A Defense of the Answer Made Unto Nine Questions, Chapter 7
CHAP. VII.
Conſid. 2.
Reply To the ſecond Conſideration of the Anſwer.THe Prepoſition is granted, That the diſpenſation of the Sacraments both ordinary and extraordinary, is limited to the Miniſtery; but in that you alledge for confirmation ſome things may be noted: 1 The firſt inſtitution of Baptiſm is not contained in that paſſage, but confirmed, for the ſeals were inſtituted before his death, &c.
Anſw. The Propoſition being granted, and the proof Mat. 28.19. being (we doubt not) pertinent in the Authors own judgment, as well as ours; Brotherly love might eaſily have paſſed over greater miſtakes then the anſwer ſeems to have fallen into: for, by Firſt inſtitution here, we meant no more, then that it is the ordinance of Chriſt himſelf, inſtituted in that firſt time of all Divine ordinances. We were not ſo ignorant to think there was no uſe, and ſo no inſtitution of Baptiſm before the death of Chriſt; and therefore this confutation might have been ſpared.
Reply. Secondly, We ſee not how you can apply that Text, Matth. 28 19. to preaching by Office; which by your expoſition is a diſpenſing of a fit portion to every one of the houſhold; and it is plain the Apoſtles were ſent to preach to every creature, &c.
Anſw. As if that commiſſion, Matth. 28. did not authorize them alſo, and require them to diſpenſe fit portions to the Churches▪ did not the care of all the Churches lye on the Apoſtle, 2 Cor. 11.28. ſo alſo 1 Cor. 7.17. were not Apoſtles given to the Church for the edifying of the body of Chriſt, &c. as well as other Officers? Epheſ. 4.11, 12. 1 Cor. 12.28. and therefore this note alſo might well have been ſpared.
Reply. Thirdly, If under the power of the Keys you comprehend preaching by Office, diſpenſing ſeals, &c. we deny the power of the Keys to belong to the Church, or community of the faithfull, in thoſe paſſages which ſpeak of this power, the execution of this authority is given to them to whom the authority is committed.
Anſw. This of the power of the Keys, and the execution thereof, was onelyonly in the Anſwer touched by the way, to prevent the objection of ſome.
1 It is well known that it is no new opinion to hold, that the Church is the firſt ſubject of the Keys, and to alledge Matth. 16. & 18. for the ſame, and therefore might as well have been ſet in the margent; many ancient Divines, and our own Modern, as Fulke, Whittaker, Baine, Parker, and others, as Robinſon, if there were not a deſire to poſſeſſe people with that conceit, that we goe in new ways with the Separatiſts alone.
2 We diſtinguiſh between power and authority: there is a power, right, or priviledge, as Joh. 1.12. which is not authority properly ſo called; the firſt is in the whole Church, by which they have right to chooſe Officers, Acts 6. & 14. receiving members, &c. Authority (properly ſo called) we aſcribe onelyonly to the Officers under Chriſt to rule and govern, whom the Church muſt obey. Now we grant that where authority is given, there power to exerciſe it is given alſo, as Mat. 28. Joh. 20. &c. it is given to the Apoſtles and Miniſters; and ſo where power is given to the Church, there power to exerciſe the ſame orderly is given alſo, as Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. 2 Cor. 2.10.
Reply. If the power of the Keys be given to the Church, the Apoſtles themſelves muſt derive their authority immediately from the Church, and not from Chriſt; for the power must be derived from them unto whom it was given, &c.
Anſw. We deny your conſequence, for the Lord may give power to his Church in all ordinary caſes, and yet reſerve to himſelf that prerogative to doe what he pleaſe immediately without the Church, as is cleare, that in this caſe he hath, firſt calling his twelve Apoſtles, Mat. 10. before he inſtituted the Church of the New Teſtament, after he was pleaſed to uſe the Miniſtery of the Church, Acts 1. to chooſe two, and take one of them immediately by a lot; and when Paul was called he appeared to him immediatly, and called him both to the faith, and to his Apoſtleſhip, whereby it is clear that their call is a reſerved caſe.
Reply. If Miniſters diſpenſe the ſeals as the ſtewards of Chriſt, from whom they receive their authority immediately; then the power of the Keys is not in the community of the faithfull; if as the ſervants of the Church, from which they derive their authority; then the Office of a Miniſter is not the immediate gift of Chriſt; nor the Miniſter ſo much the ſervant of Chriſt, as of the Church from whom he muſt receive Lawes, in whoſe names he muſt doe his Office, and to whom he muſt give account.
Anſw. This Objection will hold as ſtrongly againſt any other ſubject of the Keys that can bee named, (as Claſſes, Synods, or Church Catholick) and therefore by this manner of reaſoning the Lord Jeſus muſt doe all things immediately himſelf in chooſing Officers, &c. or elſe his Miniſters muſt receive Laws, doe all in the name of ſuch as he delegates to that work of adminiſtration under him, and therefore let others look to anſwer this Objection as well as we: Our anſwer is briefly & plainly this, the Office is the immediate inſtitution of Chriſt, the gifts and power belonging thereto are from Chriſt immediately, and therefore he miniſters in his name, and muſt give account to him, 1 Pet. 5. and yet his outward cal to this Office, whereby he hath authority to adminiſter the holy things of Chriſt to the church, is from Chriſt by his Church, and this makes him no more the ſervant of the Church, then a Captain (by the leave of the Generall) choſen by the Band of Souldiers is the ſervant of his Band. Wee ſee in this reply here and elſewhere how apt men are to caſt this odium upon this Doctrine, and to ranke us with Separatiſts in it, but it is eaſily wiped off and ſtickes as faſt upon the Claſſes, Synods, Catholick Church, or any other ſubject of this power.
Reply. If the communitie of the faithfull have to doe in all matters of the body, to admit members caſt out, make and depoſe Miniſters, &c. by authority from Chriſt, wee cannot ſee how in your judgement the execution of the power of the Keys is concredited to the Miniſters.
Anſw. If the power, priviledge and liberty of the people be rightly diſtinguiſhed from the authority of the officers as it ought, a dim ſight may eaſily perceive how the execution of the Keys by the officers authoritatively may ſtand with the liberties of the people in their place obedientially following and concurring with their guides, ſo long as they goe along with Chriſt their King and his Lawes, and cleaving in their obedience to Chriſt diſſenting from their guides, when they forſake Chriſt in their miniſtrations; if there need an ocular demonſtration hereof, it is at hand in all civill adminiſtrations wherein the execution of Laws and of juſtice in the hands of the Judges and the priviledge power or liberty of the people in the hands of the Jurours. Both ſweetly concurre in every caſe both civill & criminall; neither is the uſe of a Jury onelyonly to finde the fact done, or not done, (as ſome anſwer this inſtance) but alſo the nature and degree of the fact in reference to the Law that awards anſwerable puniſhments; as whether the fact be ſimple theft, or burglary, murder or manſlaughter, &c. and ſo in caſes of dammages, coſts in civill caſes; whereby it appeares, that although the power and priviledge of the people be great, yet the execution authoritatively may bee wholly in the Officers.
Reply. Fourthly, That which you adde, that God will not vouchſafe his preſence and bleſſing to an Ordinance but when it is diſpenſed by thoſe whom hee hath appointed thereunto, muſt be warily underſtood, or it may occaſion errors and diſtractions not a few, &c.
Anſw. Wee ſhall not contradict your warineſſe in this caſe, for wee acknowledge a preſence of God with his Ordinances adminiſtred by ſuch as hee appoints, though ſome corruptions bee admixed, in the entrance and adminiſtrations; but wee doubt not the preſence and bleſſing of God is more or leſſe according to the purity or corruptions of the adminiſtration and participation of his Ordinances: but what need there was, or uſe of this note wee ſee not, our words were ſound, and ſafe enough, but it ſeemes your tenderneſſe of the ſtandings of Miniſters and Ordinances in England occaſioned this warineſſe, and wee deny not what you ſay, that Gods preſence, and bleſſing upon his ordinances diſpenſed by us gave ſome approbation to our ſtanding and to his Ordinances, the Lord mercifully paſſing over our many corruptions: but this will no way give allowance to the many groſſe corruptions, and defects which cleaved to our ſtandings, and adminiſtrations, nor to the continuance of any in ſuch corruptions after the diſcovery thereof.
Reply. Secondly, As for the aſſumption, that Paſtors and Teachers are limited to a particular Church or ſociety, but that flock-is not ever one congregationall aſſembly meeting in one place, neither the bond ſo ſtraight, whereby they are tyed to that one ſociety that they may not upon occaſion performe ſome miniſteriall act of office in another congregation, or to them that bee not ſet members of their proper aſſembly.
Anſw. For clearing of the the aſſumption, that wee may give the more diſtinct anſwer, wee ſhall take leave to explicate our ſelves concerning the limitation of the Miniſtery to the Church, which it is like they who drew up the anſwer had formerly done, had the times then been as criticall as they are growne ſince.
1 When we ſay the Miniſtery is limited to a particular Church, wee doe not ſo limit it to a Congregation under her owne Preſbytery, as to exclude from communion in the ſeales, many Congregations ſtanding under one common Presbytery, as wee have formerly ſaid, we honour the reformed Churches of Chriſt Jeſus, and the godly members thereof.
2 When wee ſay the ſeales are limited to a particular Church or Congregation becauſe the Miniſtery is ſo limited; our meaning is not of that congregation onelyonly whereof the Miniſtry is, but of any Congregation in generall.
3 When wee ſay that where a Miniſter hath no power, he may not do an act of power, this is to be ſo underſtood, that hee cannot performe ſuch an act, as an Officer over them or unto them as to his proper flock, the office being (as wee ſaid) founded in the relation betweene the Church and the Officer, ſuch a ſtated power as an Officer over his owne flocke, hee hath not to thoſe of other Congregations partaking in his owne Church, or in any act of his Office in another Church; yet an occaſionall act of power, or precaria poteſt…s, charitatively to put forth an act of his Office to thoſe in an other church, over whom he is no Officer, wee ſee not but he may; but then this act of power is not towards them as over his owne flocke; for two things are cleare to us. 1. That an Officer of one Church, is no Officer over thoſe of an other Church, as not being his proper flocke, for there being no Office of Paſtour at large without power of Office, and the power that a Paſtour hath over others, being by the election of thoſe that choſe him their Officer, who thereby become his proper flocke, hence he hath no power as an Officer over thoſe of an other flock, unleſſe he ſhould foreign.
That ſuch an officer may put forth acts of his office towards thoſe that are not of his proper flock. E. g. A Miniſter ex officio, & as a Paſtor, not barely as a gifted man only may preach for the gathering in of thoſe that are out of the Church, as well as for the edificaon of thoſe that are within, Ephe. 4.11, 12. and yet theſe are not his proper flock; it is the office of every Paſtour to preach the Goſpel, the meanes of converting, and therefore not onelyonly to intend but to attend the converſion of men, (eſpecially in preaching to his owne Congregation) for Chriſt hath ſheep, (which are his flock) to bee gathered into his fold, which are not the Miniſters proper flock, and the Paſtour is the Miniſter of Chriſt, as well as the Paſtour of his owne flock, and therefore he is to intend their gathering in as well as the good of his owne flock.
Againe, as he hath the Keys of Office by preaching the Goſpel, to open the Kingdome of heaven to beleevers, ſo alſo he may ex officio, ſhut it againſt impenitent ſinners and unbeleevers that reject his Doctrine, Matth. 16.19. Matth. 10.14. Jer. 1.10. and yet theſe are not of his proper flocke.
Againe, a Paſtour may adminiſter the Seales, (which is an act of Office) to members of other Churches, in his his owne Congregation, (if they deſire it) who yet are not his proper Flocke. Laſtly, a Deacon of one Church may performe an act of his Office occaſionally to thoſe out of the Church, or the poore of another Church; yet be no Officer or Deacon of the other Church, and ſo 'tis here.
To illuſtrate this, A Captaine of a Band of Souldiers is an Officer onelyonly over his owne Band, but it's an act of his Office to ſubdue enemies, and to bring in thoſe that ſubmit. A Steward is an officer over his Maſters family, not over others: yet it's an act of his Office to provide for the intertainment of Strangers that come to his Lords table.
Thus far it is cleare: But now whether a Miniſter may adminiſter the Seales in another Congregation, is not ſo evident, yet wee will not deny but that occaſionally being called thereunto by the deſire of the Church, hee may lawfully doe the ſame, yet it's no foundation of a ſtated Presbytery out of a particular Congregation, for in all ſuch acts the Church ſtill keepes her power in her owne hands, while the Miniſter hath no authority, nor can put forth any act of his Miniſtery, but at her deſire, and according to her owne neceſſity, neither doth this make a Miniſter a Paſtour of the univerſall Church, for paſtorall Office conſiſts in taking charge of a people, and having power of authority to exerciſe the ſame towards his Church: But all that is ſaid doth include neither of theſe, nor doth it follow that becauſe they may ſet up a Presbytery over themſelves in the ſame Church, that therefore they may combine & ſet up a Presbytery of many Churches, the firſt being their duty injoyned by Chriſt, not the other; for it is neceſſary for them to have ſuch amongſt them as may ordinarily feed, teach, watch over them, and rule them (the end of a Miniſters Office) but it's not neceſſary ſo to ſubmit to others, who may finde worke enough to feed and rule their owne, and therefore looke as it is not in the power of many Congregations to joyne together, to ſet one Paſtour over them ſucceſſively to feed them, (for ſo they make a Pluraliſt, and the Bramble the King of trees) nor yet in their power to ſet up (as in the firſt ambitious time) a foreign with power over all ſingly, but under all joyntly, ſo neither is it in their power to ſet up many Paſtours, who by their plurality of votes may wholly drowne that power of their owne.
Nor laſtly doth it follow, that if they may deſire the benefit and exerciſe of an others Office occaſionally, that they may or ſhould doe it conſtantly, no more then becauſe they may deſire ſundry Miniſters to preach amongſt them every Sabbath for a time in the want of Officers, that therefore they ſhould content themſelves to live altogether without any of their owne.
Now for application of theſe things to the aſſumption of our argument. Although a Paſtour (in the ſenſe explained) may put forth acts of Office in another Congregation, or to others in his owne Congregation, yet will it hence follow, that a Miniſter may adminiſter Seales to ſuch as are of no Congregation? which is now the queſtion.
Reply. Now to remove thoſe 2013 objections of Mr. Ball, which onelyonly reach the queſtion in hand, whereof the firſt is Reply the 8. When ordinary Elders in the Primitive Church were to labour the comming of the Infidels to God, theſe being converted were to bee baptized of the Elders ordinarily in the Cities, though the number might bee ſo great in they could not well meet in one Congregation, nor bee ſubject to the ſame Paſtour: and therefore either the Paſtours muſt Baptize them, being no members, or they muſt remaine without Baptiſme till they grow into a body, and chooſe Miniſters to Baptize them, which is contrary to all precedents in Scripture.
Anſw. There is a third way which is paſſed over, that will eaſe the difficulty: viz. the Paſtours might baptize them unto their owne Congregations ſo long as the numbers did not exceed beyond edification, and then dividing their numbers, might make divers Churches of one, and they call Paſtours over them, and ſo wee ſee Act. 2. they added 3000. and after more, till they were ſcattered: and when peace was reſtored, Act. 9. the Churches were not onelyonly edified but multiplied, Verſe 3. and ſo the conſequence of your 9. Reply is alſo taken away.
Reply. There is no precept or example in Scripture warrants the admitting of ſet members of one Congregation to the Seales in another, more then the admitting of approved Christians that are not ſet members, The Paſtour is no more the Paſtour of the one then of the other, neither of them ſet members, and both of them may bee members for the time being.
Anſw. Wee have before ſhewed in the firſt conſideration, that which warrants the diſpenſing of the Seales to confederating beleevers, as the way of the Goſpel, and Rom. 16.1. wee have a plaine example of orderly receiving the members of one Church to Communion in an other, being recommended thereunto by the Apoſtles, wee have not the like for any not in Church order at all; and though there be a parity in reſpect of particular relation with that Paſtour and flock, yet that is a diſparity in regard of immediate right that the one have to the ordinances of Chriſt and priviledges of a Church, which the other have not, being out of that order of Chriſt preſcribed in the Goſpel, in which order of a viſible Church, viſible ordinances are to be diſpenſed, as hath been proved before.
Reply. If a Synod conſiſting of ſundry members of particular Churches, met together in the name of Chriſt about the common and publike affaires of the Churches ſhall joine together in prayer, and Communion of the Supper, we can ſee no ground to queſtion it as unlawfull, although that aſſembly bee no particular Congregation or Church, hath no Paſtour over them, &c.
Anſw. That ſuch an aſſembly may pray together is no queſtion, for every family may doe ſo: and that they may receive the Supper alſo in a right order, wee deny not, for meeting where there is a particular inſtituted Church, they may have Communion therewith in the Supper, being many as well as few, but whether they may as a Church (being no politicall body, but members of many Politicall Churches) adminiſter Church ordinances proper to a Church, wee would ſee ſome reaſons before wee can judge it lawfull ſo to doe: for though ſome doe account ſuch a Synod Eccleſia orta; yet not properly ſuch a Church as hath Eccleſiaſticall power, authority and priviledge belonging thereto: they may conſult and doctrinally determine of caſes of that aſſembly, Acts 15. but further to proceed, we ſee no rule, nor paterne. Beſides, if ſuch an aſſembly of many Churches may adminiſter Seales, why may not any other aſſembly of Church members or Miniſters doe the ſame? and ſo this power will be carried without limitation, we know not how far, if they once depart from a particular Church.