never for there never was yet any universal meeting of the Catholick Church nor its officers though some Councells have been called Generall because of the number of Bishops unitie of places from whence they have come and the Emperours latitude of Dominion that called them 3. From hence would follow that very many particular Churches would be in peril to be greatly damaged seeing in appeals they must be adjudged by those that are many thousand miles distant from them and could not have perfect * cognizance of the cause nor in case they wanted information for their guidance in judgement could by reason of distance have it in time 4. Great would be the vexation charges travel c. that would arise from such a Court as whereunto Appeals were to come and yet such there must be if the whole Church be but one Corporation 3. A third and fourth prejudice and probable exception against this opinion is T is Papal and Anti-Protestant 1. Papal not indeed in regard of the height of it as it refers the root and head of this universallity unto Rome onely but in regard of the opinion it self An universal visible Church a mayne ground of the former M. Hudson and so M. Noyes indeed would avoid this prejudice also but with Labour in Vain He saith he stateth not the question as the Papists do because they take Visible for Glorious Catholick for Romane and subject it to the Pope For 1. whatsoever the Papists add to the question yet the substance and substratum of it is the same In vain should they fix the seat of it at Rome and subject it to the Pope if it might not be in it self one Corporation and Republique 2. Again they do not take visible for glorious but for that which is obvious to the sense though they make Glorious an adjunct thereunto 3. They so fix the seat of the Church at Rome and subject it to the Pope severall of the most eminent of them as that it is onely in the absence of a general Councel which they make above the Pope as being the Church Catholick Representative as is shewed else-where But to return Bellarmine de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 11. haveing related the opinion of the Protestants and propounded the Romish in opposition thereunto viz. There is a visible Catholick Church He proves it by the same places that the Authors of this opinion do to wit Mat. 16. Vpon this Rock I will build my Church and Chap. 18. Tell the Church which though in that place he bring to prove it Visible yet it implies to make it universal also for both these joyntly Catholick Visible he was to prove in opposition to the Protestants for as they say this could not be meant of a particular Church So hee that it cannot be meant of an invisible And he defines it to be one visible Church or Congregation of men bound together by the profession of the same faith and participation of the same sacraments under the government of lawfull Pastors and especially of that onely Vicar of Christ on earth the Pontiffe or Bishop of Rome In the definition it is to be noted that hee makes all beleevers but one single Corporation or Congregation though divided in places under one single Governent under one visible head the Pope of Rome In all but the last clause which is not Essential to the thing though it be to those persons the definition agrees to the minde of the authours of the opinion here impugned And 2. It is Anti-Protestant being opposed generally by them Calvine disputing against the Papists about the unitie and visibilitie of the Church saith as was noted before The onenesse of the Church consisteth in the onenesse of faith And for the visibilitie he saith It is not necessary for the preserving of this unitie that we should see the Church with our eyes Chamier in his Answer to Hardings Argument against Jewell Art 4. Sect. 17. urging that Every multitude in it selfe one did stand in need of one Governour by whom it might be managed but the Church visible is in it self one saith The Church as it is Catholicke or Vniversall is not one in it selfe because it is one generall or universall gathered and aggregated of many particular Churches as if one should say the kingdome or a Kingdome not this or that Kingdome but Kingdome in generall the parts whereof are all particular Kingdomes the French Spanish English For SO the word CHVRCH being taken it is compounded mark not constituted of infinite particular Churches the Romane Constantinopolitane c. Now that which is one in that sence it is manifest that it needs no one governour for not as to every Kingdom there is a King so to all Kingdomes there is one King that that which is called Kingdome in Generall may have a being and therefore not in the Church neither as it is understood to be one collected of many particular Churches Is it necessary that one should be president He evidently both denyeth and excellently refuteth this Catholick union by this very thing because the Church is Catholicke therefore not really one but notionally only as all the Kingdomes in the world are one in the nature and notion of Kingdomes but not one corporation or one Government And so before him Bishop Jewell in answer to the same Papist proving the minor or second part of the former argument viz. That the Church is one visible Congregation or societie because as our brethren do there is one faith and Baptisme one calling so one Church as Saint Paul saith ye all are one body and members one of another and in our Creede wee all professe to beleeve one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church saith that whereas Mr Harding had proved the major also out of Aristotles 12. booke of his Metaphysicks out of Homer Never did Aristotle or Homer dreame of this NEW FANCY that one King should rule over the whole world And by consequence or that the whole world was but one Kingdome and so he implyeth it to be as ridiculous that all Churches should bee but one governing Church and hee addeth what is considerable in this Argument wherein reason is followed rather then scripture His reason were better if either Peter or Paul or any Catholick Father had used it and then citeth Austin de Doct. Christ l. 3. c. 28. who saith To attribute much to discourse of reason in understanding scripture haec consuetudo periculosa est this custome is dangerous per scripturas enim divinas multo tutius ambulatur It is far safer following of the Scripture So that Bishop Jewell conceiveth this against both scripture and Antiquitie Mr Rutherford also due right of Presbytery pag. 231. titleing the page thus How our Church hath been visible makes it out only by this That in all Ages there have been some who have held the same points with us in the main Implying the visibility
nor were sent to so farre as is related and then it will fall out either that they did conclude and injoyne onely Doctrinally though with authority or else that a particular and ordinary Church or two or three Churches by ordinary power may prescribe and by authoritie injoyne Lawes to all Churches in the world by way of Jurisdiction It will not be easie to get safe from betwixt the hornes of this argument 5. But it will not prejudice me to yeeld it an ordinary Assembly for it is granted to any Assembly of one Church or more to do as much as is here expressed this councell to have done viz. 1. To meet for the discussion of any Doctrine that afflicts the Churches especially if they bee sent unto as these were 2. To conferre scriptures together which concerns those points 3. Light appearing by the spirit of God and Scripture they may represent their results as the will of God and minde of the Holy Ghost and so may 4. MINISTERIALLY IMPOSE and enjoyn to all other Churches what appears to be the clear mind of Christ as Paul did 1 Cor. 7. having no expresse command and as any of our Brethren do when they preach the Word Do they not injoyne obedience in the name of Christ but withall they disclaim having sole Jurisdiction so as to Excommunicate any alone by themselves if they obey not and yet they do the former by Authority because the Ministery of the Word is an Ordinance of God Object But it was an Assembly representing the Catholick Church because of the Apostles who were the Catholick Officers and the whole acted by the ordinary power of the Catholick Church Answ. 1. The Reason overthrowes the Argument For if it was therefore an Assembly of the Catholick Church because of the presence of the Apostles Then if the Apostles had been absent it had been but the Assembly of a particular Church And the Apostles when assembled alone had made an Assembly of the Catholick Church So the universality or Catholicisme of the Assembly depended wholely and solely on the Apostles Or else secondly The Apostles if alone out of this Assembly neither severally nor joyntly should have been able to determine and do what was here done Or else thirdly The Apostles in this Assembly did denude and strip themselves of their Apostolical power or at least suspend it it for that time and acted onely as ordinary Elders of the Catholick Church but then it would follow either that that particular Church of Jerusalem was the Catholick Church as Rome is said to be for there were messengers from few if from more then one other Churches Or that the Apostles though laying aside their being Elders of the universal Church for that was their Apostleship did yet act as Elders of the universal Church all which are {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} crasse interferings I thinke this Church acted 1. As the mother Church 2. As having an accesse of Authority by the presence of the Apostles 3. As being the Church from which the scandal enquired about was conceived to arise Neither doth the joyning of the Elders and Brethren wholy take off the eminency and authority of the Apostles above the rest for their speeches onely are recorded no more then Paul's joyning others with him in his Epistles though it do argue that the Church of Antioch had not that esteem of them as infallible alone And thus much also for that other place brought for confirmation of the third Argument A Representative Catholick Church in Scripture The fourth and last Argument is from the Testimony of some Reformed Divines viz. Walaeus and the Professors of Leydon But the first speaks nothing for him but what all acknowledge and was granted above scil. The Church saith he may be considered two waies 1. Vniversally for the Church which by the preaching of the Gospel is called out of the world throughout the world which in a certain sense or in some respect may even be called Catholick or for a particular Flock tyed unto one place In which sense I know none denie a Catholick Church it being one of the Articles of the ordinary Creed that there is a Catholick Church that is that the Church is now no longer bound to any one place as under the Jewish Government But that the Church in respect of the several members and societies of it is dispersed over the face of the earth But this doth no more conclude that therefore they are one Visible Corporation then when we say Mankinde is spread over all the World that therefore all men are one company or body politick 2. The Professors of Leyden are against him for they distinguish betweene a Visible and particular Church and betweene the Invisible and universal and say That a Visible Church is considered two waies 1. As a company or Society of one Towne City or Province which are united not onely in the unity of Faith and Sacraments but also in the Forme of outward Government or else it is considered as a certain Oecumenical and Vniversal body dispersed in several places throughout the whole World Although THEY DIFFER IN THE EXTERNALL FORME IT SELFE OF CHVRCH-GOVERNEMENT and circumstantial Rites very much yet agreeing in the ESSENTIAL VNITY OF FAITH and of the Sacraments Whence that is common in Cyprian Episcopatus unus est cujus à singulis in solidum pars tenetur Wâ—ich words evidently destroy this opinion For first they make the Essentialunion or forme of the Society and onenesse of the Church to consist in the onenesse of Faith and Sacraments Secondly They imply That Government is one as it is in Christ but divers as it is in severall Churches and in the hands of severall Officers for so Calvine in Ephes. 4. 11. expounds that of Cyprian The Episcopacie he gives to Christ alone in the administring whereof every one hath his part Thirdly And which chiefly assaulteth the heart of the cause for which it is brought by this Author They make the very difference betwixt the universal Church and a particular Church to be this That they disagree in the outward or visible forme of Church-Government therefore in the sense of the Professors of Leyden the Vniversal Church is not one Governing Body for then the Government must be one not only in Essence Nature and Kinde but one in Number Existence single and Indivual being And thus much for answer in particular to Apollonius who indeed hath the substance of what hath been said for this opinion others that follow having taken his grounds and dilated them a little but not much strengthened them thereby as will appear in the sequele 2. The next Defendant of this opinion is M. Hudson cited in the first chapter his sense is the same his words and expressions not so distinct as the former Before I come to his Arguments such as seem to differ from those before 1. note that the
one particular visible Church so all particular Churches by this association make but one Catholick visible Church Ministerial and Governing of right all the rest Answ God and Christ have disposed and ordered the Government of the World and the Church according to the severall conditions whereinto the providence of the one and the other hath determined to bring them When wee are Children God hath appointed one kinde of government for us viz. to be under tutors and governours until the time of age and then we are not so when afterward a man is disposed in marriage though he have a relation to his Parent yet not a necessary dependence on him in point of government So whilst a Family is but one it is gouerned as one body by one or more Parents of Officers who in point of government are one single body but as was said if this Family multiply beyond the bounds of that first house they are not now still to be fancyed to be but one Catholick Family to be governed in common Take for instance the Family of Adam or Noah The whole world was but then one Family and governed by one man c. shall we need to repeat the absurdity of the consequence if therefore we should conclude that the severall Kingdoms and Nations are not therefore to act as Independent Corporations but as parts of the body Politick of the World which is Gods kingdom general And yet there is a relation betwixt all societies of men as men by vertue whereof they are all to regard the common good of mankinde c. In like manner doth Christ in his Church when beleevers are babes he would have them the more absolutely to subject themselves to their spiritual Parents when growne up they have a greater freedom and are to be otherwise governed the Apostle bids Timothy not to rebuke an Elder but to intreat them as Fathers c. So when the whole Church was but one company they were governed as such and by one company of Officers that had charge over them all and every one particularly according to their several offices As the Pastors to teach every one the Rulers to watch over every one the Deacons to provide for every one c. But this Family of the second Adam and second Noah as Peter implies him to be spreading into many particular Families and Nations the Scripture never I say never represents them as one visible body in respect of their outward Association and Government but still speaks of them as many the Churches of Judea which yet under the Legal government was but one the Church Act. 7. pray why this difference of speech but to confute this onenesse visible of all Churches When they are called the Church it reflects upon them as one in Faith Spirit kind of worship and Government as the place alledged Eph. 4. 1. plainly expresses And yet I denie not that these particular Churches are to have a regard to the common good of all Churches and not to act as if they were in relation to none but themselves and for this end also it is convenient and sometimes necessary if it may be done to associate with other Churches for mutual assistance and to meet in Synods and Councels together as did the Church of Antioch and Jerusalem and the Churches in the Primitive times The kingdom of England and so other Nations are bound in some cases to associate with other Kingdoms and are actually associated with them as also was Solomon with the king of Aegypt and Hiram king of Tyre but is England not to act as an Independent Kingdom from France Spain Scotland or the Kingdom of Israel or Independent saving the Articles of Association for all * that They add in the same place as a prevention of an objection That as the mutual consent of particular men and families orderly into Churches gives them Power and Authority Ecclesiasticall one over another without destroying the liberty of such persons and families but helping of it so also in this association of Churches their mutuall consent orderly regulated gives them a sufficient call for their Elders to exercise their power of Elders over the Congregations in common without impeaching the liberties c. But 1. This similitude doth not truely represent these Brethrens opinion who hold that the Catholicke visible Church is before any particular Church and is the first subject of all Church Power and the mother out of which particular Churches spring whereas this similitude makes the particular Churches to exist First as mothers to the universall this being according to their expression now nothing else but a collection or aggregation of them Secondly This seems inconsistent with the former reasoning for if by Divine Right all particular Churches are but one universall and generall Church or Corporation and all particular men and families by Gods appointment are to associate with some particular Church then have the Churches right to this common government not from any consent but from Gods institution whether the members or persons consent or consent not yea and hence is it that Churches and Presbyteries may by our brethrens principles bee excommunicated for we may suppose some Churches will not consent to such associations Objection If it bee said This consent grounds the relation to this or that particular Church with which they shall associate I reply that this removes not the objection for in generall they are ingaged unto subjection to the universall Church and the particular Church to which they joyne is but a necessary condition that they may the better bee under the universall discipline 3. The case is not the same betwixt particular persons and Families joyning into some particular Congregation and the association of several Churches into one body much lesse of all into one generall Common-wealth For the former instance plainly confutes it A man or family is ordinarily bound to be of some Kingdom Common-wealth or State but it doth not therefore follow that all States or Kingdoms must needs be associated together into one general Common-wealth neither is the reason the same For a whole Kingdom State or Society is better able to defend it self against injuries and to accomodate it self with necessaries than a particular person or Familie and what is wanting may be sufficiently supplyed by meer Voluntary Arbitrary and Temporary Association in a Common-wealth which in a Family or Person is not so 4. It must not be said by rational men that 1. All men are bound to associate and so all Churches 2. They being associated are to be governed by others which are more then themselves and yet their liberty is not diminished but strengthned if the Reverend Assembly shall say that their security and safety may possibly bee thereby strengthened it might in some cases be admitted But surely as the liberty of a particular man or family is not the same before he is bound to others and afterward though his
uncialibus literis in Capital Letters We pursue not saith the Ancient our opponents with reproches and contumelies as the most do sheltring the weaknesse of their Reasons and Arguments with revileing speeches not unlike the fish SEPIA which * they say casts out a black inkie matter whereby she avoids the fisher But that we make war for Christ we evidence by this Argument that we contend after the MANNER OF CHRIST who is meek and peaceable and bare our infirmities Now from the precedent Tractate when I have inferred a Corollary or two and breathed out a Word of love into our Brethrâ—ns eares and bosomes I have done As to the former 1. If there be one Visible Vniversal Governing Church â—hen the now endeavoured Presbyterie consisting of the Presbyteries of the whole World as one entire body and claiming so by Divine Right as on the ground of one Catholick Visible Governing Church hath no foundation in Scripture and so is in that respect * Ens Fictum A DIVINE NOTHING 2. There is no Visible Church or Corporation Ecclesiasticall properly so called and as the immediate Receptacle of Church-power but a particular Church i. e. the Church of one place though not as particular but as a Church indefinitely essentially and absolutely considered 3. Then there are no universal GOVERNING Officers at large that being ordained in one Church are Governours every where no more then a Major of one Corporation is so in another or that a Ruling Elder or Deacon of one Church hath the same power in another though perhaps in combination with the former Whence it will follow First That no Minister can do an act properly of Power Ministerial out of the Church whereof he is an Officer that is formally valid i. e. as from him being an Officer 2. That the Ordinances administred by ministers either of no Congregation or out of their owne are void formally and uneffectual 3. That Churches destitute of Ministers must remain without Ordinances c. The three first main inferences I acknowledge to be consequent to the foregoing discourse But to the conclusions drawn from them I must speak something 1. Some distinguish betwixt power purely Ministerial and properly Governing because we finde the Apostles did preach and baptise whilest Christ was on earth and before they were endued with power from on high to administer discipline and government and they say Ministerial power is of larger extent and Governing power restrained to a political body or Corporation 2. Others say that by vertue of the communion of Churches all officers are common amongst them quoadusum non quoad dominium to use though not to owne as theirs But secondly to avoid dispute I shall omit these and what else might be replyed more exactly and adhere at present to another answer viz. Factum valet fieri non debuit That the Vulgar Axiome holds here Things that are in themselves right i. e in the Essential causes matter and forme good and according to institution though not proceeding by standing rule in some externalls as in the outward efficient or minister or circumstantial manner of doing are not therefore void formally For instance first in natural things Those creatures that are begotten both by generation of their Dammes and also by putrefaction and heat of the Sun as divers creeping things are though the latter differ in the outward instrumental cause yet are they as true in their kinde as the former so the Serpent the Lice the Froggs c. that Moses made before Pharaoh and the Wine that Christ made at the Banquet were as true in their kinde as those wrought by ordinarie causes So secondly in spiritualls Zipporahs circumcising her child though M. Mead gives another Interpretation of it The Circumcision administred by the Idolatrous Priests Jehojadahs and afterward the Maccabees administration of Ecclesiastick and Civil power to wit The Kingdom and Priesthood together was valid The high Priests in the time of Christ had no orderly power as being not the persons designed by God for that office as not being of Aarons line nor coming in by a lawful way c. yet their Acts were valid and Christ present at them 3. To the third particular I say 1. This is no greater inconvenience then that a Corporation must be without many those acts which onely Officers may doe whilest they are destitute of them 2. There would bee ordinarily Ministers enough and a succession of them in every Church if the Congregations or Parishes were divided and limited by Scripture and reason that is according to the number of Christians and conveniency of Habitation And not according as the bounds of Lordships accidentally fell or superstition prompted to get Offerings or merit Pardon or Wealth and pride suggested when some grown rich would not sit so low as before which are the common originalls of the multitudes of Parishes especially in Cities and great Townes Thus of the Corrollaries 2. In the next place for our brethren the Assertors of the opposed Tenet As a Bishop must be apt to teach so hee must bee willing to heare also for he must not bee self-willed nor soone angry with those that pâ—t him in remembrance On these footings and the evidence of the truth now pleaded I take liberty with due respect unto the Persons and places of them with whom I deale to advance a step or two neerer to them and speak in os ipsum as the saying is mouth to mouth There is a general and sad complaint and that not without cause of Novelty variety and danger of opinions I shall not injure ye Brethren if I put you in minde that the opinion in your sense at least is â—ew Light and cannot but increase the differences and disputes exceedingly especially when men shall be engaged to subscribe it as an Article of Faith or else be secluded from emploiment in the Church of God which occasioned so many controversies about Liturgie Episcopacie Ceremony c. formerly That it is like also to prove of the greatest danger to the Churches and their Reformations even your owne was shewed above Now how incongruous is it that those persons who have with so much zeal inveighed against others for like things should have the beam of that in their owne eye And how imprudent would it seem to be if men of repute for wisdom and piety should be so far transported either with distaste to any party or fear of danger to their owne as to admit a forraigner with intent to evert their adversary and secure themselves who will prey on both Now if ye will needs maintain a litigious Title can ye not live on the inheritance of your Fathers Presbyterie hath stood without this proppe and it is not safe to remove a building from its old foundation this NEW peece put to the old garment is like to make the RENT it proved so in the late Church-government
at once first stop the inundation that will drowne all though the enemie in the mean time prevail the more The CONTENTS 1. THe Occasion and first Authors of the opinion of one Catholick Visible GOVERNING Church Together with the intent and scope of this Treatise as also the Authors call to this service Chap. 1. Page 1. 2. The State of the Question Chap. 2. page 4. 3. The just prejudices and strong probabilities against the former Notion Chap. 3. page 10. 4. Demonstrations against it from the efficient cause of Church Government from the material from the formal and final Chap. 4. page 19. 5. Answers to the Arguments produced for it Chap. 5. 1. By Apollonius page 33. 2. By M. Hudson page 51. 3. The Reverend Assembly page 60. 4. M. Noyes page 70. 5. The London Ministers page 78. 6. The Conclusion Chap. 6. page 83. 1. Illatory or by way of Corrollary 2. Hortatory to the Brethren of this opinion To the Reader Whereas I have reckoned chap. 1. Mr Randal in his treatise of the Church among mine Adversaries in the Argument I handle upon better search I finde him not to be so but to hold the Catholicke Church as others did and my selfe doe as by a marginall quotation I have made appear CHAP. I. The occasion and first Authors of the Question Together with the intent and scope of this Treatise As also the Authors call unto this service SECT. I. GOD having put it into the heart and hand of the Parliament of England to set upon Reformation of the Church as well as of the Common-wealth they for that end conveened an Assembly of such Learned and Godly men as they adjudged meet for their direction in that work and those of known different Judgements Episcopal Presbyterial and Congregational that they might by their opposition the better discern what way of Church Government and Reformation they should countenance and strengthen with their Authority Now the Episcopal way â—aving rendered it self odious by its imperiousnesse and otherwise the contest remained betwixt the other two whereof the Presbyterian being practised in some things in certain Reformed States and Churches who were partly constrained thereunto there being some hints of Scripture also that might be apprehended to look that way Some other things withal concurring got place either in the interests or affections of a great part of the Assembly Parliament City and Ministers in the Country Hereby also they were eyed the more by the Churches abroad that were of that way and had the opportunity to improve their endeavours for their assistance The Congregational way in the mean time though it wanted not Assertors very learned and godly and of great name in the Church and had the advantage of an amiable pattern of it in the new-English Plantations and withall the daily accesse and addition of the most knowing and conscencious sort of Professors Yet by reason of the former disadvantages it was not rendered so considerable among the Churches abroad as to depart from received Principles or neglect to appear in the defence of the former for consideration of it Hereupon the Walachrian Classis in Holland among others being sollicited by the Presbyterian partie here for their assistance they appoint G. Apollonius Pastor of the Church at Middelburgh to take on him this province and having according to his principles acquitted himself of that service in a Tractate intituled A consideration of certain controversies which concern the Government of the Church of God agitated in England the approbate of the Classis is added to the book and published 1644. both in Latin and English This Author observing as it seems that the assault on the way of the Presbyterian Government was like to be strong and fearing that the former basis and foundations of it viz. That the Government of the Church was to be by the Elders and they in equal povver 2. That it is alvvaies convenient if attainable and sometimes necessarie that Churches be associated and act in combination vvith joynt consent 3. That as Princes and States have an Independent povver within their owne limits so Churches under the Government of one Prince or State have no absolute or necessary dependance on other Churches in point of Ecclesiastick Power and Government c. These grounds as was said being doubted whether defensible the Author in the third Chapter of his discourse which treates of the Visible Instituted Church betakes himself to a larger medium and of all men that I know of the Presbyterian and almost of the Protestant judgement he first layes down this conclusion That there is a certain universal outward Church dispersed through the whole World described in the Scriptures which in a certain visible Government doth make one onely Corporation Ministerial Church-body or Political society under which all particular Churches Classical Provincial and National as it were parts of the vvhole are conteyned Apollonius is followed herein by M. Hudson in his Book written on this Subject Intituled the Essence and Vnitie of the Church Catholick visible also by the Reverend Assembly of Divines as we shall see afterward Again by M. Noyes a Minister of New-England in his book intituled the Temple measured and lastly by certain London Ministers in their Tract of the Divine Right of the Presbyterian Government by which it seems the Notion is so amiable that there is as it were a kind of Ambition who should appear first in being the Authors or Owners of it Though the truth is this conceit for substance hath been before all these the Tenet of some others whom it is not any great honour to be followers of in this as first the Papists generally also a few Episcopal men as Crakanthorpe M. Randall and perhaps some others And it may be by some absolute Royalists for that spirit must needs work in Church affairs to some such opinion I remember one of them being in conference about Church-government acknowledged indeed the Church of Rome to have abused its power that way but conceived that it was necessary for the Catholick Church to have some one standing Court and place of residence whereunto to have recourse on all occasions and which might have authority over and influence upon the vvhole to this effect was his discourse which opinion cannot be avoyded if the notion of one Catholick visible Church be granted as shall appear hereafter Now the scope of this Treatrse is not to unfasten the ground of all Church combinations and to lay a foundation for absolute Independencie The conveniencie and somtime the necessity of Classes and Synods for direction and determination and that by Divine Authority is freely acknowledged though not with power properly juridical yea I add that Episcopacie it self was and might be maintained as also Presbyterie if confined to a particular Church and not subjected to superior Ecclesiastical power which was the most ancient way of it without the notion
is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} depends upon and is referred to the Pope I answer 1. Besides what is said above The Popes themselves in some actions insinuate that they are not supreme in their owne personall relation but as the head president or chair-man of the Vniversall representative Presbyterie which are the Colledge of Cardinalls representing the Colledge of Apostles said to be the Generall Presbyterie representative of the Catholicke Visible Church Hence the forme of some Instruments in the Popes name is By the advice of the most Reverend the Cardinalls His Holinesse decrees such or such a thing In Imitation of Kingdomes which Christ forbiddeth his Church as being of an other nature where the Parliament represents the Kingdome and in their absence the King and Councel represent them both hence perhaps it is that in Proclaimations the forme often is Wee saith the King by the Advice of our Privie councell c. 2. Papists of chiefest note * yea Popish Vniversities yea Popish Councells does assert a Generall Councell which is nothing else but an Vniversall Presbytery to be above the Pope So that it may be really Popish though all do not depend on or bee referred to the Pope firstly and primarily Now that this Catholique Visible Church as our Brethren have represented it may degenerate or rather advance thereunto let it be considered that Papall Government it self had the like originall It is granted even by Bishops themselves That the Bishop at first was but the PRESIDENT or Chaire-man of the Presbyterie or assembly of Ministers Afterwards partly by the Ambition of those who were chosen to that place partly by the sloth flattery and slavishnesse of the rest of the Ministers and people all came under him So also at first each Church did all things among themselves as ordaine excommunicate c. Afterwards they associated with the great Churches in time what was of voluntary consent became a necessity and due subjection So the Bishops of Rome at first for civilities sake because it was the Emperours Seat had the Precedency for a time at length claimed it as due So here if an universall coporation there must be universall Officers over these one President or super-intendent or Chaire-man hee perhaps may have it for his life if an able man and may obtaine to act with a Committee as the representative of a Generall councell in their absence and what hinders but if another Boniface and Phocas An ambitious President and wicked Emperour meet hee may be made Vniversall Bishop Men are more loose in their Ecclesiasticall then Civil Liberties And if this Government bee not of God he will leave it to corrupt it selfe even as the other did But Thirdly Necessarily and of it self it tends to the depriving of all particular Churches of their Libertie yea though they should be Nationall Churches 1. Because In them particular Churches are not left to their choise but are Bound by this opinion to associate and to send Elders to the Councells and Presbyteries so the Reverend Assembly * 2. Though they should not doe it yet are they neverthelesse under the Government of the Catholique Church which is the first subject of Church power and so are bound to act according to the Letter or Plaine sence of the determinations of the Catholicke Church without adding altering or detracting in any Materiall thing especially which might concern the whole Church * And then what will become of the Reformations of all the Reformed Churches 2. In particular in respect of the Protestant Churches of Europe 1. Because they are much fewer then the other Churches of the world that are in the maine Orthodox as some whiles since a * Presbyterian Writer hath given in the account 2. Who shall exclude the Popish and other Heterodox Churches from being members of the Catholicke Visible Church till by a Generall Councell they be heard and excommunicated or Non communioned And whether the major part of the Churches in the world will consent to such an Excommunication or Non-communion is uncertaine and then they must VOTE also and so the Orthodox Churches will be the more over-borne Object 1. But it may be it will be said the throat of the cause is yet safe because it seems sufficient that the major part of those that are of the same judgement ought to governe the lesse To which I reply that in all Corporations and Common-wealths as our Brethren say the Vniversall Visible Church is not the major part of a Part but the major part of the whole body are to rule the rest and that not divided in severall places at a distance but convened together at least in some neernesse of place Object 2. If it be said that by reason of distance of place and multitude of persons this cannot be done viz. the collection of the Catholicke Visible Church I answer and say 1. Therefore such an opinion is not to be asserted which unavoidably and necessarily enforceth such a gathering 2. That in respect of the Commissioners general some for many Churches which the Authours of this opinion doe or must allow it may be done for matter of companie or number 3. Princes from one end of the world to the other hold leagues and correspondencies together as doth the Kingdom of England with Russia in the North and Persia in the East 4. Rome governs in all parts of the world as a single corporation notwithstanding distance of place 5. Lastly The Churches of Europe at least might have met for the Reformations they have endeavoured as many of them did in the Synod of Dort about Arminius CHAP. V. The Arguments for an Vniversal Visible Governing Church with the answers to them HItherto we have as it were battered and taken the Assailants Worke it remains that we seise on their Ammunition and Weapons the opposite reasonings produced by them And first to the Arguments of Appollonius who by the way I observe to give the cause in all particulars but one or two to those of the Congregational way and well he could not avoid it seeing that the Churches of Holland go by the same principles except that of the authority of Synods and baptizing of all children which latter how it stands with their denying Church-fellowship to all ipsi viderint But to his Arguments The first is taken out of 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath set in the Church some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers which Church there is said to consist of divers and heterogeneal members but the Ministry the Apostles c. are not given to any particular Church and the Apostles c. were the Governours of the Catholick Church Ergo The Visible Catholick Church is one Governing body under which all particular Churches are subjected and conteyned Answ. At the stating of the Question I premised the distinction of onenesse in Essence and mysterie and onenesse in
yet actually instituted Officers neither of this or the whole Church which appears vers 4. 8. Tarry ye saith he in Jerusalem till you have received power from on high But it was indeed that first Church from whence all Churches were to be produced and the Apostles especially and the rest of these members were those who were severally or joyntly to plant those Churches for some members of this Church did plant other Churches and not the Apostles onely as is expressed chap 8. as one man that is father by generation of many Families neither is an universal man nor doth ever represent them neither is he the Governour alwaies of them but for a certain time onely 2. If it were the Representative of the universal Church because the Apostles the universal Officers were there yet it was their priviledge as was shewed above to be the universal Officers and that severally so that though the Churches were one body under one number of Officers then yet they having no successors in the latitude of their power the Church now becomes many else you may as well conclude that all the world must still be one under one sort of Governours because it was so in the time of Adam and Noah 3. This act declares very small power in the Apostles or universal Church for they could not make an universal Officer whereas every particular Church can make its particular Officers and this shews there was then no Catholick government properly such but that was reserved to Christ alone 4. If it conclude it argues that the Catholick Church is formally to chuse its Catholick Officers for so they did and to come together for that purpose 5. It puts the brethren into great liberty and priviledge for they choose and the Apostles onely put them upon the work and prayed over it But to avoid this else-where labour is used to prove that here were onely the Apostles or Elders in this election quid non mortalia pectora cogis Regni sacra fames The second Argument there is that the businesse of the universal Church was transacted scil. the election of an Apostle Answ. Adam did represent all mankinde and transacted the affairs and businesse of the universal Catholick world both before and after his fall so likewise Noah and his family after the flood Gen. 8. doth it therefore follow that the whole world should be but one Kingdom or Corporation It is usual for Kingdoms to send out Colonies into forraigne parts and to give them power to become Common-wealths of themselves without dependence unlesse voluntary upon that Kingdom from whence they had their Original as New-England So fathers of Families yeild their sons an entire governement in their owne families without necessarily engageing them to the families of their brethren further then mutuall love and relations shall require But before the Colonies be sent out the Nation from whence they arise doth represent and transact the businesse both of themselves and of all those Colonies and the father of the Families both represents and transacts the businesse of the Families that spring from him yet are both the one and other afterward without any absolute and necessary dependence either upon the one or other So in the matter of Christs Church The Church of Jerusalem was as it were the mother to the rest The Apostles c. spiritual fathers who represented and transacted the affairs of all Churches that should flow from that but so that when such Churches came to be planted they shewed by their practise that the Apostles had instated them in entyre power without any necessary dependence on other Churches whether single or combined as is evident out of the first and second chapters of the Revelation noted before and other places 3. The third particular is of little moment for the brethren that are called Galileans vers. 11. were so by countrey but now were by habitation and dwelling in all probability of Hierusalem And howsoever the thing is not much material seeing there was then no other Church or societie of Christians visible but that at Hierusalem Besides the former answers take off this also And thus the first scripture viz. from Act. 1. is answered The second followes out of Act. 15. 22. Where that Assembly of Apostles Elders and Brethren which by ordinary power prescribed Ecclesiasticall Cannons and decrees to all the Churches of the Gentiles and by authority imposed them on them this Assembly is called the Church but to doe so could not bee in the power of any Provinciall or Nationall Assembly much lesse of a Congregationall but it is the Act of the Catholique Church which therefore this Assembly represented Answ 1. The former answers touching the prerogative of the Apostles and of the mother Church are equally applyable to this also 2. It is not called The Church indefinitely but with reference to THAT PLACE scil. of Hierusalem as by the context appeares for vers. 22. 'T is said It seems good to the Church to send chosen men of their OWN company but the whole Assembly as constituted of the Church of Hierusalem and the messengers of Antioch c. is not called the Church 3. It was not then the representative of the Catholick Church as it was in the first chapter there beeing now other Churches planted which were not there by their messengers Neither was the Colledge of the Apostles there the standing and supreme Court of the Catholick Church to which all Churches were to appeale and to whose judgement they were to stand but every one of the Apostles in the Churches they planted For Paul as he went not up to Hierusalem himselfe at first as was noted above and therefore could not teach the Churches any such duty of necessity binding them so neither did he now either himselfe or others therefore go up from Antioch to Hierusalem as if he had not plenary and full power to have determined the controversie but for satisfaction of the Brethren who either were told by those that came from Hierusalem as it seems by what the Apostles wrote in their letter vers. 24. to whom we gave no such commandement implying that those persons had given out that they had such command from the Apostles or else they desired the mind of the other Apostles also for further confirmation Therefore doth Paul goe up Also in divers of his Epistles hee joynes Timothy Sylvanus and Sosthenes c. with himself yea and all the Brethren Gal. 1. 1. as here the Apostles joyned the Elders and Brethren yet these examples doe not argue that the Apostle or the Apostles had not absolute power of themselves to have determined the controversie 4. It is denyed that this Assembly did act by an ordinary power for if the Apostles presence made not the Assembly extraordinary then was it but an ordinary and particular Church or two or three partcular Churches at the most there being many other Churches then planted who had no Elders there
Scripture he brings to signifie the whole company of the * Elect are the same in sense with those which he brings to signifie one * Visible Vniversal body and so are they expounded as I have done by the best interpreters even those he makes use of His first place is Eph. 5. 26. Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it c. This saith he is to be understood of the Elect. So also saith Beza but Beza parallels and make the same in sense with it 1 Cor. 12. 12. 27. Eph. 1. 22. and Eph. 4. 15. 16. as is to be seen in his larger notes on M. Hudsons second place cited for this Church of the Elect viz. Coloss. 1. 18. which place * Calvin understands of the Church as it is governed by Christ So that these places if they be to be understood of the mystical body of Christ and not of a Visible Vniversal Body then so are the other in the judgement of those Interpreters Besides * Calvin on that place whereon M. Hudson and the rest build their greatest strength 1 Cor. 12. 12. 27. doth evidently make the Body and Corporation whereof beleevers are members to be a spiritual and mystical one and doth so distinguish it from the society and corporation they have as a politick or a civil body of a Towne or City 2. This Authors definition doth not reach the subject of his question but contains what is of all hands confessed it is this The Vniversal Visible Church is the whole company of Visible Beleevers throughout the World Thirdly He brings the description of the Church visible out of several Authors none of which not Austins nor Calvins nor Bullingers nor Kekermans nor Zuinglius his nor Gerards nor Byfields who all take Vniversal in the sense now described and not as M. Hudson but one or two speak to the question viz. Apollonius and perhaps P. Ramus the former of which was pre-ingaged and touching the latter I referre the Reader to M. Beza's judgement of him and that as it seems with reference to this opinion Predixi quod in caeteris disciplinis-ausus esset mox etiam in Theologia tentaturum Quid non ille ante mortem molitus est ut in dogmatibus quibusdam in tota Ecclesiastica Disciplinâ Gallicas Ecclesias inter se COMMITTERET Vtinam ipsius scripta periissent quandoquidem haec est mundi INSANIA Bezae Epist. ad Vrsinum in Organ Aristot 4. He acknowledges among other Authors * Ames to be against him and yet in the very * next page cites him as for him 5. Yet those words of this Author which he cites speak nothing for him if compared with the Authors meaning they are We acknowledge a Catholick Visible Church in respect of its external and accidental forme in its parts or members both severally and joyntly Which is no more but this that Christians as they are single men and as they are combined into particular Churches are visible But M. Hudson might have known or remembred that M. Ames doth expresly and in terminis reject an universal Visible Church in M. Hudsons sense his words elsewhere are The Church since Christs coming is not one CATHOLIQVE so as that all the faithfull dispersed throughout the whole world should be united in one and the same bond for outward relation and depend upon one and the same Visible Pastor or Assembly of Pastors or Presbyterie marke it but there are so many Churches as there are particular Congregations For although the Church mystical as it is in its members is distinguished into its subject and adjuncts as the English Church the French the Belgick as we use to call the sea by the name of the coast it beats upon as the Brittish the Belgick the Baltick sea although it be one and the same sea yet notwithstanding instituted Churches are several distinct species or kindes or single bodies partaking of the same common Nature as severall springs several schools several families although perhaps many of them or all may be called one Church in respect of some affection which they all have in commune Like as many Families of one and the same noble and eminent Family are called by one name as the house of Nassau or the house of Austria which comprehends the Emperour and King of Spain who yet have no dependence in point of Government one on another Now wee know who taxes some-body for this fault of citeing Authors for them who are known to be in the main against them 6. His explication of his question both confutes his opinion and also contradicteth plainly what he speaks of it For he saith That the Church Catholicke visible is one whole body all whose parts or particular Churches are alike and of the same Nature And avouches for this purpose the authority of Ames who indeed saith so Now in a body all whose parts are of like nature and quality as so many drops of water or stones in a heap each part hath the same vertue and power that the whole and all the parts together the whole Sea or whole heape of Stones have no other kinde of Vertue or power then one drop or one stone Or to make it cleer by another similitude severall Kingdomes in the world and severall Corporations in a Kingdom and severall families in Corporation if they bee all but members alike of the same Kingdome and not of a higher body whereof when they are met they may be members as Kingdomes of an Empire Corporations of a Parliament Families of a Corporation They should have no more nor greater power when met then when assunder As a multitude of single men that are not of a Corporation though they bee met yet have they not the more power then each one simply for their meeting their meeting addes no power unlesse they meet as members of a body superiour to them when severall 2. This explication contradicteth expresly what he adds in the same place pag. 21. and which is his opinion that hee would establish viz. That the Church Visible Catholique is an Organicall Ministeriall Governing body that is not such a body as is the element of water or ayre every part whereof is of the same nature vertue and power in it selfe considered but such a body as a man hath which is distinguished by severall members some principall some lesse principall some governing as head eyes some acting as hands fee◠some governed as the body by the head eyes c. And such a body as all Corporations are Now this contradicts plainly the former both opinion and expression for if the Church be a similar body and all Congregations alike and the whole nothing differing in nature or constitution or power from the parts then the Catholick Vniversall visible Church is no more the Governing Church then a particular As the whole sea is no more Water then one drop nor all men if they be
much being said in the former respect which they apply to the latter The third Defendant or rather Assaylant is the Reverend Assembly of Divines Their Assertion is The whole Church is but one made up of the Collection and aggregation of all who are called out of the World by the preaching of the Word to professe the faith of Christ in the unity thereof Their first Argument implyed is this From this union there ariseth unto every one such a relation unto and dependence upon the Catholique Church as parts have to the whole and are to doe all Christian duties as parts conjoyned unto the vvhole and members of the same that must be single Common vvealth and Corporation Answ. Such is the advantage of Truth that the greatest abilities grow weak when they dash against it 'T is sensible in this Argument and Authors of it For it doth not at all follow that every company of men that in some respect have an union together and in that respect may be conceived as one whole Brotherhood or Fellowship should herefore be one common-wealth or corporation For as was said before the brethren or families of the same first Parent suppose of the house of Essex Manchester or Fairfax have an union of blood together and in that respect are called the House in the singular number not the Houses of such a Family from which union there ariseth to every one of that House such a relation unto and dependence upon the House or Family in general as parts have to the whole and are to do all such brotherly duties as parts conjoyned to the whole yet doth it not hence follow that all these persons and their Families which possibly may be many are therefore one corporation The same might more evidently be illustrated by the whole race of mankinde who are one in nature one in parent one in office general the government of the world and worship of God one in the common laws of Nature one in the principal Governour God is the King of all the Earth c. And from this union there ariseth unto every man such a relation unto and dependence upon the catholick world or mankinde in general as parts have to the whole and are to do all humane duties as parts conjoyned to the whole of mankinde Hence the Philosopher when rebuked for giving an Almes to a needy but naughty fellow replyed I give it {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} not to the man but to mankinde yet how will would the Honourable Assembly of Parliament take this consequence from the Reverend Assembly of Divines If therefore they should conclude that all the men in the world are but one common-wealth and corporation for then as the former assertion of the onenesse of the Visible Church hath made them Schismaticks in the Church and such also as have sworn to be so In like manner this inference would represent them seditious in the world in the same degree and with them all particular Churches Kings and Kingdoms likewise Object But they say That the union of the Church is neerer and the relation closer and obligation strickter betwixt the members of the Church then betwixt the persons of men because it is spiritual and heavenly To which is answered 1. That the relation and union seems to be equally neer and close in their several kindes Men as Men are as much and have as neer an union and are as much engaged one to another Christians as Christians and Churches as Churches though the relation of Christians is more Noble and excellent and the motives stronger As beasts are as much one in their kind as men though the nature of man be more excellent 2. But be the relation of Christians yet closer yet that is in Spirit Faith mystical Vnion c. not outward and visible further then to carry on the invisible according to the Institution of Christ But neither this nor the former is by this notion countenanced but the contrary as hath been evidenced There may be a Society in Faith as there was in many parts and persons where there was no onenesse in Government Job was not alone in the World some other Church God then had and so he was one in the faith and profession and kinde of Church Administration with them but not united in one body of ouâ—ward government The place alledged for strengthning this Argument viz. Eph. 4. 3 to 14 hath been ansvvered above and implies no more but an essential or mystical union which necessarily implyeth an outward one in all duties in respect of the substance onely not the subject of them but prudentially and occasionally Such an union integrally per modum suppositi subjecti and by way of onenesse in a visible way of joynt government as shall be expedient for edification which ordinarily is best promoted within such a society as may at least upon occasion meet together in one place or howsoever live together in some neernesse at least Which is the more evident because the largest Churches mentioned in Scripture did so as the Jewish Church all whose Males met thrice a year at one place and whose whole Territorie or Land was but small scarce the fourth part of England and therefore might the better be one entire Congregation or Church but had they lived some at one end of the World some at the other as Christians do there is no likelyhood they should have been one Church Integral and as the Christians in Jerusalem and in other cities at the first plantation of the Gospel The second Argument All the Ministers and officers of the Church are given to the vvhole Church Answ. All the Magistrates and Officers of the World are given to the whole world for the governing of it but not to the world conjunctim and as one single Common-wealth or Corporation made up of several corporations and Common-wealths but divisim in respect of the several corporations and Common-wealths The places alledged for proof 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11. are answered above whither we refer the Reader The third Argument is drawn from the third fourth and fifth supposition page 48 When the Church was no more then could meet in one place the Officers governed them as one undivided body respectively But their number increasing so as they could not meet altogether they divided into severall Companies which are in scripture called Churches to some one of which every beleever is bound to joyne himselfe But these severall Churches should not act or worke as if they were Independent Corporations but onely as parts of Christs body and are all to regard the common good of the whole Eph. 4. 1. c. and for that end are as much bound if it may be to associate into Presbyteries c. as particular men and families into Churches there being as much need of the one as of the other and so as many men or families make but
taken as single men have no more or higher authority then one man nor all families then one family nor all Corporations then one Corporation Wee see that 't is not one sort of men onely that are obnoxious to contradictions both verball and reall Besides the Author he seemâ— to folloâ— viz. Apollonius enterprets that place Eph. 4. 16. The whole body fitly joyned together to be meant of an Organicall Ministeriall body differing in members which Mr Hudson expounds to be meant of a Similar and body whose parts are all alike Wee see here also that even persons of this opinion cannot agree among themselves shall wee therefore say they know not what they would have seeing one would have one thing another another We must then reach out the same ingenuity unto others differing in like manner that we stand in need of our selves About his answers to the objections he brings against his opinion we may note severall things as first in his answer to the 1. Objection he saith That the dwelling in one Towne where there is a Church and being member of another Church is a kinde of dis-churching that Church which is in the Tovvne where he dwells But the answer is ready according to his opinion for they remaine still of the same integrall body if the whole Church bee but one visible Congregation and so we see what way by this opinion is made to the scattering of particular Churches seeing men may remove though not in dwelling yet in relation at pleasure without danger of Schisme for they remaine still of the same single though larger bodie as a man may dwell in one Corporation and be a member of another yet he still abides a member of one and the same single Kingdome His 2d Objection is That if all particular Churches bee all one Church they must all meet some times His answer is 1. No It is sufficient that it have the same King Lavves Spirit c. But was there ever in the world such a Kingdome or Corporation that the members of it do not meet sometimes if it be not a meere visible Monarchy as under Popery If it have any liberty left to the subjects they must meet sometimes at least by their Deputies as the Kingdome of England in Parliament the Empire of Germanie in the states of the Empire c. His 2d answer is That the Church Catholicke visible hath met in Generall Councells as a ministeriall Church and mark it is now ministeriall and heterogeneall which was before similar and homogeneall but this is replyed to above where was shewed 1. That the most primitive Churches did not so act 2. That the whole Church did not meet in them 3. That they either acted as a similar body acts in the name of those and within the Churches that sent them each for their owne and all for all those whose Deputies they were for ought we have learnt yet or else that they acted much by Regall power as by Constantines in the Councell of Nice and others by other Emperours and they acted also in late Councels by Episcopall Archiepiscopall and Patriarchal power and not as a similar body 4. If those were the Catholick Church visible representative How dare any particular Churches at most but if national abrogate and sweare against the Ordinances and government established by the Catholicke Church Let him minde this Againe he saith The power of a general Councel or of the Catholick visible Church is but EXTENSIVE and the power of particular Churches INTENSIVE but 1. This overthrowes his tenet for then the Catholicke Church hath no more power in it selfe and properly but meerely by accident then a particular Church And 2. This plucks up his second Tenet viz. That this Catholick Church is the first Church to whom power is given for if its power be extensive onely and not inward It cannot be the first subject of power The 3d. Object Hee moves against himselfe is A visible Catholicke Church must have a visible Catholicke head His 1. answer is That it is sufficient that Christ is the head though in heaven But this is altogether an unsufficient answer For Christ is the Head invisible and thence our divines affirme his body the Church to be mysticall also and invisible taken properly 2. He saith that The Church in regard of the head the government of it is absolutely Monarchicall but in regard of the Officers it is Aristocraticall But this answers not the objection for be it Monarchicall or Aristocraticall yet if the body bee one visible Corporation then must the Governours of it bee one visible either person or company of men usually or at sometimes ordinarily meeting together or at least to be considered as one body or Colledge of men by whom this body is joyntly and together and not asunder to be governed And this is the force of Calvins reason on Eph. 4. 11. though applyed to the Papacy For if wee must bee one visible corporation there must bee one visible governour either person or society which the Apostle omitting in that place where it was necessary to have been mentioned it if it had beene an ordinance cannot saith he be excused His 4th Objection is That if the Catholicke Church bee one visible body it must have a visible existence and being as it is universall and Catholicke but universalls have no beeing of their owne but they exist and have their being onely in particular as Mankinde in generall hath no being a part by it selfe from single men but hath its being in them onely His Answer is That all gathered aggregated or collected bodies do exist and have their beings so As a heape of stones hath its being only in the particular stones the water in particular drops particular Churches consist of particular families and families of particular persons and an Army in the severall Brigades which yet are one though they should never meet But this reply amounts not to an answer For no collected body that is made up of severall things hath its being in these things severally considered and apart but as united altogether it is not a heape of stones if one lye at Yorke some at London others in France Spaine c. So a Church is not a Church or one companie as the families are severall but as met together in one Assembly and so an Army Brigades may be sent out of it but if that part were never united to the Army by 1000. miles nor intended to be and if they be not governed either by one visible head or by one visible Councell of Warre no man will say they are one Army especially if one be in England and the other in America Do wee not say The Parliament hath had severall Armies under severall distinct commanders in cheife who had no dependence one on another as it was a good while after the Earle of Essex had his Comission and
of such a Congregation for we know men do that on civil and oft-times necessitated grounds as most convenient for lively-hood when yet they are altogether unsatisfied either in the Minister or Congregation A 2. passage is p. 62. the several Congregations chuse or accept their particular Officers and all the Congregation united choose or accept their common Presbyterie yet page 58. 't is said their office is conferred on them by the Church either then the common Presbyterie is the Church when they choose the Elders for the several Congregations for they do but accept of them on the matter or else it was not a plain declaration of their mindes when they said the Church chooses or else this is inconsistent with the other The 4th Assertor is Mr Noyes whose tenet is That the Church of Christ on earth is one integral body visible and hath power to act in Synods and Councels unto the end of the world His 1. Argument is The Apostle were members 2. Officers of the Catholicke not any particular Church These are replyed to above 3. They admitted members into the Catholicke Church as the Eunuch and Cornelius the Jaylor c. Answ. These persons were admitted into the Church or company of those who professe Christ and were made visible members of that societie and corporation which is invisible as the Sacraments are said to be visible signes of invisible Grace The Church Catholique is visible in respect of its severall members and societies or Churches but not in respect of its whole being as one Corporation Society and Corporation properly so called differ All men are one society but not one Corporation so in the Church Now according to nature of the society are the priviledges common society hath certain common rights proper societies have peculiar ones Now the Church in generall is a society to all the members of which there belong certain common rights and priviledges as Spirituall food the word Sacraments the right of government in the generall c. but this implies not that it should be properly one Corporation no more then it concludeth because mankinde is a society and every one that is born is already by his birth admitted a member of humane societie and so into all the rights of men as they are men as to have right to food clothes protection and government in the generall that therefore all the men in the world are one Corporation or Kingdome 2. They were admitted by baptisme immediately and directly into Christ and his mysticall body but into the visible company onely by accident If there had beene but one beleever on earth Baptisme had had its use and end Argum. 4. Christ is one visible head c. by vertue of his Lawes Ordinances Providences walking in the midst of the Church and of two or three gathered together as the King of Engl. is visibly King of Scoâ—l though residing at London in Engl. therefore the King being one the Church his Kingdom is one too Answ. Hee cites in the margent Beza saying that The Church is not a common wealth nor an Aristocracy but a Kingdome and if so surely Christ is the absolute monarch of it But that argues the Church to bee one in respect of Christ onely his spirit and lawes but not at all in respect of its visible Government by it selfe unlesse it be proved that Christ hath instituted on earth one visible single person or society of men to governe as one company together the whole Church on earth 2. A King though absent from one place yet is visible somewhere in his Kingdomes but Christ not personally visibly now 3. A king of more kingdomes then one though they be one as they meet in his person and in some respects and have some common priviledges yet may their governments be distinct as England and Scotland 4. As Christ is one so God is one and as the Church is Christs Kingdome so is the world Gods Kingdome his Law of nature one his providence governing one but is it therefore but one outward Kingdome Arg. 5. The Church of the Jews was a Type of the Christian Church the great Sanhedrin figured the Apostles and generall Councells they were many tribes but one Church Arg. 6. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 3. the universal Church is represented by one city the new Iernsalem and called the Church Mat. 16. 1 Cor. 12. Eph. 4. Answ. The Jewish Church was a Type but not in all things for then must wee have one visible high Priest one Temple must meet altogether there c. but as these ended in Christ so that national Church till it be called the second time 2. That Church was but one single intire Congregation there they met all of them thrice a year before the Lord and the Tabernacle called the Tabernacle of the Congregation 4. The Church and Common-wealth were one body as such which I think Mr Noyes will not judge to hold in all nations 2. To that of one Jerusalem I say that it is questionable whether those places speak of the Church as it shall be before the comming of Christ or after 3. Whether they speak of the state of it before the calling of the Jews or after the latter is affirmed by several expositors and they urge the word Ierusalem it shall be the State of the Jews But 4. Howsoever figurative and symbolical places are not argumentative alone 5. The Church is no mystical Ierusalem though not visible neither doth that vision argue it to be visible no more then the Holy Ghost his appearing in the shape of a Dove conclude that the Holy spirit is visible Argum. 7. The mysticall union of Brotherhood makes one mysticall body Ergo the visible union one visible body Answ. It beggs the Question For 't is denyed that there is such a visible Onenesse as is the mysticall the mystical union Catholick is reall the visible notionall only So all men have a mysticall union of nature yet not in outward government nor would it be convenient they should Argum. 8. All naturall grounds of fellowship in particular Churches in respect of ordinary execution bespeaks fellowship in one Catholick Church in respect of lesse ordinary Brotherly union Christian profession the celebration of the name of Christ who is glorified more eminently in the great assembly all these are prevalent The notion of a relation doth cherish affection pride and independency are inseparable Answ. 1. Does all relations of persons one to another and obligations of mutuall duties in regard of those relations argue that they must be one Corporation and one Government The twelve children of Iacob if God had seene it good might have beene so many severall Churches and kingdomes and yet have preserved unitie and done their duties of their relation of Brotherhood The twelve Apostles were independent in power one from another see Gal. 7. chap. 2. yet were in relation one to another and did performe all mutuall offices for