Church Concord, Chapter 5
Chap. V. Difference III. Of the Extent of a particular Church.
THE third Point wherein they seem to differ, is about the Extent of a particular Political Church, viz. Whether it be a single Congregation, or divers Congregations? Whether the Ecclesia Prima or a particular Church of the first Generation, as distinct from a Combination of Churches, should be no more than can meet in One place, and hold personal Communion in the Worship of God? Here is an appearance of some difference, but really none that will find a Reconciler work. Some Presbyterians distinguish indeed between a Worshipping Church, and a Governed Church: and they would haveNorton. Illius Eccl…siae constitutio quae uno in loco ordinario ad eultum▪ Dei celebrandum convenire requeat (ob suam multitudinem) est illegitim…, … non tamen quoad …jus Essentiam sed quoad adjunctum numerositatis. Rutherford Due Right, Pag. 301, 302. [1. The ordinary Power of Jurisdiction because of nearest Vicinity and Contignity of Members is given by Jesus Christ to one Congregation in an Isle. 1. Because that Church is a Church properly so called.—A Congregation is a Church wanting nothing of the Being and Essence of a Church. Yet is it in compleat Lond. Minist. Ius Div. Minist. Part 2. P. 82. [These Angels were Congregational, not Diocesane. Ib▪ The Asian Angels were not Diocesane Bishops, but Congregational Presbyters seated each of them i… One Church, not any of them in more than One. a single Congregation to be one Worshipping Church, but many conjoyned in their Pastors to be the first or lowest Governing Church. But that is but in cases of necessity, when there are not Elders enough in the single Worshipping Church. So that really both Parties are agreed, 1. That a particular Church may consist of One single Congregation if it be but furnished with more than one Elder for the work of Government. (Though for my own part I am quite out of doubt that where one man only is the Pastor or Governour of a Church, that man only may Govern that Church, and do the work of a Pastor to that Church▪) 2. And they are agreed, that a Church that doth not or cannot ordinarilySee Mr. Hooker's Concession of many Meetings in one Church, in Mr. Cawdrey's Review, P. 148. meet in one place, may yet be a true particular Church.
In times of Persecution when the Church dare not publickly appear, or hath no capacious Rooms to meet in, but are forced to meet dispersedly in Houses, it may not only be lawful but most convenient, for some that meet in one House and some in another, and some in a third, a fourth, a fifth, to be all united in the same Pastors, that shall visit them severally as they see cause and have opportunity, and rule them all. And in a well ordered Church there is none denyeth, but that in less Publick Meetings the Church may be distributed into several Houses: and that the Aged, Sick or Lame, or any that by distance cannot frequently come to the same most Publick Meeting, may yet have Chappels of Ease, or be allowed to meet in Houses rather than not at all: This all agree in. And I think few Presbyterians, if any, will deny, that it is most convenient, regular, and suitable to the Ends of a particular Church, (which is Personal Communion in Worship, and Holy Order) that where it can be procured, the whole Church (except the Sick or Lame, or necessarilyhindered) may frequently, if not most usually meet in one Assembly. So that either here is no work for a Reconciler, or a very easie work. For the Presbyterians say, that a particular Church May consist of one Congregation (and I believe they will say that ordinarily it is most fit): and the Independents say, It Must consist but of one Congregation, or as many as May meet together for Personal Communion in Worship, if they have Liberty; but that this is not Essential to the Church. Either then here is no Difference, or if there be, it is thus reconciled in a word. The Presbyterians [May be] shall yield to the Independents [Must be]: The Licet to the Oportet. Secure them but of more than one Elder in a Church, and I dare warrant you that all the sober Moderate Presbyterians shall readily and heartily yield to this. They have no conceit, that there Must needs go many Congregations to make a particular Political Church.
If any Presbyterians refuse to condescend so far for Reconciliation, another easie remedy is at hand. Let each have Liberty to hold that Church which in the extent is suited to their Judgment. Let them that needs must have a Church of many Congregations, hold it, if the people do consent (as few will) so they will faithfully do the Pastoral work. If they will joyn three or four Parishes together as the lowest Governed Church, let them have their Liberty (exercising just Discipline in them). But let others also have their Liberty that think it meeter, if not necessary, that the Church be but of one Congregation. The distance and quality of people may very much alter the case in this point. In places where four Parishes at great distance would afford but enough for one particular Church (if any such Parishes be) it may be the more tolerable to have ordinary Meetings in the several Parishes for Worship, and Discipline administred (and sometime the Lord's Supper) in a fuller meeting of all the Church: But I hope we are in no necessity that this should be an ordinary case. But Liberty in these cases may well be granted.