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
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
ready to charge him with Brownisme for denying hypocrites to be members of the Church he answers them that hypocrites are so according to the outward state of the Church the Brownist was as ready to charge him with Popery in affirming wicked men to be true members of the visible Church and he answers them that they are not so quoad statum internum and essentialem But let us weigh his words a little farther by fixing the question whether any thing may be considered as such from its accidental forme seeing Amesius hath said that such are members of the Church by their participation with this accidental forme of profession But may a man be considered qua homo from the figure or colour of his body or any member of that man be considered such from its partaking of either of these if by the essential form alone a thing is that which it is can any thing partake of the being of that thing without partaking of the essential form do not the Schooles generally with Thomas teach that forma accidentalis non tribuit perfectionem essentialem composito would not the affirmative to this viz. that the accident perfects the essence seeing accidens habet esse in subjecto be a flat contradiction How then can Amesius say that one that onely partakes of the accidental forme of the Church is a member thereof either we must allow that such professours are true members of the visible Church or deny them to be so if they are they must needs partake of the essential form of the body and not onely of the accidental if they are not let us be rigid Brownists and openly say what we think Yea if such professours do truely partake of the accidental form of the Church I conceive they must also truly partaker of the essential interest in the accident of any thing is founded in interest in the essence of that thing for an accident as such hath no being but in its subject and there cannot be an interest in or relation to any thing but as it is how then can a man stand under the accidental forme of the Church unlesse he be pars subjecti vel substantiae and how can that be unlesse he partake of the essential or substantial forme of the Church How can any thing partake of my colour or figure unlesse it be part of my selfe it may partake of whitenesse but not of my whitenesse or of whitenesse as an accident of me unlesse it be part of me so indeed a man may be a professor but he cannot partake of the profession of the Church unless he be a real part of the subject the Church which cannot be without partaking with the essence or essential forme thereof So that here I pitch such professours are members of the visible Church farther then Ames alloweth or not so farre for they partake either of both the essential and accidental forme or of neither and must be consequently granted to be true members of the visible Church both according to the external and the internal state thereof or according to neither Now if in conclusion it be found that such professours as we are now considering do also partake of the essential forme of the visible Church this essential forme must be either the same which Forma essentialis est Relatio spiritualis Med. 163. Neque ulla relatio vim istam habet praeter illam que consistit in primi intima affectione ad Christum p 162 163. vid p. 168 â—8 Amesius assignes or another but it cannot be the same these professours as we are now considering do also partake of the essential forme of the visible Church this essential forme must be either the same which Amesius assignes or another but it cannot be the same these professours are by himself expressed to be uncapable thereof for they are called by him tantum professione fideles i. e. such as do not savingly beleeve and this essential forme of the Church which he meaneth is a little above expressed by himself to be such a relation as carrieth true faith which effectually worketh true holiness with it of which such as onely profess are necessarily supposed to be destitute But if that essential forme of the Church be another then that which Amesius assigneth either that forme which he assigned is not the true essential forme of the Church or there are two distinct Duae formae substantiales non possunt in eadem materia consistere forms thereof Now there cannot be two distinct formes of one and the same Church I meane two distinct essential formes that is little lesse then a contradiction neither shall we be allowed to have two distinct Churches which must needs follow two substantial formes for omnis differentia constitutiva est â—orma distinguit Rem ab omnibus aliis a prioris etiam divisiva divisiva generis constitutiva specii i. e. it doth divide the genus into its species and then doth constitute the species distinct from one another Againe if there be found such an essential forme of the Church Forma substantialis tribuit essentialem perfectionem composito as those which onely profess and are without saving grace do indeed partake of then the visible Church as such or as it stands in distinction to the invisible will be found to be truely and properly a Church for the essential form giveth an essential perfection to any thing Then it will follow in conjunction with what every one grants that there is but one Church truely and properly so called that the invisible Church as distinguished from the visible is not so Therefore it remaineth that we now further enquire after the essential forme of the visible Church Amesius asserts that the essential forme of the Church lieth in Relation which saith he is nothing else but faith and concludeth fides c. faith therefore is the forme of the Church But as if he were aware that some would reply then particular Fidem enim homines fideles qui prout sigillatim distributive considerantur sunt vocati Dei sunt etiam ecclesia Dei prout conjun ctim vel collective considerantur in coetu Med. p. 163. 13. Beleevers were formal Churches he anticipateth thus faith saith he in particular beleevers distributively taken is the forme of the called but collectively taken 't is the forme of the Church the same beleevers taken apart are the called of God and conjoyn'd are the Church of God Thus he But 1. Be it so that faith is the forme of the Church if there may be found a real faith as well as a real calling that is not saving as no doubt there may my case is yet well enough though I confesse Ames clearly meaneth a saving faith 2. But I must be allowed the boldnesse once more to offer my humble exceptions against what is here by him asserted For 1. If that same faith which is the forme of the Church be indeed to be
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
in conclusion this foedus as it is extended in Ames his description is necessary in intentione passionis viz. admission non patientis the person admitted 8. Yet at length we must conclude that there is very little use of and consequently as little reason to dispute about this bond whether expresse or implicite in constituted Churches seeing herein our members are generally admitted in their infancy and what shall need to be imposed at years of discretion cannot with any shew of reason intend their admission into the Church it being rightly either but in order to their admission to some higher Ordinance or at most their confirmation in that state and those priviledges whereinto they are indeed admitted before in baptism but of this more directly and therefore more largely hereafter However my maine conclusion passeth still for if the persons that are subjects of both this society and the bond thereof may be considered as before is proved without respect to saving grace then doubtlesse so may both the society and the bond thereof touching the first viz. the society there is no colour of doubting and touching the latter viz. the Covenant let Amens himself whose words haply are the ground of our doubt be our resolver he first assures us that such as onely professe are members of the visible Church and yet also here addes that the visible Church is not constituted without the bond of this Covenant so that if Ames consist with himself or may be yeelded unto in the case this Covenant may be entred even by such as onely professe i. e. such as have no saving grace or as he in another place no inward vertue Besides what should possibly hinder but that such persons as are not endued with saving grace may yet be obliged to those duties which are not performable without that grace which themselves want by an obligation brought upon themselves by themselves when they themselves did not intend it as we have found this to be and was the very case of Simon Magus CHAP. XV. Of the definition as it may be framed by the union of the former parts HItherto of the parts of the definition of the visible Church by themselves proceed we now to look upon these parts in union and to state an entire definition therefrom Which is most ready to be done by the closing or drawing together what hath beene so long considered apart The visible Church may thus be said to be Beleevers or persons outwardly called or professing the true Religion ordinarily attending the communion of Ordinances in coetu or in a fix'd society or if you would put them together thus a community of persons that believe with a common faith or that are called with common calling or that make a profession of the true Religion ordinarily meeting and joyning together in the Ordinances of Gods worship For though communion be neerer to the essence of the visible Church then personal qualifications and community then communion yet as hath beene still acknowledged they have all their sit place and use in the definition thereof Here therefore is the qualification of the matter viz. common faith calling or profession here is the forme constituting the coetus or community as it looketh unto communion and lastly here is the formal action or if you please rather the form dâ—stinguishing this society from all other communion in the Ordinances of God Most of the definitions that our reformed Divines have given so far as I can find do indeed expresse all these three parts thereof I shall set a few of them down here and leave the rest to the search and judgement of the learned The Leiden Professors define it to be a company of those which Visibilis ecclesia est coetus eorum qui per verbum externum Sacramentorum disciplinae ecclesiasticae usum in unum corpus colescunt disp 40. The. 32 by the external word and the use of the Sacraments and ecclesiastical discipline are united into one body wherein two of the three foresaid parts are very evident 't is a company and such a company as hath the communion of such a body in the Word and Sacraments I confesse that the other viz. the qualification of the subjects of this company is not by them here specified yet their profession is easily implied in their fellowship and communion in Gods Ordinances and the not mentioning of the calling or faith or profession thereof onely intimates as before was noted that personal qualifications are not so necessary to the visible Church as this community or communion Indeed they also insert discipline but seeing that discipline is not necessary to the being of the Church and is but a separable adjunct of it it cannot be taken as more necessary into the definition of the Church Ames defineth the Church institute or visible particular to be Est societas fidelium speciali vinculo inter se conjunctorum ad communionem Sanctorum constanter inter se exercendam Med. 168. a society of beleevers joyned together among themselves by a special bond for their constant exercising the communion of Saints together where all the three parts are very visible 1 Beleever 2. In society 3. For communion I have before confessed that he intends saving faith as appears by his next words yet I humbly conceive his meaning is that all this society ought to be endued with such a faith and not that they are so indeed or if not no members of the visible Church For in the same page he tells us that it is very probable that there is no particular Church but it hath some members that do savingly beleeve and by his asserting the greatest probability of some that savingly beleeve he evidently granteth that others in this Church yea and many others for they viz. many others are directly distinguished to some may be without saving faith and yet as he grants in the next Paragraph be members of the visible Church and in that known place against Bellarmine saith expressely that it is false if any say that we the reformed Divines require inward vertues and therefore not the root of them saving faith to render one a member of the visible Church Trelcatius saith the visible Church is a company of men called Ecclesia visibitis definitur coetus hominum vacatione externam seu praedicatione verbi ad cultum gloriae Dei Inst 215 Est societas coramqui veram fidem profitentur ad communionem societatem ecclesiasticam inter se exercendam out by external calling as by the preaching of the word and the communion of the Sacraments to the worship of the glory of God here also all the parts are manifest A company 2. Of men called with external calling 3. To communion in the worship of God But Apollonius seemeth most clear and distinct whose definition I had rather fix upon then any yet named 't is saith he a society of persons professing the true faith and exercising ecclesiastical communion
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 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
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
against the errors of the Schismatical Aug. lib. de correp gr cap. 9. de don persev c. 8 Sect. And least it should be thought that the heat of dispute should have transported him he giveth us his judgement most clearly and fully upon other occasions about it as before we noted after Dr. Fulk Augustine teacheth us that such as shall certainly fall away and that finally and consequently such as have no saving grace according to their present state that is while they abide with the Church they are truely members thereof Again in the same place upon those known words of the Apostle they were not of us that is saith he they were not of the number of the sons even when they were of the faith of the sons what he means by sonship here he telleth us in his reason in the next words because they that are the sonnes indeed are foreknown and Ecclesia etiam mali sunt imo bonis multo plures ut in co rum comparatione pauci sunt de unit eccles cap. 12 predestinated these men therefore were of the many that were called but of the few that were chosen they were not yea in another place he assureth us that there are not onely evil men in the Church but indeed so many as that the good being compared with them are but a few CHAP. XXII The judgement of the Protestant Writers searched after THe second eminent point of occasion was sharpened by Bellarmine Stapleton the Rhemists and other Papists by their envy and malice against the Reformation falsely charging the doctrine thereof concerning the visible Church to be that none are truely members of it but such as are elected or such as have saving grace Hereby the Patrons of our Protestant and reformed cause are provoked to answer for us and what is their answer do they Am. Ant. Bel. Tom. 2. l. 2. c. 1 n. 5 acknowledge the charge to be just or do they not with Ames cry falsum est it is false that we require internal vertues or saving grace to render one a member of the visible Church according to the outward state thereof Accordingly Dr. Fulk wipes off the like aspersion cast upon us by the Rhemists the visible Church saith he hath both Fulk upon the Rhemists on Mat. 22. 14 Elect and reprobate in it but the Chatholick Church invisible which is the body of Christ consisteth onely of Gods Elect the true members of his body thus you know speaking to the Rhemists right-well but that you are disposed to slander us wheresoever you can take occasion to blinde the ignorant by ambiguity or generality or double understanding of any word Againe the Jesuite having charged us falsly in these words the onely reason by which hereticks hold the Church to be invisible because they imagine the Church to consist onely of the elect or at Whites way to the true church least of the good White not more generally then boldly answers Here the Jesuite bewraieth either hid ignorance or malice let him if he can for the credit of his Word shew where any of those whom he calleth Hereticks do teach or affirme that the Church militant whereof the question is consisteth of the Elect onely Whereupon also Whitaker saith that Bellarmine ought to Debuit Bellar. probare in ecclesia Catholica c. Whita Contro secund qu. pri cap. 7 prove that there are both good and bad in the Catholick that is the invisible Church which when he goeth about to prove from the Parables of the barn-floor c. he ought to understand by the barn-floore in this place not the Catholick but the particular Church in which we confesse that there are both good and bad To whom Doctor Reynolds in his defence of the Church Reynolds in his second thesis which consists of the Elect alone fully accords the wicked saith he must needs be a part of the Church if the name of the Church did signifie the visible Church and we call it consisting of the good and bad Famous Willet also addeth his testimony hereunto when in answer Willet Synop. of the Church to the Papists he openly and freely acknowledgeth that such as do not truely beleeve whom he calleth close infidels are of the visible Church viz. de jure yea and that open sinners are of the visible Church de facto until they be excommunicated Our industrious Fox is very distinct in the point which visible Church saith he having in it self a difference of two sorts Fox Act c. p. 27. of people so it is divided into two parts of which the one standeth of such as be of outward profession onely the other which by election inwardly are joyned to Christ the first are in the visible Church but not in the invisible We have before occasionally noted the consent of Pareus distinguishing the Church of the called from the Church of the Elect Pareus Polanus Bullâ—nger Ravanellus Wollebius Gomarus Apollonius c Vid. etiam Mel. part sept p. 33 Ociand Enchir p. 126 Polanus reckoning the invisible to be but a part not the whole of the visible Church Bullinger Ravanellus c. who distinguish the Church by a large and a strict acceptation and account the visible to be of larger extent then the Church invisible and with Wallebius Gomarus Apollonius and even all the reformed Divines define the Church largely taken viz. the visible Church to containe within it both good and bad elect and reprobate Master Hooker thus reasoneth all are of necessity either Christians or not Christians if by external profession they are Christians Hook eccles pol. p. 84 they are of the visible Church and Christians by external profession they all are whose mark of recognisance hath in it those things which we have mentioned one Lord one Faith one Baptisme yea although they be impious idolaters wicked Hereticks person excommunicable yea and cast out for notorious improbilities yet such we deny not to be Imps and limbs of Satan even as long as they continue such Field assureth us not onely of his own but even of the judgemen Field p. 12 13 14 of such as are most liable to exception in the case and confidently telleth us that the meaning of Wickliffe Husse and others who defined the Church to be a multitude of the Elect was not as if they thought them onely to pertaine to the Church and no others but because they onely pertaine unto it principally fully effectually and finally c. Externally those are within the Covenant though they have not for the present that sound work of faith and may be never shall Hook survey p. 36. Mr. Cobbet confesseth or asserteth rather that there is a Mr. Cobbet Concl. 3. in his just vindication Vid his Book of Inf. Bap. p. 57 Bish Usher sum of Relig. p. 396 Vid. Cottons way p 1 Expos in 39. Art p. 87. bare external being in the Covenant of grace
jure seeing men who judge onely according to appearance are Judges thereof But now it hath been the universal opinion or judgement rather of all the Church in all ages that notoriously wicked and scandalous persons are really within untill they are censured and cast out as Willet saith close infidels are in the visible Church de jure and openly wicked and flagitious persons are so de facto until excommunicated both of which do indeed evidently argue that saving grace is not an essential requisite to visible Church-membership neither can it be imagined that unlesse they are granted to be within that they are capable of being cast out or unlesse they be granted to be really within that they can really be cast out therefore persons as Ames aptly Medal p. 201 and plainly teacheth about whom discipline ought to be exercised are members of the Church and none other It will but little availe to urge here that some Divines affirme wicked men and hypocrites to be onely in and not of the Church for the same Divines acknowledge the most notoriously wicked so far in the Church as to be liable to eâ—clesiastical censure and to be cast out and do they not thereby confesse that they are also of the Church I mean visible for otherwise what hath the Church to do to Censure Judg punish one that is not of her own society and corporation therefore I am further confirmed in what before was noted that such Divines meane by such expression that wicked men are not so fully because not savingly of the visible Church or else they are not of the Church that is of the Church invisible for of the visible Church they must needs be granted to be and that really by all such as allow them really subject to the censure thereof seeing the Church judgeth none but her own members and one cannot be said to be a member by being in the body unlesse he also be of the body wherefore Ames is expresse in the words already cited that such as are liable to Church-censure are membra membra ecclesiarum members and therefore not onely in but of the Churches Arg. 5. The practice of the Church-hath ever been to readmit the penitents that is such as after baptisme have been excommunicate for scandal and have given satisfaction to the Church againe into Church-communion without rebaptization We read indeed of one kinde of Anabaptisme in the ancient Fortunat. in Conc Carthag secundinus in eodem Conc. Church much pressed by Cyprian and other fathers in the counsel of Carthage viz. of such as were baptized by hereticks but as this is nothing to our case it being in no respect to the persons that were to be rebaptized or their qualifications at all but wholly in respect to the qualifications of the administrator viz. his heresie so 't is well known that this opinion In Conc. Nic. vid. Hier. dial versus Luciferaria was afterwards both condemned by a better advised counsel and also revoked by the chiefest authours thereof themselves Now this practice of re-admitting penitents without re-baptizing them doth evidently argue this principle wheresoever it is found that persons may be considered in relation to the visible Church without respect to saving grace For 1. These penitents were acknowledged to have had some secret union with the Church even by the Church her self in their most scandalous condition when the Church could have no evidence at all of their saving grace otherwise upon their repentance they had entred covenant and consequently must have had the initiating seal applied viz. baptisme for what reason can there possibly be given why else they could not be re-baptized but onely this because they were held never wholly extirpated out of the Church or Covenant by scandal or censure neither can it be imagined that their now repenting is a certaine evidence of saving grace to have been in their hearts in the midst of their wickednesse and therefore conclude we must that they held that something else besides saving grace did root and interest in visible Church-membership for if being in Covenant and consequently being in the Church did appear unto the Churches where saving grace did not appeare who seeth not this consequence that the Churches judged that interest in the Church and Covenant is not founded in saving grace Arg. 6. The Church hath ever held that vera fides and sana doctrina is an essential note of the true visible with Ames thereupon our reformed Divines assert that a doctrinal and not a personal succession is a necessary mark thereof and according to reverend Hildersham profession and preaching of true doctrine Held in Joh. 4. p. 161 Vid. Cal. Instit l. 4. c. 1. p. 363. Zanch. de eccl p. 82 c. in all fundamental points is the onely proper and certain note of the true Church for ubi fides ibi ecclesia that as Ames explaineth fides quam or as Hierome in symb Rufin fides Christi illa est ecclesia Sancta quae fidem Christi integram servat thus the Prophets and Apostles the penmen of this doctrine of faith are said to be the foundation on which the true Church is Eph. 2. ult built Hence it must needs follow that the Church ever held that the essence of the visible Church doth not necessarily require saving grace For 1. The essential property or note of any thing doth immediately connote or argue the essence or forme of that thing 2. The profession of the true doctrine of Christ doth not necessarily much lesse immediately connote or argue saving grace many with Judas preaching and with Simon Ananias Saphira Hymeneus and Phyletus owning and professing the true faith or sound doctrine of Jesus Christ whose hearts are alienated from the life of God and strangers to the grace of that Covenant whose Doctrine they thus professe and acknowledge Arg. 7. Lastly to put the matter yet further out of doubt those very Divines that are suspected in the point do generally assert that the visible Church consisteth of good and bad that hypocrites are de jure of the visible Church that they are to be accounted members of the Church till they wholly renounce the Gospel that they are in the external part of the Covenant that they are in the Church according to the external state thereof that they have a visible right to the Ordinances all which are most obvious as well to the slightest as seriousest reader and searcher of the reformed writings and the least of which will fully satisfie my designe CHAP. XXV The last Argument from the opposite to my position and the dongerous consequences thereof WE have hitherto argued from the name the causes and the definition of the visible Church as also from divine and humane authority one place of argument more we hope may serve to conclude the question Which let me say without offence is the dangerous consequences that necessarily attend the contradictory
one that was borne in the Church will not cast him out yet who would admit a distracted Heathen while such a person known to be unregenerate would hardly be received while such yet known unregeneracy is not sufficient to cast a man out As Mr. Hooker before a scandalous person may be a Church-member and is so doubtlesse till he be excommunicate and while so he is in the Covenant within and his child is born in the Church and hath right to baptisme but I shall crave leave to signifie my mind a little more clearly herein by a few steps further 8. To draw a little neerer to our selves and our own common case I therefore adde that children borne of Church members and baptized in infancy are borne and baptized church-Church-members and though our case require it not yet I doubt not to say that the childes right in the Church and Baptisme doth not necessarily depend upon a vocal profession on purpose of its parents who yet abide in the faith and state of profession as is hereafter largely discuss'd for in Infants their being borne in the Church is instead of an outward profession as Bishop Usher affirmeth His sum of religion about Baptisme Yet I verily beleeve the childes actual possession of Baptisme not of the Church or Church-membership depends with the highest conveniency upon the parents claiming it and expresse owning the faith into which he desires his childe may be baptized and his publick undertaking to bring it it up in the fear of the Lord according to that now most general and laudable custome of the Churches of Christ amongst us which usage carrieth in my opinion as cleare a tendency to Reformation and order as any one practice not expresse in Scripture now exercised and truely such as seemes to me a great deal liklier to prevail with our people to a publick owning their obligations to God then any other course whereupon we haply fix greater expectations as to my observation lesse obnoxious to the jealousies and murmurs of a disturbed distracted and discontented generation 9. Againe those that were borne in the Church and baptized in their infancy continue in their right and possession of Church-membership as well as those admitted upon personal profession at the adult estate until they are justly devested thereof by themselves or the Church as before or in Master Cottens plaine and pertinent words the suffrage of N. E. Such as are borne of Christian parents and baptized in their His holiness of members p. 1 infancy into the fellowship of the Church are initiated members of the same Church though destitute of spiritual grace until they justly deprive themselves of the priviledge of that fellowship yea that such are not to be censured much lesse dismembred but His way of the Churches p. 89 with p. 51. upon known scandal and that they may claime the Supper also in the same Church wherein they were baptized if no exception lie against them which Learned Master Baxter hath sealed also for saith he no Church member ought to be kept from Church-communion Disp 3. p. 294 with p. 104. of his Rest much lesse cut off from the community but upon some just accusation of a crime which he was since guilty of more then he was at his admittance Consequently the children of these ought also to be reckoned members of the Church and to be Baptized to succeed in their parents profession who live and die in a state of profession from one generation to another without exacting any positive proofes or evidence of conversion or saving grace in the parents for they stand in possession and 't is not just for any to question their Title much lesse to void it without a positive disproving of it which can by no way be done without the censure of the Church upon evidence of obstinacy in known scandal which I confirme and conclude with those excellent words of worthy Master Baxter Those Disp p. 34 34. therefore that will any mans childe kept back from Baptisme for their parents unholinesse or persons kept from the Supper must not expect that men bring proof to them of their holinesse beyond their profession of it but must deale by them as by other notorious offenders even admonish them of their unholy miscarriages and he may not be so heavily punish'd before he be judged or heard 10. Thus we are at length arrived at our very case which I desire may be seriously considered who after our fathers and our fathers fathers time out of minde did generally come into the Church when we came into the world being borne of Christian parents and such as lived and died in a state of profession and do continue the succession of the same unto this day without rejecting the faith or the Church into which we were baptized or yet being rejected or censured by the Church for obstinate continuing in any know scandal Wherefore give me leave my Worthy brethren to intimate againe that if any question yet remaine about our membership 't is not to be resolved by debating what qualifications we ought to require in adult persons who desire admission or baptisme a case that hardly happens once in an age but what it is that nulls the membership of persons at age that were borne Christians and baptized in their infancy as we generally were in England This is the center where all the lines drawn like swords about most of our controversies must point at last a sound and effectual discussion of this would doubtlesse be a happy means of charming the great noise amongst us according to the determination of this most of our opinions and practices would easily be enforced one way or other thought if without offence I may so complain this is the thing that is least thought on I have venture in the Treatise upon one great and most special question under this whither I conceive we must needs be driven upon the debating of the means of unchurching viz. whether the want of saving grace be inconsistent with visible Church-membership and have afterwards though more briefly considered the general question what doth not and what doth unchurch more distinctly as also what doth constitute and evidence visible Church-membership Many other things are likewise occasionally discuss'd some more briefly and some more largely according as I thought them more or lesse serviceable to my maine designe and at last have added a large application of the whole to our Churches and to our administrations wherein some haply may judge me too large and others too strict measuring me as most men are wont to do the books they read by the model and idea of things that prepossesseth them though Reverend Sirs I cannot but hope better of you and do hereby cheerfully yet in true humility first cast my self upon your candour and then upon your censure and due admonition in any thing you shall find amisse In the mean while truely this is a comfort to me
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
is the dispensation of Christ as head 3. Because the Scripture it self hath noted them to be the proper work of the spirit of Christ which is peculiarly designed and sent to do the work of Christ as head gifts are so there are diversities of gifts but the same spirit that giveth them all graces are so too for the spirit is to convince the world of sinne c. and those that were enlightened and had tasted the good Word of God and the powers of the world to come by common grace they as the text addes were made partakers of the holy Ghost 4. Because these gifts and graces are most properly reducible to the work of Christs offices which he dispenseth as head gifts to his prophetical and graces to his Priestly and Kingly office Arg. 2. The members of the visible Church may be considered Arg. 2 to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace therefore Christ may be also considered to be truely the head of the visible Church without respect thereunto the consequence is obvious The Antecedent viz. that members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace appears 1. Because the members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely objâ—cts of discipline truely called to the Ministry and truely baptized without respect to saving grace 1. The members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely objects of discipline without respect to saving grace 1 Cor. 5. unlesse fornication railing drunkennesse covetousnesse malice wickednesse or scandal as such for which discipline is properly appointed carry respect to saving grace or those that are about dispense the rod should first consider whether the fault may consist with grace or a saving condition and otherwise not to lash therewith Therefore it will follow that the members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace For 1. All discipline is truely a part of the administration of Christ as Head of the Church it being truely appointed by himself to be dispensed by such as stand in his stead in the Church Quia vero tam efficaciter urget obedientiam er ga Christum idcirco non sâ—ne ratione singulari magna pars regni Christi preut visibiliter ecclesiam regit ab optimis theologis in ista disciplina colocatur Medul p. 202 to be dispensed by them in his Name alone to be made effectual by his power alone and lastly it being so urgent a meanes of obedience to his Gospel Wherefore as Amesius addeth is not without singular reason according to the method of our best Divines reputed a great and special part of the Kingdome of Christ which all will grant belongeth to him as Head of the Church 2. The objects on whom discipline is to be exercised or granted by all to be members of the Church and consequently of Christ for as we have said discipline is part of his dispensation as head and the influence of the head is not beyond the body Certainly Christ judgeth none with discipline but such as the Church ought to judge now the Church ought to judge none but those that are within for those that are without God 1 Cor. 5. 12 13 judgeth Within and without what but the Church and what is the Church but the body of Christ therefore Amesius exactly Personae circa quas exerceri debet sunt membra ecclesiarum visibilium insti tutarum 1 Cor. 5 11. non a lii v. 12. Med. p 201. John 6. 70. saith that persons about whom discipline ought to be exercised are members of visible instituted Churches and none other 2. Persons may be considered to be truely called to the work of the Ministry without respect to saving grace for Judas was truely called to the work of the Ministry as is undeniable insinuated by that question of our Saviour have not I chosen you twelve i. e. have not I my self put you twelve into my Ministry yet 't is known that Judas was not savingly called to be a member of Christ as the next words added by our Saviour note and one of you is a Devil which our Saviour doubtlesse knew when he first chose him and would never have chose him had saving grace been essential to a true and lawful call to the Ministry Therefore it hence also follows that persons may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace for can any one possibly think that Christ would choose an infidel remaining such to rule his Church or make him an officer over that is not one of his people or put him into the place of the steward of his house whom he yet hath not and whom he never intends to put into his house who doubts but that he that is a Ruler Officer or Steward over the Church people or house of Christ is also a member thereof and much more and that he that is a member of the Church people and house of Christ is also a member of Christ himselfe 3. Persons may be considered to be truely baptized without respect unto saving grace for persons are truely because lawfully baptized in their infant state unto the consideration of their Covenant-holinesse and not the supposition of their personal Si ullius gratiae sunt participes fit illud vi faederis gratiae atque adeo foedus primum foederis sigillum adipsos etiam pertinet saving grace for as Ames teacheth us if they are partakers of any grace it is done by force of the Covenant of grace and thus both the Covenant and the first seal of the Covenant belongs also to them not as having true grace but as borne to God and in Covenant with him by their parents and if it be so with us when infants I shall humbly ask anone why not so afterwards and in our adult estate if born Christians and if we do not renounce Christianity Then hence it also follows that persons may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace for into what are persons baptized but into the body of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 13. yea and though afterwards they prove ungodly yet are they dealt with both here and hereafter as within and as children of the Kingdome here they have punishment peculiar to the subjects and members of Christ viz. to be cast out as before if after admonition they remaine obstinate then if they repent and are re-accepted into communion with the Church they are still dealt with as within and are not required to be re-baptized and if they shall die in their wickednesse they shall be judged hereafter and proceeded against not as the children of this world but as the children of the kingdome but of this more largely hereafter as we shall have abundant occasion now accept of this short touch Arg. 3. Christ is considered under all those many
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
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
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
visible Church-membership in the Word of God But the same Word of God attributeth all these unto some that had no saving grace 1. The Word of God as was noted before acknowledgeth that both Simon Magus and the stony ground beleeved and the Word of God witnesseth also that neither Simon Magus nor the stony ground had no saving grace 2. The Word of God Heb. 10. 29. ascribeth the title of sanctified to such as trampled under foot the Son of God c. which doubtless had no saving grace 3. The Word of God 2 Pet. 2. 1. acknowlegeth such to be redeemed and bought by Christ who yet fall away and deny him and bring upon themselves swift destruction but these had never any saving grace 4. The Word of God in the last place acknowledgeth Gal. 5. 4. that some persons were once in a state of grace who fell from grace and therefore such as never had any saving grace they were in a state of grace first otherwise they could not have fallen from grace their grace however was not saving for from saving grace none did ever fall away CHAP. XIX The third Argument from Scripture admitting persons into Church-membership upon account diverse from saving grace the difference of the Infant and Adult estate largely considered MY third and last Argument from the Word of God is grounded upon the condition of admission of persons into the visible Church of God therein allow'd and it is this The Word of God both alloweth and requireth that persons be admitted members of the visible Church upon an account that is really diverse from saving grace therefore the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace The antecedent here is not to be touch'd for unlesse we pretend that according to Scripture the childe born within the Church is admitted a member thereof for his own habitual or inherent grace or that foederal or imputed grace is saving grace or that he is not of the Church or not to be baptized till he make a profession of saving grace in his own person all which are apparently absurd we must needs yeeld that according to Scripture persons are admittable into the Church upon an account that is diverse from saving grace Obj. It may not be objected that the child is admitted upon the evidence of his parents saving grace for as that is false in it selfe as anon will be shewne so it reacheth not at all to our present purpose which onely concerneth the qualification of the very person admitted and the ground thereof in himselfe Yet I grant that this is concludent onely in settled Churches for at the first plantation of a Church personal qualities are to be expected in Heathens adult for their admission into visible Church-membership as also when they are to be adjoyned to any particular Church already setled and therefore so farre onely as concerneth the admission of infants in setled Churches However is not this our common case yea and of all the Churches were not our and their members admitted in infancy time out of minde all standing as members grown up or branches sprung from the old root in the garden or Church of God at least ordinarily and for the most part for how rare a thing and extraordinary is it to hear of a Pagan Turk or Jew baptized Christian The consequence is also evident upon this ground that the same grace may easily be considered to continue the being of the visible Church which first gave it unlesse some violent accident as renouncing the Covenant c. hath since disolved it for as Dayrel saith well we must know that all which be once admitted page 171 into the Church do remaine members of the same Church be they never so wicked until either they themselves depart from it or else by excommunication they be cast out and that consequently all the scandalous persons aforesaid were in and of the Church yea the incestuous person till he was excommunicated and this as he addes they of the separation likewise acknowledge to be true Object The great objection here is that children remaine Church-members by foederal holinesse until they come unto their adult estate indeed but no longer for then they must give the answer of a good conscience for themselves and continue this relation to the Church upon the account of their own faith Answ 1. I readily grant that all children baptiz'd in their infancy ought when at yeares of discretion to give this answer of a good conscience both by their evidence of their knowledge of Christ and an holy conversation 2. I further grant that there is an evident necessity upon all such baptized persons to own the faith into which they are baptized at least negatively seeing that a positive renounciing thereof putteth out of the Church 3. Yet admit that persons thus baptized in their infant state state do not give such answer at years of discretion either of their knowledge or holinesse as they ought to do it by no meanes follows that they are forth-with rendred out of the Church or that their former foederal or relative holinesse is hereby null for these Reasons Reas 1. The Word of God wherein alone his minde is revealed hath no where evidenced that foederal or relative holinesse of persons borne in the Church or their relation to the Church thereby is extinct at years of discretion or removed and lost by ignorance or the want of the evidence of saving grace if but one text were produced intimating this this part of the controversie ends 2. Yea indeed the contrary is more then evident in sacred writ viz. that relative holinesse doth proceed even into the adult estate and that ignorance or want of the evidence of saving grace doth not then extirpate our former hurch interest convey'd thereby and sealed in infancy was not Ishmael and the incestuous person at their adult estate or were they such as evidenced saving grace yet Ishmael Gal. 4. 30. and the incestnous person 1 Cor. 5. 12. are both acknowledged to be within hath it not appeared abundantly that persons charged by God himself with actual rebellion are also acknowledged at the same instant by the same God to be his people how could they be so charged had they not been at adult age and how could they be so acknowledged had they had no foederal or relative holinesse for they had none other Yea to put it out of further question this people are expresly said to be a holy people Deut. 14. 2. even while they were charged with being stiff-neck'd and a rebellious people unto this place chap. 9. verse 6 7. and what holinesse could that be that was consistent with a stiffe neck and a rebellious heart but a Covenant-holinesse even as 't is there expounded to be I have chosen thee to be my people or a holinesse of separation as it also followeth Deut. 14. 2. to be a peculiar people unto himself
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-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-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-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-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
consequences of it as anon may further appear Object 'T is here objected that infants are borne members of the Church de jure onely and that they are not actually so until they are baptized as Rutherford distinguisheth Answ Our children are borne actually in the Church or actually out of the Church but they are not borne actually out of the Church for then they are borne actual Heathens and not Christians as is generally pleaded against the Anabaptists Ubi ponis parvulos non baptizatos profecto in numero credentium Aug. de verb. Apost Serm. 1. 2. Children are borne to an immediate right to the seal of the Covenant to wit baptisme therefore they are borne actually in Covenant and consequently in the Church for though a right to be taken into Covenant give a remote right to the seale of the Covenant it must be an actual being in Covenant that giveth an immediate title or claime to the seal thereof and that children borne within the pale of the Church have such an immediate right to baptisme is not to be doubted seeing we cannot think upon any neerer cause of title to baptisme in such children then their Birth priviledge or their being borne in the Church 3. I therefore humbly conceive that our children are borne E foederatis nascentes etiam in foedere sunt Dei in foedere comprehenfi ab ipso utero Bez in 1 Cor. 7. 14. Baptizandi sunt infantes non ut sancti sint sed quia sancti sunt Whitaker Church-members not onely de jure but also de facto and sealed rather then made such actually by baptisme though truely such as deny them to be born so actually if they as Rutherford doth will but grant that they are baptized actual Church-members my turne is thereby sufficiently served seeing most of our people were not onely borne de jure but also baptized de facto within the Covenant and members of the visible Church Object 2. It is again objected that infants are not perfect church-Church-members as Ames non adeo sunt perfecta membra c. Answ 1. There is a difference betwixt perfectè and perfecta membra one may be a member of the Church perfectly that is no perfect member thereof perfectly with regard to being or state not perfect with respect to nature or quality perfect naturally not perfect morally such a church-Church-member viz. in infancy may be and not such as such a Church-member viz. in years ought to be 2. I hence assume that Infants borne and baptized lawfully within the Church though they are not perfect members as neither are many growne persons yet they are truely and perfectly so For these Reasons 1. They are either members perfectly so or not at all for all motion from corruption to generation is instantaneous and there is no time when such a thing may be said to be partly and not wholly what it is particularly this change from a state of Heathenisme to a state of Church-membership hath no degrees of magis and minus but being wholly wrought in instanti a man is perfectly the one or the other and not halfe an Heathens and half a Christian Omne ens est verum perfectum Now none but Anabaptists will offer to say that such infants are in no respect Church-members therefore they are so perfectly 2. They are perfectly disciples therefore perfectly Church-members for disciple and Church-member are synonimous that they are perfectly disciples appeares by considering what is requisite to make a disciple perfectly so namely entrance or admittance into the Schoole or the society of such as are to be taught indeed one cannot be a perfect or compleat Schollar without learning yea and much learning but one may be truely perfectly and compleatly a Schollar before any thing at all be learned and a Schollar is so denominated not quia doctus sed ut sit doctus as is noted by many now it s generally urged against the Anabaptist that infants are admitted disciples into Christ his Schoole by Baptisme Infants are thus perfectly in Covenant otherwise we seal in Baptisme such as are partly heathens and but partly in Covenant which sounds absurdly therefore they are perfectly members of the Church for as they are in Covenant so they are in the Church the Church alone being the party in Gods Covenant 4. Lastly it may be well observed that Ames his words give no just ground for this objection for he doth not say that such infants are not perfect members much lesse not perfectly members onely that they are not so perfect members as to have a next Non adeo sunt membra perfecta c. vid. Am. Med. and immediate right to all the Ordinances as the adult or persons of age have which is as easily as readily granted by my cause CHAP. XXVIII The Terms upon which adult persons are admitted visible Church-members PRoceed we next to consider the conditions upon which persons borne and educated under Heathenisme may become Christians or members of the visible Church Now though the former discourse concerning infants be of most concernment yet here lieth the burden and stresse of Argument In general that might here satisfie which Reverend Master Cotton from the words of our Saviour hath given us viz. that such a person as is by nature and birth and breeding a Heathen and no Christian to the end he may become a Church-member he must be discipled that is as Master Cotton explaineth it he must be entred into Christ his Schoole Which I humbly conceive is truely done 1. In his own part by a voluntary offering himself to be admitted And 2. On the Churches part by receiving him and sealing him by Baptisme a member of her own society upon lawful termes I grant that there is some measure of the knowledge of Christ and some kinde of profession of the faith inherently necessary of the very designe of Baptisme in Christs Name but I think no more then that is absolutely necessary though a great deale more may I doubt not be expediently and prudently required by the Church I would not be thought to condemne the ancient practise of the Church in her more strict and severe proceeding towards the Chatecumeni though others have so freely lash'd it yet 't is known that the work of admitting proselytes by circumcision in the time of the Law and Christians by Baptisme in so many thousonds in the dayes of the Gospel by John and the Apostles was more speedy Worthy Master Hudson hath an expression which I cannot but note as very helpful and preparatory to my set and fixed answere page 127. the Church saith he is called entative not because of inward grace but from the receiving and embracing the Christians Catholick faith which is essential to a visible Beleever accordingly my answer is A serious embracing of the Christian Religion as distinct from all Ex probabilibus conjecturis an aliquis ad Christum pertineat puta in adultis si
or actual right to be admitted by the Church to the Lords Supper but may and in some cases ought to he debarred thetefrom First that every person lawfully baptized hath a right to the Lords Supper appears from precept promise and ptecedent in Scripture and Reason grounded upon or drawn from Scripture 1. Those whom Christ commands to celebrate his Supper have certainly some kind of right so to do fot what better right or Reas 1 from the command Debitum agendi debitum habendi warrant can we have to do any thing or receive any thing then our Masters command Thus duties and priviledges are inseparable what God commands is both These things I command for your own good and if we must do what God commands as our duty then we may do what God commands as our tight and priviledge But now God commands every disciple and lawfully baptized person to receive the Supper and to do all that Christ hath commanded his Church Do this in remembrance of me Teach them to observe and do whatsoever I command you This will not conclude that every Church-member must receive the Supper without any further consideration This hath been and may be further cleared for this command is but mediate and consequently gives but a mediate obligation to such as cannot and a mediate right to such as can and do not examine themselves yet it is a right though but remote or mediate and it is an obligation though it be conditional seeing the condition is commanded also and though the condition of this obligation be such as we before have heard 2. God hath conveyed and granted all Covenant-priviledges from the promise Reas 2 and consequently this of the Supper to all that are taken into and sealed in Covenant else why are we taken into Covenant if not to enjoy the priviledges of the Covenant yea what is the object of our right by Covenant but the priviledges of the Covenant Therefore the Covenant still runs thus I will be thy God and I will give thee c. yea can we have a right in God the greater and not in the Ordinances of God which is the lesse qui habet habentem omnia habet omnia how shall he not with him give us all things and with a right in him give us a right in all things I grant the Covenant is but a conditional Covenant and therefore a right unto the priviledges thereof is but a conditional right But now though differences rise high about the way and terms of being in covenant yet al agree that Church-membership discipleship and lawful baptism are of equal latitude with being in covenant Therefore wherever God begins with I will be thy God it necessarily follows and thou shalt be my people and wherever God ownes a people to be his is to be his Covenant-people 3. Those whom the Scripture admits to actual possession from example Reas 3 without requiring any new evidence or title have a plain and evident right to the Supper without any new evidence or title This cannot be denied because we have no other rule to judge of persons right to the Supper but the Scripture and because that would not admit to possession such as have no right unto it But now we finde Acts 2. 41 42. the Scripture admitteth persons baptized putting no barre by ignorance or scandal against themselves immediately without requiring any new evidence or title of them to actual communion with the Church in doctrine fellowship breaking of bread and prayers viz. in all Gospel-worship 4. A baptized church-Church-member stands not at the same distance from Scripture-ground Reas 4 from the Supper with persons that are neither church-Church-members nor baptized for he is visibly at least drawn out of that state of distance and being afarre off wherein the world of Infidels lies and is in Scripture acknowledged to be made nigh in opposition to Infidels Gentiles and those without Eph. 2. 11 12 Therefore a baptized church-Church-member must needs be granted to have some kinde of right to all Ordinances and consequently to the Supper for though there be a latitude in right yet there is no medium betwixt est and non est right and no right And if the baptized be nearer in right to all Ordinances then an Infidel he hath some kinde or degree of right thereunto not to be questioned if he be not ar the same distance with such as have no right he must needs have some kinde of right He that is not so far off from the Supper is nearer to it and he that is nearer to the Supper is nearer only in a way of right for there is no proceeding towards a legal possession but by a line of right Digression 4. The Grounds of the Churches power to deny the Supper to some Church-members materially considered Though every person lawfully baptized hath some kinde of right to the Lords Supper yet the Church hath power to withhold the present use thereof from some persons lawfully baptized The truth of this Proposition is generally allowed even in the granting 1. That children are lawfully baptized 2. That children are not to receive or not to be admitted to the Lords Supper I shall rather therefore spend this digression in digging for or fixing the grounds of this truth according to Scripture Which Grounds may be aptly considered Materially Formally The material Grounds are the objects about which this power of denying the Sacrament is exercised the Matter for which persons though baptized are to be denied the Supper or the grounds of denying the same to such persons The formal grounds are the grounds of the power it selfe by which the Church denieth the Sacrameâ—t to such the grounds on which this authority of the Church is built So that the present discourse is visibly engaged upon these two questions Quest 1. What are the just and lawful causes for which the Church may deny the Sacrament to baptized persons Quest. 2. On what is this power of the Church to deny the Sacrament upon such causes fixed or whence is it taken or derived Quest 1. First then what are the just and lawful causes of denying the Sacrament to baptized persons I answer that these causes are either privative viz. the want of some necessary qualifications conditional to this Communion or positive viz. some apparent ill quality or blemish for which a person though baptized ought to be debarred from this Communion the first is more eminently noted in 1 Cor. 11. and the latter in 1 Cor. 5. the first may be termed unworthinesse 1 Cor. 11. 29. the latter wickednesse or scandal 1 Cor. 5. ult persons under the first of these may be thought to be unfit and to be kept off upon principles of care and merciful caution persons under the latter may be thought to be und eserving and to be cast out upon principles of Justice The first are therefore rather not to be admitted ratione cautelae whose suspension called
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
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
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
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
the faithful or the called or professors of the true Religion My businesse is not to defend or to except against any of these either in their truth or fulness but to propose whether these and the like have any necessary dependance upon saving grace which to affirme I think is not without evident danger Here are two things rest upon me 1. That external calling profession of the true religion and faith have no necessary dependance upon saving grace 2. That these are true and real in their kinde as to visible membership when not saving 1. For external calling the very sound and notion thereof Efficacitas vocationis duplex una salutaris electorum proprio altera non salutaris ad vocatos communiter spectans Inst Theol. p. 114. sufficiently proves its independency upon saving grace and that as distinguished from the inward and saving calling it is true and real in its kinde and indeed effectual as Trelcatius notes I suppose is sufficiently argued before 2. Neither can any doubt but that profession of the true and Christian religion is also generally done without saving grace and for its being yet a true and real profession when not saving this depends upon the truth of the faith by which or rather from which this profession is made and which is next to be weighed 3. Therefore whereas the external calling and the profession of the faith have both been largely handled before and this common faith hath been often touched upon as againe will be frequent occasion of hereafter I shall now once for all humbly endeavour to prove that there is a faith in the members of the uisible Church which is true and real in its kind though not saving Arg. 1. This appears First from the authority Secondly from the reason of Scripture 1. From Scripture-authority thus 1. The Scripture intimates that all that are not Heathen are Beleevers 1 Cor. 7 14. as even all affirme that interpret the place against the Anabaptist for indeed the question was not Existimant reformati quod soedcralis quaedam fanctitas qua jus habent illi qui hoc modo sancti sunt ad media salutis Sacramentum Baptismi qua ab Ethnicis Turcis similibusque al iis infidelibus seperantur 1 Cor. 7. 14 Toti Nationi seu populo comunicetur cui Deus tabulas sui soederis ita imper tit easdem suscipiant profiteantur quos ad statum visibilis ecclesiae suae vocat ducit Rom. 11. 16 17 18 19 20. Blakes Seals p. 118. out of Apol. touching continuance with such as were wicked if professing religion but such as were Heathens i. e. out of the Church therefore Heathen and Infidel or no Church-member and unbeliever are synonimous Let him be to thee as a Heathen Mat. 18. is worse than an Infidel 1 Tit. 5. 8. But now there are may persons within the Church who though they are without saving grace may not be termed Heathens 1. The scandal of persons within may declare they have no saving grace yet the punishment at last to be inflicted on such is but to put them into the state of an Heathen or to deal with them as with a Heathen or a Publican therefore doubtless they were not Heathen before 2. In the place before cited a wicked Church-member is compared to an Infidel or an Unbeleever worse then an Infidel because he professeth and owneth the faith with his mouth which he denies and wounds by his ungodly life and he that is compared to an infidel is thereby concluded to be no infidel for a comparison must needs be betwixt two for it is as it were a comparison or a comparing things one with another and he that is no Infidel or unbeleever must needs be granted to be a beleever or will be enforced from 2 Cor. 6. 15. What part hath the Beleever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an infidel or one without the Church 3. Of which the Scripture giveth us a cleare instance in Simon Magus it first affirmeth that he believed and then witnesseth that he notwithstanding was in the gall of bitternesse They have indeed a true faith in their kinde but not the justifying faith of the Elect. Boultons deceit p. 73. and bond of iniquity and consequently in a state of wickedness 4. And lastly the Scripture is most plaine Luke 8. 13. in our Saviours interpretation of the stony ground which for a while beleeve but in the time of temptation fall away i. e. from that state of faith wherein they stood a while our Saviour doth not say by their falling away it appears they did not beleeve Upon this Luk 2. 13. Master Perkins notes three things 1. Their faith they are said to beleeve for a season 2. The fruits of that faith they received the Word with joy 3. Their unsoundnesse in the time of temptation they fell away Mark saith he here is a true faith yet not saving faith Epist before his declarat of a mans estate at all or shew themselves to be what indeed they were before viz. Infidels but he affirmeth they did beleeve 2. Again that this was a real faith for he saith they fell away from it they could not fall away from that which was not Lastly in the time of temptation implying that before that time they might be truely said to stand in the else the blast of temptation could not have thrown them down as also those that made shipwrack of faith are supposed 1. To have had the faith else they could not have lost it 2. To have had no saving faith for then they would not have made shipwrack of it 2. In the reason of the Scripture it is also plaine that there is a true faith which yet is not saving whether we consider it in a relative or in a qualitative sense 1. There is a relative or if any had rather a federal faith as well as holinesse allowed by all but Anabaptists upon the account of our parents Church-membership Obj. If any should reply that this faith is in the parent and not in the childe Answ I must have leave to deny it an account of which I shall give more largely hereafter in briefe here thus 1. The faith that is in the parent is a personal habitual or qualitative faith this faith that relates to the childe is foederal 2. The childe is as truely the subject of this faith which he hath by relation to his father by grace as of filiation or son-ship which he hath also by relation from his father by nature 3. Yea this faith is more firmely seated in the childe then his One sort of real holines consists in a bare relation of the people of God and depends wholly upon birth within the pale of the Church and the parents embracing the covenant Blak Scals p. 150. out of Camero filiation for this dieth with the parent that doth not which shews that the childe hath its faith as well be relation to
members of the Church but infidels but neither temporary beleevers nor foederal as before can ever from the Scripture be proved either to be infidels or savingly beleevers 2. Foederal faith is not justifying or in Wallaeus his word doth not justifie the childe yet this entitles the childe to visible Church membership and by this to wit foederal faith all that are borne in the Church are entitled and stand possessed of the said membership and this is the very state and case of most of the people of God in England and that which answereth our own case might give satisfaction without further enquiry 3. Yet if not a dogmatical faith a faith lesse then justifying or a temporary faith or a common faith which so farre draweth the person beleeving and to own and apply himself by desire of and submission unto Baptisme to the true Religion though it work not so deep as was before explained is sufficient to admit an adult heathen as more largely anon into communion with the Church as easily appears in Simon who had no more in the Eunuch who professed no more and in the stony ground which hereby stood in a due possession of this communion till in the time of temptation it fell away CHAP. XIII Touching Communion in the Ordinances of God and the place it hath in the definition of the Church WE now proceeed to the second great specialty observable in the definitions of the visible Church taken from its chief office and employment viz. communion in the Ordinances and worship of God Here though I do not altogether exclude the qualifications spoken to yet I shall humbly offer whether communion in the worship and Ordinances of God be not fitter to define the visible Church by then the former qualifications thereof Cons 1. Such as lay most weight upon the former qualifications of faith calling and profession in their definitions of the visible Church do yet ever adde more then a touch of this holy exercise and communion of it to the perfecting of their said definitions as will appeare expresly anon Amesius himself adds unto his societas fidelium ad communionem sanctorum constanter inter se Med. p. 168. exercendum Cons 2. These qualifications seeme fitter to define the Church as invisible by seeing they also are invisible indeed Ames defineth the Church to be coetus vocatorum but he evidently intends Vid. Med. cap. 31. 7. p. 162 the mystical or invisible Church it is a most usual thing for Divines to define the mystical by which they intend the Church of the saved after this manner viz by some occult invisible quality of faith love calling or the like whereas the defining of the Church from its outward acts and exercises in the worship of God is without some shew of exactnesse to define the Church as visible from something visible Cons 3. If the visible Church should take its definition rather from the said qualifications then from its communion in Ordinances then would the Church be rather known from the evidence of these qualifications then from its communion in Ordinances for that which flows most immediately from the essence of a thing into our apprehension and knowledge cannot but be reckoned the most essential and therfore the best mark of that thing But the Church on the contrary hath been ever better knowne and distinguished by the Ordinances wherein it communicates then from any personal qualities whatsoever 1. Therefore the truth of the Ordinances and the truth of the faith which is professed hath been ever respected and looked upon as an essential mark and indeed the onely essential mark of the true visible Church while personal qualities have beene ever reckoned among the seperable adjuncts thereof 2. Indeed purity of life and evidences of saving grace I humbly conceive are rather the purity of single members but the purity of Ordinances the purity of the Church as such so that the purer the Ordinances the purer the Church c. contra As even all our Divines do argue upon the Marks of the Church against the Papist and as is most punctually and fully asserted by the Irish confession Artic. 58. But particular and visible Churches of those that make a profession of the faith and live under the outward meanes of salvation be many in number wherein the more or lesse sincerely according to Christs institution the Word of God is taught not practiced and the Sacraments are administred not received and the authority of the keys is used not obeyed the more or lesse pure are such Churches to be accounted Cons 4. The Church is rather and better distinguished from O holy Socrates O holy Plato O devilish Christian O wicked Protestant Woods Serm. p. 49 its opposite viz. the world by its fellowship in Ordinances then by the evidence of inward qualities or saving grace any other way therefore its definition should rather be taken from thence 1. Many Christians are not so civil as some Heathens and many Heathens are not so profane as some Christians yet no Heathens do attend the Ordinances of God as Christians do in their solemn assemblies 2. As Heathens taken in a large sense for all infidels do openly oppose the true religion so Christians do more openly own and maintain the same in these their solemne meetings and properly publick assembles particular persons stand in most direct opposition to infidels not by their own private calling faith or profession but by their relation to these bodies and Assembles of Gods people and the communion thereof in the worship of God in publick 3. Therefore therein also the Church is most exposed to the malice of those that seek her life and thirst to destroy her very being in the world not so much in her righteousnesse towards men or in her private enjoying or separate professing the faith of Christ as in her publick and valiant owning and serving her Lord in the wayes and Ordinances of divine worship as it were to the worlds and the God of the worlds defiance for fear of whom they flinched Heb. 10. and forsock the assembling of themselves together with the Church Cons 5. This further appears if we well consider the onely way that God himself hath generally if not ever taken directly and judicially to un-church a people namely by removing his Ordinances and not his graces their faith calling or profession from them Look over all the books and works of God and see whether this can be questioned the very people that murthered Christ yet to them belongs the promise Acts 2. and they are the seed of the Covenant chap. 3. and so continue notwithstanding this height of all impiety untill the Ministry and Ordinances are turned from them to the Gentiles Acts ult 't is granted that such desperate wickednesse doth not onely deserve that God should spew a people out but also it doth violently provoke him to it yea it is threatned with it Rev. 3. 16. Yet observe they are to be
spewed out of his mouth his word is to be removed from them for how did those Asian Churches cease to be so but by the Lords performance of that other threatning in order unto this viz. removing his Candlestick out of their place Revel 2. 5. Cons 6. Yea a people have no other way to unchurch themselves but by their voluntary breaking of their communion in the Ordinances of God by heresie poysoning them and thus making them die and cease to be Gods Ordinances or schisme directly rejecting them or by the perfection of both in a total Apostasie But though wickednesse did ever unchurch a people demeritoriè it never yet did unchurch a people formaliter vel effectivè as will appear more anone Yea though Heresie be indeed a renouncing the faith and schisme a renouncing the profession of the faith yet at present I conceive that heresie doth properly and strictly unchurch as it denieth the faith not as it is the faith of Christ but as it is the foundation of this communion in the Word and Sacraments Being built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and accordingly schisme doth stictly unchurch as it breaks off this communion and not as it ceaseth the profession of the faith Therefore breaking off from this communion is most exactly and properly termed schisme or a renting of the Church and ungodlinesse of heart or life and indeed a ceasing to professe the faith as such is not so properly or stictly schysme Cons 7. These qualifications faith holinesse calling and profession may all be found where there is no instituted or formed Church and consequently to our congregational brethrens principles who as Master Cotton in the name of his brethren phraseth it say that the universal visible Church is a Chimaera where there is no formed visible Church wherein Ames is so expresse Fideles non constituant ecclesiam particularem nisi speciali Med. p. 167. vinculo inter se conjungantur which onely renders them capable of this communion the Jewish Church being dissolved the Elect that were saved were not of themselves a formed instituted Church but must therefore be added to the Gentile-Churches i. e. Congregations Therefore these personal qualifications are not so fitted to the definition of the visible Church as communion in the Ordinances of God for wheresoever this is fixed and settled there is undoubtedly a true visible Church this communion supposeth the called beleevers professors on the one side and the officers or dispensers of the Ordinances on the other side and plainly expresseth or signifieth to us the essence or truth of the visible Church by the formal actions of it Now that I may yet be more free from exception and more truely understood I shall here recollect and subjoyne what hath beene already in a scattered way hinted about these two great considerable in a few brief concessions and propositions Prop. 1. I grant that these personal qualifications are necessarily supposed in this communion in Ordinances in the senses before given of them the persons thus communicating are such as are called thereunto such as professe the faith therein and such as are presumed to beleeve what they thus professe or at least not to deny or renounce it Prop. 2. These qualifications are therefore necessary conditions of Church members or of such particular persons as assemble themselves with the Church in this worship of God or as Ames most Med. p. 163 accurately forma vocatorum the forme of the called not of the Church Prop. 3. Therefore these qualifications are rather to be reduced to the matter of the Church then to the forme Prop. 4. I grant therefore that they fitly serve to expresse the qualification of the matter of the Church in the definition thereof as I conceive Amesius and others mean whose definitions of the visible Church are usually begun thus a company of beleevers c. or of the called c. or of such as profess the faith or the true Religion Prop. 5. Yet I humbly conceive the maine distingushing part of the definition of the visible Church lieth in the communion of Ordinances for the reasons above specified this being as was said the formal action of it immediately springing from its forme and essence viz. society or community which is the next great particular in the definition of the Church and now at hand to be considered Onely by the way let this be concluded with the easie notice that my designe is yet going on seeing none can doubt but if persons void of saving grace may be truely considered to have faith calling and profession as before they may much easier also be considered to partake of the outward communion of the Church in the worship and Ordinances of God and therefore so far none can hinder the definition of the Church to be applicable therunto without respect to saving grace CHAP. XIV Touching that State of the Church whereby it is capable of communion in Ordinances viz. Community THe last great particular that claimeth a place in the definition of the Church is that proper condition or state thereof that only renders it capable of the exercise of this employment comes now to be handled This I presume will be generally consented unto to be a company community or society as it strictly intends communion in the worship of God wherein I humbly conceive is contained 1. Many particular persons or men in the kinde not sex or age 1. Many coetus requirit decem 2. Many men for other creatures below man are not capable of making a society it being a political and therefore a rational state and Angels are almost as much above it society being a state of discourse and so most properly belonging to discoursive creatures viz. men according to that of the Grammarian coetus requirit decem homines this is supposed in a society Cod. 2. The union of these men by some kinde of bond or other whereby they are embodied and made an habitual assembly a fixed society this is expressed 3. Actual communion in the Ordinances of God this is intended Coetus or societas here is therefore to be taken in a moral or political sense from corporations or companies of trade So 1. 'T is orderly not tumultuons 2. 'T is fixed not occasional 3. 'T is habitual not onely actual 4. It hath officers belonging to an orderly and fix'd society of this nature 5. Therefore lastly 't is a society of Christians governed by the Minister or Ministers of the Gospel as we still finde it to be in Scripture I shall crave leave to explicate my self herein a little further by a few propositions Prop. 1. This community is of necessity required in the true or false definition of the visible Church Prop. 2. This community doth directly immediately and formally Foederata ifla conjunctio tantum constituit ecclesiam quotenus spectat ad communionem sanctorum exercendam Am. Med 169. intend communion Communion is the most
in Ordinances so Mr. Hudson the visible Church saith he is a company of people called or separated by God from Idols to the true Religion and yeelding professed subjection to that call and more plainly Wollebius the visible Church is a company of persons commonly called as well Elect as reprobate But no Authour that I have yet met withal did ever define the Church without specifying and expressing this society or community one way or other Apollonius begins his definition with societas the Leiden Professors with coetus So Wallebius Trelcatius Ames and Augustine with unitas of English men Bradshaw saith the Churches of Christ are holy assemblies Dayrel saith a particular visible Church is a company c. so Hudson the visible Church is a company c. And Arnobius upon the 19 Arti a Congregation of faithful people Therefore it is likely that the unity or society of the Church deserveth the first and the highest place in the definition thereof Lastly therefore I shall conclude my selfe in those expresse Fideles non constituunt ecclesiam particularem quamvis simul plures in codem loco conveniant aut vivant nisi speciali vinculo inter se conjugantur Med. p. 169. Vinculum hoc est foedus c. Ibid. words of Amesius that neither the faithful or many faithful or many faithful meeting together or living in one place do thereby constitute a particular Church without they be further joyned together by some special bond among themselvs and I shall not fear to adde with him that this bond is a Covenant and that this covenant ought to be such as he there defineth it viz. that whereby the faithful oblige themselves particularly to performe all those duties both towards God and mutually towards each other which respect the Condition and Edification of the Church Yet give me leave to explain my self in a few particulars touching this bond or Covenant and I shall hasten to the conclusion of this last particular 1. I grant this bond or covenant may be lawfully expressed at the first constitution of a particular Church because it rationally agreeth with the nature of such a society 2. I further grant that the expresse bond being a prudential thing may be so much the neerer to necessity by how much the more prudence dictates it to be of use and discovers more evident occasion thereof accidentally occurring at the constitution of such a Church 3. Yet I must interpose against the necessity thereof in its own nature because we finde not any such command in Scripture nor any such practice in the primitive Churches 4. Neither may the want much lesse the absence thereof by any means be hence interpreted to the questioning of the truth of such Churches as have the Word and Sacraments purely or but truly administred and constantly attended upon for who can deny but that these are infallible marks yea essential notes of a true Church besides it is apparent even thereby that there is an implicit bond or covenant wherein to such a people are not onely taken with God but mutuo inter se mutually with one another seeing as the prophet queries how can two walk together unlesse they be agreed which two of the most eminent Dr. Ames and Mr. Hooker as well as moderate Congregational men have under their hands acknowledged to be all that 's necessary to the truth of a visible Church in this respect 5. Therefore we must with them conclude that the form consisteth not in a Covenant as expressed for then where that was wanting the Church could not exist but as a Covenant or mutual bond so far as it is necessarily supposed in the nature of such a society or community 6. Although I have before granted that either an expresse or implicite covenanting to performe the duties of Church members is a necessary duty binding all that are admitted into such a relation Yet I must still deny it to be of such absolute necessity as that the non-real and actual intention in a particular person so to covenant and oblige himselfe should exclude the reality of his visible Church-membership provided his desire to be admitted be real and sincere The reality of his desire of admission is essential to his very admission but the reality of his actual purpose to performe all the duties to which he is obliged by his admission is onely essential to his safe admission the first is necessary for his being the last for his well-being in this state of the Church membership Indeed he is passively bound by the command of God as also by his relation to this society of the Church both actively Persons may be passively bound when they do not actively binde themselves and actually to oblige himself unto the said duties yet if by reason of the Churches carelesnesse he is not put upon it or by reason of his ignorance of this his duty or his unwillingnesse to engage at present so farre in it he shall not thus oblige himself he is not thereby presently disobliged from his duty by the nullity of this his Relation or visible Church membership 7. This actual obliging himself in truth to performe all the duties There is a necessary duty a necessary condition of a Church-member is therefore a necessary duty accompanying his admission but no necessary condition thereof or without which he cannot be admitted And this I would conceive to be the meaning of Ames his words before noted viz. the bond without which the faithful do not constitute a particular Church is a Covenant vel expressum vel implicitum which implicitum I humbly conceive must necessarily An implicit Covenant opposed to an expresse and an actual covenanting An actual conanting is either vocal or mental We covenant consequentially or vertually what neither expressely nor actually be opposed both to expressum and to actuale and his meaning is or should be that neither an expresse that is a vocal nor yet an actual whether vocal or mental Covenant is a condition so necessary as without which the faithful cannot constitute a Church but a conjunction so far foederata as his phrase is as is necessary to communion which doth implicitely i. e. consequentially though not expressely and vertually though not actually also bind the faithful i. e. all the members of the Church particulatim to the performance of all those duties which the nature of so holy a society calls them unto For I readily grant that though particular persons do not actually either in their words or thoughts oblige themselves so largely yet by their very desire of admission into the Church if admitted they do by consequence and vertue thereof oblige themselves unto all those duties that the state into which they desire to be and are accordingly admitted doth necessarily and naturally We binde our selves vertually to more when we yeeld to be admitted sometimes then we that are admitted think of or intend put them upon so
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
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
Supper will appear from the following passages which he transcribeth also out of Dionysius Areopagita Albaspinaeus and the Apology of the Waldenses pag. 21 22. 4. Though I must confesse I think the ancients sometimes at least if not ordinarily meant something more viz. a perfection of grace as well as Church-priviledge by that perfection which was usually attributed by them to confirmation for saith Cyprian p. 20. cited by our Authour such as are baptized in the Church are offered to the Overseers of the Church that by our prayer and imposition of hands they may receive the holy Ghost and be consummate through the gifts thereof by the Lords seal tum demum saith he in another place plenè sanctificari that 's the grace and esse filii Dei that 's the priviledge possunt si Sacramento utroque nascantur and yet more fully to our purpose it is also necessary saith he for him that is baptized to be anointed that the chrysme being received he may be the annoited of God i. e. perfectly a Christian as it is gloss'd and have in him the grace of Christ Yet here again we may distinguish and with ease and passe over Perfection of the membâ—r and of the membership any objection hence to be raised for there is a perfection of the member and a perfection of the membership I grant confirmation may serve to perfect the member but deny it any hand in perfecting the membership viz. the persons relation to or interest in the Church which I beleeve the ancients never intended a plaister applied to a weak part or member of our bodies may be said to strengthen or perfect the member but it hath no influence at all upon its membership in which it stood as firmly by its union with the body though but a feeble and weak member as the strongest part of the body a childe may be made by good education a more perfect childe but that addes nothing to his filiation child-ship or relation to his Parents or Family This is excellently illustrated by our authours own glosse upon p. 55. the words of Paraeus in Heb. 6. 2. Infantes Christianorum jure promissionis baptizabantur in infantia pueritiam egressi impositione manuum in ecclesiam adultorum recipiebantur not saith our Author hereupon that these were two distinct Churches for they did both concur according to their several capacities to the mâ—king up of one but rather two distinct formes or classes of persons in one and the same Church So that as Schollars of the lowest forme are as truely and compleatly members of the Schoole as those of the highest so those The lowest forme of Schollaâ—s is in the School that are baptized and not confirmed are as truely and perfectly members of the Church as those that are confirmed and invested with all Church-priviledges This is also pâ—ainly intimated in the very word confirmation The word confirmation câ—rrieâ—h so much Priscis temporibus impoâ—itione manuum baptismum confirmaâ—i solebat Walf Sâ—rab â—eb eccl c. 26. we would not confirme the catechumens in a state without the Church neither in a state of half Church-membership their very being to be confirm'd implies they are fully in the estate already This Ordinance was of old therefore thought to confirm Baptism or the state wherinto we are baptized or as the Waldenses it was in fidei confirmationem ad stabilitatem Militiamque fidei whereupon the Catechumens were admitted indeed to higher priviledge or forme in the Church but not into any new church-Church-state onely they were confirmed therein wherein they were perfectly before though as Ames clearly to the point of infants non adeo perfesta sunt membra ecclesiae ut possunt admitti ad omnia ejus privilegia participanda Secondly I think it will hence follow that a persons first foederal right and Covenant-relation to the Church doth not dissolve A persons first foederal right not dissolved for want of confiâ—mation upon his conviction of grosse ignorance when he comes to be confirmed for if onely by this federal right a person stand in his church-Church-state during his infancy and if when at the adult estate he give not satisfaction to the Church by personal profession by reason of ignorance though confirmation be justly denyed him he is to continue in the same condition he was before then the want of giving satisfaction to the Church for confirmation doth not destroy federal right or make invalid that first way of right he had in the Church by means of being born of beleeving parents Doubtlesse the Church is bound to require and every childe of the Church to render an account when duely called of their knowledge faith and conversation yet I bumbly conceive that where a satisfactory account is not obtained as the church-Church-state of such a person is not lost so the way and mean of this interest is not changed though I conceive that such a ones personal profession in his general owning the true faith and usual attending Gods publick worship doth super-adde a kinde of new right and mingle it with such a persons former right had by his birth-priviledge We do not imagine that the former right which a person who is now deservedly confirmed had in the Church by birth-priviledge is wholly lost or made void by confirmation but rather confirmed to him his baptism and consequently his first right to baptism viz One that is confirmed doth not thereby lose his former way of right in the Church his birth priviledg being confirmed to him and nothing taken away from him thereby only he hath now a double right in the Church and Covenant or rather a right therin two ways and both acknowledged by the Church through foederal faith at baptism through personal faith at a confirmation so much rather that right which a person not confirm'd and so not owned by the Church upon personal profession hath still in the Church must needs be his birth-right or that which he had by birth-priviledge or at least that is not lost and another way of right introduced by his not being confirmed as a person that is borne a member of a family or a Common-wealth continueth to be such while this his relation remaines upon the account of his birth-right onely or not so properly any other ways I am confident we read not of one person eâ—ther in Scripture or We â—ead of none in Scrâ—ptâ—â—e or antâ—quity that thus lost his birth-right Antiquity that lost his Birth-right in the Church any other way then by heresie schisme or the perfection of both Apostasie I think few will add excommunication Object If any should imagine that the birth-right of such is lost I think it must be upon this ground because the childe has no right but in his parent but at the adult estate children are to be admitted upon their own account as distinct to their parents Answ But the whole reason is peccant these two propositions 1. That foederal holinesse to which we were borne proceeds
be of Israel whom yet in the very same place it denieth to have any true saving grace all are not Israel i. e. all are not in the purpose of God according to election v 11. that are of Israel or of the visible Church therefore some are of Israel that are not elected and consequently that have no saving grace 3. The Scripture Luke 15. 6. affirmeth some persons to be of the house of Israel also whom it also denieth to have any evidence of saving grace viz. lost sheep lost sheep are of the house of Israel but lost sheep are therefore without evidence of saving grace therefore persons whom the Scripture affirmeth to be without evidence of saving grace it attributeth interest in the house of Israel or the visible Church unto 9. To be the people of God to bring forth children unto God and to have a right coram Deo or in the sight of God unto the first seale or the Ordinance of initiation do all of them import in the Word of God visible Church-membership But the Word of God ascribeth every one of these unto such as it self also testifieth to have had no evidence at least of saving grace 1. The Word of God Jer. 7. 12. as also before the same was observed from Isa 1. 3. thus attributes the title of the people of God to such as had no evidence of saving grace even to those Israelites that by their abominable wickednesse had brought a curse and desolation upon the place where they lived viz. Shiloh see what I have done to Shiloh for the wickednesse of Israel yea of my people Israel but evidence of saving is inconsistent with such wickednesse 2. The Word of God Ezek. 16. 20. ascribes the honour of bringing forth children unto God unto such as had no evidence at least of saving grace they sacrificed their children unto Molâ—ck therefore they had no evidence of saving grace yet their children which they thus idolatrously sacrificed God owns for his sons and his daughters and such as the parents had borne unto him To say that these children were the first born onely which the Lord challengeth for his in a peculiar manner may seeme to gratifie an Anabaptist somewhat but doth not so much as seem to weaken my inference hence for the first borne of those in whom the Lord had this interest onely and who were related to God as his people were challenged by God for his in this peculiar manner therefore if we grant that these were the first-borne onely yet seeing God challengeth them for his sons and daughters he owneth and acknowledgeth the parents of them yet to remaine in his Covenant and to be in the number of his people If those that are gracelesse had a command to receive the seals had warrant to receive them then they had a right from God but such as Ishmael Mr. Hooker survey p. 41 3. The Word of God Gen. 17. 23. acknowledgeth that one may have a right to the first seal of the Covenant and that coram Deo and in the sight of God that hath no saving grace in the case of Ishmael Ishmael was thirteen years old vers 25. when he was circumcised and therefore past the age and state of Infancy and of age to answer for himself yet againe Ishmael had no saving grace which the Lord knew well enough neither was he within the Covenant of Isaac the Covenant of absolute and certaine salvation from which he was excluded vers 19. If Ishmael had not been circumcised he had broken the covenant v. 14 therefore he was in covenant The Hebrew calls Ishmael a wilde asse and the Targum retaineth the original word Metaphoricè pro homine insociabili ferinis moribus praedito saith Rivet who with Paraeus Cajctane Pererius and others judgeth him to be a reprobate as Mr. Mar. hath observed page 277. yet lastly Ishmael hath a right unto the first seal of the Covenant and consequently was truely in one respect within the Covenant coram Deo and in his sight as is most evident from the immediate command of God that he that was borne in Abrahams house as God knew that Ishmael was so already must needs be circumcised v. 12. and accordingly Abraham understood it although the Lord himself had but now revealed to him that Ishmael in particular was to have no part in the Covenant of Isaac or the Covenant of salvation or the saving state of the Covenant rather he proceeds upon the command of the Lord to circumcise Ishmael first of all Now what is it that giveth one right to any Ordinance but the command or at least more evidently then the command of God himself and that right which we have from Gods command is doubtlesse a right coram Deo and in his sight and the consequence from that first seal of circumcision to ours of baptisme will passe without scruple upon all but Anabaptists with whom I am not now disputing 10. To be borne againe and to be of the body are both equivalent to Church-membership But the Word of God acknowledgeth such to be borne againe and to be of or in the body the one great body of Christianity whom it also witnesseth to have no saving grace 1. The Word of God John 3. 5. acknowledgeth that all that are baptized with water are borne again of water wherefore haply baptism is meant by the lavor or washing of regeneration Tit. 3. 5. 2. The Word of God acknowledgeth also that all that are baptized are baptized into that one great body of Christianity 1 Cor. 12. 13. we are all baptized into one body 3. And yet the Word of God hath witnessed that many are baptized that never had any saving grace as Simon Hymeneus Philetus Alexander Ananias and Saphira c. 11. To have the Spirit to have begun in the Spirit to be sonnes to be children of the promise to be children of the free woman that is I conceive by embracing and submitting unto the Gospel of Christ Jesus who was the seed in whom the promise to Isaac was especially fulfilled are all equivalent to Church-membership But the Word of God ascribeth all these to such as gave no evidence of saving grace and all of them in those two Chapters the third and fourth to the Galatians Gal. 3. 2 3. they are acknowledged to have received the Spirit and to have begun in the Spirit yet the same place witnesseth their folly and their great danger of ending in the flesh which gave no evidence of their saving grace Gal. 4. even those are said to be sons v. 6. to be the children of the promise with Isaac v. 28. and children of the free-woman that is I conceive not under the Law but the Gospel v. 31. of whom Paul travelled in birth again until Christ be formed in them ver 19. and of whom therefore we may safely say they had no saving grace 12. Beleevers sanctified redeemed and a state of grace are all equivalent to