his place against the holy Ghost the said holy Spirit bearing the contrary record to his Conscience Testimonies taken out of the Harmony of the Confessions of the Faith of the 〈◊〉 Churches Râ—printed at London 1643. Pag. 238. Out of the confession of Helvetia FUrthermore there is another power of duty or ministerial power limited out by him who hath full and absolute power and authority And this is more like a Ministry then Dominion For we see that some master doth give unto the steward of his house authority and power over his House and for that cause delivereth him his keyes that he may admit or exclude such as his master will have admitted or excluded According to this power doth the Minister by his office that which the Lord hath commanded him to do and the Lord doth ratifie and confirm that which he doth and will have the deeds of his ministers to be acknowledged and esteemed as his own deeds unto which end are those speeches in the Gospel I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest or loosest in earth shall be bound and loosed in heaven Again whose sins soever ye remit they shall be remitted and whose sins soever ye retain they shall be retained But if the minister deal not in all things as his Lord hath commanded him but passe the limits and bounds of Faith then the Lord doth make void that which he doth Wherefore the Ecclesiastical power of the Ministers of the Church is that function whereby they do indeed govern the Church of God but yet so as they do all things in the Church as he hath prescribed in his Word which thing being so done the faithful do esteem them as done of the Lord himself Pag. 250. Out of the confession of Bohemia THe 14th Chapter of Ecclesiastical doctrine is of the Lords keyes of which he saith to Peter I will give thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and these keyes are the peculiar function or Ministery and administration of Christ his power and his holy Spirit which power is committed to the Church of Christ and to the Ministers thereof unto the end of the world that they should not onely by preaching publish the holy Gospel although they should do this especially that is should shew forth that Word of true comfort and the joyful message of peace and new tydings of that favour which God offereth but also that to the beleeving and unbeleeving they should publikely or privately denounce and make known to wit to them his favour to these his wrath and that to all in general or to every one in particular that they may wisely receive some into the house of God to the communion of Saints and drive some out from thence and may so through the performance of their Ministery hold in their hand the Scepter of Christ his Kingdom and use the same to the government of Christ his Sheep And after Moreover a manifest example of using the power of the keyes is laid out in that sinner of Corinth and others whom St. Paul together with the Church in that place by the power and authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and of his Spirit threw out from thence and delivered to Sathan and contrariwise after that God had given him grace to repent he absolved him from his sins he took him again into the Church to the communion of Saints and Sacraments and so opened to him the Kingdom of Heaven again By this we may understand that these keyes or this divine function of the Lords is committed and granted to those that have charge of souls and to each several Ecclesiastical Societies whether they be smal or great Of which thing the Lord sayeth to the Churches Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in heaven And straight after For where two or three are gathered together in my Name there am I in the middest of them Pag. 253. Out of the French Confession VVE beleeve that this true Church ought to be governed by that regiment or discâ—pline which our Lord Jesus Christ hath established to wit so that there be Pastors Elders and Deacons that the purity of doctrine may be retained vices repressed c. Pag. 257. Out of the Confession of Belgia VVE beleeve that this Church ought to be ruled and governed by that spiritual Regiment which God himself hath delivered in his word so that there be placed in it Pastors and Ministers purely to preach and rightly to administer the holy Sacraments that there be also in it Seniors and Deacons of whom the Senate of the Church might consist that by these means true Religion might be preserved and sincere doctrine in every place retained and spread abroad that vicious and wicked men might after a spiritual manner be rebuked amended and as it were by the bridle of discipline kept within their compasse Pag. 260. Out of the Confession of Auspurge AGain by the Gospel or as they term it by Gods Law Bishops as they be Bishops that is such as have the administration of the Word and Sacraments committed to them have no jurisdiction at all but onely to forgive sin Also to know what is true doctrine and to reject such Doctrine as will not stand with the Gospel and to debarre from the communion of the Church such as are notoriously wicked not by humane force and violence but by the word of God And herein of necessity the Churches ought by the law of God to perform obedience unto them according to the saying of Christ He that heareth you heareth me Upon which place the Observation saith thus To debar the wicked c. To wit by the judgement and verdict of the Presbyterie lawfully gathered together c. A Testimony out of the Ecclesiastical Discipline of the Reformed Churches in France Cap. 5. Art 9. THe knowledge of scandals and the censure or judgement thereof belongeth to the Company of Pastors and Elders Art 15. If it befalleth that besides the admonitions usually made by the Consistories to such as have done amisse there be some other punishment or more rigorous censure to be used It shall then be done either by suspension or privation of the holy communion for a time or by excommunication or cutting off from the Church In which cases the Consistories are to be advised to use all prudence and to make distinction betwixt the one and the other As likewise to ponder and carefully to examine the faults and scandals that are brought before them with all their circumstances to judge warily of the censure which may be required Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum Cap. 14. Art 7. 8. 9. PEccata sua natura publica aut per admonitionis privatae contemtum publicata ex Consistorii totius arbitrio modo formâ ad aedificationem maximè accomodatis sunt Corrigenda Qui pertinaciter Consistorii admonitiones rejecerit à S. Coenae communione
M r Prynne also doth vindic page 4 5. yet he speaketh dubiously of their power of capitall punishments But this is confuted by the reasons which I have given Whereunto I further adde these few animadversions 1. The strongest proofe which Erastus brings out of Iosephus antiq lib. 20. cap. 8. which as he alledgeth puts the thing out of all controversie is a very weake and insufficient proof Iosephus tels us in the close of that Chapter that after the death of Herod and A chelaus this was the Jewish Government 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This he citeth page 177. and page 178. to prove that the Sanhedrin in Christs time was a civill Magistracy having power of the Sword But I may with a great deale more probability argue contrariwise from these words Iosephus tels us the Constitution and forme of the Jewish policy or Government was at that time Aristocraticall but it was an Ecclesiasticall Aristocracy the government was in the hands of the chiefe Priests Or thus if you will the Jewes at that time had a bare name of an aristocracy they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Optimates Primates or Rulers but it was titulo tenus all power of civill government being taken from them by the Romans and the government that was was Ecclesiasticall That very Chapter gives us a better argument to prove that the Romans did not permit to the Jewes capitall Judgements for Iosephus there records that Ananus the high Priest taking the opportunity after the death of Festus while Albinus the Successour of Festus was but yet on his journey toward Iudea did call a Councell of Judges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before whom he presented Iames the brother of Christ and some others who were as guilty of impiety condemned to be stoned Which mightily displeased all such as did observe the Laws Albinus at that time comming from Alexandria being enformed of the thing and that it was not lawfull for Ananus to doe any such thing without the Roman Governour wrote a chiding and threatning letter to Ananus And further the thing being secretly signified by some to King Agrippa who did also beseech the King to command Ananus to doe no such thing againe he having trespassed in this Whereupon Agrippa was so highly offended that he tooke away from Ananus the high Priests place and gaue it to Iesus the sonne of Damneus 2. Whereas Erastus argueth from the imprisoning beating or scourging yea taking counsell to kill the Apostles Acts 4 5. the stoning of Steven Acts 7. Pauls letters from the high Priest for biuding and bringing to Ierusalem the Disciples of the Lord Acts 9. 1 2. also the imprisoning and condemning to death the Saints Acts 26. 10. Unto all this I answer out of Iosephus that in that degenerate age the high Priests and such as adhered to them did use a great deale of violence whereby they did many things for which they had no just nor lawfull power So that the Letters and Warrants given out to Saul and the execution of the same by a cruell and bloody persecuting of the Saints can not prove the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the power and authority which was allowed to the Sanhedrin but onely the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the present prevalent power of the high Priest and his faction in that confusion of affaires and their extreame malice against the Saints to have been such as made them to doe things for which they had no legall power nor warrant And this one Animadversion breakes all the strength of M r Prynnes argument vindic page 5. that the Councell of the Jewes had power which no meere Ecclesiasticall consistory can doe to scourge imprison torture and out-law offenders if not to câ—…ndemne put to death Where he citeth divers Texts none of which proveth either torturing or out-lawing and the most of which prove not so much as that the Councell of the Jewes at that time had authority to scourge or imprison as Matth. 5. 22. 10. 17. Mark 13. 9. Acts 6. 12 13 14. 24. 20. 25. 15. The imprisonment of the Apostles was not without the authority of the Captaine of the Temple Acts 4. 1 3. This captaine of the Temple is thought by the best interpreters to have been the Captaine of the Garrison which the Romans placed in the caâ—tle Antonia hard by the Temple and that to prevent tumults and uproares when the people came to the Temple especially at the solemne feasts in great multitudes But that the Captaine of the Temple was a civill Magistrate of the Jewes or one d puted with authority and power from the Sanhedrin will never be proved When the Councell thought of slaying the Apostles Acts 5. 33. it was in a sudden passion being cut to the heart at that which they heard But Gamaliel tels them Verse 35. Ye men of Israel take heed to your selves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 warning them as Interpreters take it of their own danger from the Romans if they should put any one to death The putting of Steven to death was upon pretence of Iudicium zeli or Ius zelotarum as Grotius thinks dâ—… Jure belli aâ—… pacis lib. 2. cap 20. sect 9. If so it was an extraordinary act I am sure it was done most tumultuously disorderly and furiously before either himselfe was heard speake out or any sentence was given against him as is manifest Acts 7. 54 57 58. 3. Erastus his glosse upon Iohn 18. 31. It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death meaning saith he for making himselfe a King against Caesar the cause for which they did chiefly accuse him to Pilate So likewise Bishop Bilson a great follower of Erastus of the perpetuall government of Christs Church cap. 4. But marke the words Then said Pilate unto them Take ye him and judge him according to your Law The Jewes therefore said unto him It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death Pilate durst not have refused to judge a man who made himselfe a King against Caesar nor durst he have put it over upon the Jewes to have judged one in that which concerned Caesars crowne Nay as soone as the Jewes objected If thou let this man goe thou art not Caesars friend for whosoever maketh himselfe a King speaketh against Caesar. Pilate when he heard that went in againe and sate down on the Judgement seat Iohn 19. 12. 13. Therefore when Pilate said to the Jewes take ye him and judge him according to your law he spake it of matters of their Law The Councell of the chiefe Priests Elders and Scribes had given sentence against Christ de juâ—…e that he was guilty of blasphemy and thereupon not having power to put any man to death they led him to Pilate Matth. 26. 65 66. with Matth. 27. 1 2. Marke 14. 63 64. with Marke 15. 1. Luke 22. 71. with Luke 23. 1. Pilate unwilling to meddle against Christ waves the businesse in the
sentence of either as is evident by that disjunctive Law Deut. 17. 12. And the man that will do presumptuously and will not hearken unto the Priest that is to the Priests as vers 9. or unto the Judge that is the Assembly or Court of Judges as I have cleared else-where even that man shall die But I have also answered more fully this objection concerning co-ordination Chap. 8. 4. Object Ministers have other work to do and such as will take up the whole man To this Argument saith Mr. Hussey pag. 8. Mr. Gilespie maketh no answer at all though Saint Paul useth the very self same Argument to discharge the Preachers from oversight of the poor Act. 6. 2. God forbid we should leave the care of the word of God and serve at Tables It will not be unseasonable to mind both him and Mr. Prynne that the canonized names by them used Stylo Romano Saint Paul Saint Matthew Saint Mark c. ought to be laid aside except they will use it of all Saints and why not as well Saint Moses and Saint Aarâ—…n whom the Psalmist calls the Saint of the Lord or why not Saint Aquila Saint Apollos Saint Epaphras c. Methinks men professing Reformation ought not to satisfie themselves in using this forme of speech onely of such as have been canonizâ—dat Rome and inrolled Saints in the Popes Calender And as strange it is that Mr. Hussey makes Paul to act in the businesse Act. 6. before he was either Saint or Apostle Now to the Argument I did answer at first though Mr. Hussey is pleased not to take notice of it pag. 36. that where Mr. Coleman objected Ministers have other work to do he might as well have added that when Ministers have done that other work and all that ever they can yet without the power of Church-government they shall not keep themselves nor the Ordinances from pollution that is Church-Government is a part of their work and a necessary part which hath been proved I thought it enough to touch an answer where an objection was but touched another objection in that very place being more insisted on and with more colour of reason concerning the fear of an ambitious ensnarement And for the objection now in hand Mr. Hussey hath made it no whit stronger by his instance from Act. 6. For 1. the Apostles did not wholy lay aside the care of the poor Sure Paul afterward an Apostle took great care of the poor at diverse times and in diverse places as himself recordeth but such taking care of the poor as did distract and hinder them from the main work of preaching the Gospel this was it which they declined and in that respect the work of baptizing also did give place to the work of preaching 1 Cor. 1. 17. Likewise the work of Discipline must be so ordered as may not hinder the principal work of preaching the Gospel which is very possible yea probatum est for where Church-government is exercised there are as painful Preachers as any in the World and such as neglect none of their other work 2. To take speciall and particular care of the poor did belong by Christs institution whose mind was no doubt known to the Apostles to the office of Deacons and for that reason the Ministers of the word ought in like manner to be relieved of that burthen by Deacons but Church-Government doth belong to the Elders of the Church of whom some labour both in Doctrine and Government others in Government onely But neither must the Argument go so I have another thing to ask what is that other work which will take up the whole man Mr. Hussey pag. 12. expounds Mr. Colemans meaning that the preaching of the Gospel would take up the whole man especially in our time our knowledge of the Scriptures is to be acquired by ordinary means c. And in his Epistle to the Parliament he saith I found the Minister charged onely with preaching and baptizing which being performed with such zeal and diligence as is needful is aboundantly a sufficient employment And so he takes off the Minister not onely from Government but from visiting particular families especially the sick from catechising and examining those who are to be admitted to the Lords Supper from the celebration of the Lords Supper it self to say nothing of the solemnization of marriage yea from disputations in Schools concerning the controversies of the time which yet himself so much calls for And why the Minister hath other work to do and such as will take up the whole man which is to preach and baptize 5. Object If acts of Government be put in the hands of Church-Officers there is fear of an ambitious ensnarement which Mr. Coleman proved by an arguing from his owne heart to the hearts of other men Mr. Gilespies answer to the matter of ambition saith Mr. Hussey pag. 10. is onely by involving the Civil Magistrate in the same danger of ambition And here he falleth out into a concertation professedly with my answer but really with Mr. Colemans Argument for the foundation of his Argument was universal Might I measure others by my selfe and I know not why I may not God fashioneth mens hearts alike and as in warer face answers to face so the heart of man to man c. Hereupon I replyed Is this corruption onely in the hearts of Ministers or is it in the hearts of all other men I suppose he will say in all mens hearts and then his Argument will conclude against all Civil Government And now per omnes musas I beseech him which of us involveth the Magistrate in ambition Must I be charged with involving the Magistrate because I discovered that Mr. Colemans Argument involveth the Magistrate He might as truly say he is not the Traytor that commits Treason but he is the Traytor that 〈◊〉 Treason And why saith he that my answer was onely concerning that involving of the Magistrate Did I not first shew that the two Scriptures on which Mr. Colemans Argument was grounded did not prove it though now Mr. Hussey tells us Mr. Coleman did but allude to those Scriptures I am sure it was all the Scripturall proof which was brought for that Argument upon which so much weight was laid which I will not trouble my Reader withall saith he A pretty shift when a man cannot defend the Argument then forsooth he will not trouble the Reader Next did I not deny that which Mr. Coleman did take for granted that we may reason from this or that particular corruption in one mans heart to prove the same particular corruption in all other mens hearts and that Paul taught us not so Phil. 2. 3. Did I not also answer in his owne words that his Brethrens wisedom and humility may safely be trusted with as large a share of Government as themselves desire Did I not lastly answer that if his whole Argument were granted it cannot prove that there ought to be no Church-Government
whole Diocesse consisting it may be of some hundreds of Congregations holding that the Ministers of particular Congregations did preach the Word and minister the Sacraments in his name by vertue of authority and order from him and because he could not act by himself in every Congregation The Presbyteriall Government acknowledgeth no Pastorall charge of preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments to more Congregations then one and doth acknowledge the Pastors of particular Churches being lawfully called to have power and authority for preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments in the name of Christ and not in the name of the Presbyterie 5. The Prelates as they denyed the power and authority of Pastors so they utterly denyed the very offices of ruling Elders and Deacons for taking more especiall care of the poor in particular Congregations 6. They did not acknowledge Congregationall Elderships nor any power of discipline in particular Congregations which the Presbyteriall Government doth 7. They intruded Pastors oft times against the consent of the Congregation and reclamante Ecclesiâ which the Presbyteriall Government doth not 8. They ordained Ministers without any particular charge which the Presbyterial Government doth not 9 In Synods they did not allow any but the Clergie alone as they kept up the name to have decisive suffrage The Presbyterial Government gives decisive voices to ruling Elders as well as to Pastors 10. The Prelates declined to be accountable to and censurable by either Chapters Diocesan or Nationall Synods In Presbyteriall Government all in whatsoever Ecclesiasticall administration are called to an account in Presbyteries Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies respectively and none are exempted from Synodicall censures in case of scandall and obstinacy 11. The Prelates power was not meerly Ecclesiasticall they were Lords of Parliament they held Civil places in the State which the Presbyterial Government condemneth 12. The Prelats were not chosen by the Church Presbyters are 13. The Prelates did presume to make Lawes binding the Conscience even in things indifferent and did persecute imprison fine depose excommunicate men for certain Rites and Ceremonies acknowledged by themselves to be indifferent setting aside the will and authority of the Law makers This the Presbyteriall Government abhorreth 14. They did excommunicate for money matters for trifles Which the Presbyteriall Government condemneth 15. The Prelates did not allow men to examine by the Judgement of Christian and private discretion their Decrees and Canons so as to search the Scriptures and look at the Warrants but would needs have men think it enough to know the things to be commanded by them that are in place and power Presbyteriall Government doth not lord it over mens consciences but admitteth yea commendeth the searching of the Scriptures whether these things which it holds forth be not so and doth not presse mens Consciences with Sic volo sic jubeo but desireth they may doe in faith what they do 16. The Prelates held up pluralities non-residencies c. Which the Presbyteriall Government doth not 17. As many of the Prelates did themselves neglect to preach the Gospel so they kept up in diverse places a reading non-preaching Ministery Which the Presbyteriall Goverment suffereth not 18. They opened the door of the Ministery to diverse scandalous Arminianized and popishly affected men and locked the door upon many worthy to be admitted The Presbyteriall Government herein is as contrary to theirs as theirs was to the right 19. Their Official Courts Commissaries c. did serve themselves Hâ—ires to the sons of Eli Nay but thou shalt give it me now and if not I will take it by force The Presbyterial Government 〈◊〉 such proceedings 20. The Prelates and their High-Commission Court did assume potâ—…statem utriusque gladij the power both of the Temporall and Civil Sword The Presbyteriall Government medleth with no Civil nor Temporall punishments I do not intend to enumerate all the differences between the Papal and Prelatical Government on the one side and the Presbyterial Government on the other side in this point of unlimitednesse or arbitrarynesse These differences which I have given may serve for a consciencious caution to intelligent and moderate men to beware of such odiouâ— and unjust comparisons as have been used by some and among others by Mr. Salâ—…marsh in his Parallel between the Prelacy and Presbyterie Which as it cannot strike against us nor any of the Reformed Churches who acknowledge no such Presbyterie as he describeth and in some particulars striketh at the Ordinance of Parliament as namely in point of the Directory so he that hath a mind to a Recrimination might with more truth lay diverse of those imputations upon those whom I beleeve he is most unwilling they should be laid upon In the third place The Presbyterian Government is more limited and lesse arbitrary than the Independent Government of single Congregations which exempting themselves from the Presbyterial subordination and from being accountable to and censurable by Classes or Synods must needs be supposed to exercise a much more unlimited or arbitrary power than the Presbyterial Churches do especially when this shall be compared and laid together with one of their three grand Principles which disclaimeth the binding of themselves for the future unto their present judgement and practice and avoucheth the keeping of this reserve to alter and retract See their Apologetical narration pag. 10 11. By which it appeareth that their way will not suffer them to be so far moulded into an Uniformity or bounded within certain particular rules I say not with others but even among themselves as the Presbyterian way will adâ—it of Finally The Presbyterial Government hath no such liberty nor arbitrarinesse as Civil or Military Government hath there being in all civil or temporal affairs a great deal of latitude 〈◊〉 to those who manage the same so that they command nor act nothing against the Word of God But Presbyterial Government is tyed up to the rules of Scripture in all such particulars as are properly spiritual and proper to the Church Though in other particular occasional circumstances of times places accommodations and the like the same light of nature and reason guideth both Church and State yet in things properly Spiritual and Ecclesiastical there is not near somuch latitude left to the Presbytery as there is in civil affairs to the Magistrate And thus I have made good what I said That Presbyterial Government is the most limited and least arbitrary Government of any other All which Vindication and clearing of the Presbyterial Government doth overthrow as to this Point Master Hussey's Observation pag. 9. of the irregularity and arbitrarinesse of Church-government And so much of my fourth Concâ—ssion The fifth shall be this 'T is far from our meaning that the Christian Magistrate should not meddle with matters of Religion or things and causes Ecclesiastical and that he is to take care of the Common-wealth but not of the Church Certainly there is much power and Authority which
falls in the same ditch with him The Question is not whether Church-officers ought to have any share in the Civil Government Nor whether Church-officers may have any Lordly government or imperious domination over the Lords heritage Nor whether Church-Officers may exercise an arbitrary irregular Government and rule as themselves list God forbid But the Question plainly is Whether there may not yea ought not to be in the Church a Ministeriall or Ecclesiastical Government properly so called beside the civil Government or Magistracy Mr. Coleman did and Mr. Hussey doth hold there ought not I hold there ought and I shall propound for the affirmative these Arguments The first Argument I draw from 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders that rule well Mr. Hussey pag. 8. askes whether the word Elder be prima or secunda notio If prima notio why must not Elder women be Church-officers as well as Elder men If secunda notio for a ruling Officer Parliament men Kings and all Civil Governours are such Elders I know no use which that distinction of prima and secunda notio hath in this place except to let us know that he understands these Logicall termes Egregiam vero laudem He might have saved himself the labour for who knowes not Hieromes distinction Elder is either a word of age or of office but in Ecclesiasticall use it is a word of office Mr. Husseys first notion concerning Elder women is no masculine notion His second notion is an anti-parliamentary notion For the honourable Houses of Parliament in the first words of their Ordinance concerning ordination of Ministers have declared that by the word of God a Bishop and a Presbyter or Elder are all one for thus beginneth the Ordinance Whereas the word Presbyter that is to say Elder and the word Bishop do in the Scripture intend and signifie one and the same function c. Therefore Parliament men and civil Governors cannot be the Elders mentioned by the Apostle Paul except Mr. Hussey make them Bishops and invest them with power of ordination Besides this if Kings and Parliament men be such Elders as are mentioned in this Text then the Ministers of the Word must have not onely an equall share in Government but more honour and maintenance then Kings and Parliament men See how well Mr. Hussey pleadeth for Christian Magistracy It is also an anti-Scripturall notion for some of those Elders that ruled well did labour in the Word and Doctrine as Paul tells us in the very same place these sure are not civil Governours Wherefore Mr. Hussey must seek a third notion before he hit the Apostles meaning It is not hujus loci to debate from this Text the distinction of two sorts of Elders though among all the answers which ever I heard or read Mr. Husseys is the weakest pag. 11. that by Elders that labour in the Word and Doctrine are meant those Ministers whose excellencie lies in Doctrine and instruction and that by Elders that rule are meant those that give reproof He contradistinguisheth a reproving minister from a minister labouring in the Word and Doctrine The very reproof given by a minister will be it seemes at last challenged as an act of government It is as wide from the mark that he will have the two sorts of Elders to differ thus that the one must governe and not preach the other must preach and not govern not observing that the Text makes ruling to be common to both The one doth both rule and labour in the Word and Doctrine The other ruleth one y and is therefore called ruling Elder non quia solus praeest sed quia solum praeest But to let all these things be laid aside as heterogeneous to this present Argument the point is here are Rulers in the Church who are no civil Rulers Yea this my Argument from this Text was clearly yeelded by Mr. Coleman in his Maledicis pag. 8. But I will deal clearly saith he these Officers are Ministers which are instituted not here but else-where and those are the Rulers here mentioned Ergo he yeeldeth Ecclesiastical rulers and those instituted distinct from Magistracy Neither is it a Lordly but a ministeriall ruling of which our Question is For my part saith Mr. Hussey I know not how Lordship and Government doth differ one from another Then every Governour of a ship must be a lord Then every Steward of a great house must be lord of the House There is an oeconomicall or ministerial government and of that we mean My second Argument I take from 1 Thes. 5. 12. And we beseech you brethren to know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui praesunt vobis Hence doth Calvin conclude a Church Government distinct from civil government for this is a spirituall Government it is in the Lord that is in the name of the Lord or as others in things pertaining to God Hence also Beza argueth against Episcopall Government because the Elders in the Apostolique Churches did govern in common But saith Mr. Hussey pag. 18. Pasor telleth us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a genitive case signifieth praecedo and then it signifieth no more but them that go before you either by Doctrine or example I answer first to the matter next to the force of the Word For the matter certainly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or ruling power of ministers is not meerly doctrinall or perswasive as is manifest by 1 Tim. 5. 17. where those who are not convinced of two sorts of Elders are yet fully convinced of two sorts of acts the act of ruling and the act of teaching Whatsoever that Text hath more in it or hath not this it hath that those who labour in the Word and Doctrine are Rulers but they are more especially to be honoured for their labouring in the Word and Doctrine Next as to the force of the Word if it be true which Mr. Hussey here saith then the English Translators that read are over you Calvin Beza Bullinger Gualther and others that here follow Hierome and read praesunt vobis Arias Montanus who reads praesidentes vobis have not well understood the Greek But if Mr. Hussey would needs correct all these and many more Why did he not at least produce some instances to shew us where the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used for no more but a meer going before either by doctrine or example without any power or authority of Government Yea if this here be no more but a going before either by Doctrine or example then every good Christian who goeth before others by good example is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither will that of the genitive case help him for see the like 1 Tim. 3. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that ruleth well his
onely of that avoiding or rejecting by which every private Christian ought to observe and avoid and not receive false Teachers but of a publike Ministerial or Consistorial rejecting of an Heretick by cutting him off or casting him out of the Church It is a Canon de Judiciis Ecclesiasticis saith Tossanus upon the the place This the Greek will easily admit for Stephanus in Thesauro linguae Gr. tells us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for recuse aversor repudio and citeth out of Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to repudiate or put away a wife As here also we may read A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition repudiate or put away though the word reject doth also bear the same sence And as the Greek will admit it so I have these reasons to confirm it which shall suffice for the present He that pleaseth may read a large Discourse concerning the censure of Hereticks in Claudius Espencaeus upon this place First The Apostles scope is not to hold forth the common duties of all Christians except ex consequenti but his primary intention all along in that Epistle is to instruct Titus concerning the ordering and governing of the Church Chap. 1. vers 5. Secondly there must be a first and second admonition before the Heretick be thus rejected This rejecting is not for his dangerous and false Doctrine simply or by it self considered but for his contumacy and incorrigiblenesse But private Christians ought to observe by the judgement of private discretion and ought in prudence and caution to avoid all familiar fellowship and conversation with a man that is an Heretick though he hath not yet gotten a first and second admonition Matth. 7. 15 16. Beware of false Prophets which come to you in â—…eeps clothing but inwardly they are ravening Wolves Ye shall know them by their fruits Thirdly the admonition in the Text is a publike authoritative or ministerial admonition after that thou Titus hast once and again admonished him saith the Syriack therefore the rejecting must also be publick and ministerial Fourthly This rejecting of an Heretick is the last act when he appears incorrigible We find before chap. 1. vers 13. Rebuke them sharply and chap. 2. vers 15. Rebuke with all authority But now when the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reject this is a higher degree and this much more must be with all authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which words compare with 1 Cor. 7. 25. where the Apostle opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commandement and opinion or judgement From all which it will appear that this rejecting of an Heretick by Titus and others joyned with him in the Government of the Church was an authoritative and Juridical act and the judgement thereupon decisive not consultative onely Fifthly Look by what authority Elders were ordained by the same authority they were for heresie maintained with contumacy rejected for the Apostle committeth into the same hands the ordaining of Elders and the rejecting of Hereticks compare Tit. 3. 10. with Tit. 1. 5. Now the ordination was by the Presbyterie 1 Tim. 4. 14. Therefore so was the rejection I conclude with the Dutch Annotations upon Tit. 3. 10. reject i. e. Have no communion with him Let him go without disputing any further with him and casting the holy things before such dogs Matth. 7. 6. Let him not remain in the outward communion of the Church The sixth Argument I draw from 1 Cor. 5. 12. Do not ye judge them that are within Vers. 13. Therefore put away from among your selves that wicked person 2 Cor. 2. 6. Sufficient to such a man is this punishment or censure which was inflicted of many Here is an Ecclesiastical judging not by the judgement of private Christian discretion onely for so they judged those also that were without but an authoritative corrective Judgement by which a scandalous brother a rotten member like to infect other members is put away from among the people of God And this Judgement was made sentence given and censure inflicted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by many that is not by all but by the Elders of that Church saith Walaeus Tom. 1. pag. 468 or you may read by the chiefest So Piscator and Heinsius upon the place The sence is all one as if the Apostle had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by them that have the rule over you Now what will you make of judging putting away and censuring being acts neither of a civil power nor put forth upon any except Church-members if you make it not a corrective Church-government As for Mr. Colemans answer that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amounts to no more but an objurgation I have fully confuted that in Male audis pag. 12. 13. 14. which I will not resume But beside all I said there I add somewhat which I have since observed Zonaras in Conc. Antioch can 22. useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for to be punished or censured and in Conc. Carthag can 49. he calls the man who is under Church-censure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Balsamon in Conc. Carthag can 46. calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both of them do often use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Church-censure as in the place last cited 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yea the Councell of Antioch held under Constantius useth Pauls word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to expresse Ecclesiasticall censure and an act of corrective government Can. 3. It is said of him that receiveth a Presbyter or Deacon being justly deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ille quoque à communi Synodo puniatur ut qui Ecclesiastica statuta dissolvat Ibid. Can. 22. A Bishop is prohibit to ordain within the charge of another Bishop unlesse that other Bishop consent But if any presume to do such a thing let the ordination be void or null 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipse a Synodo puniatur and let himself be punished by the Synod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Balsamen how they should be punished who ordain without the bounds of their owne charge and without consent of him whose charge it is may be learned from other Canons Where you see he understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to agree in signification with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is punishment The sixth general Councel Can. 60. useth the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for suffering punishment adding also by way of explanation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be subject to afflictions and labours Seventhly We have an Argument from 1 Cor. 14. 32 33. And the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets for God is not the Author of confusion but of peace as in all Churches of the Saints The Apostle is giving such rules and directions concerning prophecying or interpretation of Scripture that upon the one hand there may be a liberty to all the Prophets to prophecy and that the Church may be edified by the gifts of all and
civil punishment but they had power to bind the soul and to retain the sin Ioh. 20. 23. And this power of binding is not in all the Scripture ascribed to the civil Magistrate The eighteenth Argument shall be drawn from the example of excommunication 1 Cor. 5. 4 5. The Apostle writeth to the church of Corinth to deliver to Sathan for the delivery to Sathan was an act of the church of Corinth as the Syriack explaineth it the incestuous man which is called a censure inflicted by many 2 Cor. 2. 6. that is by the whole Presbytery of the Church of Corinth And whereas some understand by delivering to Sathan the putting forth of the extraordinary Apostolicall power to the working of a miracle upon the offender by giving him over into the hands of Sathan so as to be bodily tormented by him or to be killed and destroyed as Erastus takes it I answer 1. It cannot be meant of death for it is said that Hymeneus and Alexander were delivered to Sathan and to what end that they might learne not to blaspheme 1 Tim. 1. 20 which had been too late to learn after death 2. Nor is it at all meant of any miraculous tormenting of the body by the divel for beside that it is not likely this miracle could have been wrought Paul himself not being present to work it it is utterly incredible that the Apostle would have so sharply rebuked the Church of Corinth for that a miracle was not wrought upon the incestuous man it not being in their power to do or that he would seek the consent of that Church to the working of a miracle and as a joynt act proceeding from him and the Church by common counsell and deliberation for where read wee of any miracle wrought that way Therefore it is much more safe to understand by delivering to Sathan as Gualther himself doth Excommunication which is a shutting out of a Church-member from the Church whereby Sathan commeth to get dominion and power over him for he is the God of this World who reigneth at his pleasure in and over those who are not the Church and people of God 2 Cor. 4. 4. Eoh. 2. 2. And if any shall be so far unsatisfied as not to admit this sence which we put upon that phrase of delivering to Sathan Yet our Argument for Excommunication drawn from 1 Cor. 5. standeth strong the weight of it not being laid upon tradere Satanae onely but upon vers 6. 7. 11 12. compared with 2 Cor. 2. 6. which undeniably prove Excommunication from Church fellowship The nineteenth Argument shall be drawn from Act. 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the flock over the which the holy Ghost hath made you Overseers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compared with 1 Pet. 5. 2. 3. Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Texts as they hold forth a Bishop and a Presbyter to be one and the same Iure divino so they hold forth the ruling power of Presbyters or Elders First Because otherwise the simile so much made use of in these Scriptures of overseeing the flock mentioned and joyned together with the feeding thereof will fall short in a main and most materiall point for the overseers of flocks do not onely make them to lye down in green pastures and lead them beside the still waters but they have also rodds and staves for ruling the flocks and for correcting and reducing the wandring sheep which will not be brought home by the voice of the shepheard Psal. 23. 2. 4. The Pastorall rod there mentioned by David is corrective as Clemens Alexandrinus paedag lib. 1. cap. 7. who doth also paralel it with that 1 Cor. 4. Shall I comâ— unto you with a rod Secondly Paul requireth the Elders of the Church of Ephesus to take heed unto and to oversee the whole flock which did consist of more then did or could then meet together ordinarily into one place for the worship of God as appeareth by the Church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla which was one but not the onely one Church assembly at Ephesus by the great and wonderfull increase of the Gospel at Ephesus and such other Arguments which I do but point at the full debate of them not being my present work Peter also writing to the Churches of the strangers in severall provinces calls them the flock not flocks and commends unto the Elders the feeding and oversight of that flock Now what is it that can denominate many particular visible Churches or Congregations to be one visible ministeriall flock or Church unlesse it be their union and association under one Ecclesiasticall Government No doubt they had the administration of the Word and Sacraments partitive or severally Nor do I deny but they had a partitive several Government but there was also an union or association of them under one common Government which did denominate them to be one visible Ecclesiastical flock Thirdly The very name given to the Elders of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a name of authority rule and government especially in the Christian and Ecclesiasticall use of the Word H. Stephanus in Thes. ling. Gr. in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith that the Elders of the Church were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wit saith he those qui verbo gubernationi praeeraâ—…t Where he tells us also that the Magistrate or Praetor who was sent with a Judiciall power into those Townes which were undâ—r the power of the Athenians was called by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Septuagints use the word Nehem. 11. 9. Ioel the son of Ziâ—…hri was their overfeer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Judah the son of Senuah was second over the City He that had but the second place was a Ruler how much more he that was in the first place Loe here the head and chief Ruler of the Benjamites called by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Numb 31. 14. 2 Kings 11. 15. the chief officers of the Host the Captains over thousands and captains over hundreds are called by the Septuâ—gints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The same Hebrew words which they render by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they render in other places by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praefectus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Antistes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praepositus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Princeps Yea the name of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they render by this word Iob. 20. 29. This is the portion of a wicked man from God and the heritage appointed to him by God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek by the overseer even as the same name of Bishop is given to Christ 1 Pet. 2. 25. Conradus Kirchâ—…rus in the word Pakad tells us also that Gen. 41. 34. Lâ—…t Pharaoh do this and let him appoint Officers over the Land where the 70. read