parts of the matter of the Church as truely such without respect to saving grace did not Judas truely teach and do not thousands truely professe in the Church of Christ being truely called though not savingly chosen without any measure of saving grace but this will more fitly meet us in the next consideration of the matter of the Church viz. as having the reason the subject matter Next we enquire what the subject matter of the visible is and whether it also may be considered without respect to saving grace 1. What is rhen the subject matter of the visible Church Trelcatius tells us that it is all such as are called out and externally professe the faith which I think none can choose but approve of when they consider that faith is a thing invisible and therefore not any way fitted to commend the matter of the Church to us as visible and though it be granted that faith doth unite men to the Church yet it must still be yeelded that profession thereof doth render them members of the Church as visible 2. But here seeing most do consent that professors of the faith are the subject matter of the visible Church it will I presume be worth our enquirie what is meant by the faith so professed Certainly it must be either the doctrine or the grace of faith and which of these is properly or usual said to be professed 1. Is it the grace of faith which men professe certainly no for that is the faith by which and not the faith which we profess 2. How incongruous a speech would it be to say I professe that I believe while it is good and sound and relishing upon the minde of the hearer to say I professe what or that doctrine which I do beleeve 3. If the meaning was that we do professe the grace of faith then the Epithite true which Divines do generally annex to faith should be put to profession and whereas they usually speak of the profession of the true faith they should should say the true profession of the faith 4. This appeares in its contrary out of doubt for such as fall away from the faith are not said to deny their own faith but the faith or doctrine of Christ 2. Then it is doctrine of faith which we professe as members of the visible Church and if this be the note or character of the matter of the visible Church it can in the most strict and rigid sense that can possibly be put upon it onely require two things truth in the object professed and truth in the subject professing i. e. that he professe the true doctrine of faith and that he believe what he professeth i. e. that he have a good profession and that he have a good principle answering to it such a faith as such a profession doth require to make it not dissembled but true and real and thus though we do not professe the grace of faith yet the grace of faith so farre is consented to as is requisite to a true profession seeing thereby we truely beleeve what we so professe 3. Yet though this faith is supposed to be true where the matter of the Church is true the matter of the Church doth not receive its denomination of being true from the truth of this grace of faith but from the truth of its object or doctrine beleeved and accordingly professed which as also what was before asserted viz. that the doctrine of faith is the object of proper profession or the faith properly professed appears by abundant example in Scripture The Eunuch being being demanded dost thou beleeve answered not my faith is sincere but I beleeve that Jesus Acts 8. 37. is the Sonne of God The like did they Matth. 14. 33. when reproved for their unbeleef they professed saying of a truth thou art the Sonne of God John also bare record and what was it that is the Son of
found in particular beleevers scattered I cannot imagine how this conclusion can be intercepted particular believers have the forme of the Church and consequently are truely a Church though not in coetu or in societie do they want the mattter of the Church no for they are considered apart in his own words the called of God and the called of God are the true matter of the Church none will deny Neither 2. Will it be helped to say that faith in beleevers considered collectively is the form of the Church For 1. The form of a thing is real which hath being extra mentis operationem it receiveth no part of its nature from consideration and therefore if faith be in it self or properly the essential forme of the Church so it still will be whether we consider it distributively or collectively and wheresoever we finde it viz. in materia congrua in fit matter as the called doubtlesse are Besides 2. Then something is apparently added to faith to informe the Church viz. the collection of the persons so beleeving and then I humbly offer whether whatsoever faith be meant here it belong not exactly to the matter and most unproperly to the forme of the Church for that which doth not perfect the essence or give essential perfection to a thing is not the essential forme of that thing but faith doth not give essential perfection to the Church for where faith is there is not this essential perfection of the Church without something else viz. collection or association of the subjects of this faith together added 3. Therefore he saith 1. Fides est forma ecclesiae and then 2. Coetus est forma ecclesiae wherein I am yet to seek his meaning for either these differ and are two things and then there are two formal causes of the Church or else faith and company are all one in his sense and indeed almost in his words fides spectata collectivè est coetus vocatorum id est forma ecclesiae which I cannot comprehend 4. If coetus vocatorum be indeed a definition of the Church as Amesius saith then either vocati are the forme or coetus or both Med. p. 163. 12. if vocati distinct from coetus be then coetus is not if coetus distinct from vocati then the vocati are not and if both together be the forme then where is the matter 5. Again if this be a perfect definition and consequently the whole cannot be the forme one of the parts must and now which is likeliest coetus or fideles not fideles of the faithful because that these prae-exist before the Church is informed and something as was before observed is necessarily to be added to perfect the essence of the Church 2. One of these two must be the matter of the Church but coetus cannot because the matter is presupposed to the forme but coetus or the consosiation of beleevers doth praesuppose beleevers 3. Therefore the cleanest account with me is that beleevers are the matter the coetus and the collection or community of them is the true essential forme of the Church That wherein they have communion is the publick exercise of such duties as we ead Act 2. 47. Hook eccles pol. 89. Here then at length I pitch that the forme of the Church lieth in society or community stâ—ictly and properly that collection taken actively or unitâ—on is the immediate efficient collection taken passively or union is the effect or proper state of the Church that communion is its formal action but corporation society or community is strictly the forme thereof Which learned Ames himself doth seeme more than to intimate if we let passe the foresaid obscurities saying that faithful Med p. 163. 13. men are the Church of God prout conjunctim vel collectivè considerantur in coetu and yet more plainly in the page before p. 162. 9. Coetus dicitur quia in multitudine consociata vel communitate multorum proprie consistit non in aliquo uno vocato So that in short account the remote matter of the Church Ad homines restringitur iste coetus p. 162. 10 is men the lesse remote matter of the Church is men called and the next matter of the Church is a many or a multitude of men called and now that which is to be added to compleat the Church is the society or community as Ames exactly of these many or this multitude of men called and this is properly the forme thereof Which further appeares For 1. The Church is allowed by all to be totum aggregativum or a holy heap now where lieth the forme of an heap but in the society of the parts thereof they being put together 2. 'T is therefore called a body in Scripture corpus coagmentatum and compactum ex variis membris as Ames noteth from Ephes 4. 16. as also a House a Family a City a Kingdome a Flock and where lieth the forme of all these but in society or community 3. This notion suits so well with the principles of many that they are called Congregational men and their way called Emphatically the Congregational way doubtlesse then their Church is a Congregation yea the opinion of many of them is that their Church-Covenant is the forme of their instituted Church which Covenant is onely the bond of the company or society Lastly that which being put in any matter the thing is necessarily Quo posito in materia aliqua necessario constituitur compositum sublato tollitur id est illius forma constituted and being taken away the thing is dissolved is the forme of that thing but society or community being added to many men called which is the matter of the Church the Church is necessarily constituted and society or community being taken away the Church is dissolved therefore society or community is the forme of the Church 5. Szegedine teacheth that true doctrine and the true use of the Sacraments are the formal cause of the Church But these I conceive are rather either the means of communion which is as was said before the formal action more properly then the very forme it selfe of the Church or else the distinguishing forme whereby the Church is known rather then the constitutive form whereby the Church hath its being But to draw up this discourse of the constitutive forme of the Church 1. Whatsoever it appear to be I hope to prove that it may be truely considered without respect to saving grace if it be calling or faith or profession it hath before appeared that these may be considered to be truely when not savingly such and if it be society or community as hath partly appeared already and will more fully appear when we handle the definition of the Church I presume none will question but this also may be considered to be truely such without any respect to saving grace 2. But if Ames should mean as he truely seemeth to do that coetus vocatorum or societas fidelium
in an united and conjunct sense is the forme of the Church that is neither the called nor society but these both together as a company or society of the called or the faithful though then we know not as before was said where to finde the matter of the Church and that the whole definition will be taken up in the form and consequently we may not grant it yet I conceive we may safely give it for the visible Church may be as well considered to be a society of persons called conjunctively as persons called and a society without respect to saving grace 3. And although we should farther give him that which also we have before denyed to grant him viz. that that faith which is the essential forme of the Church is a saving faith yet he is pleased freely to recompense us again with with as much in affirming that persons that are onely externally called and such as onely professe as himself speaks are truely members of the Church of Christ according to the outward state thereof or as it is a visible Church which is freely acknowledged to be all that is necessarily sought in the present controversie 4. Indeed he also adds that such profession and outward calling is but the accidental form of the Church as before which assertion we conceive will hardly bear this his conclusion however this is nothing unto us We thankfully take his concession and leave the consequence to be further considered CHAP. XI The Argument from the distinguishing forme of the visible Church WE now descend to the other branch of the formal cause called distinguens vel discriminans contained in those notes or marks whereby the Church is known to be true and distinguished from a false Church Whence the Argument is this The notes or marks of a true Church may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace therefore the Church her selfe None will venture upon the consequence for if those very things viz. the notes whereby alone we take to our selves a consideration of the Churches being and truth cannot be affirmed to have any dependance upon saving grace then certainly the Church may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace The Antecedent appears by an easie induction of the notes and marks of a true Church They are either essential or accidental it is generally agreed Professio verae fidei est maxime essentialis ecclesiae nota Med. p. 171. that the essential note of the Church is profession of the true faith which as Amesius saith is maximè essentialis in the highest manner essential to the Church Now the nature of an essential mark as the Schooles teach is certo demonstrare infallibly to demonstrate the essence of that thing of which it is a mark therefore profession of the true faith doth thus certainly infallibly demonstrate the essence and nature of the true Church but now profession of the true faith may be truely considered without respect to saving grace for the true faith may be professed by a Cain a Judas a Simon Magus a Demas and those that have no share at all in saving grace and that truely to as none I think will venture to question But this profession of the true faith I humbly conceive if we speak exactly as it is a mark of the true Church must be taken ecclesiastically and not personally for there may be a private personal owning and profession of the faith where there is no formal proper and exact Church and there we cannot affirme profession of the faith an essential note of the true Church personal profession I grant is a certaine mark of a member of the Church i. e. universal and ecclesiastical profession of the Church it self This ecclesiastical profession I conceive consists in attendance upon the Ordinance of divine worship and is rather a real then a vocal profession for the end of the visible Church being properly the worship of God the note thereof is properly that which renders it serviceable to its end which is attendance upon those things which are ordained for that end the Ordinances of divine worship I confesse Amesius intends a profession of faith formally and vocally taken which he distinguisheth from the solemne preaching Professio ista in coetu aliquo potest antecedere solennem verbi praedicationem Sacramentorum administrationem Med. p. 172. 30. of the Word and administration of the Sacraments By which he either meanes a profession made by all those that are admitted into an instituted Church which cannot I conceive be proved from Scripture to be a necessary duty much lesse an essential mark of the true Church and is not very consonant with reason seeing if this be maximè essentialis nota the Church may possibly through want of occasion of admitting be many years without such an essential note the nature of which if I mistake not requires that it be more usual Besides how such a profession can be looked upon as the profession of the whole which is of some necessity for its being a mark of the whole I know not it being not made by a publick Minister but a private member yea hardly a member if the end of his confession be in order to his admission but however 't is clearly the profession of the party and a note onely of his faith and worthinesse of admission and in any sober sense can hardly be look'd on as the profession much lesse the note and least of all the essential the chiefly essential note of the whole Church as indeed we never found affirmed before by any Authentick authour in the Church of Christ and which I humbly conceive is not Ames his sense here onely I took this occasion to free him from it because I fear these words of his are made a patron of such a practise But if this be not the profession of faith which Amesius affirmeth to be the note of the Church it must needs be the set and solemn declaration of the faith by the mouth of the Church to wit the Minister which was wont to be done as he requireth before the Sermon But this I humbly conceive is not to be distinguished from the Word and Sacraments as it is maxime â—ssentialis ecclesiae nota according to Scripture reason or the judgement of most if not all that have anciently written upon this subject is not the same faith professed by the Minister in preaching and the people in hearing and by both in participating in the Sacraments or seales thereof which is read in the Creed and are not these actions as visible and as essential to the Church as the reading and hearing of the Creed or dare any say that where there is a constant and diligent attendance on the preaching of the true doctrine and lawful administration of prayers and Sacraments that there we cannot discerne a true Church without a solemne declaring of the faith in a set Creed and most of our
Churches in England that have at present I know not for what cause laid aside that practice are therefore not visible true Churches Though I highly approve of such a solemn declaration of the faith if possible in the same sound forme of words to be universally made yet I humbly conceive that this is but a prudential humane Ordinance and therefore not so necessary or so neer the essence or so essential a mark of the Church as sound doctrine and pure Sacraments both which are undoubtedly of immediate divine institution and without which the Church cannot exist Which thing Trelcatius doth thus most accurately and fully open the proper and essential note of the visible Church which flows immediately from the very forme of it is but one viz. the Nota propria essentialis ecclesiae visibilis proximeque fluens ex forma illius unica est veritas scilicet verbi Dei Revelati ac communicati cui veritas Sacramentorum tanquam connexum inseperabile conjuncta est Utriusque enim veritas ita proprium essentiale est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ecclesiae ut veritas haec ecclesia convertantur Instit Theol. p. 224. truth of the Word of God revealed and communicated to which the truth of the Sacraments is inseparably joyned for which he quotes Heb. 4. 12. John 10. 27. Matth. 28. 10. Rom. 4. 11. for as he addes the truth of both is such a proper and essential mark of the Church that this truth of both Word and Sacraments and the Church are convertible But of this I shall have more occasion in the next Chapter therefore I have onely this to do here namely to set this profession of the faith before you to consider whether it doth necessarily suppose saving grace or not in any of these senses 1. May not personal vocal profession be made without saving We are to acknowledge a Church of Christ more or lesse corrupt according to the greater or lesse abuse of Gods Word and worship Bp. Usher p. 39. his sum of Rel. grace and the truth be professed as well as beleeved where saving grace is wanting 2. May not ecclesiastical profession whether more formally by a solemn Creed read and silently consented unto by the people be also done and considered without any respect to saving grace in the declarer or consenters 3. Or that other real profession consisting in attendance upon the Ordinances of God be considered to have truth for its object both in Word and Sacraments and yet without respect to saving graces Againe the accidental notes of the Church are also generally acknowledged to be of two sorts inseparable or proper and separable or common The separable and proper notes of a true Church are said to be the pure preaching of the Word and the lawful administration of the Sacraments which are but the meanes or actions of conveyance and application of the foresaid truth of both unto the Church and so near unto the profession thereof which was said before to be the essential mark of the Church that I have already reduced it thither and need not repeat it here againe The separable notes of the Church whatsoever they be cannot conclude any thing against me because they are such I meane separable and therefore not necessary in our consideration of the being of the Church However that we leave not them onely untoucht they are usually reduced unto two heads 1. Ecclesiastical power 2. And holiness of life Ecclesiastical power hath three branches the power of Ministry the power of Order the power of Discipline all which may easily be considered without the least respect to saving grace 1. Judas may truely exercise his Ministry And 2. Outward Order may be fix'd and observed And 3. Discipline may be erected and dispensed without any necessary supposition of saving grace either in the parties so dispensing or in the objects openly scandalous on which the Discipline is dispensed as hath beene touched before and will be more fully handled hereafter I confesse holiness of life cometh neerest to shew its respect to saving grace but this also shewes as much respect to my cause as easily appeares by this concluding argument If holiness of life be separable from a true Church then saving grace is separable from a true Church for if a holy life doth not alwayes suppose saving yet saving grace doth not always produce a holy life But it is still confessed by those which write most accurately on the Church that holinesse of life is a separable accidental note which is onely necessary to the order and welfare of the Church and not to the being or truth thereof Now if saving grace be separable from a true Church then it may be considered to be truely such without respect thereunto The summe of the general Argument from the causes is this The Summe of the Argument from the causes in general All the causes of the visible Church may really exist without the work of saving grace viz. The efficient as Authour God Head Christ The end of the Glory of God on earth before men Worship The matter whether it be Professors of the faith The outwardly called Outward worshippers The form whether it be Constituting Distinguishing he forme constituting whether it be Faith Calling Society or community The form distinguishing whether it be Essential Profession of the faith or truth of word Sacraments ccidental inseperable Pure preaching of the word and administration of Sacraments Therefore the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace CHAP. XII The Argument from the definition of the visible Church first from its special quality HAving done with the causes we proceed to the definition whence we thus argue The definition of the visible Church doth not suppose saving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 grace therefore the definition the visible Church it self may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace for the definition of a thing is but that whereby the nature of that thing is declared or explicated and is plainly convertible with the thing defined Now whether the definition of the visible Church be inclusive of saving grace or not may appear First from the parts thereof severally considered And Secondly by a view of such definitions of the Church as are already given us by approved Authours 1. The parts are three 1. The special quality of the visible Church 2. Or the special work and employment thereof Or lastly the state and condition wherein the Church so qualified is rendred capable of that employment First let us look upon the special quality of the visible Church which may be conceived to be either the faith calling or profession thereof Whence by some the visible Church is in short defined to be a company or society of Beleevers or a company of men called by external vocation or a company professing the Christian and true Religion where the weight and emphasis rests upon
natural act and the very essential efflux of community therefore coetus a coire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is truely rendred an Assembly or Congregation Prop. 3. Communion then hath the next necessity and place to community in the definition of the Church as being the essential property thereof and its formal evidence Prop. 4. The means of this communion or its specification is the Ordinances or worship of God instituted and enjoyned by Christ in the Gospel Prop. 5. Would we view all the three special particulars that lay claime to this definition at once I humbly conceive 1. That the qualifications spoken of viz. faith calling c. taken with Ames in a saving sense they best serve to define the Church invisible 2. Communion in Ordinances best serve to define the universal visible 3. And this community or proper society best serves to define the particular instituted visible Church which is the Church which we finde most frequently defined by Authors not but that they may all have their place in the definition of the particular Church but I think thus they may all have the chiefest and most necessary place in the definition of the Church Prop. 6. We then may hence note three degrees of necessity in these three great parts of the definition of the Church 1. The Church cannot be without the qualifications specified yet they may be where the Church viz. a particular Neque tamen sufficit subitanea aliqua conjunctio sanctae communionis exercitium ad ecclesiam constituendam nisi etiam constantia illa accedat quoad intentionem saltem c. Am. Med p. 170 instituted Church is not viz. in the called or beleevers scattered 2. Actual communion constantly attended on cannot be where the Church is not yet the Church may be where there is no actual communion the Church is really when it doth not meet or assemble together this is more necessary then the formes 3. Communion or society referring to this communion can neither be where the Church is not neither can the Church be where this is not therefore this is necessary even with the highest degree of necessity for a right defining a particular visible Church which further appeareth thus 1. Because as before we conceive the very forme of the Definitio propriè dicta vel essenâ—ialis est physica quae datur per Meteriam formam vel metaphysica que datur per genus differentiam Church to consist in coetu in society or community it being an aggregative body but I still intend such a community as relates to communion in the worship of God now desinitions being onely to explicate the essence of a thing and the forme being neerest to the essence and as Aristotle saith the very quid and essence it self definitions are best when taken from the forme 2. Definitions are fittest to be taken from hence because the qualifications mentioned are supposed in the persons of this society and this community doth essentially con-note the communion in Ordinances in the habit or first act of it when the second act or actual communion is unavoidably suspended by intrinsick or extrinsick necessity thereof 3. These qualifications may be where there is no Church and a Church may be where there is no actual communion at present The action being ended the Assembly is dissolved and is no longer in being whereas the Church which was assembled doth no lesse continue afterward then before Hook eccles pol. 89 and therefore neither of these are so fit to define the Church withal as community that was now observed to be convertible with the Church 4. The Names of the Church do generally intimate this community for its most usual and proper name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scharpius acquaints us that it is from convocando and that among the Athenians it signified a company called together voce praeconis to hear the sentence of the Senate which Assembly the Latines called concio and this saith he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transferred to a holy use we see here one actual Congregation of the people and this called ecclesia from their being convocated and this usual actual convocation must needs suppose a community by which they were held in a constant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a convocando apud Athenienses significabat coetume reliqua Turba voce praeconis ad audiendum Senatus sententiam convocdtum qui coetus latinis concio dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad res sac as traducitur Nempe ad significandum sanctum coetum voce praeconien verbi vocatorum ad oracirla divina audienda Joh. Scharp Carsus Theol. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gâ—aecis celebre usitatura significans proprie coetus hominum a suis sedibus in alium convocatorum ad aliquid audiendum Poly. Anth. p. 969. Vid Bul. dec p 135. preparation for these summons but he proceeds to tell us what it is in a holy sense viz. an holy Assembly of persons called together by the voice of the Preachers of the Word to hear the Divine Oracles Langus also teacheth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Greeks signifying properly a company of men called together from their own seats into some other place ad audiendum to hear something whence the occasion being frequent and solemn the company became a society or an habitual company constantly attending in one place upon Gods worship which is properly a Church of God therefore in Latine 't is called Congregatio haply from the Hebrew Katial Congregavit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It s metaphorical names import no lesse 't is called a Body a House a Family a City a Flock a Kingdom all which connote union and such as directly intends communion and fellowship 5 The Church is therefore called a Way I persecuted saith Paul this way unto the death Acts 22. v. 4. which is a figure pointing at the persons that usually walked together in Visibilis ecclesia est coetus eorum qui per verbum externum Sacramentorum ac disciplinae ecclesiastice usum in unum externum corpus coalescunt disp 40 Thes 32 Est unitas ecclesiae quae late patet in Sacram. omnium societate communione His Vind. p. 9 Visibilis ecclesia est coetus communiter vocatorum tum electorum tum reproborum p. 194. Arnob. p. 156. upon the 19. Art allowed by the former Church of England one way of worship and evidently intimateth that the persons that thus walked together were a fix'd community or society 6. Some that define the Church leave out the foresaid personal qualifications so do the Leiden Professours the visible Church say they is a company of persons that by the external word the use of the Sacraments and discipline are united into one outward body And Augustine 't is the unity of the Church which lieth broad in the society and community of all the Sacraments Some againe that define the Church do not expresse it communion
and fellowship among themselves here is society of professors for communion communion ecclesiastical distinguishing this society from all others and profession dâ—stinguishing this society and communion to be of the visible and not of the invisible Church There are some of our own countrey-men that have given very clear definitions of the visible Church in this kinde Reverend Bradshaw saith the Churches of Christ are holy assemblies joyning ordinarily and orderly together in the worship of God here is an Assembly the qualification thereof holy the communion thereof joyning together in the Worship of God though I confesse I suppose that he here called these assemblies holy not with respect to the subjects or the persons that made it up but to the works and employment about which they were conversant the holy service and worship of God Yet I confesse that there is an obscure Authour whose name is Dayrel that wrote many yeares agon in the defence of Dayrel of the Church p. 24 like to Hookers our Churches against the Brownists whose definition is more exact to my notion of the visible particular Church then any of A Church as now we are to understand it â—s a society that â—s a number of persons belonging unto Christian fellowship the place and limits whereof are not certain eccl pol. p. 88 Lictionary p. 85 the former a particular visible Church saith he is that company that in a City Town or place cohabiting professe the Christian or true Religion and do ordinarily meet and joyne together in the exercises of religion A company united by co-habitation and profession and having communion together ordinarily in religious exercises the Ordinances of God Much like to which Wilson hath defined the universal visible Church 't is saith he a company of men selected gathered and called out of the world by the doctrine of the Gospel to know and worship the true God in Christ according to his Word Or if these be too long you may take it thus the visible Church Ecclesia specialiter sumitur pro coetu sacra scu conventu hominum ad cultum Dei convenientium Ravanel de eccl for which he quotes many Texts is a society of persons called out of the world to the worship of the true God In this last I am willing to acquiesce it being short and yet I humbly conceive plaine clear and full evidently conteining the whole sense of all the former and wanting for ought I can see in no necessary propertie of a perfect definition Herein we finde the matter persons called so termed by Christ himself as peculiar to the visible distinguished to the invisible or the Church of the Elect. 2. They are persons called out so it exactly answers to the most natural and allowed Etymology of the Church 3. Here are the termes of this motion a quo out of the world ad quem to the worship of God wherein we have its seperation The end of the Church in the Scripture in the time of the Gospel is to worship God as before from John 4 and its dedication its seperation from the world its dedication to God and his worship Wherein also its distinguishing forme and end and office is con-noted communion in the meanes or Ordinances of this worship of God 4. 'T is also said to be a society a fix'd community that respects this communion wherein as hath been often said the tò formale the very constituting form of the Church consisteth This definition is also convertible with the thing defined it doth not lie broader or narrower but just adequate and even with it for every society thus called out of the world to the worship of God is a Church of God and è contra Object Neither doth it avail to object that in this definition there is no mention at all of the constant or ordinary meeting thereof for this worship of God as some other definitions have it Answ For we are defining a visible Church in general which ought to be such as agrees with every kinde of visible Church if I may so speak both universal and particular now this constant actual meeting together is rather peculiar to the particular Church then common therewith to the Church universal which hath this actual meeting together but either in its representative a general counsel or in its parts particular Churches whereas a society called out of the world to the worship of God is general and common both to the universal and particular Church 2. Yea a particular visible Church it self is such when it hath not this actual meeting together much more when it hath it not constantly from which it haply may accidentally be long suspended and yet not lose its being and therefore not come short of its definition the essence of the Church lieth not in act but in habit not in communion but in community as this community * Foeder ata ista conjunctio catenus tantum constituit ecclesiam quatenus spectat ad communioneÌ„ exercendam to be exercised Am. Med. 169 Sanctae communis exercitium ad ecclesiam constituendam sufficit si constantia illa acâ—edit quoad intentionem tantum quae statum ad sert corporis membrorum in spirituali quadam politia as with small variation of words is gathered From Am. Med. 170 parag 21 looks towards and alwayes intends this communion to which it is therefore said to be called out of the world in the definition As a man doth not lose any part of his essence or cease at all to be a man when he ceaseth the exercise of his reason in his sleep or the like because the essence of his manhood lieth not in the exercise but in the faculty of reason whereby he is fitted and duely furnished to exercise the same when occasion is offered and impediments are removed So the Church ceaseth not to be a Church when she ceaseth her actual communion in the worship of God because the essence of the Church being in society to that end doth not suppose it though indeed it strongly intend it and dispose unto it as it conteineth a habit therof or at least an obligation thereunto upon due seasons Yet though the communion be not actual but onely habitual we may not say the community is onely habitual and not actual it would be strange to say that a man is only an habitual man because his reasoning is now habitual and not actual or a society of such a trade is onely habitually so when it doth not actually meet and assemble together The communion therefore is but habitual but the Church hath its essence and existence when it doth not meet together Therefore to have put ordinary or orderly meeting together into the definition of the Church would have made the definition larger then the definitum sometimes so that sometimes the Church must have been no Church when indeed it is so or the definition thereof must have been no proper definition thereof but variable
sometimes fit and sometimes not fit when the Church is an actual meeting and not fit when she hath adjourned to another time Therefore this definition a society called out of the world to the worship of the true God being fit to expresse the nature both of the universal and the particular visible Church and that at all times and states thereof it may I think be yeelded to be a proper definition thereof Now to draw up this discourse I shall onely further intimate that the definition of the visible Church may be truely considered to be such and truely applicable to the visible Church without any respect to saving grace as appears to the very first glance of our observation from the definition fix'd upon viz. that it is a society of men called â—ut of the world to the worship of God who will be so ventrous as to question either the fitness of this definition or its applicablenesse to the visible Church without respect to saving grace For 1. All the parts that are either essential or necessary or fit for this definition of the Church have appeared before to be thus truely applicable thereunto without respect to saving grace therefore the whole is so likewise 2. All particular definitions now mentioned except one are to be truely considered without respect to saving grace without any colour of question much lesse controversie and that one viz of Ames is nothing against us seeing Ames his judgement is for us and himself alloweth such persons a place in the Church as he will not allow if we understand him any place in the definition of the Church as before is noted 3. Therefore these very Authours take occasion to acquaint us that the Church which they thus define containeth Hypocrites as well as the Elect and that with the joint consent of the reformed Divines which I doubt not abundantly to make to appear when we speak upon the head of humane Testimony CHAP. XVI Objections answered and the true sense of the reformed Divines considered who say the invisible Church is onely the true Church BEfore we passe on to that way of arguing termed inartificial namely from authority we think fit to consider a few objections which may be called artificial and leave the other Objections which arise from Scripture and the judgement of the Church to be handled I think more methodically after my arguments thence The first and indeed the onely considerable objection against me is this Object 'T is confest that there is but one true Church 't is also confest that the invisible Church is one true Church but now the Church invisible cannot be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace therefore neither the Church visible Answ I answer that in general this argument is justly exceptible against because before it reacheth the conclusion of my opponent it evidently concludeth that which I presume himself renounceth viz. that the visible Church is in no respect at all either with or without saving grace to be truely a Church of Christ that this is the first conclusion of the argument is most obvious from the two first propositions 1. 'T is said there is but one true 2. The invisible is one true Church What now doth force it self from hence but therefore the visible is no visible Church somewhat a strange conclusion unknown I think to all the ages of the Church before us and such as imposed upon the providence of God to have entrusted this whole worship and Ordinances in the hands of a false Church 2. Hereby also we have a quick dispatch of the present controversie for what need we reach any further after the thing before us viz. whether the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without this respect to saving grace if it be first concluded that there is no visible Church at all 3. But more directly I answer by denying at least one of these things either 1. That the one true Church is the Church invisible Or 2. That though the one true Church be invisible yea and this invisible Church cannot be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace yet it followeth not that the visible Church may not be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace 1. I might deny with fairnesse enough that the one true Church is properly the Church invisible until my arguments above for the contrary are answered till when the present objection can challenge no answer 2. But here I shall rather deny the consequence and that though I grant the invisible Church to be the onely true Church and that this cannot be truely considered as such without respect to saving grace yet the visible Church is a true Church and may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace the reason is because these attributes of visible and invisible though they are given to the same subject the Church yet in diverse respects which appears by this argument if they are to be taken in the same respect and visibility be as none will deny an inseperable adjunct of the Church then there is no invisible Church for to say as Ames saith the Church never ceaseth to be visible and there is an invisible Church if visible and invisible here be to be taken in the same respect is a plaine contradiction now the consideration of the divers respect wherein the same Church is said to be visible and invisible detects the fallacy of the former Argument thus the Church with respect to its saving faith and to those persons that have this saving faith is said to be invisible this faith being not seen and these persons not to be certainly known And againe the same Church with respect to its profession and the persons therein that own the same in the eyes of the world is truely said to be visible So that though there be but one Church there is a Church invisible and a Church visible And again though this Church as invisible cannot be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace seeing it is therefore said to be invisible because of its saving grace and the subjects thereof cannot be seen or certainly known by men yet this Church in its visible consideration or as it is the visible Church may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace seeing that which renders it thus visible hath no necessary dependance upon saving grace as Reverend Hudson saith well the Church is considered to be visible and invisible à duplici modo communionis externae internae visible with respect to its external way of communion which doth not suppose saving grace and invisible with regard to its internal way of communion which doth suppose saving grace This is doubtlesse the plaine sense of the reformed Protestant Churches as is clearly stated by that eminent patron thereof Med. p. 165 Dr. Ames his words are known The Militant Church
do onely partake of the accidental forme of the Church is for ought I can see a plaine contradiction to it self For if the reason of an accident be to be in the subject then it no farther is then it is in the subject then also nothing can stand under it as it is the accident of such a subject viz. the Church unlesse it be part of the Church unlesse it also partake of the substantial forme of the Church or that which renders the Church or the subject of this profession or what ever it is which is said to be the accident thereof a Church a dead carkasse though it still retaine the same colour and figure that it had when it was alive yet it cannot be said to stand under the colour and figure of a man and why because the substantial form of a man is not in it 't is not a man therefore not capable of the accidents of a man so a hypocrite may partake of profession which is like the profession of the Church but cannot partake of the profession of the Church nor any part of the accidental forme of the Church unlesse it be part of the subject the Church which it cannot truely be without partaking also of the substantial forme of the Church where there is an essential totum as well as an integral all the essential parts must feel the influence of the essential forme or else they do not partake of an accidental forme of the totum for indeed a member that admits no influence from the forme is no longer an integral part of the body and consequently doth no longer partake of any thing as it is of the body Yet I shall adde one Argument ad hominem to prove that hypocrites partake of the essential forme of the Church a mark is said to be essential because 1. It flows directly and necessarily from the essence And 2. It is a sure indication of the essence of a thing therefore wheresoever we finde an essential mark there the essence of the thing is and there we may know it to be now what is the essential mark of the Church hath not Ames answered the profession of the true faith therefore hypocrites c. who doubtlesse do partake of this profession which himself acknowledgeth to be the essential note of the Church are and may be known to be of the essence of the Church Ames tells us that hypocrites have a share in the the outward profession of the Church which he saith is the accidental forme and which he also saith is the essential note of the true Church therefore they partaking in the accidental state or forme of the Church they also partake in the essential note of the Church and therefore of the essence of the Church and therefore of the essential form of the Church 3. I confesse it is my present opinion that that which Ames assignes to be the essential or internal forme viz. faith is no forme at all either of the Church visible or invisible but onely a necessary qualification of the matter of the Church of the saved or the Church invisible which seemes not much incongruous to Ames himself sometimes for he affirmeth that fides taken distributively is but forma vocatorum the forme of the called and not of the Church and that collective sense that he would put on faith to make it the forme of the Church is it self as distinguished from faith the forme of the Church which is not far from his own meaning yea and words too in another place ecclesia maximè consistit in coetu 4. Yea further I yet judge that the visible Church hath no internal forme at all and that which Ames calleth the accidental forme and others the external is very neere unto all the essential forme constituting of the visible Church the visible Church is a collective or aggregative body and that visible Now whether is the essential form of a visible aggregative body inward or outward indeed the particular parts of such a body separately considered have their internal formes but is not the form of the whole another thing is not union or rather unity or society of the parts the forme of the whole and is not this external for instance every particular sheep hath its forme internal but as these are a flock they have another outward forme which yet is not accidental but essential to it as it is a flock viz. their being in unity or community or society together Indeed 't is necessary that there be sheep if there be a flock of sheep and 't is necessary that these sheep have their essential which is an internal forme yet both these are but conditions of a congruous matter which is essential to every compositum I grant therefore that sheep with their internal forme are essential to the flock viz. as the matter is essential but they are no part of the forme I grant also that in rational aggregative bodies viz. societies of men there lieth some difference from a heap of inanimate creatures as stones c. from a flock of sensitive creatures as sheep c. because the reason of man doth qualifie rational societies with an habitude or aptitude to various ends and employments which are accordingly distinguishing and specifically differencing rational societies and which is not communicable to other collective bodies which are irrational therefore there is something to be understood at least if not expressed which is to signifie the reason or the end of every rational society to distinguish it from societies of men of another kinde Ex. gr among men there are domestick politick scholastick ecclesiastick societies which constitutes a family a Common-wealth a Colledge and a Church Now without some peculiar reason or end of these several societies how shall we distinguish the one from the other they are all collective bodies they are societies of men yea they may be all societies of Christians yea they may be all societies of Christians that are in a state of salvation and yet discovered by a general description onely and nothing intimated to distinguish to us one kinde of society from another Therefore something is to be added besides a bare society of Christians to distinguish the Church from a Christian family a Christian Common-wealth or a Christian Colledge which hath beene often hinted to be the peculiar reason and intention of this ecclesiastick society from all others viz. the joynt and publick communion thereof in the worship and Ordinances of God Neither may it be then replied that the forme of the Church consisteth not in coetu or in society because there is something to be added to distinguish the same for that which is added is but the quality or reason of this society or its being such a society yet a society still even as none may say that the forme of a man is not his soul because a soul in general is not that which distinguisheth a man from a beast a
thinks fit to commend her for as he had done before in all his Epistles to the rest of the Churches Secondly positively she was so abominable in her lukewarmnesse ver 14. and her carnal security and self-confidence and slighting of Christ and his riches and treasures ver 16 17. his stomack even rose against her so that he threatens to spew her out of his mouth ver 15. Yet secondly observe the mouth of Christ himselfe and that from heaven and even now in the very midst of his heat and anger against her sticks not to own her and call her a Church to the Angel of the Church of Laodicea he could as well have directed his letter to the governour of those that would be thought to be a Church or that pretended Church or have left the superscription to have been written by his servant John who in charity might have cured and have stiled her a Church who indeed was none but loe this is a truth revealed from heaven and that by the mouth of him that had just now told this same Church that he was a true and faithful witnesse v. 14. and therefore may not be thought to flatter her that a wicked people may yet be owned by Christ himself to be his Church 2. Thus the antecedent appears the consequence which is that therefore a Church may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace is as fully manifest by two short considerations 1. Let it be seriously considered whether it can reasonably or indeed possibly be imagined that God or Christ do intimate by owning such a wicked people as is noted before that yet notwithstanding all this wickednesse abounding upon them they were savingly sanctified or had saving grace and yet clearly thus it must have been if a people cannot be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect unto this sanctifying or saving grace and if it were not so and it be granted that God had no respect unto their saving grace when he owneth them thus for his Church and people then it will hence easily follow that God doth own such a people to be his Church and people upon other termes and respects then this of saving grace and then who seeth not the undeniablenesse and strength of the former consequence 2. Again it is yet more evident and forceable if we adde this to the former consideration that we are speaking of the visible Church quoad homines or as men are to consider of it then we may reason thus if God and Christ call a people his people and his Church that give no evidence at all of their saving grace then we are doubtlesse to account a people sometimes at least to be a Church and people of God that give us no evidence of saving grace for none will deny but that we are to account of a peoples relation to God as he himself is pleased to reveale it to us Now God as we have heard hath in his word revealed that a people visibly wicked and consequently without any evidence of saving grace are a people of God and a Church of Christ therefore we also are to reckon a visibly wicked people and a people that give no evidence of their saving grace sometimes to be a people of God and a Church of Christ and then how apparently and irresistibly must it needs follow that as a people may be known to us to be a people of God and a Church of Christ without the help of the evidence of saving grace so they may be truely considered to be thus a people of God and a Church of Christ without respect unto saving grace seeing God himself hath been pleased to reveale that there is something else on which we shall through Gods assistance particularly insist anone to ground a true and right understanding of a peoples interest and relation to God as his people and Church besides this sincere or saving grace CHAP. XVIII The second Argument from Scripture such as the word declares to have no saving grace it giveth titles equivalent to Church-membership THat we may yet further search into the minde of God in the present controversie we shall now descend to consider the titles which all allow to be equiualent to visible Church-membership and to what kinde of persons the Scripture applieth them which with the more fairnesse and fitnesse of reasoning will be dispatcht in the confirmation of the following Argument If the Word of God ascribe such titles as are truely equivalent to visible Church-membership unto such persons as the Word of God it self hath testified to have at that time had no evidence at least of saving grace then the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace In this consequence I confesse there is one thing begg'd which yet I think none will deny me viz. that it is good arguing from the members to the body or the parts of the Church to the whole But considering that 1. The Church entitively taken is nothing else but a company of members 2. That the whole difference in dispute resteth upon the matter of the Church and the necessary qualification thereof And 3. That chiefly as it hath rationem subjecti in which sense Ministers and all within are members of the Church And 4. That the end of this great controversie is evidently practice which is onely conversant about particular persons or members my consequence here is not to be excepted against But now the Word of God ascribeth such titles as are truely equivalent to visible Church-membership to such particular persons as the Word of God it selfe hath testified to have at that time had no evidence at least of saving grace This is indeed the proposition that the nature of this dispute expects to to be proved which I think I shall be able to do in many particulars 1. Brother is in 1 Cor. 6. 8. equivalent to Church-member yet even there it is ascribed to some that give no evidence of saving grace ye do wrong and defraud and that your brethren those that do wrong and defraud their brethren give no evidence of saving grace but some that do wrong and defraud their brethren are even by the Scripture called brethren for if the defrauded are brethren to the defrauders then by the same reason of relation the defrauders are brethren to the defrauded but the defrauded are brethren to the defrauders your brethren therefore the defrauders are brethren to them as indeed they are expressed to be verse 6. Brother goeth to Law with brother 2. Called is a title in Scripture equivalent to Church-member But our Saviour therein also tells us that some are called that give no evidence of saving grace even some that neither then had any saving grace nor ever should for more are asserted by Christ to be called then are elected but no more either now have or ever shall have saving grace then are elected therefore some
above all the nations that are upon the earth And to anticipate any that should restraine and limit this Covenant-holinesse consistent with actuai wickednesse to the time of the Law The Apostle Peter hath taken the very same passage and made its application to the times of the Gospel 2 Peter 2. 9. If yet any possible scruple remaine seriously weigh that method of reasoning God is pleased with in Psalm 50. 7. God threatens there to testifie against Israel a sufficient note of Israels wickednesse yet in the same verse God owneth Israel a competent token of Israles holinesse but how dâ—th God own wicked Israel not in Covenant yea doubtlesse in both the maine parts thereof thou art my people and I am thy God hear O my people and I will speak O Israel and I will testifie against thee I am God even thy God here is sufficient doubtlesse infinitely to supersede what can lawfully be argued against the possibility of a wicked Israelite his being in Covenant from v. 16 17. so much insisted on 3. Therefore nothing is more trite in reformed Writers especially against the Anabaptist then the distinction of persons holy vel actu vel orasione professione debita holinesse real and relative habitual and imputed foederal and inherent who generally acknowledge that some persons are holy in a relative foederal and imputed sense and by profession obligation separation and calling that are not holy really as it stands opposed to relatively actually personally or inherently who are yet onely called to be Saints taking the word called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut sint sancti as Paraeus Aretius and divers others do in which sense Master Baxters words are ordinarily quoted That there are His Rest p. 105 many Saints or sanctified men that shall never come to Heaven who are onely Saints by their separation from paganisme into the fellowship of the visible Church Whence also Chamier proportionably reasons quomodo Paulus dicebat Romae i. e. omnes sui temporis Judaeos esse sanctos quod eorum Truncus i. e. Abraham sanctos fuisset 4. We need not trouble our selves to prove particularly that the judgement of the reformed Churches is that foederal holinesse doth proceed into the Adult estate seeing those Churches viz. of New England which alone are capable of suspition in this controversie have expressely declared for it or at least very strongly Mr. Cottons way of the Church of New England pag. 51. intimated in these words those say they that are baptized in any Church may by vertue of this former interest require the Supper in that Church if there be no impediment in regard of their unfitnesse to examine themselves Which yet Master Baxter hath somwhat more clearly for saith he their being baptized persons if at age or members of the universal Church into which it is that they are baptized is a sufficient evidence of their interest to the Supper till they do by heresie His Rest p. 104 or scandal blot that evidence which assureth us to be the confident issue of much doubting dispute and study of the Scriptures 5. Yea that prudent Ordinance called confirmation though of singular use in the hurch if well managed and that onely thing that seemeth against us in this part of dispute it being looked upon as a mean of passing from the Infant to the Adult estate yet it is most evident this did not intend to exclude those that were found ignorant and wanted a fit and ready answer at their examination presently out of the Church or on the other side to admit the rest upon a new account into Church-membership they being sufficiently so before for they stiled this exercise not an admission but a confirmation or if in any respect it was an admission the term thereof was only into the company of adult Church-members or to some higher priviledge of the visible Church viz. the Supper and not at all to the state or society of Church-members as such Neither did such examinants intend at least a direct search for evidence of grace but competency of knowledge or at utmost a renuing of that covenant or promise personally and actively which before in their infancy they were only passively and in their sureties bound unto Which promise having for the object of it repentance and obedience and being for the nature of it a promise that is respecting the future and being made for something yet to be doth rather suppose that as yet they have not repented nor entred upon a course of new obedience and consequently are not yet supposed to have any saving grace though thought fit upon such a promise to pass by confirmation of their examinants out of their Infant into their Adult estate 6. If those that do not render this answer of a good conscience are no longer within the Church I demand whether they were truely members of the Church in their state of Infancy or onely seemingly so 1. If it be replied that they were onely seemingly so then Infants interest in the Church by foederal holinesse is not a real interest which is plainly Anabaptistical or at least but dependently and upon the supposition of future saving grace which is absurd and plainly against the Scripture For after heaven had reveal'd that Ishmael was none of the seed of the promise of salvation with Isaac and that to Abraham Vid. Gen. 17 himself he is yet by vertue of his relative foederal holinesse from his fathers family and in plaine obedience to Gods command circumcised by Abraham the mark and token of the Covenant of God And the bond woman and her sonne who indeed was Ishmael are clearly intimated to be within Gal. 4. 30. where they are charged to be cast out Where also the Apostle assures us that this history of Ishmael and Isaac was allegâ—rical and served to conclude that even in the dayes of the Gospel to the end of the world there should be Ishmaels as well as Isaac's in the visible Church the Apostle arguing v. 29. from then to now 2. Againe if it be said that such were really visible members before in their infant estate but now they wanting that which their Adult estate requires to continue this their membership they cease to be any longer so I then must demand whether they cease to be so on course and by any thing which flowes from the nature of such a state or whether they cease or rather are made to cease to be so by violent censure or Excommunication 1. If the first be chosen viz. that they cease to be any longer members of themselves without any censure of the Church 1. I humbly conceive here is a new way of loosing Church-membership viz. by ignorance wickednesse c. unknowne to the Scripture or any age of any Church before 2. Then Ideots and distracted persons cease to be members of the visible Church at their Adult estate 3. What shadow of Scripture or reason is there that ignorance for which
ancient people may not be excommunicated should of it self put the younger out of the Church or that wickednesse which cannot put elder persons out with censure should be thus effectual to exclude youth just at such a crisis or age 4. Why then are not such persons whose ignorance or want of the answer of a good conscience hath made their interest in the Covenant null upon their after-learning c. to be re-baptiz'd 5. Yea if this confirmation be indeed a new admission viz. upon the account of personal or habitual holinesse and the former ground of our Church and Covenant interest viz. foederal holinesse do passe no further then such an age why are not all at this transition rebaptiz'd we are no longer in Covenant then the reason of being in Covenant holds and the seal of the Covenant holds no longer then our being in Covenant continues and it seemes the reason of our former being in Covenant is now lost and we enter Covenant again upon our personal a new account why then must not we have the seale of entrance applied also viz. baptisme But Lastly this is most expressely confuted by the former instance of Ishmael he was borne in the Church he hath sigillum foederis put upon him and therein he continueth though wicked until he is by violence cast out as the Scripture witnesseth Gal. 4. 30. 2. Then there is no refuge left but that such as are found ignorant c. at yeares of discretion are to be cast out of the Church by Excommunication If this be said 1. I answer that it is hereby granted me that the interest of ignorant persons c. is real until they be excommunicated and consequently that such persons may be that is actually though not lawfully real members of the visible Church as have no saving grace which as much as I need desire in general yea or in this particular for then this Church-membership is continued upon the account of foederal holinesse not saving grace untill this violent accident of excommunication dissolve it 2. Howsoever this doth not at all distinguish the crisis or period of the beginning of the Adult estate which we are now upon for no reason can possibly be shewne why ignorance or scandal should deserve this censure more at this time or state of passing then at any other age of our lives 3. But lastly let me be answered did we ever reade either in Scripture or any history of any Church that ignorance or unreadinesse to answer or learne when catechiz'd doth render youth so censurable as to be wholly extirpated and cast out of all relation to the Church therefore and yet let us bethink our selves is not this the very case Let me conclude with plainnesse a childe is borne in the Church and sealed therein in his infancy and therein continues until ripenesse of yeares and all this by vertue of his first Covenant-holinesse I desire to know whether this his Covenant-holinesse and his relation to the Church so long held and continued till now thereby doth now expire what Scripture or reason depriveth him of it the authority of what Church hath declared it void what can cast him out but excommunication whether all excommunication doth utterly root up Covenant interest what can merit so great a penalty but known and proved scandal and lastly whether all or any ignorance at ripenesse of age or unaptnesse in youth to learn the Catechisme be tollerably to be accounted according to Scripture or the judgement or practise of any one Church of Christ a scandal or such a scandal as may be censur'd and punisht with utter extirpation out of the Church CHAP. XX. Objections from Scripture considered BEfore I passe to the humane authority I hold my self bound to answer such objections against my Scripture-arguments as are offered thence Though I humbly professe I can hardly find or think of any that have either weight or colour in them but what have had sufficient though occasional answer already or at least been anticipated However that this head may have some body and that I may not write nihil hic nisi carmina c. Object 1. It is objected from John 8. 37. that those that were Abrahams seed were yet the devils children Answ What then therefore some Church-members are really the children of the devil but this we deny not onely we still assert that notwithstanding they may be really members of the visible Church as well as really Abrahams seed in regard of their holy profession and state they were really Church-members and children of Abraham yea of God but in regard of their unregenerate nature and rebellious lives they were as our Saviour affirmes the children of the Devil Were there any need we might fully explicate the answer hereunto by distinguishing of the Jews First as they are acknowledged to be Abrahams seed And secondly as they are called the Devils children First these Jews may be thought to be Abrahams seed either carnally ecclesiastically or spiritually i. e. savingly as his natural off-spring as Jews or as borne of him the head of the Covenant as holy branches of that old root or members of the Church Or lastly in that strict and saving sense as the children of Isaac or the seed of the promise elect to salvation 1. Now to apply if our Saviour here mean that these Jews were Abrahams seed onely in this first sense viz. borne of his naturaly body but by their heresie denying Christ and their schisme negative keeping themselves off from the Gospel-dispensation and positive raising themselves as a Church in distinction and opposition to the Gospel Church now planting in the world of all which they were highly guilty deservedly divorced and cut off from the Church then I say this text reacheth not our case for though such desperate murderers of the Lord of life and open rebels against the doctrine and meanes of salvation are no real Church-members it followeth not that therefore we cannot consider others that joyn themselves to the Gospel and professe to expect salvation from Jesus Christ c. to be so neither 2. If our Saviour meant that they were the visible Church and people of God and Abrahams seed in that ecclesiastical or covenant-Covenant-sense This I take to be the common sense of Expositors for though they call these Jews carnales Abrahae posteras yet they oppose carnales here to spirituales i. e. veros in their known and common sense Vid. Expos in locum then it either resteth to be proved that our Saviour intended here to declare them onely nominally or equivocally so because he chargeth them as children of the Devil for which there is no colour in the world seeing both as before may be really predicated of the same subject viz. that they are really members of Christs visible Kingdome and yet really children of the Devil as those children of the Kingdome were who went accursed from the mouth of Christ in another place Or secondly it
thus excommunicate hath yet both habitual and actual communion in part with the Church either of which is far more then a bare conditionall or potential communion with it and therefore participateth of the essence and ceaseth not wholly to be a member thereof 1. An excommunicate person hath habitual communion with the Church which is real and more then potential though he Habitual should have actual communion this hath largely appeared before for his communion is onely suspended upon expectation of satisfaction and he hath it in desire and in the preparation of mind and the seal of the Covenant viz. baptisme is yet in force upon him 2. Yea such an excommunicate person hath actual commmunion with the Church in many though not all her Ordinances Actual 1. As before in the ordinance of Baptisme 2. In the prayers of the Church which are or ought to be made for him as a person in some relation as a brother to them which he may claime at least if he may not heare 3. In the counsel and exhortations of the Church which doubtlesse is an Ordinance Heb. 11. 25. and to be performed to the excommunicate count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother 4. In the Ordinance of excommunication also which is acknowledged to be appointed and ought to be executed as a medicine to heal and not alwayes as a sword wholly to cut off a diseased member the Excommunicate are thereby under the meanes of cure 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 5. the meanes of salvation which no one wholly out of the Church is Yea some conceive that the excommunicate have an actual right in all Ordinances but the Supper and the politick acts of the Niddui Church Niddui among the Jews which is thought to answer to our lesser degree of excommunication did not exclude a man from the Temple as the Talmudists say though according to Drusius he might not come into the Synagogue whence haply Vid. Gillesp Aarons rod. that forme of speech casting out of the Synagogue in Scripture Yet Joh. Coch. thinks that an excommunicate person was not altogether cast out of the Synagogue neither but was permitted to heare and in other things was separate which yet hath some colour from that proverb of the Jews that he that was under Cherem or the greater excommunication non docet non docetur and by this he was distinguished by those under Niddui intimating that such though they might not teach yet they might be taught otherwise there appears to be no difference betwixt them herein That which favours this opinion amongst us is that other Ordinances may be dispensed to Heathens and Publicans a Publican may come into the Temple to pray and an Heathen came into the Church at Corinth to heare and a person thus excommunicate is but an Heathen or a Publican but enough of this I presume not to determine any thing in so nice a Controversie I crave onely leave to conclude that if the excommunicate heare onely as a Heathen and pray onely as a Publican then not as a Church-member which serveth to cut this Observation wholly off from the present question and to break short off the thread of my answer hereto CHAP. XXXIII What doth wholly cut a man off from the visible Church first on Gods part HItherto we have answered negatively and laboured to shew that ignorance wickednesse and excommunication viz. the lesser doth not wholly root up visible Church-membership come we now to give our positive answer and to shew what doth The person that is the subject of this sad change may be considered The person cut off is passive or active in it to be passive in it onely and to be cut off or active also and to cut himself off from the Church If we look upon him as passive in it I mean in the punishment not in the sinne the agent can be none in a strict and principal When the man is passive God is the agent properly sense but God for as the Husband is said most properly to give the wife a bill of divorce though others viz. the administers of the Law be subservient also so God alone hath this prerogative to admit into and cast out of his own Church though the discipline of the Church be used by God therein therefore we are taught by Divines that when the key of the Church erreth God doth not binde in heaven and consequently men are not really bound at all 1. But God may be considered to give this bill of utter divorce two wayes first mediately by the hand of the Church in her God doth divorce 1. Mediately by the Church highest act of punishment if such a one there be called Anathema Maranatha which God doth either by ratifying in heaven what is done accordingly on earth when the Church dares arise to so great and dreadful a judgement as it is said she did against Julian and doth not misapply it or else by putting forth such a judicial sentence against a person known to himself to have sinned the unpardonable sinne though not to the Church as a dismal addition and not onely a ratification of the Churches lesser censure Secondly sometimes God doth put in his own hand and sickle and wholly cut off persons and Churches more immedialy i. e. without 2. Immediately two wayes the meanes or mediation of the Church and that two ways 1. By the stroke of natural death whereby a person if wicked is in 1. By death heavy judgement wholly cut from the Church in all respects but if godly in much mercy wholly cut off from the Church in our present respect viz. as militant to be joyned to Jerusalem above in the glory and triumphs thereof for ever 2. By removing his Ordinances 2. By removing the candlesticks the onely means of Church-communion from the place where such a person or people who have not hearts or fruits answerable do inhabite for otherwise though the Gospel be removed yet if a mans heart be to it indeed he hath habitual communion with all other Churches and power to joyne himselfe to any true Church in the world and to claime actual communion with it as none can doubt though his own former Congregation be dissolved Just thus it was with the ancient Church of the Jews God after many warnings and threatnings when she had stoned the servants and killed the heire and yet still refused her own mercies scorning to be wash'd in the blood her selfe had shed or healed by the wounds she had made God at length giveth commission to his servants in the Gospel and lo they turne to the Gentiles and carry away the light and glory of Israel the golden candlestick of the Gospel and the Where God utterly taking away the means of his Word and worship Acts 15. 46 hath apparently given the bill of divorce Isa 50 1 then are we not to acknowledge any Church at all at this day in Jerusalem
had his Church because he had thousands which never bowed their knees to Baal but whose knees were bowed unto Baal even they were also of the visible Church Apostasie a genus or an integrum of heresie and schisme And if it be yet urged that apostacy should be reckoned among the meanes of unchurching I reply that Apostacy may be thought to be a genus of heresie and schism or a compositum made up of both and the perfection of heresie and schisme as it is in the first respect totum universale or in the latter respect totum essentiale vel integrale whose species or whose parts are heresie and schism 1. Now if we consider apostasie as a genus of heresie and schism Apostasie as a genus c. is such in grammar and Scripture then we may conceive heresie or a falling from the faith to be one kinde of Apostasie and Schisme or a forsaking the Assemblies to be another kinde of Apostasie by the one men fall from the truth and by the other from the Church and by either or both from God Apostasie thus understood as I humbly conceive both according to grammar or the Etymology of the word which is in general onely a falling from which may equally respect the truth and the Church and also according to Scripture or the use thereof in the Scripture is such in the first and properest sense of the word Now if we take Apostasie in this signification it cannot be reasonably added as a third meanes of unchurching unto Heresie As a compound the usual sense and schisme seeing that a genus is universale and not individuum and existing onely in its species and not as distinct thereunto or in it self 2. If we take Apostasie in the sense of the Church wherein it is usually taken for a compound of perfect or total Heresie and Schisme or a perfect and absolute renouncing the faith and forsaking the communion of the faithful then I answer that it seemeth needlesse to adde this as a third means of unchurching in this sense either seeing it hath no other nature or force thereunto but what it received from its parts to wit heresie and schisme which have been before insisted upon so that all the difference is that heresie and schisme considered in themselves do unchurch apart and considered in Apostasie they do unchurch together or they are considered to do that together in Apostasie which they were considered to do before apart in themselves and this need not be added as a third meanes which hath no energy to do this effect but that which it receiveth from the other two yea even as it consisteth wholly thereof I conclude this discourse with a synopsis of what hath been said herein given us in those pertinent words of Learned Willet Synop. of the second contr of the Church he first tells us who may not be of the visible Church viz. Infidels i. e. such as are not baptized 2. Hereticks 3. Schismaticks to which he addes excommunicate persons he secondly teacheth who are or may be of the visible Church viz. 1. Such as are not predestinate 2. Manifest sinners de facto 3. Close Infidels i. e. hypocrites CHAP. XXXV Our Churches in England are true Churches inferr'd from the former discourse I Had once resolved to have written no more but finis to the former discourse and to have entrusted it as it is to the impartial improvement of my Readers Genius for who seeth not what great things a very little use of reason may inferre therefrom both touching our Churches Sacraments and Censure However though peaceable prudence be ready to advize as things and persons now are to be very sparing in taking the advantages offered us thence yet love to the truth and the zeale of the house of the Lord hath prevailed with to add something upon each of these heads as most direct and easie conclusions from the former premises and first concerning our Churches thus If we seriously consider what hath been said what can possibly hinder us from concluding therefrom that our publick Congregations in England are true Churches Were not all our members borne in the Church baptized in the Church and have they not hitherto remained in communion of the Church hath Apostasie Heresie Schisme hath a removal of the Candlestick or excommunication it self if it have such a power unchurched them Are not all our Congregations called out of the world of Infidels Turks Jews yea and Papists too and do not they stand as holy communities separate therefrom to the true worship and ordinarily exercised in the Ordinances of God Doth the Scripture require any more to the essence of the Church then ours have or doth it note any thing sufficient to unchurch that ours are not free from are not all the causes distinguishing marks of the true visible Church eminently in ours or doth not the whole definition thereof agree to them do not all the Churches salute and own us as true Churches and would not many dangerous absurdities both in judgement and practice immediately follow the denial thereof Are our Churches corrupt in their conversation true but the essence of the Church consisteth not in saving grace nor its visibility in an holy life besides what Scripture-Church is there except one viz. that at Philippi but is even by the Scripture it self both blamed for corruption and also acknowledged to be a Church or people of God But I intend not to enlarge here having elsewhere largely anticipated this discourse onely having often observed one great objection taken from the first constitution of our Churches to be the last and onely hold of the ancient Brownists as also of the subtiler sort of our later Anabaptists to whom we might adde the Papist I shall spend the remains of this chapter in the view and answer thereof 't is this Obj. Our Churches were not rightly constituted at first therefore they are no true Churches Answer This Objection as it lieth thus in general may be easily evaded upon all our adversaries own principles 1. To the Papists we reply that our Church was at first rightly constituted upon Popish principles for do they not say that we were at first converted unto Christianity by the preaching of Augustine the Monk and that he was commissionated thereunto by the Pope himself 2. To the Brownist we say that we were at first converted by the Ordinance of preaching whether of Joseph or not to which we may adde in answer to the Anabaptist that our ancestors were then baptized upon their personal professing the faith at years of discretion which thing cannot be rationally doubted seeing all are agreed that Heathens are not to be baptized but upon such profession of the faith and againe that our Ancestours were Heathens before their conversion to Christianity Object I know that all these adversaries are ready to reply that something hath since intervened that hath destroyed our Churches Answ Yet then the objection taken
unto him by the command of these Kings in like manner our gracious Queen Elizabeth did her duty to God in following these happy Kings in the like case in England and the people did no lesse then their duty to God and the Queene in returning to their God at the Queenes command 2. Neither can it be sufficiently proved that the preaching of the Word is of absolute necessity at the first constitution of a particular Church especially where some Knowledge of God and his wayes is presupposed as our case in England then was 1. I grant that in ordinary cases the preaching of the Gospel is required to the constitution of a Church but that there can be no extraordinary exception to this rule I deny especially when men would thence reason us out of our senses as well as our Churches we see our Churches in all the parts and essentials of true Churches shall we yet argue against what we see and not believe our own eyes because their first constitution was not as we would have had it or as indeed ordinarily Churches are constituted would it not have been judged a madnesse in Caine and Abel to have reasoned their parents out of the number of man-kinde because they were not born of a woman as men ordinarily are Let who will undertake to prove that our Churches in England were not constituted at first by the preaching of the Word and I dare engage to make good the assumption that our Churches in England are true Churches and thus we may haply discover another extraordinary way of constitution of Churches besides the preaching of the Word 2. The preaching of the Word as necessary to a true Church may be thought to be either antecedent or subsequent to the constitution thereof either of which is sufficient provided that the people are brought to a willing embracement of the Christian profession by any other means so that where the Candlestick is pitched and the Ministry of the Word is fixed among any people that freely attend upon it there none may doubt but that God hath chosen a people to be his Church for here are found the infallible marks of a true Church Now none can deny but that our Congregations in England if they were not at first reduced by the Minstry yet they have enjoyed it ever since that their reduction from the Popish yoak in the dayes of that famous Queen and that none may have cause to say that this our attendance on the Ordinances of God is generally forced by a Law as was wont to be laid to our charge we have of late a most clear evidence that it is indeed free and voluntary seeing all compulsory meanes are known to be rebated and taken away in the present liberty 3. Much lesse can it without grosse ignorance or dangerous impudence be denied that the Ministery of the word was instrumental with the Queens command to the reduction of the people in her dayes from Popery to Protestantisme yea 't is well known that divers Ministers were sent into all parts to satisfie the people touching that change in Religion which she then was about and allowed the people that their returne might be free above half a years time to consider of it and what law was made at length to compel in any regard was made by consent of the people themselves in Parliament all which are so evident in history that I shall need say no more thereof However suppose that all these things should be granted them 1. That we lost our Churches in Queen Maries dayes 2. That a true Church can be constituted onely by the preaching of the Word 3. That our Churches in Queen Elizabeths dayes were gathered or rather compelled onely by the Queens Command 4. And consequently that they then were no true Churches but societies of Heathens all which have appeared to be false yet what will this adversary conclude from thence against our present Churches especially if we adde the serious consideration of these four following particulars 1. That our people have had the preaching of the Word ever since 2. That they are now a willing people in Gods publick worship all meanes of compulsion being now taken off 3. That they became thus willing to embrace and abide in the true Religion by the preaching of the Word seeing no other meanes by their owne principles could make them so 4. And therefore consequently we stand true Churches now by their own principles being constituted such at length by the long abiding of the same among us if not so at first by the preaching of the Word CHAP. XXXVI Inferences from the former discourse concerning Baptisme and title to it WE have found the former doctrine helpful to us in the vindication of the truth of our Churches let us follow it a little further and it may haply discover something also touching their title to Sacraments And First of Baptisme Secondly of the Supper Concerning Baptisme it follows that if the former principle stand the children of foure sorts of persons may lawfully communicate Baptisme thereof the children of such as have no saving grace nor evidence of it the children of visibly wicked persons the children of the excommunicate and the children of such as ought not to be admitted to the Lords Table which will fall into so many Positions 1. Then first saving grace in the parent is not absolutely necessary to a real-right nor its evidence to a visible right in baptism for his child or the children of such as have no such grace and make no satisfactory evidence thereof to the Church may yet have a clear and good title to Baptisme and be lawfully baptized 1. The children of such as have no saving grace may have a Children of graceless persons have right in Baptisme real right in baptisme because such parents may notwithstanding their want of saving grace be really members of the visible Church and be themselves really baptized which is all that is requisite to entitle their children to visible Church-membership and consequently to baptisme the children of such parents are within the Covenant and interest in the Covenant carrieth Foederatis competit signum foederis doubtlesse a right in it to some seal of the Covenant and if to any must it not be to the first viz. Baptisme 2. The children of such as give no satisfactory evidence of saving grace may yet have a visible title to baptisme and a just claime for it from the hands of the Church because such parents may without such evidence have evidence enough of their interest in the Covenant and the visible Church sufficiently satisfying the Judges thereof by some other means for that which being real giveth real right to Ordinances in Gods account being visible or seen and known or not to be doubted of by men giveth visible right thereunto in the Court of the Church But something else besides such saving grace being real giveth real right to Ordinances therefore
the people not to suffer him to do his duty in administring to them or not to attend upon their own duty in communicating to say that a Minister is bound by Christs command to administer to all Church members and againe that he is bound in the Name of Christ to warne some not to receive is to make the will of Christ contrary to it self and to say that a Minister is bound to warne the wicked from the Sacrament and yet to say that the will of Christ is that all are absolutely bound to receive is to contradict our selves by the first we confesse that the will of Christ is that wicked men ought not to receive which is formally denied in the latter Neither is this gathered onely from the practice for it is indeed the expresse judgement of most eminent men in the Church almost 2. Churches judgement in all ages Irenaeus is expresse for it in his time who seemes to speak the unquestioned sense of the whole Church then for whom he maketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. 2. this Apology with us saith he this nourishment is called the Eucharist of which it is lawful for none to partake but such as beleeve our doctrine such as are wash'd to remission of sinnes or baptized and such as live so as Christ hath commanded This place of Irenaeus gives cause of doubting to a learned man Ludov. Molinae Paraen p. 315. Whether it ought to be understood of Christians not admitted by confoederal discipline to partake of the Supper or whether they belong to that command of Paul 1 Cor. 11. whereby it is not lawful for an unworthy man or a man wanting faith to receive but tells us he could easily beleeve the latter adding that 't is granted to be spoken of such as are baptized and therefore Church-members who live not according to the doctrine of Christ and that is as much as I contend for that some baptized members of the Church ought not to partake of the Eucharist in the judgement of the Church in Irenaeus his time We have seen before what the judgement of the Church was in Chrysostomes time also and for the opinion of later fathers and Schoolmen 't is sufficiently known to be on our side as also of most of the Reformed Divines and Churches The Church of Bohemia in her confession saith that if any approach Reformed Churches of Bohemia this Table without such a man should greatly profane and reproach this Sacrament yea and the whole institution thereof appointed by Christ In like manner the Church of Scotland confesseth that the Scotland Supper of the Lord appertaines onely to such as be of the household of faith and can try and examine themselves to these accord the Churches of Auspurgh Saxony France Belgia and most eminently our own Church as appeared before from the Auspurgh Saxony France Belgia and England Common prayer and Directory to which our confession of faith lately framed may be seasonably added The Confession of faith saith that all ignorant and ungodly persons cannot without great sin against Christ whiles they remaine such partake of these holy mysteries Many eminent Divines joyn issue hecein Trelcatius Trelcatius teacheth page 185. that Materia seu subjectum participans sunt ij omnes qui per baptismum ecclesiae membra facti jam adulti sanam doctrinam profitentur Sanctae vitae testimonium habent to which he addes that hereby are excluded 1. Mortui 2. Aegroti moriturii 3. Pueri ac Infantes 4. Qui propter Haeresius dissolutam vitam excommunicati sunt legitime Bucanus loc com 48. qu. 8. to this question quibus est Bucanus Instituta coena Domini Answers non omnibus promiscuè Vrsine Cat. quae 8. to the same question answer tantum pii Ursin debent accedere Bishop Vsher is as plaine in answer to the like question viz. who are to be partakers of the Lord Supper saith he such Usher as are of yeares and of sound judgement to discerne the Lords body I might adde Ames Diodate Calvine Zanchy Perkins and infinite more but let me break off the trouble with these few sufficing for all SECT III. Objections hereunto Answered THis point is run upon by two sorts of Adversaries 1. By some too strict 2. By others too large 1. Some have ventured to say that Church-members or rather to use their own terme disciples as such have an immediate right in this Sacrament but none are disciples save persons so and so qualified These I do not purposely deal with here for the present they may be contented with a very short answer that both their Propositions are false or at least fallacious 1. That none are disciples but persons qualified with knowledge holinesse c. which they must needs grant to be false if they will avoid Anabaptisme seeing according to the principalls of Infant-Baptism all that are lawfully baptized are disciples Matth. 28. 19. and again that all that are lawfully baptized are not so and so qualified as in the case of Infants who are baptized and lawfully so 2. That all that are disciples are to receive the Supper this holds not 1. Till what I have urged for wicked mens Church-membership be refuted 2. Till Infants discipleship be denied 3. Or till both Infants and wicked Church-members yea and suspended yea excommunicate Church members are proved to have an immediate and present right to the Lords Supper seeing all such may be Church-members and disciples But let us rather weigh what is urged by the other larger party against this barr upon some Church-members to keep them from receiving the Supper 'T is scornfully urged more then solidly that then Church-members Obj. 1 by their wickednesse have it seems a writ of ease from their duty If wicked Church-members are forbidden the Sacrament Just as excommunicate persons have a writ of Ease from all other Answ 1 Ordinances as well as this 2. This gives a faire occasion to note the ground of that cloudy not to say contradictory way of some mens expressing themselves upon this point sometimes they say all Church-members are obliged to receive the Supper at other times when this pincheth that some Church-members viz. children c. are not obliged and ought not to be admitted Now both these are true and both are false as they may be understood All Church-members as such are under an obligation to receive and yet some Church-members are under an obligation to abstain and yet here is no contradiction in Gods Commands though there may be and I fear is in mens application of them in this case 3. And what is the ground hereof but want of care or skill to distinguish of Gods Commands and the force and obligation thereof Which if a little heeded may serve both to extricate these difficulties and solve the present objection 1. The command obliging to receive the Sacrament is to The Command to receive is mediate to some immediate
to others some persons mediate and remote to others immediate and of present and actual obligation It obligeth all Church-members as such to receive more remotely upon condition of their fitnesse It obligeth worthy and prepared Church members immediately and actually To apply this to the present objection I answer that such Church-members as are not worthy they are under a remote obligation to receive even while they are unworthy because they ought to be worthy and then to receive And not to receive is their sin remotely though their immediate and present penalty Wicked men not excused from though not permitted to receive Wicked men in a double capacity as Church-members 2. As wicked in this forbidden in that commanded to receive If he receive not he sins twice if he do receive he sins thrice So that they are not excused from their duty of receiving by any writ of ease but rather still pressed with a double duty first to be worthy and then to receive though the latter is forbidden without the former This may receive some further clearnesse from a right apprehending the subjects of this duty of receiving in a double capacity as Church-members so they are commanded as wicked or unfit Church-members and so they are forbidden to receive Such therefore is the misery of a wicked man he sins twice if he do not receive First in not being worthy Secondly in not being worthy and receiving And he sins thrice in receiving while he is unworthy 1. In not being worthy to receive 2. In not receiving worthily 3. In receiving not being worthy 2. Again the matter will yet be plainer by considering the command to receive either singly and by it selfe or conjoyned with the command of worthinesse If we look upon the Command to receive singly in it selfe The Command to receive single or jointly with the command of the condition or separately considered from the Command of worthinesse then this command to receive is but mediate and conditional and doth not presently immediately or actually oblige without a supposition of worthinesse which is the condition of this obligation to receive God commands indeed both the duty and the condition but yet in his own order First the condition and then the duty The condition immediately the duty remotely as depending upon the condition God saith indeed Thou shalt eat but he saith again thou shalt first be worthy and consequently thou shalt not eat unworthily or thou shalt not eat unlesse thou be worthy for that which is commanded upon such a condition is virtually forbidden where that condition is wanting Again if we look upon the command to receive in conjunction with the command of worthinesse as I desire to do in answer to this objection then I say the command to receive viz. worthily is of immediate obligation upon all intelligent Church-members for every person at years of discretion and in the ordinary use of reason within the Church whom I call an Intelligent Church-member ought doubtlesse to receive worthily and in this compounded sense by consequence to receive though any such person not being worthy ought in the former divided sense not to receive Now I humbly conceive thus only or at least chiefly we We ought to take the command jointly ought to consider the obligation upon members of the Church to receive the Sacrament as jointly obliging both to worthinesse and receiving or to worthy receiving God hath put them both together in his Command Do this in remembrance of me let a man examine himself and so let him eat and therefore let no man put them asunder in the application and say Do this though you do not remember Christ and eate though you do not examine your selves Yet as hath been said though God command both together 't is one in order to the other the one as the condition or the necessary qualification and the other as the duty Yet one in order to the other The text saith Examine and eate yet it saith also Examine and so eat not eat without examining not eat though you do not examine not first eat and then examine not both eat and examine together but examine first and so or then eat and so and not otherwise eat This difficult matter may be easily resembled by a familiar instance The Farmer going from home commands his servant to plough and sowe such a field This command is compounded by A familiar instance for it the Master both to plough and sowe and may not be divided by the servants obedience If now the servant do not sowe this field all will say he is faulty But if he should sow the field and not plow it would not we say he is more faulty if he plow not he sins for he was commanded to plough if he sowe not he sins for he was commanded to sowe If he plough and sowe not he sins for he was commanded both to plough and sowe if he sowe and plough not he sins for still he was commanded both yea if he first sowe and then plough he sins for he was commanded first to plough and then to sowe Both are commanded but one in order to the other Neither is this applied to divine commands without book all the Jews were commanded by God to be clean and to eate the Passeover but they were not either to be clean and not eat the Passeover nor yet to eat the Passeover unclean nor yet excused from eatimg the Passeover by their uncleannesse for a day was appointed by God when the unclean being cleansed should observe it the obligation pressed still upon them because they ought both to be clean and to eat by vertue of a joint obligation upon them though being unclean there was another command that the unclean during their uncleannesse ought not to eat Mr. Perkins hath gone before us in applying this to the Sacrament First he concludes generally and compoundedly that every one of years living in the Church and being baptized is bound in conscience by Gods Commandment to use the Lords Supper and then puts this case What shall a man do that finds himself unworthy To which he answers very distinctly that there be two kinds of unworthinesse of an evil conscience and of infirmity and then concludes that the latter cannot justly hinder a man from the Supper neither is it sufficient to cause him to forbear evidently implying that there is one kinde of unworthinesse viz. his former that is sufficient to hinder and to cause a man to foâ—bear this Sacrament and that nothing can be sufficient to cause to forbear without some command prohibiting such persons because of such unworthinesse none will deny and then here is a general command remotely commanding the same persons to receive or joyntly commanding them to receive worthily and a particular command prohibiting them at present to meddle with it But Ames in a very few words hinteth all my mind hereabout He first resolveth that such unworthinesse
and desirable Ordinance Wherefore if I may possibly prevent so scandalous a censure I shall not venture to hold my Reader in so long suspence till he come to the pages where confirmation is considered in the book nor yet barely to acknowledge my allowance of it under my hand but after my humble thanks heartily tendred to our worthy Author for his excellent paines in so seasonable a subject I do also presume earnestly to beseech my Reverend brethren that what the learned and zealous Master Baxter hath so smartly pressed upon the Ministry about it may be speedily and seriously considered and undertaken by us Yet least I should dash upon the other rock I humbly crave the leave to offer without offence whether there be not some few proviso's touching confirmation to be distinctly noted to the end it may prove which the God of truth and peace grant a happy meane of reconciling at length the two long divided and differing brethren and whether they may not be such as these 1. That such of the Catechmmens as appear when called to be Ignorant Châ—istians not to be confirmed are Church members confirmed grossely ignorant of the fundamentals of Religion and consequently such as cannot personally professe the faith as they ought be notwithstanding this their ignorance and the further just suspention of their confirmation still acknowledged to be Church-members So farre I doubt not but we are agreed for our Reverend Authour makes no question but the Catechumens are in p. 52. 54 57. Church-state and then asserts that if they give not when called to it a satisfactory account of their faith they are to continue and to be left in that condition indeed without enjoying any further priviledge as himself addes yet as he conceives p. 60 not to be cast out of the Church 1. I acknowledge that the Catechumens baptized in Infancy Perfection Moral Physical are but incompleat and imperfect members yet I crave leave to distinguish for there is a moral and there is a physical compleatnesse and perfection a man that hath all the excellencies and ornaments Perfectio transcendatis est qua ens dicitur perfectum quatenus ipsi nihil deest in integretate essendi of a man is usually said to be a perfect a compleat man yet a childe that hath almost nothing but the bare essentials of a man in it is as truely said to be a perfect or compleat man as he the first in a moral the last in a physical or metaphysical sense for omne ens est verum perfectum so there are babes in Christ in his School his Church as truely and in that sense as perfectly so as strong men and such as are not fit through ignorance to be received to higher priviledges have yet the essentials of Church-members though they want the ornament of such as our Perfection of essence ornament Reverend Authour stiles confirmation they have therefore the perfection of essence but not of ornament and though I need not assert them to be perfecta yet I hope it is no offence to say they are perfectè membra and not half Christians and half Heathens Object It is acknowledged that confirmation was of old called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfecting unction and the confirmed were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perfecti vel persecti Christiani perfect or perfect Christians Answ Yet it may be also noted 1. That among the ancients The Ancients deny perfection rather to the Catechumens not baptized Oâ—seâ—v l. 2. c. 3 the imperfection of membership is generally attributed to the Catechumeni not yet baptized non initiati non illuminati as they used to speak rather then to the baptized not yet confirm'd of these speaks Albaspinaeus quoted by our Author corporis Christi perfecta omnino formata membra non erant for the baptized are initiati not entring but entred not forming but formed Areopagitam de Hierarch eccl initio accordingly when Dionisius would note the priviledge of the members of the Church above the Catechumens he distributes the Church into the initiati or the baptized and the fideles or the Communicants at the holy table and we hear nothing of a third sort viz. the confirmed betwixt these two Doctrina inquit de Sacramentis è Scripturis de prompta solis fidelibus initiatis est communicanda 2 The Fathers usually adorning what they treat of with Rethorical No aâ—gument to be grounded upon the ancients single expressions Credunt infantes Corpus mortis in primis parentibus generavit eos peccatores spiritus vitae in posterioribus parentibus regeneravit eos fideles Aug. tom 10 p. 421 Octa. flowers it may be questioned whether it be safe to build a point of such weight and consequence as this is upon single expressions especially in the case in hand wherein we finde them varying something among themselves Chysostome and Austine stile the catechumeni not yet baptized brethren Austine affirmeth that infants being baptized are membra Christi yea and fideles Albaspinaeus and Pachimer acquainting us with antiquity that none could be a perfect Christian but be that was confirm'd and that of old confirmation was therefore called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perfection Again that no one was thought to deserve the name of Christian unlesse he were confirmed and that confirmation seemed to give as it were the last stroke to perfection And yet again that the Eucharist is the perfection and consummation Catechumeni sunt fidâ—le inquit haymo quia credunt in verum deum sed quia nondum sunt baptizati non sunt sancti super 1. ad Eph. of both baptism and confirmation and that those alone were accounted fideles or the faithful who were not onely baptized and confirmed but had been partakers of the Eucharist though now the Church seeth reason to maintaine that such as are not yet baptized are Christians holy and faithful or beleevers and therefore or upon that account to receive them to Baptisme I doubt not but these various expressiâ—ns of the Ancients are easily reconciled as will offer it self in the particulars following therefore 3. There is a perfection of Church-state and a perfection of Perfection of Church-state and Chuâ—ch-priviledge Church-priviledge those that were baptized though not confirmed were perfect with a perfection of Church-state though not yet perfect with a perfection of Church-priviledge until they were confirmed which our Authour hath observed and excellently collected and approved for us to be all that was meant by that perfection which the ancients ascribed to confirmation there were saith he such as by imposition of hands were admitted p. 15. to the participation of all the priviledges of Church members and so that is by his participation became and were declared to be compleat and perfect Christians Again more plainly having largely discoursed of the perfection attained by confirmation that by perfection saith he is meant no other then their right to enjoyment of those priviledges especially the Lords
to ratifie what had been promised by the susseptors on their behalf at their infant-baptisme we do not finde that children borne in the Church and baptized in infancy were after baptisme stiled catechumeni or confirmed when they came to yeares of discretion to answer for themselves much lesse in that great and solemne way wherein we are now desirous to do it Onely this we finde that generally such as were baptised were confirmed immediately after their baptisme in which confirmation the party was presumed to receive the holy Ghost by prayer and imposition of the hands of the Bishop all which is most easie to evidence The Bishop onely might lay on hands in this work they thought because none but the Apostles did Igitur hoc erat in Apostolis singulare unde praecipuos non alios videmus hoc facere Chrysost in Art 8. 14. who therefore came down to Samaria on purpose to confirme Philips converts Acts 8 14 15 16. they presumed the receiving the holy Ghost thereupon Impositionis manuum per quam creditur spiritus sanctus acâ—â—pi posse I conceive because so did those upon whom the Apostles laid their hands this they did immediately after baptisme too or as soon as they could conveniently it may be in allusion to the instance of our Saviour upon whom as soon as he came out of the water the text notes the holy Ghost descended Mat. 3. Exindè egressi de lavacro perungimur benedicta unctione c. Teâ—t lib. de baptismo Ita vocat Augustinus Sanctum dicit Chrismatis Sacramentum ut baptismus quia ipsi erat annexum Riveâ—us Ceremoniam confirmandi veteri ecclesiae per plura secula fuisse ceremonialem ritum baptismi non peâ—uliare per se Sacramentum Amesius Tam certum est unum idemquo Sacramentum fuisse reputatum ut effecti Baptismi Chrys matis promiscuè describuntur Chamier panstrat de Sacrament c. 11. s 3. l. 4. as also to those a Apostolical Intergatory's Act. 19. 2 3 4 5 6 to which they soone added the unction in allusion as Tertullian notes to the oile wherewith the Priesthood in the old discipline were wont to be anointed Wherefore methinks Rivet and Ames and Chamier had great reason to judge as they did viz. that the laying on of hands in the ancient Churches was not an Ordinance much lesse a Sacrament distinct from Baptisme but a thing annex'd unto it especially for that nothing of so great a moment as Baptisme is might be done in the Church whether by such as had power to do it or such as had none without the consent and hand of the Bishop for the ratifying of baptisme in case it was dispensed by such as had no power and otherwise for the unity of the Church the honour of its Government and the giving as before the Holy Ghost as History notes Now if I do understand my authour he will hardly allow of any thing in these primitive practices save the ceremony of imposition of hands it self 1. For the laying on of hands now in order to the giving of the Holy Ghost in the first extraordinary way according to the manner of Apostles of Christ in Scripture our Authour hath given his sense of it in these words This expression saith he of giving and receiving the holy Ghost was still continued and made use of because the Apostles by imposition of hands did conferre the Holy Ghost which though none after their time did or could do c. 2. And for the practice of the Churches afterwards confirming even Infants immediately after Baptisme confirming the Adult without exacting any new confessions in order thereunto restraining the work of confirmation onely to the Bishops or making confirmation onely a Ceremonial right of Baptisme as Ames affirmes the Churches of old did for many ages together indeed I know not which part here mentioned either our Authour or any other late Patron of this excellent Ordinance of confirmation would adhere unto or not reject 3. Lastly let us briefly consider confirmation as used or rather desired by the Churches of Christ of later yeares and we may yet more easily perceive both its great unlikenesse to that of old and its great aptnesse and likelinesse to prove if fixed upon its right basis and intended to its just ends a most excellent and profitable right of the Churches of Christ in the later ages Confirmation in this moderne sense pardon the expression Waldenses Calvina Chemnitins Bullinger Pareus Three special ends of confirmation seems to be desired for three most special ends and uses all which may seeme to be carried in the very word it selfe namely that the baptisme the graces and lastly the proxime right of the party in the Eucharist might hereby be confirmed and is principally intended for such as being baptized in their infancy not excluding others and being grown to years of discretion in the Church are competentes or desire to be partakers 1. To confirm baptisme with the Church in the Eucharist or any other high priviledge hitherto denied them 1. First such are therefore now to be called to confirme openly and in their own persons that which their susseptors engaged for them at their first infant-baptisme according to our own Lyturgy noted by our Authour Confirmation saith it ought to be observed because when children come to riper age and shall learne what and how great things their undertakers did in their name promise in baptisme they themselves ipsi proprio ore proprio concensu publice eadem agnoscant Vel rata habeant a Erasmus phraze is confirment they themselves should openly and with their own mouth and consent acknowledge and confirme the same upon this now I conceive confirmation may be rightly said to confirme baptimse this act of confirmation is properly the parties own act 2. Secondly another great end and use of confirmation to 2. To confirm grace such is that by meanes of this solemne profession together with the publick earnest prayers of the Church the graces of the peâ—son may be strengthened and confirmed or that he Fieret publica precatio pro illis pueris ut Deut Confirmare dignaretur may receive the grace of confirmation let there saith Clemnitius be publick prayer made for the children that are confirm'd that God by his holy spirit would vouchsafe to guide preserve and confirme them in this profession therefore the Waldenses appoint confirmation to be done in stabilitatem confirmationem fidei Now this is Gods act properly as the first was the parties own 3. The third and last great use of this Ordinance is to declare To confirm right in the Supper and confirme the parties proxime and immediate right in the Lords Supper c. which the party had before indeed by inward qualifications or at least appeared so to have by a good profession this now is more properly the Churches act and that which me thinks is a great deale more intended by those that strive