Reply to a Book, Reply · Part 25
Section 27. examined, concerning the undue power of the Claſsis.
IN this, and the fowre following Sections, they make their third complaint of his government, viz, that he ſubjecteth that Church under an undue power of the Claſſis, which they aggravate two wayes, 1. by his indirect aymes in it, for, they conceive, that he doeth it merely for his owne ends, 2. by his irregular pitching upō ſuch meanes for the attayning of his ends. For, they ſay, he doeth it, without any warrant from the word of God. For our more orderly and cleare proceeding in examining theſe five Sections, I will premiſe ſome thing, in theſi, concerning the power of Claſſes, and then deſcend to the hypotheſis, and try how juſt their complaint is. Whereunto the Anſwerer compelleth me, not onelyonly by his frequent mentioning my name, which he wrighte… at its full length every where (& in the next Section 30 times, in leſſe then three leaves of paper) but alſo by his acenſing me as an oppoſite to the government of theſe Churches by Synods and Claſſes. This to be a mere ſlander the indifferent Reader will judge by what I have already ſaid in examination of former Sections. All lawfull Authority I am alwayes, and ſhall be ready to acknowledge, with due ſubmiſſion thereunto, even when I freely teſtifye againſt all uſurpation and tyranny, and plead for the obſervation of thoſe ancient limits and bounds, which God hath ſet. But I proceed to the matter, concerning Claſſes.
Jt is not my purpoſe to ſpeake of the originall of them, nor of their antiquity, nor to contend about the name given them, much leſſe to cōdemne all uſe of them,Medull. Theol: lib. 1. Cap. 39 Sect: 27. from which I am ſo farr, that I freely confeſſe with Dr. Ames (though the Anſwerer traduceth, both him, and me as otherwiſe minded) that particular Churches, as their Communion requireth, and the light of nature, the aequity of rules, and the examples of Scripture teach, may, and, in many caſes, ought to enter into a mutuall conſociation, and confaederation, amongſt themſelves, in Claſſes, and Synods, that they may uſe their common conſent, and mutuall helpe, ſo farr at it may commodiouſly be done, eſpecially in thoſe things, which are of greater moment. Provided alwaies that ſpeciall care be taken that, under pretence of helping the Churches, they doe not hinder them, by taking away, and diminiſhing that liberty, and power which Chriſt hath given them. It was ſome ſuch abuſe that made Greg: Nazianzen ſo bitter againſt Councells,Epiſt: 42. ad Procop. that he reſolved to ſhun all ſuch aſſemblyes. Which Dr. Whittaker imputed to the evill event,Contra. Camp: p. 83. edit. 1601. whereunto the ambition & polypragmony of ſome men had brought matters, who, in ſtead of compoſing former differences & ending thoſe controverſyes, made new ones, which agreeth with Nazianzens owne expreſſion of the reaſon why evills were, rather increaſed then diminiſhed, by them, foreign. i. e. For Contentiouſnes and ambition prevayled more then reaſon. And, it may be, ſome ſuch provocation cauſed that learned politick man Hugo Grotius ſo to ſlight the authority of Claſſes and Synods,Pietas. Ordinum Holl. ac Weſt-Friſ. as he did, in that treatiſe which he publiſhed againſt Sibr. Lubbertus, upon which Bogermannus publiſhed his Annotations learnedly and ſuccinctly penned, in defence of D. Sibrandus, wherein, for anſwer of that part which concerned the neceſſity and authority of Synods, he referred Grotius to what Iunius had written againſt Bellarmine de neceſſitatee…p oteſtate Conciliorum, wherein I fully agree with Iunius. But we are now to ſpeake of a more imperfect combination of Churches, then that, which is in provinciall Synods, viz, a Dioceſan union of them in Claſſes.
Betwixt which and the imperfect combination of Churches, in and about Geneva, there is ſome difference. For that is a voluntary conjunction of the ſmaller Churches with the greater, in one Conſiſtory, for their helpe in their particular Church buiſeneſſes (the ſmaller Churches wanting men fit for the manadging of their Church affayres, and making one preſbytery,Zanch. in 4. praecept. with the next greater Church, which, being better fitted, meete weekely in their owne Conſiſtory, and theſe with them) But this is a combination which is betweene diverſe Churches, which, having their ſeverall preſbyteryes, or Conſiſtoryes apart, ſend their deputyes, viz, one Miniſter and one Elder, to meete with the like deputyes from all other Churches,Synopſ: pur. Theol. diſp. 49. Theſ. 5. in ſuch a Dioceſſe or diviſion, at a time, and place appoynted, to handle ſuch things as concerne many Churches in common, and as could not be ended in the Conſiſtoryes of the particular Churches. Concerning theſe the queſtion is, in this and the following Sections; for the diſcuſſion whereof I will propound two things to be conſidered, in theſi, or in generall. 1. What kind of combination that is which, is lawfull amongſt Churches? 2. What power that is which is due to them over particular Churches, by vertue of that combination?
For the firſt. The combination of particular Churches, in Claſſes and Synods, is, either ſuch a conſociation of them as is betweene aequalls, or ſuch a ſubordinatiō of them as is betweene unaequalls. The firſt is by way of counſaile, or brotherly direction. The ſecond is by way of command, or maſterly ſubjection. This we condemne, as being the firſt ſtep, whereby the Pope aſcended into the chayre of peſtilence, and a mere inlet for tyranny to invade and uſurpe the Churches right. The other is approved by the practiſe of the moſt ancient Churches and by good reaſon.
Firſt. The practiſe of the Churches of the firſt age is cleare for a free ſeeking and communicating of mutuall helpe, by letters, and meſſengers, as occaſion required, and that, not onelyonly in Scripture(a)Act. 15 1. Cor. 16. ult. Revel 1. et 2. but alſo in Eccleſiaſticall hyſtoryes(b)Euſeb: lib. 3. Cap. 32. Cyprian. lib. 3. Cap. 13. Catal. teſt. ver. lib. 9. p. 109. 110. And Cyprian expreſly declareth that the Churches, in his time, did give mutuall helpe to one another, ex charitate, non ex ſubjectione, in way of charity, not of ſubjection. And the Epitomatour of the Centuriſts fitly expreſſeth that combination which was, in thoſe primitive times, among the Churches, by the communion of the members in the body, and concludeth that thoſe actions and offices of their mutuall care, one for another, did not, ex imperio aut ſubjectione quâdam proficiſci, ſed ex charitate & aedificandi ſtudio i. e. did not ariſe from any authority, which one did excerciſe over another, ſubjecting it to the reſt, but out of love and indeavour of mutuall aedifying.
Secondly. The reaſons, whereby it may be proved, are weighty. M. Parker hath ſaved me the labour of this taſke, by laying downe ſix Arguments, for the proofe of this, in thoſe his learned and elaborate treatiſes, concerning Eccleſiaſticall policy, as 1, From the ground of this combination of Churches,Dc eccleſ. pol. lib. 3. Cap. 22. p. 329. which is love, not obedience. 2. From the forme of it, which is communion and conſociation &c. 3. From the matter of it, which are Churches, who are aequall among themſelves, as members in the body, which have a viciſſitude of offices mutually to be performed, among themſelves. 4. From the object of it, which is res communis, that which concerneth all the Churches, in common. 5. From the outward manner of proceeding, which is eollatione conciliorum, by conference and communication of counſells. 6. From the end of this combination, which is, not to receive the mandates of other Churches, but their conſent, counſail, and approbation.
The ſecond thing to be conſidered, in theſi, is what power or authority that is which is due to Claſſes over particular Churches, by vertue of their combination.
Firſt. More generally, This will beſt appeare by a right underſtanding of the nature of that kind of aſſocication or combination, as it hath bene, in the words immediately preceding, expreſſed. For, anſwerable to thoſe two kinds of combination, there is a twofold power, in the perſons ſo combined, whereby they may juſtly doe ſuch things, which others cannot, who are not, by ſuch a relation, thereunto qualifyed. Thus, to the unaequall fellowſhip which is betweene ſuperious and inferiours (as parents and children, Maſters and ſervants Princes and people) appertayneth jus Rectorium, the power of government:Hugo Grot de jure pacis, et belli. p. 4. but to that other ſociety which is betweene aequalls (as brethren, Citizens, freinds, confaederates) belongeth jus aequatorium, ſuch a power of communicating mutuall helpe as may ſtand with the preſervation of their ſeverall libertyes and mutuall aequality, ſafe and untouched. And no other power is due to them, quâ tales. If they aſſume any other, it is a mere uſurpation, and tranſgreſſion of the bounds and limits of their combination.
Secondly. More particularly, to apply this to Claſſes, which are ſociall combinations of many Churches, for mutuall helpe, it muſt be conſidered. 1. What is the object of this combination. 2. What power it hath, in reference to that object.
Firſt. The object of claſſicall combinations of Churches is res communis. i. e. that which concerneth all the Churches, or many of them, in that diviſion, either of it ſelfe, or by accident. Beza declareth Synods to be neceſſary for 3 cauſes,De triplic. Epiſt. pag. 91. 9. 3. 1. to preſerve conſent. 2. to provide common remedyes, againſt common evills, by common counſail. 3. to helpe thoſe who thinck themſelves injuryed by the judgment of particular preſbyteryes. The Synod of 3 nations in Can. 35 reduceth all to. 1. matters of doctrine. 2. matters of order, and eccleſiaſticall policy. 3. particular facts. To be breife, theſe things are matters, either of fayth, or of fact, whether brought to them, or obſerved by them.
1. In matters of fayth, their reſolution is required, not their juriſdiction, their counſayl, not their command, it being the end of the Churches combination, in ſuch matters, onelyonly to communicate their gifts in fellowſhip together, to find out the ſenſe of the Scripture more clearely and certainely, for the ſatiſfaction of all, then it could have bene done by any, apart from the r…ſt.
2. Matters of fact are, either common, or perſonall. Perſonall matters doe primarily belong to the particular Churches, and onelyonly to them, ſo farr as they are proper, but, if, by accident, they become common, they fall under the deliberation of many Churches thus combined as in cauſâ lapſorum, in the cauſe of thoſe who fell off, in thoſe times of perſecution, not onelyonly in ſome one, but in many Churches, for the diſcuſſion whereof, Cyprian and the Affrican Doctors alſo concluded,Cypr. lib. 1 Epiſt. 8. et lib. 4. Epiſt 2. that a common meeting of many Churches was neceſſary, in a buiſenes ſo common and of ſo great conſequence, that the plaſter might be as broad as the ſore, and the remedy hold ſome proportion with the malady.
Secondly. For the power it hath] That it may be diſtinctly underſtood what kind of power it is, which (in reference to the preſent queſtion) is due or undue to Claſſes, I will premiſe two or three diſtincttons.
1. Diſt: Jt is not poteſtas originalis, but derivata i. e. it not a power which the Claſſis hath originally, in, and from it ſelfe, but which is borrowed and derived from others, viz, from particular Churches. So that, as the conduit pipes can give no other water, then what themſelves received from the ſprings, nor the ſtarres any greater light, then is communicated to them from the Sun: ſo the Claſſes can excerciſe no other power over any particular Church, then that which it ſelfe hath freely given them. Hence it will follow, that the Claſſes have not an abſolute but a limited power, not a Magiſteriall, but a Miniſteriall power, not the power of lords, but of ſtewards, not of princes, but of embaſſadours, or heraulds, not of lawgivers, but of cryers, or publiſhers of proclamations, not to command (as princes doe in the common wealth) but onelyonly to ſignifye and declare the command and will of God. And therefore, that they may not define, or determine matters by the opinions or cuſtoms of men, but by the truth of God in the Scriptures, which they muſt ſhew for their warrant. Becauſe the Church it ſelfe, from whence their power is derived, hath no other power committed to it. And none can give that to others, which themſelves have not. And therefore to require and injoyne men to reſt in their determinations, and judgments, without ſufficient proofe of their agreement with the Scripture, is to give them an undue power.
2. Diſt: This derived power and authority, which is given to Claſſes, in theſe things, is not a praerogative of juriſdiction, but of aeſtimation and reverence rather. Becauſe Gods ordinance hath limited the former to particular Churches, as his delegates in their owne matters, & it is not in their power to alienate it frō themſelves: But the latter is due to Claſſis conſiſting of grave, learned, prudent, and faythfull men, for their excelent perſonall gifts, in which reſpect, their judgment is to be much valued, and received with due regard. And for theſe cauſes the Affrican Doctors ſaught helpe of Damaſus, Ierom, Jnnocentius &c. in the great queſtion, de lapſis, that the truth, being confirmed by their teſtimony and conſent, who were orthodox and ſound in judgment, might have the more authority with men generally, whoſe eyes are upon men that are famous for wiſdom & ſoundnes in the fayth,Confer. Chap. 8. d. 6. as Dr. Reynolds told Hart, yet, in the ſame place, he affirmeth that all Churches which the Apoſtles planted were aequall in power. And therefore to aſcribe unto them a power of juriſdiction over particular Churches, and that in things proper to themſelves, is to ſubject particular Churches under an undue power.
3. Diſt: Whatſoever power or authority is given to Claſſes, in reference to particular Churches, it is given to them cumulativè, not privativè. i. e. for the helpe & ſtrengthening of them, in the excerciſe of that power which Chriſt hath given them not for the depriving them of it, or ſtreightening them in the due & right uſe of it. For, whatſoever Eccleſiaſticall power or authority is given to any, it is, for aedification, not for deſtruction, in this ſenſe alſo.2. Cor. 10 8. And therefore all that power, whether aſſumed by them, or by others aſcribed to them, whereby particular Churches are abridged of their liberty and power, in any particular, is an uſurped, and undue power. Theſe things being thus premiſed, our concluſion is, that.
All that power which Claſſes have duely received by the free gift of particular Churches as a praerogative of aeſtimation and reverence, or any wayes for the helpe and ſtrengthening of thoſe Churches, in the well manadging of their owne matters, is a due power. But whatſoever power of juriſdiction they aſſume to themſelves for the depriving of particular Churches of that power, which Chriſt hath given them, it is an undue power. From this concluſion we will deduce two Conſectaryes.
1. Conſect: That there is a lawfull expedient, and, in ſome caſes, a neceſſary uſe of the communion and combination of Churches, being rightly ordered for the helpe of particular Churches in theyre proper affayres. As, Firſt, In the choyſe of Miniſters. 1, for provocation, to quicken the particular Churches by their exhortations and admonitions to ſeeke out ſome fit man, if they be ſlack therein. 2, for direction, to counſayle and adviſe them, from the Scripture, about the fitnes of the men, whom they would chooſe, and to admoniſh them of any notable unfitnes in them, to prevent the danger of infecting themſelves, or other Churches, by any dangerous errours maintained by them againſt the rule of fayth, or otherwiſe of common and important conſequence. 3, for countenance and protection againſt any that would deprive them of meete helpers, either by falſe ſuggeſtions to the Magiſtrates, or by rayſing contention and oppoſition among themſelves. Secondly. In the excommunication of members, which is a matter of great moment, if the particular Churches ſeeke the helpe of neighbour Churches, to prevent any errour among themſelves, in a difficult caſe, or any miſreport which may ariſe concerning theyr proceedings amongſt others, or to add the more ſtrength for the convincing of thoſe whom they are to cenſure, by the concurrence and conſent of grave, and learned, and prudent men of neighbour Churches, they ſhall doe piouſly and prudently therein. Thirdly. In other caſes of difference, wherewith particular Churches are excerciſed, and whereby they are ſo divided that the matter can not be ended, and the differences compoſed among themſelves, by reaſon of the aequall number of the oppoſites, on boath ſides, in matters that ſhould be determined by voyces, or the difficulty of the caſe in queſtion. In all theſe, and ſuch like caſes, much benefit and helpe may and ſhould be affoarded to particular Churches by their cōſociation with others, in manner aforeſaid, and they aught to ſeeke and uſe theyre helpe therein.
2. Conſect: That, if Claſſes, under pretence of theſe ends and benefits, aſſume unto themſelves ſuch a primacy of power, or ſuch an authority of juriſdiction over particular Churches, as 1, that they ſhall not chooſe their owne Miniſters, excommunicate their members, &c. Without a power derived from them, or, 2, that, the Church is hindred from injoying Miniſters of ſound judgment, and unblameable behaviour, at their pleaſure. or, 3. that they may impoſe conformity to unwarrantable cuſtoms, or concluſions of their owne, as a condition without which Miniſters may not lawfully be received by ſuch a Church into the paſtorall office, or, 4, that their ſaying a man is not fit for ſuch a place, whom themſelves acknowledge to be fit for any other place, and that without ſhewing the aequity of that their judgement from the Scriptures, or aequally and judiciouſly weighing the lawfull deſires of the Chu…ch, and their right in this particular, through a partial adhaering to one party, ſhould, or may deprive the Church of ſuch men. or, 5. that the Church may not injoy a man, againſt whom there is no juſt and ſufficient exception, as an aſſiſtant, for a time, or to preach amongſt them a ſermon or two, as a paſſant, without their leave: or, 6. that matters, proper to the Church and which may be ended in their owne Conſiſtory commodiouſly, yet being brought to them, though but by ſome one man, out of oppoſition to the reſt, that he may ſway matters according to his owne mind, by theyre helpe, may be taken from the Church and concluded by them, in favour of one, againſt the mind of the Church, and the Church muſt be bound to reſt in their determination, though they ſhew no warrant from the Scripture to ſatiſfye their conſciences about the aequity of their ſo determining and doing. In a word, whatſoever power they aſſume, or others give them, to deprive the Church of that power which Chriſt hath given it, in its owne matters, is againſt the end of their aſſociation and ſo an undue power.
Now, for the Hypotheſis, or particular application of thoſe generalls to the preſent queſtion] The Anſwerer is chalenged by the Complainants for ſubjecting their Church under an undue power of the Claſſis, for his owne ends, and without warrant from the word. Out of queſtion, if it be an undue power, it is not onelyonly without warrant from the word, but alſo contrary to the rule. But, it may be, they meane that he hath done this, without ſhewing them any word which warranted his ſo doing. And, in that ſenſe, it is a complaint of too maſterly and ſelfewilled a carriage of himſelfe in Church affayres. Which they ſeeme indeed to intend by that addition, when they ſay, that he doeth it, for his owne ends. Now, to detract from another for a mans owne commodity is againſt nature, as the heathen man could ſay, and he proved it thus,Ci…. de offic: lib. 3. becauſe, if that be done, the deſtruction of ſociety and community amongſt men will neceſſarily follow. With-whom another agreeth, expreſſing the ſame thing, under a Metaphor, which he applyeth to men ſingularly and individually conſidered, but I will apply to particular Churches, in reference to Claſſicall combinations. As all the members agree amongst themſelves, becauſe it concerneth the wholl that every one be ſafe: ſo men doe ſpare one another, becauſe we are borne for communiō. Scen: de ira 1. lib. 3 C. 32.Salva enim eſſe ſocietas, niſi amore & cuſtodiâ partium, non poteſt: For a ſociety cannot otherwiſe be ſafe then by keeping the parts, whereof it is compounded, from being hurt. But let us examine his anſwer to this complaint, which conſiſts of fowre particulars. In all which I will paſſe by the overflowing of his gall, which he too frequently diſcovereth.
1. In his firſt anſwer he chargeth them with ſlandring the Claſſis, when they charge it with an undue power, which ſlander, he ſayth, is againſt the very ſtate of government, and forme of diſcipline obſerved and practiſed in theſe reformed Churches, and calleth for proofe. Wherein, me thincketh, he had forgotten himſelfe: for, in the three next Sections, he himſelfe produceth the proofes which they brought: In examining his anſwers to thoſe proofes, I doubt, it will appeare, that the complaint is juſt, whereunto I referr the Reader, praying him, in the meane ſpace, to noate that the thing complained of, is, not all power excerciſed by the Claſſis, but onelyonly an undue power, whereof whileſt they complaine, they doe implicitely acknowledge ſo much power to be due, as the word of God warranteth to them, and they ſuppoſe that the government and diſcipline of theſe Reformed Churches acknowledgeth no other power to be due to them. So that, if it ſhall be found that the Claſſis have aſſumed to themſelves an undue power over their Church, in any particular, the complaint againſt the Claſſis is juſt, and the ſlandring of the very ſtate of the government of theſe Churches, is to be charged upon himſelfe, not upon them.
2. In his ſecond anſwer, he chargeth them with ſlander, for ſaying that he hath ſubjected the Church under an undue power. This alſo will appeare in the proofes of the juſtnes of this complaint, in the following Sections, whereunto I referr the Reader.
3. In his third anſwer he chargeth them with ſlāder, for ſaying that he hath done this merely for his owne ends. This, he ſayth, is a great arrogancy, and ſetting of themſelves in Gods ſtead, whoſe peculiar it is to ſearch, and to judge the heart, and reynes. But, is this to anſwer complaints? or is it not to give new cauſe of complaints? that, whereas formerly they complained that he deprived the Church of the power, which Chriſt had given it, now they may complaine, that he would put out the eyes of the members, and deprive them of the reaſon and underſtanding which God hath given them. For, if men may not judge of mens intentions, how is it that our Lord hath left it for a rule, whereby to diſcerne falſe prophets whoſe intentions are wolviſh, and to raven, how ſheepiſh and harmeleſſe ſoever they ſeeme to be, in their pretences, when he ſayth, Ye ſhall know them by their fruits? Mat. 7.15.16:Which I doe not, nor dare apply perſonally to the Anſwerer, of whom I have better thoughts, and eſteeme, but onelyonly to ſhew that it is lawfull for men, in ſome caſes, and ſo farr as they keepe to the rule, to judge of others mens intentions. It is true; it is Gods praerogative to judge the heart. But, what then? may not men, by the light of reaſon, which he hath given them,Pſal. 139.2. judge the actions? God knoweth the thoughts a farr off, in their hidden cauſes, and ſeminall preparations, and that, infallibly, this is his peculiar glory, which is not arrogated by man, whileſt he profeſſeth onelyonly to judge the cauſe by the effect, and the end by the meanes, which is, as if a man ſhould ſay. The ſmoake appeareth out of the chimney; therefore there is ſome fire in the houſe, or the man chuſeth ſuch a way; therefore his intent is to travayle to ſuch a place. The light of reaſon and ſenſe inableth a man thus to judge, and the light of Scripture warranteth it. How then can any man juſtly condemne it? As for the Anſwerers ends, in this action, reaſon in any of the complainants ſayth, they muſt be, either publick, or private. If his ends were the publick good of the Church, the meanes would be directed thereunto: but it ſeemes to them that the meanes are ſuch as tend rather to deprive the Church of men, whom they warrantably deſire, and to ſtreighten the Churches liberty and power in her owne matters, Hereupon they conjecture that his end is not their publick good, but ſome private ſelfe reſpect. This judgment is but humane, and therefore fallible. For it is poſſible that a man, by an errour in his judgment, may purſue a good end in wrong meanes: & ſo the Anſwerer, thincking it to be more for the good of the Church to be ſtreightned thus and limited by the Claſſis, then to be otherwiſe, might have a good end, but miſtooke the meanes. And therefore, if they miſſed of the matter of the complaint, in chalenging him for unlawfull ends, yet the complaint will be found juſt, if they accuſe him of uſing unwarrātable meanes. Yet I cannot free him, as I deſire, from theyre accuſation of ſelfe-aymes, in what he hath done, till he ſhall deny it, & declare his intendments to have bene for the publick good, which when he ſhall have done, the Complaint will appeare to have bene a ſlander, and I ſhall rejoyce to ſee his integrity cleared, in this particular.
4. In his fourth anſwer, he would faine know, he ſayth, what that due power is, by which they would have the Church to be governed. The truth is. In all this paſſage appeareth much ſarcaſticall bitternes, unworthy of the learning, gravity, and holy function of the Anſwerer. Yet, I ſuppoſe, the Complainants would be ready, if they were called, to anſwer ſoberly that they deſire no other Church government, unto which they would willingly be ſubject, then that which Chriſt hath appoynted the Church to be under. What that is, if they know not, he aught to teach them: If they know it, and deſire it, he aught to lead them out, and to goe before them, as a faythfull ſhepheard, that the ſheep may follow him, as he followeth Chriſt, & not to praejudice them againſt any good way, by a ſcoffing propoſall of mens differences in judgment, about ſome particular tract, or turning in the way, to the great ſcandall and offence of many, and the diſhonour of the Goſpel, and the hindrance of Reformation, by his joyning with the enimyes thereof, in an old cavill which hath turned many out of the way, and cauſed ſome to returne back to a mere neutrality in religion, till the profeſſours of it agree among themſelves about the path, wherein they will walke.
Whereas he taketh occaſion againe, without provocation, to mention Mr. Iacob as an enimy to Claſſes and Synods, that I might ſpeake a word in the cauſe of the dumbe, and of the dead, I have examined what he hath written concerning this point (more, upon this occaſion, then formerly I had done, and, it may be,Treat: of Ch. Government. Chap. 1. pag. 13. Chap. 7. 88. 89. 90 Confeſſ: Art. 5. more then elſe I ſhould have done) and doe find that he profeſſeth his agrement, (that I may uſe his owne words) even to an hayre; with Calvin and Beza, touching the ſubſtance of this matter, and that he acknowledgeth, with them, both the pariſhionall and Dioceſan preſbyteryes: yea, the provinciall, and larger too, if occaſion ſerve. How he explaineth himſelfe herein the diligent Reader will eaſily obſerve in other paſſages of the ſame booke. And elſe where he acknowledgeth that there may be, and, on occaſion, there ought to be, on earth, a conſociation of Congregations, and Churches, and namely, by way of Synods, but not a ſubordination, or, ſurely, not a ſubjection of the Congregations under any higher ſpirituall authority abſolute, ſave only Chriſts, and the holy Scriptures. Whereby it appeareth, that the ſingle uncompounded policy, which Mr, I, required, is not contrary to the government of theſe reformed Churches, by Claſſes and Synods rightly ordered;Ch. Government Chap. 7. p. 89. nay rather he ſo farr approveth of it, that he ſayth, it is Apoſtolicall for many ordinary Congregations, conſociating together, in their ſpirituall government, to have a Dioceſan or larger Synod, or preſbytery over them, for their better direction, and, he addeth, ſuch the reformed Churches, at this day, doe injoy. But, if he thinck, by mentioning the name of Mr. Iacob, to leave the Complainants under the ſuſpicion of adhaering to ſome ſect, or of depending upon the authority of man, & not upon the word of Chriſt, for their rule, about Church matters, he will be found to be injurious, not to them alone, but to Chriſt alſo,Mat. 18.17. 1. Cor: 5. Coll. 2.5. and 4.17. Acts 20.17.28. Rev. 2 & 3 1. Tim. 3.15. Cha. 5.21. Chap. 6.13. to 17. and to the truth.
Firſt. To Chriſt, ſeing they acknowledge all that power to be due (and thereunto they are willing to ſubmit) which, by the word, is warranted to be that whereby Churches ſhould be governed, according to the mind of Chriſt, & which agreeth with the patterne which Chriſt left to his diſciples, and which the Apoſtles exactly followed, in planting thoſe primitive Churches of Corinth, Coloſſe, Epheſus, the 7 golden Candleſticks in Aſia, among whom Chriſt walked. &c. and which Paul ſo ſtreightly charged Timothy to obſerve, in all Church affayres which: is no other then the power committed by Chriſt to particuler Churches, as his delegates, for the right ordering of themſelves, in their Church government, and in all holy adminiſtrations and ordinances, according to his command and direction in the Scripture, without dependance upon any Claſſes or Synods, or whatſoever humane ſpirituall power for licenſe or authority to be received from them for their ſo doing. And, as they thus acknowledge all that power, under which the Church is ſubjected by warrant of the word, to be due; ſo they profeſſe all that power, under which the Church is ſubjected, to be undue, which the word doeth not warrant, and which taketh away from particular Churches that power which, by Chriſt his ordinance, is due to them, which, what is it but to remove the ancient bounds, Prov. 22.28. Gal. 5.1.3. Ioh. 9.& to thruſt the Churches from the libertyes wherein they are commanded to ſtand faſt, and to affect an undue praeheminence in the Church?
Secondly. To the truth, whileſt it is preſented to the view of all men under the ſhew of ſome ſingular opinion (or errour rather) of a particular man, or as a forelorne thing, deſerted of all her witneſſes, excepting Mr. Iacob, whereas ſo much as the Complainants ſeeme to require (as appeareth in their referring themſelves to the warrant of the word) hath bene acknowledged by the faythfull witneſſes in all ages,Heb. 12.1 with which cloud of witneſſes we are compaſſed about, as the Iſraelites were with that pillar of a cloud, wherein the Lord went before them, by day, Exod. 13.21.to lead them in the way. Such were the Apoſtles, in their time, and thoſe worthyes, as Cyprian, and thoſe of whom Euſebius taketh notice,Cypr. lib. 3 Epiſt. 14. Euſeb. li. 3 et 4. et 5. in many places, and in ſome ſucceeding inſtances, before the miſtery wraught to its full hight. The ſame thing may appeare to thoſe who are converſant in the wrightings of the Centuriators. To theſe I may add thoſe who have handled the controverſyes concerning the neceſſity, and authority of Councills, amongſt whom I will inſtance in Dr. Whittaker, who,Whitt. de Concil: quest. 5. Arg. ſpeaking of the fullnes of that delegated power which Chriſt hath given to the Church, not to the Pope (which he applyeth to the Keyes in binding and looſing, ſhutting and opening, retayning and remitting ſinnes) ſayth, that this power belongeth primarily, principally, and eſſentially to the Church, but to the ſeverall Biſhops onelyonly accidentally, ſecundarily, and l…ſſe principally, and explaineth himſelfe by a rule in philoſophy, which is, that when any power is in two, in one neceſſarily & eſſentially, in another contingently and accidentally, it is more principally in him, in whom it is neceſſarily and eſſentially, then in him, whoſe it is onelyonly contingently and accidentally. As the heate is more principally in the fire then in the water, becauſe it is in the water by reaſon of the fire. So (ſayth he) ſeing this juriſdiction and fullnes of power is given to the Church neceſſarily and primarily, but to the Pope onelyonly ſecundarily, and by the Church, it is manifeſt that it is more in the Church then in the Pope. What that learned wrighter ſayth of the Churches power, in compariſon with the Pope, holds in all other paralell inſtances.
To theſe I may add thoſe who have written concerning the right ordering of Churches, according to the Scripture. I will not ſtand to give a Catalogue of their names, though I might be plentifull therein, but will content my ſelfe with the three wrighters of this kind, whom the Anſwerer pretended, in conference with me, to make for him, and I ſhall ſhew them to be ſtrongly againſt him, Mr, Cartwright, and Mr. Fenner and Mr. Parker, men of our owne nation.
Sect. 4. p. 53.1. For Mr. Cartwright. The very place in his booke, whereunto the Anſwerer referred me, I have examined before, and have ſhewen how litle helpe he will have from him.
De Sacra Theol. lib. 7. p. 279.2. For M. Fenner. He, ſpeaking of the Eccleſiaſticall preſbytery, diſtinguiſheth betweene the Elderſhip of one particular Church (which, he ſayth, is properly called foreign) and the Elderſhip of many Churches.
P. 277. & 278.The Elderſhip of the firſt ſort, he ſayth, is a compound office wherein all the Elders doe, in the name of the wholl Church, adminiſter all the buiſeneſſes of the Church, that is, of the Lord, by common authority and counſaile. And, for this purpoſe, he alleadgeth many texts out of the old and new teſtaments. Theſe buiſeneſſes, he ſayth, are either judiciary or extrajudiciary. Iudiciary buiſeneſſes are ſuch things as are to be defined by the judgment of the Church, which are, either matters doubtfull, which muſt be defined by the Scriptures, or cenſures to be adminiſtred. Extrajudiciary buiſeneſſes, are Elections, ordinations, cheife care of diſpoſing the holy treaſures, keeping of order in the aſſembly, and all things which are to be done. Yet, in matters of greateſt moment, and which concerne the good, or ruine of the wholl Church, he ſayth, the Elders, after conſultation had among themſelves, muſt tell their opinions to the Church, that, if they have any thing to counſail, or to object, it may be brought in, and afterwards, the opinions and aſſent of all being declared, matters are to be concluded, unleſſe it be neceſſary to referr the buiſenes to a greater aſſembly of Elders, for the avoyding, or compoſing of differences, which is then to be done when the difference is betweene the greater part of the Church. And theſe matters, of the greateſt moment, are, the cenſures, excommunication, and abſolution from it, which is to be done in the aſſembly, by the AUTHORITY OF THE WHOLE CHURCH, orders alſo of the greateſt moment to be made, controverſyes of fayth to be compoſed, the elections and juſt depoſing of Miniſters, & other things aequall to theſe, or greater then they all, which muſt be thus tranſacted, as he plentifully declareth from Scripture. Thus I have faythfully tranſlated the words of this eminent light, in his time Mr. Dudley Fenner, who was joyned with Mr. Cartwright in the publick miniſtry to the Engliſh Company in Antwerpe, to whom, and to that worke of his Mr. Cartwright, in an epiſtle to him praefixed to that booke, giveth a ſingular teſtimony, comparing him to Moſes, who, from Mount Nebo, viewed the wholl land of Canaan, as it were, with one caſt of his eye, to whom the Anſwerer him ſelfe referred me (wherein I admire his confidence) as to one that made for him. The Reader may ſee how he leaveth the wholl power of juriſdiction in the particular Church, and bindeth them no further to make uſe of other Eccleſiaſticall Senats, out of themſelves, then neceſſity requireth, and he doeth not acknowledge that it is a caſe of that neceſſity; but when the avoyding of troubles and diſſentions in the Church makes it neceſſary. And when is that? Not when one alone contentiouſly differeth from all the reſt. But, when the difference is among the greater part. And that, in ſuch a caſe, the judgment of the wholl Church is firſt to be tryed and the opinions, and aſſent of all being declared, matters are to be concluded.Idem ibid p. 280. Elſe where he ſayth, that the preſbytery of many Churches is to compoſe and end ſuch things onelyonly as cannot be ended in particular Churches. Act. 15.1. to 8. 2. Chron. 20.33. Act. 16.4. And theſe are caſes, either proper to thoſe Churches, which are brought to them, or things common to many Churches, and ſo taken up by them. I demand of the Anſwerer, whether he be of this worthy wrighters judgment, or not? If not; why did he referr me to him for ſatiſfaction? If yea; why is his practiſe ſo different from it? For, in this buiſenes, though of ſo great conſequence, that it indangered the breaking of the Church (if I had not ſat downe quietly, and ſuffered wrong, for peace ſake) the Anſwerer alone oppoſing the deſire of the Elders, and of the greater part of the Church, and the buiſenes being proper to the Church, and which might have bene ended among themſelves, yet, againſt the liberty and right of the Church (if Mr. Fenners judgement be right) he would carry it to the Claſſis, that he might effect his purpoſe.
De polit. Eccleſ: lib. 3. Chap. 1.3. For Mr. Parker. He largely, and ſtrongly proveth this poſition, poteſtas Eccleſiaſtica eſſentialiter & primario in ipſâ Fccl…ſiâ, tanquam in ſubjecto proprio, reſidet. The power eccleſiaſticall doeth eſſentially & primarily reſide in the Church it ſelfe, as in its, proper ſubject. The ſenſe wherein he thus ſpake, to prevent all ſuſpicion of his pleading for popular confuſion, he declareth out of Zanchy, who ſayth,Zanch in praecept 4. queſt. 3. toti Eccleſiae dediſſe Chriſtum claves, ſed ita ut in Eccleſiâ certi eſſent, qui clavibus utantur ad ſalutem Eccleſiae, honoremque Dei. That Chriſt gave the keyes to the wholl Church, but ſo, that there ſhould be certaine men that ſhould uſe the keyes to the good of the Church and glory of God. For the proofe of the former, that the right of power is in every particular Church, he uſeth five Arguments, in the 6: & 7. chapters, & then, in the 8. chapter, he cometh to ſpeak of the excerciſe and ordinary execution of this power, which is, he ſayth, in the Church-officers or rulers, yet, with this moderation, that this diſpenſation of the Churches power in the officers be according to a well tempered forme, partly Ariſtocraticall, partly Democraticall, the Church committing thoſe things to the preſbytery, which it can not commodiouſly performe by it ſelfe, and retaining that excerciſe of power which belongs to the dignity, authority, and liberty which it hath received from Chriſt. Thus he wholy deſtroyeth that democraty, or popular Anarchy, which Beza juſtly condemneth in Morellius, and is, by ſome, unjuſtly imputed to thoſe that plead for a due reformation of Churches, according to the rules of the word, and the primitive patternes. Of the firſt ſort of things, which the Church committeth to the Rulers, becauſe it cannot commodiouſly performe them by it ſelfe, he ſpeaketh in cap. 9.10.11. of the ſecond ſort of things, which the Church retaineth in it ſelfe, becauſe it can commodiouſly excerciſe them by it ſelfe, he ſpeaketh in cap. 12. Wherin, by 22. Arguments, he proveth the Churches ſuperiority over her Paſtors and rulers, in 3 reſpects. 1. of the end, the power which they have being given them for her aedification. 2, in reſpect of the application of it to the perſons, 3 in reſpect of regulating the uſe of it, if it be abuſed. And in cap. 18. 13, making a compariſon betweene a particular Church, and Churches combined in Synods and Claſſes, he affirmeth that the difference betweene them is, not in the intenſive conſideration of their power (which the congregation hath, in reference to the Keyes, within it ſelfe) but in the extenſive power onelyonly, wherein the Synod hath a power extended to more objects, viz, to many Churches (in things common) whereas the power of a particular Church is confined, and limited within its owne compaſſe. The ſame authour, in the 20 chapter, ſpeaking of the ſummity, or ſupremacy of the power of particular Congregations, propoundeth the due limits of it, wherein, he conceiveth, it is to be underſtood, and bounded, as, that the power of particular Churches is cheife. 1. in its owne matters, not in things commō to many Churches. 2. in caſe it be able to tranſact its owne matters within it ſelfe: as, if a doubt or controverſy ariſe, the Church hath power to terminate it, if it can: as the Church of Antioch firſt diſputed the matter among themſelves, & laboured to compoſe the difference within themſelves, but finding (not a want of right to end it among themſelves, but) need of more helpe they ſent to Ieruſalem freely for the helpe of their counſail, in this matter. 3. In caſe of right and lawfull adminiſtration. 4. In caſe of no evill adminiſtration praeſumed by thoſe, who, finding themſelves wronged by an unjuſt ſentence, appeale to the judgment of the Synod. In which 3 laſt limitations, other Churches (to whoſe judgment, or advice, perſons injuried by an unjuſt ſentence appeale) doe concurr, in way of counſail, and declaration of theire judgment, to helpe particular churches to excerciſe theire power aright,P. 47. P. 239. in theyre owne matters, as was before noated out of Mr. Cartw. and Mr. Fenner, and out of the Authour himſelfe in the foregoing paſſages, wich being ſo underſtood, doeth not juſtifye any undue power of juriſdict…ō, if it be excerciſed by the Claſſis over that Church in the caſes & manner complained of by the Subcribers: and how fully it agreeth with my ſtating of the queſtion in the beginning of this Section, will appeare to the indifferent Reader, when he ſhall have compared boath together.Caſus conſcient: lib. 4 c: 24. qu. 4 et c: 25. qu: 5.
Thus we have examined his owne witneſſes, and find them wholy for us in this cauſe. To theſe I might add Dr. Ames in that which he wrote, in his latter time, wherein the Anſwerer pretendeth that he ſet downe his jugdment more warily, in this matter,Dioc: tryall. p. 13. et 21. then formerly. See his caſes of conſcience, the 4, Booke where he ſpeaketh clearly of this power as eſſentially belonging to particular Churches. To him I may add Mr. Paul Baynes, a man of ſingular noate for learning and piety, in Cambridge, where he ſucceeded Mr. Perkins, who freely expreſſeth his jugdment for the right of particular Churches,1. part 2. l. 2. p. 104 105. &c. and their independence, in this ſenſe, in his Dioceſans tryall. With whom I might joyne the Replyer vponupon Dr. Downams defence, who, not onelyonly declareth his owne jugdment herein concurring with the above mentioned, but alſo joyneth with them the ſuffrages of diverſe others, as the Centuriſts, Illiricus, D. Andrewes Biſhop of Wincheſter, Dr. Fulke, Willet, Thom: Bell, Ciprian, Auguſtine, Gerſon, Ferus,
Deſp: cauſ. pap. lib. 2.To the ſame purpoſe, hath a worthy, and learned wrighter of theſe countries Voetius, Profeſſour of Divinity in Vtrecht whoſe words I thus tranſlate.Sect. 2. cap. 12. p. 18. 6. The Church is the ſpouſe of Chriſt, which is the proper and adaequate ſubject of that power, to whom Chriſt hath committed that delegate right, reſerving the cheife to himſelfe. Which aught to be and to remaine ſo proper to the Church, that it, neither may be ſnatched away by the authority of others, nor loſt by their voluntary conceſſion, nor committed to the truſt of any other; although diverſe acts belonging to the calling of a Miniſter may and aught to be performed by certaine members of the Church. Thus he profeſſedly vindicateth the Churches right in an Ariſtocratico-Democratie, as appeareth in the title of that chapter.
And, to conclude, thus it was ordered in the Engliſh Church at Franckford, among the exiles in thoſe Marian daies, that,A Diſcourſe of the troubles in the Engl. Church at Franckf. Art. 62. Art. 67: if all the Miniſters and Seniors be ſuſpected, or found parties; if any appeale be made from them, that then ſuch appeale be made to the body of the Congregation &c. & that the body of the Congregation may appoint ſo many of the Congregation to heare and determine the ſaid matter, or matters, as it ſhall ſeeme good to the Congregation. Againe If any controverſy be about the doubtfull meaning of any word, or words in the Diſcipline, that firſt it be referred to the Miniſters, or Senjors: and, if they cannot agree thereupon, then the thing be referred to the wholl Congregation.