Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n according_a church_n doctrine_n 2,019 5 6.0761 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A90523 A defence of church-government, exercised in presbyteriall, classicall, & synodall assemblies; according to the practise of the reformed churches: touching I. The power of a particular eldership, against those that plead for a meere popular government, specially Mr Ainsvvorth in his Animadversion to Mr Clyft. &c. II. The authority of classes and synods, against the patrons of independencie: answering in this poynt Mr Davenport his Apologeticall reply, &c. and Mr Canne his Churches plea, &c, sent forth first by W. Best, and afterwards for this part of it, under the title of Syons prerogative royall. By Iohn Paget, late able and faithfull pastour of the Reformed English Church in Amsterdam. Hereunto is prefixed an advertisement to the Parliament, wherein are inserted some animadversions on the Cheshire Remonstrance against Presbytery: by T.P. Paget, John, d. 1640.; Paget, Thomas, d. 1660. 1641 (1641) Wing P166; Thomason E117_1; ESTC R16734 348,418 298

There are 16 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

parchments he left behinde him to publick use for the common benefit of the English nation in a time of need calling for helpe (v) 2. Sam. 15.34 counsel to defeate the dangerous projects of all Achitophels Right honorable ye are as (x) 2. Sam. 14.17 Angels of God to discerne good bad to speake comfortable words to your afflicted banished Countreymen Yee are the great Counsellers Iudges and State-physitians of England Now (y) Isa 9.6 the Wonderfull Counseller the mighty God the everlasting Father the Prince of peace furnish your Honors more more with the (z) Isa 11.2 Spirit of wisdome understanding the Spirit of Counsell and might the Spirit of knowledge of the feare of the Lord (a) Psal 20.4 fulfill all your counsells which are for the (b) 1. Cor. 10.31 glory of God for the (c) 1. Pet. 2.17 honor of our gracious King Charles and for the true (d) Iob 22.30 welfare of England Scotland Ireland even soe prayeth Your Honors most humble advertiser and devoted observer THOMAS PAGET The Publisher to the Christian Reader THere are two staves wherewith the Lord Christ the great Shepherd of his sheep doth usually feed his flock Doctrine and Discipline By the one he maketh them to lie downe in greene pastures and leadeth them beside the still waters replenishing their soules with the food of life by the other he guideth them and ordereth them in their going out and comming in for their further peace and safety and both his rodde and his staffe doe comfort them If either of these be wanting the flock is endangered if God in his just judgement cause one of them to faile the other presently comes to be in jeopardy Wofull experience hath taught that where the reignes of Discipline are slackned or ill guided there the soundnes of Doctrine doth hardly subsist long and where the trueth of Doctrine is assaulted there the course of Discipline is not free from injurious attempts Though Doctrine justly challenge the first place yet seeing Discipline also to speak properly is a part of Doctrine being onely the practise of divine trueth revealed concerning the guidance of the Church hence it may not without cause share in the arguments alledged for the necessity and benefit of the other They both being so neerly allyed and joyntly requisite to the welfare of Gods Church the Enemy ever envying the prosperity and plotting the ruine thereof where he cannot prevayle against the one he sets on work his mischievous devices against the other When he cannot hinder the growth of good corne and sound trueths by sowing tares then he makes so much the more furious onsets upon the fences and hedges of due order and government And if his designes may be effected in the one he findes a readyer way to the other But he that hath bruised Satans head is not ignorant of his devices nor slow to resist him in his enterprises Christ doth graciously provide for the safety of his flock against both kindes of evills by such instruments as he is wont to rayse for the explaining and vindicating the trueth of those lawes which he hath given both to direct and maintaine his people in the obedience of his will and to stop the mouth of all iniquity oppugning the same His goodnes therefore is to be acknowledged in whatsoever helps to this purpose are affoorded unto us And that thou mayest the better be provoked hereunto Christian Reader concerning the Treatise now presented unto thee take a brief survey at thy first entrance of somewhat may further fit thee unto a more judicious and profitable perusall of the work it self The maine errours touching the exercise of Church-government may be reduced unto these two extremes whereby men swarve from that middle and safe way prescribed by Christ the onely Prince and Lawgiver of his Church Some ambitious of preeminence making themselves lords over Gods heritage have brought in and seek to maintaine a Tyrannicall kinde of government in the Church by ingrossing all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction into their owne hands as the Popes and Popish Bishops Against these Vsurpers many Worthies have stood up and done valiantly in their Writings whereof divers remaine yet unanswered Others have erroneously fallen into a contrary extreme while opposing Hierarchicall Tyranny they have become pleaders for a meere Democracy and not contēt to reject Provinciall Diocesan Bishops they have impugned the lawfull combination of Churches in Provinciall and Classicall Synods Against this twofold errour the ensuing Treatise is directed The former part thereof was written long agone about the yeare 1618 upon the occasion noted in the Introduction And though it was but a beginning of a larger writing neither finished nor polished for publick view yet considering how little there is extant in this kinde how usefull it may be for these times and what affinity it hath with the other controversy touching Classes and Synods by how much the opposers of such joynt Presbyteries doe seldome allow the due power of particular Elderships I thought good to prefixe it before the other in such wise as it doth now come foorth The second and maine part of this Treatise discusseth at large and more fully then any other yet seene the question concerning the due power of Classicall Synodall Assemblies A controversy in a manner unknowne to former ages and for the present scarcely heard of among the Reformed Churches in other nations For though the positive trueth thereof be manifest from the testimonies of Orthodox Writers of all times and places yet hitherto it hath not beene shewed that ever any Authours of note I meane either of former ages or other nations have maintained the assertions here opposed viz. that the power of Classes Synods is an undue power and that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction must be confined within the bounds of a particular Congregation H. Barrow those of that Sect are noted to be the first that in such sort have opposed this kinde of government The Arminians indeed have spoken much against the jurisdiction deciding sentence of Synods * Censur Confes Remonstr p. 322.326.328 Apol. Remonstr f. 6. 282-290 but upon other grounds to wit so farre as it taketh away that liberty of Prophecy which they plead for and describe to be in effect an unlimited licentiousnes of venting and maintaining almost any thing in matters of religion They doe so contradict the power of Synods that withall they overthrow all Ecclesiasticall judgment and censure at least in matters of heresie false doctrine as well in a particular Congregation as elswhere Herein they differ from the Patrons of Independencie here disputed against These therefore though they be not all Brownists yet they must not take it ill to see this errour in the following Treatise sometimes branded with the mark of Brownisme especially when the Authour deales with Mr Canne a knowne Separatist and hitherto the busiest Disputer for
live to this onely true forme or els to betake themselves unto some Church so formed as they tender their spirituall safety comfortable assurance in Christ But we on the contrary side though we hold that Classes and Synods are most necessary and profitable for the well being of the Church being also prescribed unto us by divine ordinance See Voet. Desp Caus Pap. p. 65 2. yet doe we not hold that the essence being of the Church doth consist in this much lesse in that forme of government commended by them If a particular Church of God should sojourne among the Indians or among Hereticks where it could not obtaine fellowship with other Churches out of it self or if by violence or other unavoydable inconveniencies any Church should be hindred from enjoying this benefit of combination with other Churches in Classicall government yet doe we acknowledge that notwithstanding this want such a Church might still subsist be reputed a true Church And yet so that we hold every Church bound to seek this dependency union with other Churches as God shall give oportunity meanes and cannot without sinne neglect the same To this place belongs the answer unto two of those Questions which Mr Canne (a) Churches plea. p. 33. propounds upon another occasion I. CAN. Whither it be Jure Divino that Ecclesiasticall Officers of many Churches are necessarily bound to determine by joint authority the cases of many particular Congregations or whither it be a thing arbitrary left unto every mans liberty ANSVV. That the combination of Churches in Classes Synods for judging determining the cases of many particular Churches by joynt authority is a divine ordinance and appointed Jure Divino is that which I maintaine labour to prove in this Dispute in the following Arguments As it is not a thing arbitrary and left unto every mans liberty whether he shall joyne himself as a member unto a particular Church if he have meanes and opportunity to doe it so it is not a thing arbitrary nor left in the liberty of particular Churches whether they shall combine themselves into Classes Synods for their spirituall government if they have opportunity All that neglect to doe it sinne against the communion of Saints walke not as becomes the members of the body of Christ Rom. 12.5 1. Cor. 12.25 Eph. 4.16 I. CAN. Whither all such cases and controversies as are decided by many Ministers combined into Classes Synods must so stand as that particular Congregations may not if they thinke fit reject the same and practise otherwise then hath bene there determined by joint authority ANSVV. Men are bound to stand unto the judgements of Classes Synods so farre as their determinations are found agreeable unto the Word no further Act. 4.19 But if any particular Church reject their sentence determination being consonant unto the Scripture then that Church committeth double sinne once for transgressing against the written word of God and againe for despising the ordinance of God and contemning the joynt authority of such as are met together in his name Particular Churches are so to respect and stand unto the determinations of Classicall or Provinciall Synods even as particular men and members of a Church are bound to stand unto the sentence of that Church where they are members viz. according to the trueth and will of Gods and not otherwise CHAP. II. The first Argument taken from the words of the Lavv Deut. 17 8-12 THe first Argument is taken from the ordinance of God delivered by Moses of old unto Israel where the people of God in particular Congregations were taught to bring their hard difficult controversies as well Ecclesiasticall as Civill unto a superiour Judicatory unto the Priests the Levites or unto the Judge in those dayes according to the quality of the cause for the deciding thereof Deut. 17 8-12 This Order was also reestablished in the dayes of Iehoshaphat who placed and settled in Ierusalem an Ecclesiasticall Synedrion or Senate for the matters of the Lord over which Amariah was President these were to receive the complaints and to judge the causes of their brethren that came up unto them from other cities places of their habitation even as there was also a Civill Synedrion for the affaires of the King over which Zebadiah was President 2. Chron. 19 8-11 This forme of government is commended unto us of David as the praise of Ierusalem when he poynts out distinctly these two kindes of Senates (a) See Iun. Annot. on Psal 122. Ecclesiasticall and Civill thrones of judgement and thrones of the house of David whereunto the Tribes even the Tribes of the Lord did goe up Psa 122.4.5 As Paul once rejoyced in the spirit to see the order of the Colossians Col. 2.5 so David considering the beauty of this order declares the same to be one speciall cause of his spirituall gladnes joy in the Lord witnessed in that Psalme Hereby it is evident that the Assemblies Synagogues of Israel were not independent but stood under an Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves they had no single uncompounded policie all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction was not limited unto particular Congregations Now let us see what our opposites say to this I. CAN. (b) Churches plea. p. 43 44. Hee seekes to strengthen the authority of Classes Synods by the Iewish politie government Now the Papists to establish the Sea of Rome use the same argument And the truth is if Mr Paget intend to dispute this way they will cary it quite away from him But I thinke he will hereafter be more considerate and speake no further of that manner and forme of Church government seeing he knowes the most learned on our side doe condemne the Papists for it viz. (c) Animadv contr 1. l. 3. c. 4. Iunius (d) Inst l. 4. c 6. sect 2. Calvin (e) Ag. Whitg l. 2. p. 614. Cartwright (f) Contr. 4. qu. 1. D. Whitaker others ANSVV. Mr Ainsworth before him speakes much in like manner to this purpose he saith (g) Animadv p. 15.16 It is a mayn pillar of Popery to proportion the Church now in the outward politie to Israel The Rhemists would have (h) Rhem. annot on Mat. 23.2 the see of Rome in the new law to be answerable to the chair of Moses Cardinall Bellarmine (i) De Rom. Pout l. 4. c. 1 maketh his first argument for the Popes judging of controversies from the Priest Judge that was appointed in the Law Deut. 17. c. And there also he alledgeth three of the same witnesses against arguing from the Iewish policie which here Mr Canne citeth againe Mr Davenp pleads to the same effect saying (k) Apol. repl p. 254. The Texts which Bellarmine alledgeth for the power of Councills in making lawes are the same which the Answerer sometimes harpeth upon in this case but Iunius clearly sheweth that they
so that the 120 persons met together at this time Act. 1.15 cānot be sayd to have bene a distinct particular Church of persons dwelling in Ierusalem but an occasionall assembly or Synod upon such ground as the story of the Scripture doth manifest II. In respect of the busines it self here performed viz. the election of an Apostle it was such a work as did not appertaine unto any one particular Church but all Churches had interest therein seeing the care of all the Churches was cōmitted unto the Apostles 2. Cor. 11.28 All Churches were alike bound to beware of false Apostles that could transforme themselves into the Apostles of Christ 2. Cor. 11.13 It had bene a presumption in any one Church and a wrong unto all the rest if without their consent one alone should have chosen an Apostle especially considering there were even at this time a multitude of the faithfull in other places whom this work concerned Many had bene lately converted by the ministery of Iohn Baptist Matt. 11.12 and now immediately before the Ascension of Christ we read of more then 500 brethren at once which were witnesses of the Resurrection of Christ 1. Cor. 15.6 These 120 had done injury unto them save that these generall persons the Apostles called of God for the service of all Churches did for them by divine appointment appeare in this Synod III. In respect of the manner of this election which was made with a threefold limitation 1. Unto one of those men which had companyed with the Apostles all the time that the Lord Iesus went in and out among them beginning from the baptisme of Iohn even untill that same day that he was taken up from them Act. 1.21 22. Now these Disciples that thus waited on Christ such as Barsabas and Matthias were being no inhabitants of Ierusalem what power had a particular Church to determine and dispose of them that were no members of their particular society 2. There was a restraint from absolute electing of any one of these they were onely allowed to present two and to offer them unto the choyse of the Lord. vers 23.24 3. The way and meanes of inquiring the will of God herein was determined and restrained unto a Lot whereby the judgment and definitive sentence of God was declared unto the Synod that rested therein And by these extraordinary directions it pleased God to honour this first Synod of the new Testament It is here also to be observed that although some Writers have spoken of this election as made by a particular Church yet we have sundry learned men consenting with us in the exposition of this story who labouring to shew the profit and necessity of Synods (a) Whitak de Concil qu. 1. c. 3. doe argue from this place Act. 1. and affirme that in the New Testament the Apostles and whole Church did celebrate a Synod for the choosing of Matthias into the place of Iudas The Professours of Leyden to the same purpose (b) Synops pur Theol. Disp 49. alledge this example Act. 1. and call it the first Synod at Ierusalem II. The example of that renowned Synod which is recorded Act. 15. is a sufficiēt warrant wherein the use and authority of Classes and Synods is commended unto us and this not onely for counsell and admonition but also for the judgement of causes and for the exercise of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction As that which went before the Synod namely the great dissention about a dangerous errour with seeking of redresse by a solemne deputation of messengers from the Church of Antioch Act. 15.1 2. did call for help in the most effectuall manner so the things done in the Synod are an evidence of the authority which they used therein both by a definitive sentence which they pronounced concerning that controversy which was brought unto them vers 28 29. and by an authentick ambassage of chosen men sent from that Assembly of Apostles Elders and brethren both to carry the Epistle that was written and by word of mouth to declare the same things vers 22 23 25 27. That also which is noted to have bene done after the Synod in the publication of the acts thereof doth also beare witnesse touching the authority of those acts in that they are called the decrees ordained of the Apostles and Elders c. Act. 16.4 The fruit also which by the blessing of God followed hereupon in being a meanes of great consolation and establishment of the Churches in the faith Act. 15.31 16.5 is to be considered as an argument whereby the H. Ghost doth further commend unto us the authority of such Synods in the right government of the Church Upon this example doe generally all judicious Writers build the authority of Synods as upon a sure foundation groundwork Calvine saith that (c) Cōment in Act. 15.6 here is prescribed of God the forme and order of gathering Synods c. Beza upon this place (d) Annot. maj in Act. 15.12 V. 23. having shewed that here was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or foregoing consultation of the Apostles and Elders which was related unto the whole Church and ratifyed in the common assembly thereof he affirmeth that this was the right forme of a lawfull and true Apostolick Synod c. And both these are to be understood of such Synods as exercised authority of Ecclesiasticall censure according to the practise of those Churches wherein they lived of which more hereafter Bullinger observeth here as is noted by (e) Expos Eccles in Act. 15.6 Marlorate that this custome was in old time diligently kept of the holy Bishops in imitation of the Apostles and complaineth of the neglect thereof D. Rainolds when as the Papist objected unto him that there must be a chief Iudge to end controversies to keep the trueth of faith peace of the Church that it be not pestered with heresies and schismes he answers thereunto (f) Conf. with Hart. c. 6. div 2. p. 206. that The wisedome of God hath committed that chieftie of judgement so to call it not to the soveraigne power of one but to the common care of many For when there was a controversy in the Church of Antioch about the observation of the law of Moses some Iewes teaching contrarie to that which Paul and Barnabas taught they ordained that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them should goe up to Ierusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question Act. 15.2 And so by their common agreement decree the controversy was ended the trueth of faith kept and peace maintained in the Church After which example the (g) Euseb hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 14. 21. 22. lib. 7. c. 26. 28. Cypr. epist 6. 14 31. 53. 72. 75. Concil Ancyr Gangr Antioch Laodic c. Bishops that succeeded them made the like assemblies on the like occasions and by common conference took order for such matters both of doctrine and discipline
for the judging of lesser causes without bringing them to the whole Congregation the other for the deciding of weightier matters which neither Eldership nor Congregation can so well end And this is acknowledged by sundry of his Witnesses whose names he abuseth in this controversy Mr Parker touching Mat. 18. sayth (f) Pol. Eccl. l. 3. c. 15. p. 160. The Church of the faythfull is intended of Christ not as it is simply considered as we sayd before but as it exerciseth Discipline according to an Aristocraticall temperament in the Eldership For we doe think that the Church mentioned in the first place in those words Tell the Church doth precisely signify the Aristocraticall part that is the Eldership but that which is mentioned in the latter place in these words If he heare not the Church if as Downame teacheth it include the Church excommunicating for contempt and not onely decreeing or examining then it doth also comprehend the Democraticall part of the Church forasmuch as the consent of the people is necessary unto excommunication And a little before he sayth (g) Ibid. p. 159. Almost all interpreters doe agree that those words in vers 19. If two or three doe containe an amplification from the lesse to the greater from a lesse company to a greater so that it is most plaine that under the name of the Church he included as well the greater company as that which consists of two or three How Mr Parker proved the Synod also from Mat. 18. is shewed (h) See Ch. 3. p. 45. 49. before where D. Whitaker Mr Cartwright and others also teach the same thing ARGVM III. (i) Church plea. p. 70. Whatsoever was commanded to the 7 Churches to be practised by each of them apart in and for themselves that no Church of God must now omit But Ecclesiasticall government was commanded to the 7 Churches to be practised by each of them apart in and for themselves Therefore no Churches of God must omit the practise of Ecclesiasticall government apart in and for themselves The Proposition cannot be doubted of For as Chytraeus c. The Assumption is proved clearly in chap. 2. vers 2 14 20. c. Moreover Mr Perkins c. ANSVV. I. This Argument for the forme of it is a misshapen Syllogisme and that in a double respect both because the Minor terminus is superfluously put into the Major Proposition and because the same terminus is confusedly joyned with the Praedicate in the Minor proposition when it should have bene placed with the Subject therein But this is one of the least faults in Mr Cannes reasonings II. For the matter of it this Argument doth also come short of the mark reacheth not home to the question And that which he concludes being well understood may be safely granted of us That which Mr Canne alledgeth from Chytraeus Bullinger Brightman Perkins for the proof of his Proposition Assumption I doe willingly assent unto and it was but an idle labour to bring them for proof of that which is not denyed There be no Churches here among us which refuse to practise Ecclesiasticall government apart in for themselves This they practise after a double manner 1. There be many rebukes and censures against sinne administred in them without the knowledge of Classis or Synod apart in and for themselves 2. When as more hard weighty causes are brought unto the Deputies of other Churches assembled in Classes for their advise and judgement even then also when upon their consideration matters are cleared and there remaineth no scruple they are then remitted againe and referred unto the particular Churches so that the Eldership with consent of the Congregation proceedeth therein as they finde cause according to the repentance or obstinacy of the persons with whom they have to deale And so the sentence is both determined and executed apart in for themselves without the Classis But if by government to be practised apart in and for themselves he meane such a solitary and separate government as refuseth combination with other neighbour Churches such as admitteth no liberty of appeale in case of greatest wrong such as excepteth a particular Congregation from the censure of all other Churches though it should erre never so perniciously and in summe such a government apart as denyeth all authority and jurisdiction of Classes and Synods then is his Assumption most false and all that he alledgeth for proofe thereof helpes him nothing for 1. Though the Angel of the Church of Ephesus be commended for not bearing with the wicked c. and the Angel of the Church of Pergamus and Thyatira be reprehended for suffering divers enormities Rev. 2.2.14.20 by what good consequence can these examples overthrow the authority of Synods There might be occasion at this day to write unto some Ministers standing under the Classes and Synods in these Reformed Churches and some of them might justly be commended for their zeale in not bearing with the wicked others might justly be reprehended for their negligence in tolerating of such as offend now Mr Canne according to this reasoning might as well conclude against experience against the knowne trueth that these Ministers doe not stand under any Classicall government 2. The praise or dispraise which is given to the Angels of severall Churches apart doth not so much serve to argue an independency or disunion in government in these Churches but the very * Rev. 1.16.20 2.1 3.1 forme of the vision in the union of these Starres of the Churches in Christs right hand doth rather argue a consociation of them for their mutuall help in the government of his Church They appeare not scattered in the Firmament but gathered and drawne together What is a Classis or Synod but as a Constellation of so many Starres of the Churches combined together which by their conjunction together doe yeeld both a greater light of direction and a stronger influence of authority for the confirmation of the trueth and conviction of errour And as for the testimony of Mr Perkins though he acknowledge (k) Vpō Rev. 2.20 3.7 God hath given to every Church power and authority to preach the Word administer the Sacraments represse evill men c. yet doth he not thereby exempt those Churches from the censure of others if they be found to pervert the word corrupt the Sacraments and judge unrighteously It is not probable that such a conceit did ever enter into Mr Perkins head neither can it be collected from his words ARCVM IV. If the Church of Corinth had power and authority within herself to exercise Ecclesiasticall government yea and did it I meane the Ministery and the rest of the Church there Then ought not particular Congregations now to stand under any other Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves But the first is true Therefore the second The first part is unquestionably certain and of this judgement was D. Willet c. ANSVV. That which
man of sinne With these testimonies of ancient Fathers Mr Canne alledgeth for his opinion that some Councels have granted so much and Christian Emperours by their Lawes confirmed it Two of these viz. the Councell of Nice Constantinople he alledgeth at large and specifyes no Canon which he intendeth for this purpose And as for the 3d Councell of Carthage whereat Augustine was present I have shewed * Pa. 223. before that it makes directly for us That 22th Canon which he alledgeth viz. (a) Magdeb. Cent. 4. c. 9. col 868. that no Clerk be or dained without examination by Bishops and testimony of the people empeacheth not the authority of Classes and Synods but confirmeth the order established by them And that Christian Emperours have by their lawes confirmed the authority of Synods it is plaine and undenyable The (b) Sulp. Se. v S. Hist l. 2 Councell of Nice that condemned Arius was authorised by Constantine the Great The (c) Sulp. S. Hist con●in ex Sleyd p. 162. Councell of Constantinople that condemned Macedonius was authorised by the Emperour Theodosius the Elder The (d) P. 164. Councell of Ephesus that condemned Nestorius was authorised by Theodosius the younger The (e) P. 170. Councell of Chalcedon that condemned Eutyches was authorised by the Emperour Martianus And as it was in these first Generall Councels so may it be observed in many other Instead of the rest let the (f) Codex Canon Ecc. Univ. edit Christ Just book of Canons suffice confirmed by Iustinian the Emperour there being contained in that book many Canons which ordaine that the causes of particular Churches should be (g) Can. 5 80 83 85. judged by Synods and so decided by another superiour Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves At the end of these Canons there is added the sanction or decree of Iustinian (h) Novella consti Just Imper. 131. by which he doth not onely allow them and give force of lawes unto them but with an excessive farre greater honour then is due unto them would have the foure Oecumenicall Councels to be receaved even as the holy Scriptures Now though he offended greatly in this his esteeme of them yet this may serve to shew what little reason Mr Canne had to alledge the decrees of Councels for his opinion SECT VII Touching the Testimonies of Reformed Churches FRom ancient times they come back to the later times of Reformation and say (a) Ch. pl. p. 91. Touching Reformed Churches if we may take the Confession of their faith for testimony then surely we have their consent also with us The Churches consenting with them as they vainely imagine are these according to their order in alledging of them The Bohemian Churches Churches under the Palsgrave the Helvetian Churches the French Churches Churches of the Auspurge Confession of the Low-countries of Nasovia But the trueth is both these and other Reformed Churches doe condemne my oppisites in allowing of Synods to judge the causes of particular Congregations The Confession of the Bohemian Churches say they hath these words (b) Harm Conf. c. 14. The keyes that is Ecclesiasticall Government are given in trust and granted to the Pastours and to each severall Ecclesiasticall society that is ordinary Congregation whether they be small or great I answer I. This testimony is clipped by Mr Canne who leaves out the words of order which shew their opinion touching the originall and derivation of this power The words of this Bohemian Confession are that the keyes of the Lord or this administration and power of the keyes is granted and delivered first unto the Governours and Ministers of the Church and then unto every Christian Congregation c. Therein they doe not consent with Mr Canne but with the opinion of Mr Baines noted (c) P. 114 115. before And they doe there also apply these words unto absolution given by the Priest of the Church as they call him To this end they alledge those places Ioh. 20.23 Luk. 10.16 Their meaning is declared more fully before where they (d) Harmo Confes Art 5. de Poenit. p. 241. edit 1612. teach that the poenitent are to come unto the Priest and to confesse their sinnes unto God before him c. and to desire absolution of him by the keyes of the Church that they may obtaine remission of sinnes by such a ministery so instituted of Christ. This order seemes to agree with that forme of absolution described and appointed in the English booke of Common prayer at the visitation of the sick 11. It is acknowledged by the Ministers of the Church of the Picards so called in Bohemia and Moravia in the (e) P. 219. preface to the forementioned Confession of their fayth that their fathers had appealed unto a Synod c. where if any thing should be found dissonant from the Scriptures they were willing from the heart and lovingly to be subject and obedient to the censure and appointment of the Synod in all things This shewes their dissent from Mr Canne and his people III. The Combination of the Christian and Orthodox Churches in Bohemia and Moravia called by themselves The Vnitie of the brethren in Bohemie doth give a cleare testimony unto the trueth touching the authority of Synods for the government of particular Churches and judgement of their causes by a superiour Ecclesiasticall authority out of themselves as appeareth in the booke of their Discipline where they (f) Ratio Discip ordinisq Ecc. in Unitate frat Bohem. c. 2. p. 33.34 38. professe that for weighty causes in providing for the necessities of the whole Vnitie or some Diocesse therein they use to hold Synods either Generall or Particular c. They alledge these 5 ends To confirme brotherly love and concord To strengthen them in the work of the Lord To preserve the vigour of Discipline To exclude scandalous persons out of the number of their Ministers c. To ordaine Ministers c. and for the (g) Ib. p. 41. examination of Ministers before they be confirmed The exercise of this authority is also declared in their (h) Ib. cap. 6. p. 87 88. c. Visitations of the Churches which are in their Vnitie or consociation This example of these brethren of the Vnitie is so much the more to be regarded of us in respect of the singular providence blessing of God in preserving them to this day in the midst of so many persecutions as they have endured being more ancient then other Reformed Churches having continued from the dayes of Iohn Husse and being holpen by the Waldenses that were scattered into those parts so that they (i) Ib. pref p. 2 3. were increased to almost 200 little Congregations in Bohemia Moravia about the yeare 1500 before the time of Luther Their piety love concord and zeale of religion notwithstanding some imperfections appeares by their orders to be very great in speciall their care of sanctifying the
times speak And for the delay occasioned partly by the difficulty of the work and partly by other distractions want of necessary helps for dispatch the book itself unto those that are not unacquainted with businesses of this nature will give reasonable satisfaction That which thou here seest touching Classes and Synods was written by the Authour in the latter dayes of his pilgrimage amidst sundry bodily weaknesses other necessary imployments There are now three yeares expired since he rested from this other his labours having served the will of God in his owne age entred into the joy of his Lord. Being warned some time before by a messenger of death to desist from the pursuit of this work he gave way that in convenient time as I was able I should husband these his notes for publick use It were to have been wished that his owne eye hand might have prevented the charge of an executour herein So shouldest thou have had this work farre more compleat and refined then now can be expected But the Almighty infinite in understanding to whom belong the issues of life and death hath ordered otherwise who will say unto him What doest thou According to the trust therefore committed unto me I doe now at length set foorth this monument of his godly painfull labours touching this weighty point of Church-government I have forborne as much as might be to interpose my rude pencill in this master-piece The liberty allowed unto me for the persiting of what was wanting I have used no further then was requisite for the coupling of the parts together out of severall papers written at severall times for the filling up of a few gaps specially in Ch. 7. having had the opportunity to meet with some bookes which the Authour wanted I have withall added a small Supplement for answer unto what remained in Mr Cannes book touching this poynt according to the first edition the same which the Authour onely saw followed in this his Defence And thus I have also cast my mite into this Treasury before I opened it for publick benefit If my coine be not currant let not that prejudice the rich supply that may be had out of the Authours store the value whereof will sufficiently discover itself unto them that with understanding unpartiall mindes receive it Howbeit thou art allowed desired according to the Authours meaning to bring it to the touchstone of trueth to the Law to the Testimony According this word try the reasons on both sides and hold fast that which is good Farewell from DORT Where a most pregnant effectuall testimonie hath been given for the needfull authority of Synods with which testimony the Authour hath closed his writing touching this subject Where this his Treatise now comes to light which we hope may prove usefull to direct unto the like remedy where the like case may require it He that hath the Starres in his right hand so guide the beames of this Candle now set upon the Candlestick that it may give light unto all that are in the house that the darke corners of errour may be further disclosed the lustre of his owne Ordinances becomes more apparent With this suit I againe take leave requesting thee to joyne therein with him that desires to be Thine in trueth R. PAGET THE FIRST PART OF THIS TREATISE Touching The Povver of a particular Eldership CHAP. 1. The occasion of this vvriting and the State of the Question WHereas Mr Ainsworth was desired by the Authour (a) Arrow ag Separ f. 2. v. to set down his reasons concerning whatsoever he thought might be a just cause of refusing communion with that part●●ular Congregation whereof he was a Minister Mr Ainsw in his answer among the rest hath (b) Ibid. pag. 5. these words Other things there are wherein you know we differ from you c. Your Eldership sitteth judgeth matters apart from the Congregation c. Concerning which particular the Authour thus (c) Ibid. p. 33. replyed Though our Eldership for the examination of parties witnesses and for their consultations thereabout do sit apart as is meet yet do we not exclude or debarre any from hearing seeing the conviction of any sinne that is either publique of it self or persisted in when they desire the same yea we our selves have oft desired their presence to behold the convictions admonitions rebukes of offenders And further before any sentence be given for the cutting off of any offender we do first propound the matter unto the whole Church requiring their prayers advise and consent without which never yet any judgment of excommunication hath bene executed against any amongst us and this also is propounded unto them by divers degrees long oft before any pronouncing of sentence that so our brethren may have sufficient time both to informe themselves of the matter and to deliberate ripely thereof c. Mr Ainsworth in his next having (d) Ibid p. 317. sayd I put you in minde that you have not as yet alledged any one word of God for your Consistory c. the Authour puts him in minde of his owne allowing the same by communicating therewith in some measure whereof he had bene told (e) Ibid. p. 32. before whereunto he answered not a word and addes (f) Ibid p. 330. further Seeing you have not yet answered neither the (g) Exp. of Matt. 18. first nor the (h) Christian plea. last booke of Mr Iohnson wherein he hath written against your popular government what meane you to call for more if more be requisite you may see that I promised you in my former (i) Arrow ag Sep p. 33. writing that when I should receive any arguments from you to prove your refusall of communion upon these grounds that I would then give further answer unto you The errours which you have published in your Animadversion for the maintenance of your popular order and the enormities which in that order are committed by you in your unlawfull excommunications censures are so many that they require a distinct treatise for the refutation thereof of which I purpose to say more hereafter as occasion is given c. Hereupon and about the same time was written that which followes though not happily all that was intended By that which is sayd it may appeare that the Question is not whether the power of the keyes be given to the Church or whether the power of excommunication be in the body of the Church or whether Church-government ought to be with the peoples free consent c. All this may be granted and yet the point in controversy remaine undecided But the difference is about the execution judiciall exercising of this power Whether every offence to be judged or cause to be determined ought to be brought to the multitude or body of the Congregation and they to give their voyces therein together with the Officers of
all sorts the sayd words as they are written in their owne letters being compared together eyther joyntly or severally II. If the Deacons may distribute some almes ūto the poore without the knowledge of the whole Congregation then may the Elders also judge some causes without the knowledge of the whole Church But the first is true Therefore c. The consequence of the Propositiō is proved by this Because the whole Church hath as much right authority to dispose of the Church-treasure almes as they have to judge of the offences that are committed therein This the Scripture sheweth by the examples of sundry Churches of Antiochia Macedonia Achaia c. Act. 11.29 30. Rom. 15 25-28 1. Cor. 16.3.2 Cor. 8.1.4.19 Phil. 2.25 with c. 4.18 The Assumption is manifest and your owne practise confirmeth it III. If Arbiters chosen by consent of some particular persons may judge the causes of wrong injury whether publick or private wherein they strive against one another then may the Elders chosen by consent of the whole Church judge the causes offences that arise when they willingly submit unto the same But Arbiters so chosen may judge the causes referred unto them Therefore the Elders may doe it also The truth of the Proposition appeares because the free solemne consent of the Church in any election gives authority unto such persons either in generall or speciall workes as well as the choyse of any particular men in their causes Act. 14.23 2. Cor. 8.19 The truth of the Assumption appeares by the doctrine of the Apostle giving such power of judgement unto Arbiters 1. Cor. 6.4 5. If you answer hereunto as you (l) H. Ains Animadv to Mr Clyfton p. 43. elswhere expound this place that these controversies to be referred unto Arbiters are for civill things of this life that such are not Church-matters nor there to be heard c. this is insufficient and will not help you seeing it appeares by the text that these Controversies in Corinth might as well have bene sayd to be Ecclesiasticall causes as Civill and belonging to the judgement of the Church as of the Magistrates or Arbiters Had their controversies bene touching a wound or stroke given touching any slander or theft which may be sayd to be Ecclesiasticall causes as belonging to the judgement of the Church yet might the Apostle have sayd unto them thereupon all that he doth 1. Cor. 6 1-9 for 1. These are businesses which Infidell Magistrates in those times used to judge and the generall speech of the Apostle imports as much v. 1. 6. 2. The reason which the Apostle useth taken from the honour dignity of Saints in their judgement of Angels the world serves to perswado them to submit the judgment of such causes to one another mutually as well as any other causes v. 2 3. 3. The reason taken from their shame as if there were no wise men among them to judge these causes serves to reprove them for a want of wisedome in Ecclesiasticall things as well as Civill 4. The matters of controversy among them were of wrong injury done to brethren v. 7 8 9. And these being sinnes scandals belong to the judgment of the Church as doth the judgment of * 2. Cor. 10.4 5 6. 1. Cor. 5.7 all knowne sinnes This Argument is in effect yeelded unto by your self when you (m) H. Ains Animadv to Mr Clyf ton p. 9. allow the Articles of the Discipline agreed upon in the Reformed English Church which was at Franckford in Q. Maries dayes for whereas in the 62. art thereof in case of difference betwixt the Governours of the Church others it is there concluded that the body of the Congregation may appoint so many of the Congregation to heare determine the sayd matter or matters as it shall seeme good unto the Congregation hereupon in approbation of this Discipline you observe that hereby the reader may see what the learned most conscionable of the Church of England held heretofore which if they had continued in would have freed them of all Antichristian Prelacy the bane of so many Churches And hereupon I observe further against you how the reader may hereby see that if the body of the Church may appoint so many Arbiters as they will to heare determine matters then may the Elders of the Church receive this authority as well as any others then is it no unlawfull usurpation for them to heare determine some matters among the brethren by themselves IV. If particular persons may lawfully passe by some lesser offences leave them unto the consciences of the offenders without prosequuting thē or bringing them to the Church for any judgment at all then may the Church also leave some lesser offences unto the judgment of the Elders But the first is true Therefore the second also The consequence of the Proposition is proved because God doth no more require the Church to judge of sinnes made knowne unto the same then he doth require particular persons to prosequute and to deale against the offences made knowne unto them the Scripture speaking as fully giving unto particular persons as ample commission charge to * Mat. 18.15 16 17. Lev. 19.17 admonish and complaine of sinne as it doth unto the Church to judge censure the same The Assumption is proved 1. By expresse testimonyes of Scripture that teach us to passe by some sins offences and not to prosequute them Prov. 19.11 Eccl. 7.21 2. Particular persons being taught to love their neighbour as themselves to doe good unto all Levit. 19.18 Matt. 22.39 Rom. 13.9 Gal. 5.14 Iam. 2.8 are thereby bound to admonish them that are without those that are not mēbers of the same Church with them but of any other eyther true or false or of none Now if this be to be done it followes necessarily that the reproofes of many lesser faults are to be omitted because otherwise men could never discharge this duety neither would their time suffice to performe these dueties of admonition to all such as they should finde subject thereunto both within the Church without Yea suppose they had no other calling to attend upon yet could not the whole age of man be sufficient to testify effectually in order against all such transgressions which an intelligent person might discerne to be committed dayly before his eyes both in private publick 3. Even yourself seem to acknowledge this also when touching the difference of offences you say (i) Com. of Saints cap. 22. § 2. 3. when offences arise it shal be our glory if we can passe them by as Solomon hath sayd But if the trespasse be such as we may not but insist upon both for the honour of God who is offended soule of the sinner which is endangered our owne or neighbours good who are endammaged thereby then are we bound to admonish the trespasser hereof
Church which was the title then given unto the Ecclesiasticall Senate and his words of having as a Publicane Heathen doe manifestly prove he meant to speak according to their custome c. And therefore also in his (z) S. Theol l. 7. c. 7. p. 276. generall description of a Presbyterie comprehending under it as well the government of many Churches by Synods as of one particular Church by the Eldership thereof for the proof and warrant of one as well as the other he alledgeth this rule Mat. 18.18 even as he doth other places taken from the Jewish Policy under the Law Mr Brightman when he shewes that Christ in his Church hath appointed a more accurate order for remove all of lesse offences then that which the Pharisees observed who corrupted the Law with their erroneous glosses condemning grosser sinnes as murders and neglecting lesser transgressions yet for the forme of the Judicatorie he declares that it was such an one as the former Writers doe witnesse to have bene taken from the Jewes Policy when as he thus describeth it (a) Comment in Cant. cap. 4. The Synedrion is a Senate of Elders watching for the soules of that Congregation over which they are set in things that belong unto manners Christian honesty which Senate because it represents the state or * quoniam vicem sustineat c. beares the place of the whole Congregation is called of Christ himself the Church saying Tell the Church Mat. 18.17 and of Paul is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Eldership 1. Tim. 4.14 And againe in the next leafe shewing the meaning of that text Matth. 18.15 c. Onely remember thence that the Church is not the vvhole Congregation but a Synedrion or Senate of certaine chosen persons And for ought that can be gathered from this his exposition it was no new rule but a renewing and confirming of that which had bene of old prescribed unto Israel Mr Parker for the maintenance of Classes and Synods whereby many particular Churches are combined united together argues also from Mat. 18. and that after a double manner for first to shew withall that the right manner and forme of combination doth consist in a mutuall obligation of Churches without subjection unto the rule or dominion of any one he reasons thus (b) Polit. Eccles l. 3. c. 22. p. 331 Let us goe to the very fountaine of combination which as Chamierus saith well is found in Mat. 18. because many Churches are combined together after the same manner that the prime Churches viz. particular Congregations doe grow together in their members into one frame And he maintaines that the forme of this combination comming together is noted in those words in my name and if they agree together Mat. 18. v. 19 20. Thus he derives the combination of Churches from their mutuall consent agreement And hence it may appeare further that as members of particular Churches are united together by the bond of mutuall consent not onely for counsell advise but also for the censuring judging of their offences and this without superiority of one member above another so by the like bond of mutuall consent many Churches are also united not onely for counsell but for the mutuall censuring deciding of one anothers causes and this without superiority of any one Church above the rest Otherwise also how could he have applyed these things as he doth for the defence of the Reformed Churches wherein such authority of Classes and Synods is exercised Secondly whereas D. Whitgift others dispute against the Classes Presbyteries of Scotland the Low-countries where the faults and causes of particular Churches are judged censured and aske for Scripture to prove and justify such an order of government Mr Parker in defence of them besides other answers proofes alledges this place Matt. 18. for the warrant thereof and sayth (c) Polit. Eccl. l. 3. c. 24. p. 355. This proceeding from an Eldership to a Classis from a Classis to a Synod is founded in the institution of Christ Matt. 18.17 by proportion on this manner He commands that from the admonition of one being despised men proceed unto the admonition of two or three if that be contemned unto the censure of the Eldership if that be despised unto the censure of the whole Church therefore why not from one whole Church unto many in a Classis againe from many in a Classis unto yet more in a Synod And having layd this just foundation he reprooves the opposites further from the confessiō of some of them contradicting the other (d) Ibidem Both Sutlive Downam doe interpret the Church Mat. 18. to be either a Consistory or a Synod Behold therefore by the judgement even of Hierachicall men themselves a manifest commandement of Christ for Classicall assemblies for what Is not the Classis a certaine kinde of Synod Zepperus having spoken of the Ecclesiasticall Policie or government in the Judaicall Church shewes how the same was continued when he sayth (e) Polit. Eccl. l. 1. c. 16. p. 198.199 This administration of Ecclesiasticall discipline Christ also established and made to be perpetuall Mat. 18.15 c. Gersom Bucerus that excellent and worthy servant of God who hath given so full an answer to D. Downam in defence of the Discipline practised in the Reformed Churches is as full in this poynt that the Rule of Christ Mat. 18. is no new rule He maintaineth that (f) Dissert de Gubern Eccl p. 182. the forme of the sacred Politie in the new Testament ought to be framed according to the manner of the Jewes Politie To this end he (g) Ibid. p. 48. brings the testimony of many learned Writers witnessing with him unto the same trueth Philip Melanchthon as he is there alledged by him shewing what order of Discipline was appoynted by Christ in those words Tell the Church Mat. 18. sayth (h) P. Melā cōment in 1. Cor. 15. This custome was not first instituted of the Messias but was the old manner of the Leviticall Priests who in their place maintained the discipline by such judgements though they had also other Politicall judgements punishments Victorinus Strigelius cited also by him speakes in like manner (i) Hypom in N. T. in Mat. 18. A new forme of judgement is not instituted in this place but the old manner is repeated delivered from the first fathers the steps whereof have alwayes remained in the Church c. Pezelius having expressed the forme of Government in Israel writes thus (k) Argum. Resp Theol. part 7.8.690 According to this example of the old Politie almost the same order of judgements was kept in the new Testament c. Musculus (l) Loc. cō de Eccl. c. 5. Aretius (m) Problē Tom. 2. loc de Excom are likewise brought in by him as deriving describing the Discipline of the Church Matth. 18. from
as appeares (p) Act. Synod Nat. Dordr Sess 4. Art 3. in the lawes orders prescribed by the Illustrious LL. the States Generall c. III. Even of those which by a lawfull election deputation are sent unto Synods whether they be Ministers and Elders or other members of the Church there ought to be a limited and certaine number for if every Church in a whole nation might send as many as they would or could there might be thousands and ten thousands gathered together into some Synods whereby great confusion and disorder in the discussing and judging of many causes would apparently follow D. Whitaker saith (q) De Cōc q. 3. p. 81. Certainly confusion cannot be avoyded when too many meet together And as for that Synod at Ierusalem he saith * Ibid. q. 1. c. 6. That assembly could not be great because they were compassed about with the Priests and Pharisees And therefore also in the practise of these Churches there is a certaine number determined of such as are to be sent unto Synods as appeareth likewise in (r) Act. Synod Nat. Dordr Sess 4. Art 3. those lawes before mentioned If Mr Canne will allow any limitation of number and can therein satisfy himself that he doth not deprive the people Churches of their right he may thereby also satisfy himself for any thing that he objecteth unto us in this behalf IV. We doe further grant this liberty even unto such as are no Delegates or Deputies of the Church that though they be not allowed for judges yet many of them (ſ) Inn. Animadv in Bell. de Concil l. 1. c. 15. n. 2.3 9. as hearers may for their edification be present at the cōmunication conference in the Synod that they may profit in godlines This also is the practise of these Churches both in Provinciall and Nationall Synods so farre as the place will conveniently receive a competent number and so also it was observed in the Nationall Synod at Dort V. This liberty of hearing in Synods is so moderated restrained that though they which have no calling unto the Synod may heare questions touching doctrine and religion discussed yet such are not allowed to be present and to heare when personall matters of scandall and offence come to be examined because as Iunius saith (t) Ibid. c. 15. n. 9. contra charitatem fuisset Nam veritatis cognitio ad omnes pertinet infirmitatum minime that is It had bene against charity for the knowledge of the trueth belongs unto all the knowledge of infirmities not so VI. Touching the right and liberty of Synods there are many other things to be further observed When Mr Cartwright had spoken very much for the liberty of the people in Synods yet for prevention of mistaking and by way of correcting himself after a sort he saith (v) Confut. of the Rhemists Ann. on Act. 15. V. 6. n. 5. Yet write we not this as though the peoples presence either in all Councels where the doctrine is not in controversy were * The negative particle added there seemes to be the Printers fault being concrary to that which went before and followes after making no good sense in his words is therefore to be omitted needfull or that in those Councels where they were present they have like right with those Bishops and Elders For they we mean Bishops and Elders may first by a severall and foreset deliberation take counsell whether it be expedient to propound any such matter as is in cōtroversie in that Councell where the people shall be present Whereby if they perceive any generall and obstinate opposition of them against the truth they may hold that poynt of doctrine back This we see to have been done by Iosias who or ever he assembled the people first of all assembled the Elders of Iuda and Ierusalem 2. King 23.1 Also by Iames who at Pauls arrivall to Ierusalem first assembled the Elders to debate of the matter or ever he was presented before the Church Act. 21.18 19. Secondly if the people should bewray a wilfull stubbornesse against the truth not suspected by them yet the Governours being sound without whom there can nothing be concluded there should not follow any prejudice of the Councels authority against the trueth albeit the number of the people assembled were greater then of those Bishops and Elders Hereupon it commeth that the Decrees of the Councell are after called the Decrees of the Apostles Elders leaving out the brethren which Luke had first set downe And upon the same ground in the decision of doubtfull matters Moses Deut. 17. commandeth that they should have recourse unto the Priests of the Leviticall stocke for that they bare the principall sway in those deliberations Lastly the case of Councels being as it hath bene declared it is no marvell although Augustine call a Generall Councell in some respect the consent of the whole Church considering that not onely those Bishops and Elders but some of the people were in all likelyhood there assembled That which Mr Cartw. sayth of the severall and foreset deliberation agreeth with that which Beza (x) Ann. in Act. 15.12 writes of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or foregoing consultation The same is acknowledged by (y) S. Theo. l. 7. p. 277. Mr Fenner also And hereunto accordeth that which Gersom Bucerus fitly noteth concerning the meaning of Cyprian who writing unto the Elders Deacons that he had determined from the beginning of his government to doe nothing by his owne judgement privately (z) Cyprian l. 3. ep 10. without their counsell and without consent of the people Bucerus explaineth his speech distinctly on this manner (a) Dissent de Gub. Eccles p. 145. Behold first he mentions the counsell which was to be borrowed from the Presbytery and then the consent whereby the judgement of the Presbytery was publickly approved of the people And this he applyes also to the order of that judgement described 1. Cor. 5. But concerning the judgement of Cyprian we have occasion to speak more hereafter I. CAN. V. Howsoever the Church at Antioch sent some Brethren with Paul and Barnabas unto the Church at Ierusalem notwithstanding and let it be well observed they did not this as being a dependent body and standing under another Ecclesiasticall authoritie out of themselves For as Mr Parker (b) Poli. Eccl l. 3. c. 20. p. 301. 314. excellently proves it the Church at Antioch at this time had absolute power in and for her self to have ended the controversy and might have done it I say in respect of authority without acquainting therewith any other Congregation at all To the same purpose another saith (c) D. Whit. Conc. qu. 1. c. 1. The Church of Antioch sent not to Ierusalem as being bound in duety thereto But in regard it was the chief place of Religion therefore they made choyse freely of that Congregation as knowing them to be best
controversies that arise in the same and according to Mr Parker doe exercise a lawfull jurisdiction herein From this Communication of Churches he commeth to speak (k) Ibid. c. 23. p. 345. 340. of their Combination from whence ariseth a combined Church derived from other Churches This combination he notes to consist either of two or more Churches An instance of this combination of two he gives in the Synod at Ierusalem Act. 15. and sayth It was a Councell and Synod and that properly and that of two Churches to wit of Antioch and Ierusalem for the Messengers sent from Antioch were present which represented the Church of Antioch as is usuall in Councels And notwithstanding an objection made against the Church of Antioch yet he sayth that Church was also judge in that Councell because their Messengers brought the judgement of the same with them Hereupon he reproveth two Spirits of errour the one of Grotius who 〈◊〉 sayd to reject the use of Synods altogether for who would write this saith Mr Par●… 〈◊〉 be that is bewitched with errour seeing the Church of God hath alwayes held that S●… are here instituted of God to endure for ever c. The second spirit of errour wi●●●he reproves is that of the Hierarchy (l) P. 347. because they condemne the Reformed Synods as if they were degenerate quae tamen ad hunc typum accuratissime efformantur which are notwithstanding most exactly framed according to this patterne Hence it appeareth that Mr Parker held the Synods of divine institution to be not onely for counsell and admonition but for jurisdiction also for otherwise he could not have sayd with truth that the Reformed Synods all which exercise jurisdiction doe answer exactly thereunto otherwise he might rather have sayd that the Synods of the Reformed Churches swarving from the primitive patterne were indeed adulterare and degenerate usurping authority and jurisdiction which did not belong unto them The combination of more Churches Mr Par. describes in divers kindes or degrees also (m) Ibidē and first that which is of many Churches into one Eldership The reason of this is because some little Churches knowing their owne weaknes doe joyne themselves unto the neighbour Churches and so make but one Eldership onely among themselves He gives an instance of this in those small Churches about Geneva which not being sufficient for themselves doe joyne themselves unto the Church in the next City so that they come together weekly into the neighbour-Consistory of the City This combination of lesser Churches into one Eldership or Consistory Mr Parker approves and justifyes and declares his judgement touching this kinde of consociation 1. He sayth It is grounded upon the communion of Churches and derived from the wisedome of the Spirit and complaines of the Hierarchy that doe so virulently impugne the same 2. (n) P. 348. Whereas nothing is more objected against the Reformation in England then that many Churches or Parishes are unable for it wanting fit men to governe and to exercise discipline in Elderships Mr Parker answereth hereunto If it be so let them joyne themselves unto the next Eldership or erect a common Eldership among themselves and so from common counsell and help let them seek remedy for their weaknes Now it is recorded (o) Calvin Epist 167. that in the Discipline at Geneva the right of Excommunication is in the power of this Consistory or common Eldership and hereby then it appeares that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited unto a particular Church onely and that Mr Parker allowing of this government at Geneva is not against the jurisdiction of many Churches over one Againe whereas D. Bancroft and D. Field object that the Churches at Geneva and the villages of the Netherlands have not the power of Excommunication and whereas my opposites complaine that Churches are brought into bondage and loose their liberty when they may not excommunicate without the consent of others Mr Parkers answer is (p) P. 349. that the power of Excommunication ordination and other jurisdiction remaines pure in them saving that communion which ought to be among Churches every Church in greater matters useth the consent and counsell of her neighbours as of the Classis or Eldership in the City quod ego Ecclesiis vel perfectissimis non indig●um reor which I judge saith he not to be unmeet even for the most perfect Churches Thus he requires not onely counsell but consent of other Churches in weightier matters which is that we stand for This doth not as he saith (q) P. 390. import any Hierarchicall subjection in the parishes at Geneva unlesse happily any can be subjected unto himself for these parishes each for their part and that equally are this very Eldership What subjection is it where all as well City-churches as the Country-churches are equall for the country-churches are no more subject unto this Eldership then are the city-churches The next combination of many Churches which Mr Parker speaks of (r) Ibid. c. 24. p. 353. c. is when they are united into one Classis And of these he giveth instance in the Churches of the Netherlands and in Scotland where the 52 Presbyteries so called by them were nothing els but so many Classes For the warrant of these he bringeth both divers grounds of holy Scripture and the example of antiquity He there answereth 10 Objections made by the Hierarchy against these Classes And it is to be observed that he doth not simply speak of Classes in generall but of these Classes of the Reformed Churches in these Countries of our Classes as he useth to call them not onely for that he approved them but because together with us he was a member of this communion and lived under the jurisdiction of the Classis with us If he had not allowed their jurisdiction which he knew and saw to be exercised by them how could he with good conscience have praised them as he doth Speaking of the ancient Discipline used in the Primitive Churches he saith (f) P. 357. Omnia his in politeia nostra in Classibus nostris similia O quantum peccat Hierarchia quae hanc suavissimam Ecclesiarum combinationem eliminavit that is All things in our government and in our Classes are like unto these O how much doth the Hierarchy offend which hath banished this most sweet combination of Churches And as well might we cry out O how much doe the authours of the single uncompounded policie offend who likewise seek to banish and overthrow this combination of Churches in Classes while they allow them onely for counsell and regard not their consent but allow the Churches in combination to proceed in the weightiest affaires without or against the consent of Classes Whereas it is objected not onely by my opposites but by some of the Hierarchy themselves that these Classes doe take unto themselves that jurisdiction which they seeme to condemne in the Hierarchy Mr Parker in his answer
for counsell both because he allowes a distinction of them in the Synod which had the authority of a determining voyce from them that did onely dispute or consult and because he intimates a judiciall proceeding in the Synods by mentioning parties accused their citing or calling of them the condemning of them which imports a further matter then onely of admonition or counsell Whereas Bellarmine accuseth us that we allow any learned men though Laicks to have a determining voyce let their office be what it will Junius answereth (m) N. 4. These things have none of us sayd or thought as they are here layd downe This is that which we say such are to be taken into the Synod which are furnished with gifts and calling which for gifts are godly honest learned for their calling which are either ordinarily appointed to teach or extraordinarily sent for and brought by just authority Now this necessity of a calling which he so (n) See c. 16. n. 10. 18. 20. c. 17. n. 1. often urgeth and requireth to be in the members of a Synod doth argue a speciall power and authority belonging unto them by vertue whereof they may give sentence in the judgement of causes whereas to admonish or counsell requires no more power then that which every Christian hath in another for his good as Mr D. himself confesseth To the same purpose Junius shewes against Bellarmine that the meaning of Theodosius and Valentinian was not to admit Bishops onely but that (o) Ibid. c 15. n. 13. those onely might heare examine and give sentence in a Synod which being sent from the Churches unto the Synod were reckoned up of the Bishops according to their letters of publick authority which they were wont to exhibit Againe he sayth (p) N. 15. They which are present without the authority of the Church of them some may onely heare as the laicks or common people some may be used in consultations as the learned men especially Ecclesiasticall persons but they may not give definitive sentence And thus still by distinguishing those that gave counsell from those that gave sentence in the Synod it appeares he acknowledged a power of jurisdiction in Synods and that they were not onely for counsell So when Bellarmine sayth it was a fault in the Councell of Basill that Presbyters or other learned men besides Bishops were allowed to have not onely a consulting voyce but a deciding suffrage affirmeth that this was against the custome of all antiquity c. Junius answereth (q) N. 19. This we denye for it was the first institution Act. 15. and not onely the manner and custome Seeing therefore there was such an institution of the Apostles in their assembly what need was there to alledge custome c. When Bellarmine chargeth the Protestants as holding that a Synod is nothing but an inquisition and that Christ alone and his written word hath a determining voyce Junius sayth (r) Ibid. in c. 18. n. ● It is false for Synods have both an inquisition of that which is true just holy by religious communication and also a ministeriall giving of sentence Though he shew there and in many annotations following that it is not lawfull for Christians to obey them further then they agree with the Scriptures that their sentence of it self is but a persuasion and not a constraint a ministeriall judgement not of absolute authority of itself c. yet he (ſ) N. 3. grants the Lord hath commanded that we should obey the sentence of a lawfull Synod assembled together in his name c. He sayth (t) N. 14. Synods have true judgements so farre as they are of God according to the tables of his trueth and commandement of themselves they are not judgements but declarations publications and ministeriall pronouncings of the trueth and judgements of God And more then this cannot be yeelded to any Ecclesiasticall judicatory whatsoever Herein he fully grants as much jurisdiction to Synods as belongs to any particular Congregation or Eldership either apart or joyntly together When Bellarmine blames the Protestants for their exception against the Councell of Trent Junius answereth (v) Ibid. in c. 21. n. 1. It is the ordinary way of right in every appeale that the judgement of Synods and the exequution of their sentence be suspended and stayed so long untill the matter be againe examined in another more free or greater Assembly c. This answer had bene needles and impertinent unlesse Synods had more power then of counsell and admonition onely He sayth (x) N. 7. Certainly in every just Synod Hereticks being cited heard present or willfully hiding themselves have bene condemned c. When Bellarm. objects that Protestants will have nothing to be determined in Synods and so strifes to be never ended Junius answers (y) N. 23. that he perverts their meaning and referres us to his preface nota 40. where the Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction of Synods is plainely avouched IUnius proceeding to the examination of his second book touching Synods where Bellarmine repeats that Synods of Bishops may judge all controversies both of faith and manners Junius answereth (z) Animadv in Bell. l. 2. deCōcl c. 1. n. 1. We have granted it of those that are lawfull Synods When Bellarmine had sayd that nothing is greater then a lawfull and approved Generall Councell Junius answereth (a) Ibid. c. 4. n. 2. It is false for Christ is greater and the Scripture is greater seeing Christ and the Scripture are great of themselves the Church is great by them c. But this answer had bene insufficient not direct enough if my opposites opinion were true For then according to their opinion he might more fitly have answered that the authority of a particular Congregation is greater then the authority of a Generall Synod because though the counsell and advise of the Synod was more to be reverenced in respect of many excellently learned and godly men from many Churches that were in it yet seeing Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is limited to a particular Congregation therefore the same is greater in the power of censuring and in the use of the keyes for binding and loosing of impenitent sinners seeing Synods have no jurisdiction at all over any other Churches Againe when Bellarmine sets downe this insolent proposition that the Pope cannot commit neither unto a Synod nor to any man the coactive judgement over himself but onely the discretive Iunius answereth (b) Ibid. in c. 18. n. 1. The proposition is most true he cannot commit because God hath committed it to the Synod and lawfull Councell Wherefore we say on the contrary neither can he commit it for if he be the servant of God God hath committed the judgement concerning him unto his Church neither can he reject it but though he be unwilling yet both the Church is bound to judge concerning him and he to undergoe the judgement thereof discretive and coactive howsoever it
abuses about excōmunication he saith Can the Bishop alone excōmunicate Excōmunication doth not belong unto any one man whosoever he be but unto the Church By these the like speeches of Zuinglius it appeares that his testimonies are not prejudiciall unto our practise nor unto that authority of Synods which we maintaine seeing we grant that no one person alone can by right excommunicate any man by his owne authority neither can any Church or Churches excommunicate those that are not in communion with them The other place cited out of Zuinglius touching the calling of Ministers is so farre from prooving any thing against us that being duely considered it may fitly serve to blame those popular courses which Mr Can. pleades for and to justify our practise in not performing this weighty businesse without the advise and approbation of neighbour Ministers assembled in the Classis Zuinglius in that treatise called Ecclesiastes having spoken of the Popish tyranny bereaving most Churches of the liberty of election he reprooves another extreme saving (f) Eccles Tom. 2. f. 54. If there were any Church unto which election was yet left free the common people rashly without all deliberation and without all counsell of learned prudent and faithfull men did choose those whom they did most favour not such as were indued with true vertues beseeming a Bishop Therefore there is nothing so agreeable unto the Divine ordinance and ancient institution as that the whole Congregation of a faithfull people together with some learned and godly Bishops or other faithfull and experienced men doe make choyse of a Pastour Thus he plainly disavowes the independency of Churches in such cases not allowing a Congregation to proceed unto the election of a Minister without the assistance of the Ministers of other Churches and to this effect he explaines himself further in the same place saying It is meet that the power of election should be in the Church being furnished with the counsels of faithfull and learned men For as that matter may not lye in the power of any one man so neither may the rude and unlearned multitude take upon them so great a weight of election c. And in the same leafe speaking of Anabaptists intruding themselves into the Churches of their owne accord he proves that they are no lawfull Ministers because they have not a due calling thus Bishops they are not for they are not chosen of any Church by lawfull and unanimous consent the authority of other Bishops excelling in faith and prudence also concurring Observe how that with the free consent of the people he joynes not onely the counsell or advise as he had called it before but the authority of the Officers of other Congregations Moreover that Zuinglius did not absolutely deny the authority of Synods though he speake much against Popish Synods may appeare if we consider the reasons which he useth against them viz. because they were not assembled in the holy Ghost because they did not judge of matters according to the Scriptures but according to the ordinances and customes of men c. Now this is not to dispute against the thing itself but against the abuse of it And therefore having spoken against such Councels of the Pope Cardinals and Bishops in such sort as Mr Canne had alledged him (g) Ch. pl. p. 75. before he addes withall (h) Art 8. expl I speake onely of these that are such my writings shall not hurt others who set themselves under the Scriptures not above the Scriptures And that these conditions for the want whereof he opposed those Popish Synods may yet be found in other Synods which have made decrees for the deciding of controversies raysed in the Church he acknowledgeth in these words (i) Paraenes ad cōmun Helvet civ Tom. 1. f. 116. If the Councill of Gangra were assembled in the holy Ghost which no good man will deny while he sees that the decrees thereof doe agree with the lawes of the Gospell and with the doctrine of the Apostles it was unworthily done of those that came after that have disanulled the decrees thereof without being moved by any authority of the Scriptures Againe in another place speaking of the foure Generall Councels though he justly blame those that accounted them to be of equall authority with the foure Evangelists yet he saith (k) Archeteles T. 1. f. 137. Truely I would not have any thing to be detracted from them He was not therefore of Mr Cannes minde who will have all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to be detracted or removed from Synods Besides Zuinglius doth not onely approve of these Synods held in former times but he also shewes himself ready to joyne in the like practise even in the exercise of the same Ecclesiasticall authority that was used in those Synods For when the Magistrates of Zurich had assembled together all the Ministers of the Churches both in their city and countrie and had procured the presence of divers others for the solemne vindicating of the doctrine taught in their Churches there Faber Vicar of the Bishop of Constance having spoken of a Generall Councell that it onely had authority to determine these things Zuinglius replyes (l) Act. Disp 1. Tom. 2. f. ●10 Whereas in this our assembly there be so many right faithfull men both of our owne countrey and strangers and furthermore seeing here be so many godly learned Bishops present who doubtles have a desire not onely to heare and understand but also to advance divine trueth verily I see nothing to hinder even in this place whereby it should not be lawfull for us according to the Vicars meaning to dispute of these things and to decree what trueth teacheth But other nations he sayth will never consent unto these our decrees c. By these and the like (m) Ibid. f. 621. c. passages it is evident that Zuinglius did allow the Ministers of severall Congregations assembled in a Synod not onely to consult and dispute but also to determine yea and to make decrees for the removing of controversies settling peace in the Church while they did it according to the Scriptures which is the same that we maintaine The words of Mr Luther whom he cites in the next place as they are to no purpose alledged against us seeing they touch not the question as I shewed before so being compared with other his writings they make it appeare that these two propositions may well stand together viz. that the Church hath power to judge to call to depose c. and yet that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not confined within the bounds of a particular Congregation but that Synods Councells have authority to judge of Church affaires and to censure offendours forasmuch as Luther doth as plainly and as fully avouch the one as the other In the yeare 1518 having understood that they proceeded against him in the Popes Court at Rome and that an unjust sentence was likely to
hath ordained these Holy assemblies with promise that they being gathered together in the name of Christ he himself will be among them With the Synod the Pastour hath authority to determine concerning regiment of the Church Againe (d) P. 115 116. 117. Let us returne to the authority of the Synod which consisteth in deciding and determining such matters as cannot otherwise in particular Churches be concluded either because they concerne the common state of all Churches or because they lack sufficient authority in some one Church First therefore the lawfull Synod hath to consider if any controversy of doctrine doe arise that it be determined by the word of God c. Secondly it hath to determine of the use of the ceremonies not of will without reason or ground of Scripture but upon necessary causes of avoiding offence and similitude of superstition of bearing with the weak of order and comelinesse and edification So did the Synod of the Apostles and Elders command for a time abstinencie from meat offered to Idols otherwise lawfull in it selfe for offences sake c. Also for order and comelines and best edification the Synod hath to determine what shall be observed in particular charges as of the time place and forme of preaching and praying and administring of the Sacraments For who should be able to know what order comelines and edification requireth according to Gods word but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others For it is absurd that they should be taught by such in these small things as ought to learne the trueth of them in all matters c. (e) P. 118. It is out of all controversy that before there were any Christian Magistrates this authority was proper unto the Synod Which authority we know to be granted to the Church by our Saviour Christ practised by his Apostles continued by their successours three hundred yeares before there were any Christian Emperours and long time after there were Christian Emperours even as long as any puritie continued in religion untill both Emperours and Synods were thrust out of all lawfull authoritie which they ought to have in the Church by the tyrannie of Antichrist In the same learned Discourse of Ecclesiasticall Government it is further added (f) P. 122. 123. 124. The Synod hath further authority concerning Discipline to reforme and redresse by Ecclesiasticall Censure all such defaults and controversies as cannot be determined in the particular Churches as for example If the Pastour himselfe have need to be severely punished where there is but one Pastour in a Church or if Elders which should be reformers of others have notoriously misgoverned themselves or if they have beene led by affection to condemne an innocent or to justifye the ungodly in these and such like cases all contention is to be concluded by the authority of the Synod Some example we have thereof Act. 15. where those contentious Schismatiques that withstood Paul and Barnabas at Antiochia were constrained to yeeld by authority of the Councell and Paul and Barnabas restored to their credit For which causes Synodes ought oftentimes to be assembled though not generall of the whole Realme but particular of every Province or Shire as it may be most conveniently that such things as are to be reformed may be redressed with speed These and many other such like assertions in allowance of Synods and their authority hath this learned Authour whom yet they have alledged against me Had Will. Best but had so much wit or conscience as to have duely looked upon these English Authors being but small treatises and perused them diligently he might easily have learned hereby what order God requires in the Government of his Church But taking so much upon trust and presuming blindely upon the fidelity and skill of a Brownist therefore is he runne into Scandall having published many slanders against the Churches of Christ and wrested so many witnesses against their meanings In the next place the Testimony of Mr Fenner doth fitly offer itself to be examined of us for seeing he tooke upon him the Defence of the former Authour against Bridges who impugned that learned Discourse of Eccles Gov. we have reason to exspect that he also will defend the authority of Synods in like manner As for the two pages which Mr Ca. (g) Against Bridges p. 15 16. alledgeth he neither specifyeth his words neither doe I finde in either of those pages any one word against the use of Classes or Synods amōgst us but on the contrary a cleare testimony which he gives unto them For speaking there in pag. 16. of the forme of Discipline appoynted of God and of the severall points thereof particularly set downe in the word of God with other he reckoneth up these the joynt care of Elderships and Synods Afterwards he speaketh more fully in praise of this government and saith (h) Def. of Ecc. Disci ag Bridg. p. 105. The nature of this order itself which admitteth no Minister but learned nor any decision of weight but by advise of many with appointed conferences and Synods of learned men for such purposes besides the assurance of Gods favourable blessing of his owne ordinance and the experience of the Synodes of the Reformed Churches the comparison of their judgements Canons and other constitutions with the like of the other in any part beareth witnesse whether the want of learning and pietie both must needes be greater in it then in the other Whereas D. Fulk had given unto these Churches which have a Classicall and Synodall government the title and praise of (i) Learn Disc of Ecc. Gov. p. 7. rightly reformed Churches when D. Bridges was offended therewith Mr Fenner maintaines that praise to be due unto them and commends k their entire and whole obedience which they yeeld to God in receyving all the holy doctrine of our Saviour Christ both concerning things to be beleeved and also concerning the spirituall policie Discipline and order for guiding of his Church And further in the same place he repeats and undertakes to defend D. Fulkes words perswading to imbrace that most beautifull order of Ecclesiasticall regiment which God doth so manifestly blesse and prosper in our neighbours hands Hereby it may appeare how farre Mr Fenner was from that erroneous and slanderous spirit of Mr C. and W.B. And here by the example of W. Best all simple ignorant men are to be warned of publishing such false things as he hath done upon the credit of other men that are strangers from the Churches of Christ Moreover the judgement of Mr Fenner in approving this use of Synods for the government of Churches and judgement of causes may be clearly seen in sundry other testimonies which he hath given to this purpose and which I have (l) P. 84-88 before noted where among the rest when having maintained the right of Synods to be jure divino alledging many Scriptures for the warrant thereof he
that (i) Ibid. p. 109 110 c. book and approved by these Ministers are most of them and generally the very same that are observed in the Classes and Synods of the Reformed Churches in these United Provinces of the Netherlands where we live and where our English Church is combined with them in the same Ecclesiasticall government The agreement and consent of these men in their desire of Classes and Synods according to the order and practise observed also in Scotland at Geneva is therefore by the Recorder thereof noted stiled over the head of many pages in that book English Genevating for Reformation And againe English Scottizing for Discipline by practise Even these reproaches doe justly serve for the reproofe of Mr Canne who denyes that which other opposites doe willingly acknowledge Thirdly the very Brownists themselves were wont of old to acknowledge that the not-conforming Ministers in England did stand for Classes and Synods Though with great skorne reproach they speak of Synods yet that very skorne and reproach is a witnesse against Mr Can. and W. B. to shew the consent of former times with me Hen. Barow speaking of the censures of evill and condemning both Conformists and Non-conformists together he saith (k) H. Bar. Discov of False Chur. p. 165. Yea all the Priests of the land both Pontificall and Reformists agree in this poynt conclude that the lay people as they terme them ought not to intermeddle either with the deposing their Minister or reproof of his doctrine The one sort saith he sendeth them to their Lords these Bishops the other referreth them over for these and many other cases under hand to a Provinciall or Classicall Synod or permanent Councell of Priests c. Amongst whom all these affaires must be debated and after they are agreed upon the poynt then their decrees to be brought forth solemnly published and pronounced to the people who must attend upon wait and receave these Oracles as most holy and Canonicall They have no remedy if they also be contrary to the trueth but to appeale to a Councell c. And this he calleth a devilish forgerie c. After that to like purpose he saith (l) Ibid. p. 169. These Priests they will not onely not submit their persons and doctrine to the censure of the Church where they administer for they must have a Jurie of Clarkes a Classis of Priests to goe upon them but they binde their poore Church to their lippes build it upon themselves and with their blazing light strike all the rest of their hearers followers stark blinde Againe (m) P. 169 170. By their Propheticall Conventicles and Classicall Synods they assume into their owne hands the key of all knowledge and shutting up the Scriptures yea all Gods graces even the Holy Ghost itself among themselves in these their Schooles of Prophets as also into their Classes of select Priests the scepter of Christ and absolute government of all Churches to whom it is left but to receive and execute the reverent decrees of this famous Classis of Priests In another place having told how the Pontificals have opened their mouthes unto accursed blasphemy then he returnes unto the Reformists and speakes on this wise (n) P. 189 190. The Pharisees of these times I meane these your great learned Preachers your Good men that sigh and grone for Reformation but their hands with the sluggard denie to worke These counterfaites would raise up a second error even as a second Beast by so much more dangerous by how much it hath more shew of the truth These men instead of this grosse Antichristian government which is now manifest and odious unto all men would bring in a new adulterate forged government in shew or rather in despite of Christs blessed government which they in the pride rashnes ignorance and sensualitie of their fleshly hearts most miserably innovate corrupt and pervert c. The thing itselfe they innovate and corrupt in that they adde new devises of their owne as their Pastorall suspension from their Sacraments their set continued Synods their select Classes of Ministers their setled supreme Councell c. That which Mr Iohnson and others with him doe require is more generall and ambiguous viz. (o) Apol. of Brown Pet. 3 pos 9. p. 64. that the Church be not governed by Popish Canons Courts Classes Customes or any humane inventions but by the lawes and rules which Christ hath appoynted in his Testament But that which H. Barow writes is more plaine and more particularly applyed to the Ministers of England whom he calleth the Reformists Of them he saith (p) Discov p. 191. Their permanent Synods Councels also which they would erect not here to speak of their new Dutch Classes for therein is a secret should onely consist of Priests or Ministers as they terme them people of the Churches be shut out neither be made acquainted with the matters debated there neither have free voyce in those Synods and Councels but must receave and obey without contradiction whatsoever those learned Priests shall decree These Synods and Councels shall have absolute power over all Churches doctrines Ministers to erect ratifie or abrogate to excommunicate or depose at their pleasures Their decrees are most holy without controulement unlesse it be by the Prince or the high Court of Parliament Not here to speake of their solemne orders observed in these Councils and Synodes as their choice by suffrage amongst themselves of their Archisynagogon or Rector Chori their President as they call him propounder or moderator of their Councell about which their predecessours have had no small stir untill their holy Father the Pope put an end to the strife by getting the chaire This stuffe they would bring in againe under colour of Reformation these and many more their leavened corrupt writings of Discipline and their supplications unto the Parliament declare c. Againe he saith (q) Ib. P. 193 These Reformists howsoever for fashion sake they give the people a little libertie to sweeten their mouthes and make them beleeve that they should choose their owne Ministers for further right in the censuring their Ministers or in the ordering the affaires of their Churches they allow not as hath bene sayd yet even in this pretended choice doe they coozen beguile them also leaving them nothing but the smoky windy title of election onely injoyning them to choose some Universitie Clarke one of these Colledge birds of their owne brood or els comes a Synode in the necke of them annihilates the election whatsoever it be They have also a trick to stop it before it come so farre namely in the ordinatiō which must forsooth needs be done by other Priests for the Church that chooseth him hath no power to ordaine him And this makes the mother Church of Geneva and the Dutch Classes I dare not say the secret Classes in England to make Ministers for us in
were come from other places c. Therefore when we alledge this example Act. 15. to shew the authority and power of Synods in judging of controversies those that to frustrate elude this example doe plead and except that the Apostles had extraordinary power they are here reproved by Iunius who shewes that though the Apostles had extraordinary gifts in judging which might procure the more respect in that regard yet the power it self by which they did judge Act. 15. was not extraordinary and peculiar to the Apostles but ordinary and common to Ministers Elders other Deputies of the Churches therefore commonly perpetually to be observed used as occasion requireth Mr Can's Exceptions touching Act. 15. answered BEfore he comes to the point he intreats me to resolve five Questions the two latter whereof I have answered (c) Pag. 34. before the other with their answers are as followeth I. CAN. I. (d) Churches plea p. 32 33. Whither the Assembly mentioned in Act. 15. there a Synod or Classis ANSVV. The Assembly mentioned Act. 15. was a Synod and not properly a Classis according to the usuall acception of the word in these places Classes are Assemblies of Ministers comming often together out of neighbour Churches within a lesser circuit Synods have a larger extent comprehend many Classes under them come more seldome together I. CAN. II. How it can be manifested from that place that both are divine institutions as here is affirmed ANSVV. This place Act. 15. or any other that yeelds warrant for one of these Assemblies yeelds it for both because both are of like nature and differ not essentially but in circumstantiall matters of time place number of persons In both these is a superiour Ecclesiasticall authority over particular Churches in respect of both there appeareth a mutuall dependence of Churches that all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is not limited unto a particular Church which is the Question betwixt us I. CAN. III. How he can naturally from thence rayse this doctrine viz. Excommunications and elections of Ministers are actions belonging unto Classes and Synods ANSVV. When I rayse such a doctrine from Act. 15. as he mentions which I have not done any where then is it time for me to manifest how the same ariseth naturally from the Text. Election of Ministers is an action belonging to severall Congregations and not to Classes and Synods but if any particular Churches doe offend in choosing unlawfull and unfit persons then are Classes and Synods to judge thereof and to hinder such elections Had the Church of Antioch gone about to elect for a Minister among them one of that Sect which taught the brethren there Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses ye cannot be saved Act. 15.1.5 then had the Synod at Ierusalem authority to have hindred that election which appeareth because they had power to make a decree against such false doctrine Act. 15.28 And thence also it followeth that if any of the Christian Pharisees had stood obstinately in such errours tending to the subversion of soules to the bringing in of another Gospel and making Christ become of no effect unto men Act. 15.24 Gal. 1.6 7. 5.2 3 4. then after due conviction that Synod at Ierusalem had authority as well to censure the person as to condemne his errour having in readines a revenge against all disobedience 2. Cor. 10.6 with Gal. 1.8 9. especially if the particular Church whereof such a person was a member should refuse to doe the same according to their direction I. CAN. To the point now I doe deny that this place Act. 15. proveth any such thing for which it is alledged For I. Here was no combination of many Ministers of divers Churches but onely a few messengers sent from Antiochia unto the Congregation at Ierusalem about a controversy there specifyed Hence it is affirmed by many learned men (e) D. Brid pag. 1224. that as this was an assembly of one onely particular Church so it binds (f) D. Whit. de Conc. qu. 2. p. 6. 67 onely but in a speciall or particular meeting ANSVV. I. It is untrue which he sayth that here was no combination of many Ministers of divers Churches because here were the Ministers of all Churches even the Apostles that had the care of all the Churches of whom all Churches might say these are our Ministers Act. 15.6.2 Cor. 11.28.1 Cor. 3.21 22. Mat. 28.19 This was the noblest combination of Ministers that ever was II. It is without warrant that he saith onely a few messengers were sent from Antiochia for besides Paul and Barnabas the deputies and messengers of that Church which might stand for many other it is sayd that certaine other of them were sent Act. 15.2 but how many or how few it is not specifyed III. That which he alledgeth from D. Bridges is unsound viz. that this was an Assembly of one onely particular Church As it is expressely against the text so I may oppose against in the testimony of Iunius * Pag. 68. before noted who speaking of them that judged in this Synod reckons up first the Apostles and Apostolick men then the Elders that laboured in the ministery of the Word as well them of the place in Ierusalem as those of Antioch and if any moreover were come from other places c. IV. Whereas he citeth D. Whitaker as if he affirmed of this Synod at Ierusalem that it bindes onely but in a speciall or particular meeting he doth herein falsify the testimony of D. Whitak for though he distinguishing Synods into Particular Provinciall or Nationall Universall doth in (g) De Concil Qu. 1. c. 2. p. 6. that place call this a Particular Synod yet hath he no such assertion as though it should binde onely in a speciall or particular meeting and it had bene against the text Act. 15.23 16.4 where it is noted that the Synodicall Epistle was sent unto the Churches of the Gentiles in Antioch Syria Cilicia that they might observe the decrees thereof As for that (h) Ibid. p. 67. other place out of D. Whit. it is misalledged there being no such matter at all there mentioned Instead of that mistaken place let him consider what Mr Cartwright saith hereof (i) Confut. of Rhem. Annot. on Act. 15.6 We will not strive whether the Councell were Generall or Provinciall but it may be counted a Generall Councell in respect of the presence of the Apostles which were Governours of all the Churches of the world I. CAN. II. As Mr Cartwright saith (k) Refut of Rhem. on the place Paul and Barnabas went not up to Ierusalem to submit their judgement to the judgement of the Apostles for that had diminished the authoritie of their doctrine then which there was no greater in the world they being both infallibly directed by the Holy Ghost Onely they went up to conferre with them and for countenance of the truth in respect of men
and for the stopping of the mouthes of such deceivers as pretended they were sent by the Apostles vers 24. In a word that no suspicion might remaine in the minds of the people as if Paul in doctrine differed from the rest ANSVV. I. Mr Canne corrupteth and falsifyeth the words of Mr Cartwright by adding unto them this word Onely Though Paul and Barnabas went up to conferre yet the words of Mr Cartw. are not Onely they went up to conferre as here they are alledged Againe those words that follow which Mr Canne sets downe in such a letter as if Mr Cartw. had spoken word for word in such manner viz. for countenance of the trueth in respect of men and for the stopping of the mouthes of such deceivers as pretended they were sent by the Apostles v. 24. these are the words of Mr Robinson (l) Iustif of Sepat p. 199. verbatim taken out of his writing and therefore ought rather to have bene alledged in his name then in Mr Cartwrights II. Though Paul and Barnabas went up for such ends as are here propounded for countenancing of the trueth c. yet those ends doe not argue that therefore the Synod at Ierusalem did not exercise Ecclesiasticall authority in giving definitive sentence touching the controversy brought unto them seeing those ends were more effectually and fully obtained thereby for by such judiciall sentence the truth was countenanced before men and the mouthes of deceyvers more effectually stopped and suspicion of difference betwixt the Apostles more clearly taken away III. Though Paul and Barnabas went not up to submit their judgement to the judgement of the Apostles yet this hinders not their going to procure that the judgement of those deceyvers which had troubled the Church of Antioch and likewise that the judgement of such as had bene made to doubt by them might be submitted unto the judgement of the Apostles or that those deceyvers might be censured by the Synod if after conviction they should persist in their evill IV. That which Mr Cartw. speakes of P. and Barn not submitting their judgement unto the judgement of the Apostles as if it would have diminished the authority of their doctrine c. is to be understood as I conceive as spoken by way of opposition to the Rhemists and other Papists against whom he dealt who say as well concerning Paul and Barnabas as concerning the other deceivers (m) Rhem. on Act. 15.2 that they did not stand stifly to their owne opinion on either side but condescended to referre the whole controversy and the determination thereof to the Apostles Priests or Ancients c. who hold from Jerome that (n) Rainol Conf. with Hart. c. 4. div 3. p. 133 Paul had not had security of preaching the Gospel unles it had bene approved by the sentence of Peter and of the rest that were with him Such a submission might have diminished the authority of their doctrine and therefore is not to be acknowledged Otherwise there was even in the Apostles themselves a lawfull submissiō unto the judgement of the Church 1. Peter himself as Iunius well (o) Animadv in Bell. de Concil l. 2. c. 16. § 5. observes judicio Ecclesiae subjicitur atque ad cam remittitur voce Christi jubentis Dic Ecclesiae Mat. 18. alibi that is he was subjected unto the judgement of the Church sent unto it by the voyce of Christ commanding Tell the Church Mat. 18. elswhere D. Whitaker also (p) Contro de Concil Qu. 5. c. 3. p. 172. affirmes and confirmes the same thing concerning Peter and why may it not be sayd of Paul and Barnabas as well as of him 2. Seeing Paul and Barnabas were certaine that the Apostles did agree with them in judgement and could not erre in their sentence they knew that the same should not diminish the authority of their doctrine but rather magnify and illustrate the same I. CAN. III. If Ierusalem lay northward 200 miles from Antioch as I read (q) Itiner N. Test fol. 96. it did Surely then he hath small reason to bring this Scripture as the ground and foundation of the Classicall Assembly yea and to tell us * Pag. 88. that it is a remarkable place of Scripture to warrant the exercise of that power which we deny And a little after This one allegation is sufficient to evince the falshood of their assertion ANSVV. I. He mistakes and so perverts the testimony of the Author whom he alledgeth directly contrary to his expresse words who (r) Itiner N.T. p. 66. 82. edit 1624. p. 82. 101. edit 1635. in divers places of this book as is to be seen in the severall editions sayth not as it is alledged that Ierusalem lay Northward from Antioch but on the contrary that Antioch lay Northward from Ierusalem So uncircumspect is he in his quotations II. Suppose it had bene written in his Author so as he alledgeth it yet then it was a great simplicity and want of judgement in him that could not of himself have corrected such a manifest and palpable errour Had he had a very small measure of knowledge in the Geographicall descriptions of the holy Land and the countries bordering thereupon without the knowledge whereof men cannot well understand the story of the Bible there being so many references which the H. Ghost hath unto the different situation of severall places then might he have knowne that Ierusalem lay Southward and Antioch Northward from Ierusalem for 1. The common Geographers (ſ) Cl. Ptol. Asiae tab 4. Atlas Merc. c. old and new of all sorts doe beare witnesse hereof in their Mappes and ordinary descriptions of the world and those parts thereof 2. Had he gone no further but looked well on this story Act. 15. where the messengers travelling from Antioch to Ierusalem are sayd in their way to passe through Phaenice and Samaria he might have observed that as those countries in the way lay Northward from Ierusalem so must Antioch also from whence in the right way they came to those countries Let others be admonished hereby that they rashly follow not such a guide that will be a great master and teacher of the Churches and yet as the wise man noteth knowes not the way to the City Eccles 10.15 III. I doe willingly grant that Antioch was 200 miles from Ierusalem those 70 Dutch miles which this Authour mentions according to common account make 280 English miles 80 more then Mr Canne reckons Now the further that Antioch was from Ierusalem the stronger is this our Argument from Act. 15. The greater paines they tooke in travell to come unto another superiour judicatory out of themselves doth argue the greater necessity of Synods and shewes that the fruit expected thereby was the more precious in their eyes The Deputies of the Churches that came to the late Synod at Dort from Geneva Zurich and Berne travelled further then these Antiochians did And of old