and be the better accepted and submitted unto without heart burning and grudge against the particular Elders or fear of revenge Secondly it is impossible for one congregation to enjoy all the Ordinances of God within themselves First Synods and Councels are acknowledged to be the ordinance of God and particularly by that reverend Divine Mr Cotton in a late booke set out by him and he groundeth it on Act. 15. And though some of our brethren for congregationall Churches wave that place yet grant the thing and are members of one at this time and this Ordinance all men will grant cannot be had in one congregation but sometimes requires the helpe of a whole Province Kingdome yea many Kingdomes Yea secondly the Ordinances that nearly concerne a particular congregation cannot be performed by that alone for how can a congregation of private Christians try the sufficiency of an Elder to be elected over them and if they have a tryed man among them who shall give him imposition of hands which is belonging only to Elders to performe Neither have our Brethren of congregationall Churches ever dared as farre as I have heard to permit common Christians to impose hands on their Elders but alwayes desired the Elders of other congregations to doe it and therefore they cannot have this Ordinance among themselves And though this seeme to some a thing of small weight yea but a * Quisquiliae veritatu sunt pretiosissimae complement yet is it an Ordinance of God And the Apostle Heb. 6.1 2. reckoneth it up amongst the Principles of Religion and part of the foundation which place Hen Jocob urgeth vehemently to overthrow the lawfulnesse of all the Ministers of the Church of England because they have as he conceived erred in the foundation not having right and due imposition of hands of the Presbytery though by his leave he was mistaken for those that imposed their hands on them were Presbyters And this impossibility befals a Church either in the beginning of it and first constitution or may at other times by mortality of Elders or when but one remains alive which will be frequent And because it is not rationally probable that the Churches of Jerusalem Rome Corinth Philippi Thessalonica or the 7 Churches of Asia were meerly congregationall but rather Presbyteriall unles it were in their very infancy for a little time before their numbers were increased It seemeth difficult to me to find in Scripture an expresse instance or example of a congregationall Church standing and continuing so by it selfe The Church of Cenchraea mentioned Ro. 16.1 is the most probable because of the conceived smalnesse of the place yet it is not certaine for it was a Port Town * Oppidum Corinthiorum navium statione câ—leberrimum et ideò frequent valâ—e populorum Gualr in Rom. 16. and yet it may be the necessity of those times and disjunction from other places might make it stand single for a while at least And yet there might be more congregations then one therin if it were so popuous as some say Indeed we find 1 Cor. 14.34 these words Let your women keepe silence in the CHVRCHES which word Churches if it doth import severall companies meeting in severall places to enjoy the publike Ordinances and that these companies are called Churches which is to some a Question yet it is certain they were all one combined Church of Corinth often spoken of in the singular number But this dispute belongs not to this Question yet the present difference of opinions and practises have caused me to dilate a little upon this subject beyond the explication of the Tearme And I understand by particular Churches any or all the fore-mentioned Churches whether Nationall Provinciall Presbyteriall or Congregationall and this last principally for those that have first mooved this Question meane principally if not solely the congregationall Church because as I suppose they hold no other particular Churches but such The fourth Tearme to be opened is What is meant by Prima vel Orta This distinction or at least in these tearmes is not ancient for Mr Parker in hic Politeia Eccl. was the first that sprung it as farre as I know Primum in Logick is defined to be Quod est suae Originis Ortum quod oritur à primo But I suppose in this Question it is meant which hath the priority in consideration Whether in our apprehension of Churches we are to begin at the Church Catholike and descend to particular Churches or begin at the particular Churches and ascend to the Church Catholike Which notion is first in distinct knowledge whether Ecclesia universalis aut particularis Which is as the root which the branches Which is as the mother which the daughter Or to speake more punctually Whether the nature and priviledges of the Church belong first to the particular congregation and so ascend to the Church Catholike or belong first to the Church Catholike and descend unto the particular Churches I do not in this Question by primum meane absolutè primum for God only is Eus primum who hath his being in himselfe and from himselfe and giveth being to all his creatures And so the whole Church is Gods house built by him but Primum in suo genere in genere Ecclesiarum Neither doe I meane by Ortum that the particular Churches doe arise out of the generall by the sole vertue or innate power and strength of the Church Catholike but because the particular Churches are made up of the members of the Church Catholike and partake of the benefits and priviledges of the Church primarily not because they are members of the particular Churches but of the Catholike And yet I deny not but that a Ministeriall Synodicall or Classicall Church made up of delegated Members of divers particular Churches pro tempore which some improperly call a representative Church may put on the notion of Ecclesia Orta and the particular Churches out of which those members are chosen and delegated may in some sence in reference unto them put on the notion of Ecclesia prima but the Question is not so stated but between the whole Church Catholike and whole particular Churches Now I have opened the Tearmes of my Question I find two Questions instead of one and whether of them is the most difficult I cannot tell For whereas the subject of every Question useth to be taken for granted and the predicate only proved I find the subject of my Question exceedingly opposed and that by our own Divines and therefore I must crave leave to confirme that sufficiently or else whatever I shall say of the predicate will be as a house built on the sand or a castle in the aire For if there be no universall Church visible then it is not capable of being prima or Orta In handling both these Questions I shall follow my wonted method I preferre one divine testimonie before ten arguments and one good argument before ten humane testimonies First
of a Church future to be built which Christ then intended to set up which was the Evangelicall Catholike Church and not Catholike as some take it for the Church past present and to come for those past were already built and were in Heaven out of Gunshot of assault but it is meant de Ecclesia vivorum de militante de Ecclesia quam Christus erat aedificaturus Object O but this place is meant of the Church invisible for they that are only visible may be prevailed against Answ It is true but those invisible are also visible and they shall never be prevailed against as visible Ecclesia nunquam desinit esse visibilis Satan or persecutours shall never so far prevaile as to cut off all the visible members And though such heresies come that shall deceive all but the Elect yet as long as the Elect are not deceived there remaines a Church Catholike visible still in their visibility If all the visible members should faile then all the invisible must needs faile also for none are invisible in this world but be must be visible also except any be converted and fed only by inspiration which we have no ground for in the Scripture Again Excommunication in 2 Ep. John 10. is called casting out of the Church What Church is that It cannot be the Invisible Church for all the censures in the world cannot cast a man out of that if once he be in therefore it is the visible Church and if it be the visible Church then I would know whether a man truly excommunicated in one Church or Congregation is not thereby excommunicated from brotherly fellowship with all Congregations Or whether the delivering up to Satan be only within the bounds of one Congregation so that if he remove out of such a circle or circuit of ground to another he is out of Satans bonds againe and may communicate there safely I deny not but that through ignorance such a thing may be admitted but certainly if the censure be past against him he needeth no other Excommunication but his first sentence will binde him in all the Christian world if it can be known I am not ignorant that I have Dr Whitakers and many Protestant Divines against me herein and therefore I onely propose what my light guideth me to judge herein Herein I agree with Apollonius Sicut per excommunicationem legitimam excommunicatus non tantum ex hac vel illa particulari Ecclesia ejicitur sed ubicunque terrarum ligatur excommunione fraterna universalis Ecclesiae excluditur Matth. 18.17 18. Ita per Sacramentum Baptismi sacrae Eucharistiae homini communio Ecclesiastica non tantum in particulari sed universali Ecclesia obsignatur Apollon p. 26. If any one that is called a * 1 Cor. 5.11 brother be a drunkard railer extortioner c. What makes him to be called a brother Is it because he is of that particular Congregation or the Church Catholike Is it because he is an invisible member or a visible by Profession Few Fornicators Idolaters Drunkards c. are invisible members Againe all those Metaphors which set out the Church in Scripture shew the unity of the Church Catholike This is the woman clothed with the Sunne Rev. 12.1 the Righteousnesse of Christ and the Moon all terrestriall mutable things under her feet or clothed with the Sunne the purity of Doctrine and the Moon i. e. as some will have it Discipline under her feet Surely this woman was not a particular Congregation but the Church Catholike for were it meant of particular Congregations it should have been women not a woman There shall be one Shepherd saith Christ and one Sheep-fold Joh. 10.16 which is meant of the Church Catholike and that visible consisting of Jew and Gentile The Church is called the Body of Christ and that is the Church Catholike for Christ hath but one body Rom. 12.5 As we have many members in one body and all members have not the same office so we being many are one body in Christ and every one members one of another This the Apostle speakes of the visible Organicall Church for thereupon he fals to reckon up the severall offices in the Church as Prophecying Teaching Exhorting Giving Ruling Shewing mercy which some compute to be an exact distribution of the Church Offices So Eph. 4.4 * 1 Cor. 10.17 1 Cor. 12 1â— 13 20. Eph. 2.16 It is called the a 1 Tim. 3.15 House of God How thou shouldest behave thy selfe in the House of God And the City of God b Eph. 2.19 Heb. 12 22. Rev. 3.12 Now these things had they been meant of particular Congregations should have been Bodies Houses Cities Sheepfolds But as many members in a body hinder not the unity of the whole and many townes in a Kingdome and many houses in a Citie and many roomes in an house or in the Arke hinder not the unity thereof so many particular Congregations hinder not the unity of the Church Catholike Cant. 6.9 My Dove my undefiled is but one she is the only one of her mother She is the Lilly c Cant. 2.2 among the thorns which is the Church militant She is called the Spouse of Christ d Cant. 4.8 9 10 11 12. Yea the Holy Ghost chooseth to joyn many particular Churches together by Nounes collective Nounes of multitude in the singular number where it can be with convenience Remarkeable is that 1 Peter 5.2 where writing to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bithinia he cals them all one flock not flocks Feed the flock of God which is among you The same word Paul useth Acts 20. to the Elders of Ephesus Est una sola Christi Ecclesia â—â—ae ob id etiam dicitur Catholica Particulares Ecclesia non sunt impedimento quin una sit Ecclesia Zanch. de Ecclesia A second kinde of proofe hereof is by argument or demonstration If particular Churches be visible there is a visible Catholike Church but particular Churches are visible therefore The consequence will follow whether you consider the particular Churches as Species or as Partes Omne particulare habet suum generale sive universale omne membrum habet suum integrum omnis pars habet suum totum If therefore there be particular Churches there is a generall and if the particular be visible so is the generall if the particulars be mingled wheat and tares together so is the generall Genus Species pars totum similare presertim sunt ejusdem praedicamenti Ten thousand particular corporeall substances cannot make one generall incorporeall Ten thousand visible particular Churches cannot make one invisible generall Church But all Divines yea our brethren for Congregationall Churches yea the Separation hold that particular Churches are visible as consisting indeed of visible members And Gerard though he will not grant a Church Catholike visible yet saith Ecclesias particulares visibiles esse
gates of hell but onely that on earth And though it be applicable to the invisible onely yet to those as visible for so they are assailed by persecutions and heresies Againe He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved This doth primarily belong to the Church Catholike and that a visible Church because capable of Baptisme and though it be applicable to every member of any particular Congregation yet not as being a member thereof but of the Church Catholike to which that Promise was made yea look over all the Promises in the New Testament and you shall finde them made in generall without the least respect or reference to the particular Congregations wherein the Beleevers lived In any similar body as water the accidents doe not primarily pertaine to this or that particular drop and secondarily to the whole but first to the whole and secondarily to this or that drop So the Priviledges of the Church doe not primarily belong to this or that particular Church and secondarily to the generall but first to the generall and secondarily to this particular being a part of it The maine Priviledges of the Church visible are first Federall Holinesse to the children secondly right to the Ordinances quoad nos saltem now neither of both these betide any man primarily as a member of a particular Congregation but as a member of the Church Catholike For Federall or Covenant Holinesse whereby the children are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betideth no mans children because the parents are of this or that particular Congregation but because of the Church Catholike and this appeares by divers demonstrations I will give you but one That which should have been though the particular relation had never been and which continueth when the particular relation ceaseth that is not a proper Priviledge of that relation but such is federall Holinesse in regard of relation to any particular Church Suppose those baptized by John Baptist or by Christs Disciples before there was any particular distinction should have any children or the Eunuch if he were an Eunuch by office only and not in body baptized by Philip and went immediately home into his own country should not their children be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Suppose a Church dissolved by warre the Minister and people slaine and some women left with childe should be carryed away captive should not those children be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because the particular relation is extinct Doe not those women remaine members of the Church Are they to be counted without in the Apostles sence Secondly for Ordinances either of Worship or Discipline they are both Priviledges of the Church Catholike primarily For Worship a man or a childe hath right to Baptisme as a member of the Church Catholike and not of the particular Congregation for they had right before Congregations were distinguished as in John Baptists and Christs time and the Eunuchs case and have right after that relation ceaseth as children born in captivity as in the former instances such children being holy are capable of Baptisme Infantes baptizandi sunt non ut sancti sint sed quia sancti sunt Whitak And therefore no question but any Minister might baptize those children if he could come by them And for hearing the Word of God let a Christian dwell where he will and have opportunity to heare the Word where he can he hath right to it and doth heare it not as a heathen that is without but as his rightfull portion And even in Congregationall Churches the brethren in one Congregation communicate at the Lords Table in other Congregations as occasion is offered And no question but any Christian may joyne in prayer and say Our Father c. with any Christians in the furthest parts of the world And for the Ordinances of Discipline every one as a member of the Church Catholike is bound to submit thereunto and every officer of the Church Catholike visible hath right to power in the Ordinances of Discipline in actu primo every where as shall be shewed more afterward And certainly the Church Catholike even in their representative ministeriall body have more extensive authoritative power then particular Classes or Congregations though haply not more intensive Neither can it be imagined that all the other Priviledges should belong first to the Church Catholike and so descend to particulars and this of Discipline should belong first to the particular congregation and so ascend to the Catholike that some should go in a geneticall method as it were and others in an analyticall Suppose an Apostle should have preached in a citie and converted at first but two or three or converted a company of women as it was Pauls lot to preach to a company of women Acts 16.13 So that they could not be brought in to an organicall congregation could it be conceived that they though baptized were still without and were not their children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if any of them should miscarry in their judgements or practises had Paul nothing to doe to censure them because they were not in a Church way as some terme it or in a particular Congregation though they were in the Church Catholike visible If they were lyable to censure or capable thereof not being in a particular congregation but the Church Catholike only then Discipline belongs to the Church Catholike and that primarily The Keyes of Discipline were first given to the Church Catholike because first given to the Apostles who were generall Pastours and therefore the Keyes are Catholike Also censures past in one Congregation reach the whole Church Catholike visible as shall be shewed more afterward That which belongeth to all and every part of a similar body as parts of that body that primarily belongeth to the whole but so doth Discipline Therefore c. Argument 3 Thirdly Christs Offices are first intended for and executed on the Church Catholike here below He is King Priest and Prophet primarily in respect of the whole and but secondarily in respect of a particular congregation or member Gods aime in Redemption was to redeeme the whole firstly and secondarily particulars God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son c. And so is the application of that redemption by Christ As a Priest he reconcileth cleanseth and intercedeth for all of the elect and proffers it to the whole Church Catholike visible As a Prophet he teacheth all As a King he ruleth all primarily and particulars secondarily As an earthly King is indeed King of Thomas and John c. but not primarily but secondarily as they are members of his kingdome And the naturall head is indeed head to the little finger and little toe but not primarily but as they are parts of the whole body whereof it is head so is Christ a mysticall King and head first of the whole and secondarily of the particular parts contained in and under the whole Yea Christ may be King Priest and Prophet to