The Reformed Pastor, Chapter 4 · Section 7
SECT. VII.
4. THE negligent execution of acknowledged duties, doth ſhew that we be not ſo wholly Devoted to the work as we ſhould be. If there be any work of Reformation to be ſet a foot, how many are there that will go no further then they are drawn? And it were well if all would do but that much.
If any buſineſs for the Church be on foot, how many neglect it for their own private buſineſs? when we ſhould meet and conſult together for the unanimous and ſucceſsful performance of our work, one hath this buſineſs of his own, and another that buſineſs, which muſt be preferred before Gods buſineſs.
And when a work is like to prove difficult and coſtly, how backward are we to it, and make excuſes and will not come on? For inſtance; What hath been for more talked of, and prayed for, and contended about in England for many years paſt, then the buſineſs of Diſcipline? And there are but few men (the Eraſtians) but they ſeem zealous in diſputing for one ſide or other: ſome for the Prelatical way, and ſome for the Presbyterian, and ſome for the Congregational. And yet when we come to the practice of it, for ought I ſee we are moſt of us for no way. It hath made me admire ſometimes; to look on the face of England, and ſee how few Congregations in the Land have any conſiderable execution of Diſcipline, and to think withall what volumns they have written for it; and how almoſt all the Miniſtery of the Nation is engaged for it? how zealouſly they have contended for it, and made many a (juſt) exclamation againſt the oppoſers of it; and yet for all this will do little or nothing in the exerciſe of it. I have marvelled what ſhould make them ſo zealous in ſiding for that which their practice ſhews that their hearts are againſt. But I ſee a diſputing zeal is more natural then a holy obedient practizing zeal. How many Miniſters in England be there that know not their own charge, that plead for the truth of their particular Churches, and know not which they be, or who be members of them? and that never caſt out one obſtinate ſinner; no nor brought one to publike Confeſsion, and expreſsion of Repentance and promiſe of reformation; No nor admoniſhed one publikely to call him to ſuch Repentance. But they think they do their duties if they give them not the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, (when it is perhaps avoided voluntarily by themſelves, and thouſands will keep away themſelves without our prohibiting them) and in the mean time we leave them ſtated members of our Churches, and grant them all other Communion with the Church, and call them not to perſonal Repentance for their ſin. Read Albaſpinaens, a ſober Papiſt in his Obſervat. 1. and 2. and 3. after his Annot on O tatus, and ſee whether Church-Communion in former times was taken to conſiſt only …n co-partaking of the Lords Supper. Either theſe hundreds that we communicate not with in the Supper are members of our Churches, or not; If not; then we are Separatiſts while we ſo much diſclaim it; for we have not caſt them out nor have we called them to any profeſſion, whether they own or diſown their memberſhip, but only whether they will be examined in order to a Sacrament nor do we uſe to let them know that we take their refuſal of Examination for a refuſal of Church memberſhip, and excluſion of themſelves. It follows therefore that we have gathered Churches out of Churches before they were unchurched, or before we took Gods way to caſt any of them (much leſs all of them) out. But if they are taken for members, how can we ſatisfie our conſciences to forbear all execution of Diſcipline upon them? It is not Gods Ordinance that they ſhould be perſonally rebuked and admoniſhed, and then publikely called to Repentance and be caſt out if they remain impenitent? If theſe be no duties, why have we made ſuch a noiſe and ſtir about them in the world as we have done? If they be duties, why do we not practiſe them▪ If none of all theſe perſons be ſcandalous, why do we not admit them to the Lords Supper? If they keep away themſelves, is not that a ſin which a brother ſhould not be permitted to remain in? Is it not a ſcandal for them to avoid the Ordinances of God and the Communion of the Church for ſo many years together as they do? Yea and many a one of them avoideth alſo the very hearing of the word: The antient Diſcipline was ſtricter, when the ſixth general Council at Trull, in Conſtantinop. ordained Can. 80. that whoſoever was three daies together from Church, without urgent neceſſity, was to be excommunicated.
Brethren, for my part, I deſire not to offend any party, nor to bring the leaſt diſhonour to them; but I muſt needs ſay that theſe ſins are not to be cloaked over with excuſes, extenuations or denyals. We have long cryed up Diſcipline, and every party their ſeveral waies. Would you have people value your way of Government or not? No doubt but you would; Why if you would have them value it, it muſt be for ſom excellency: ſhew them then that excellency. What is it? and wherein doth it conſiſt? And if you would have them believe you, ſhew it them not only in paper, but in practice, not only in words, but in deeds. How can the people know the worth of bare notions and names of Diſcipline, without the thing? Is it a name and a ſhadow that you have made all this noiſe about? How can they think that that is good which doth no good? Truly I fear we take not the right way to maintain our cauſe, but even betray it, while we are hot diſputers for it. Speak truly; is it not theſe two things that keep up the Reputation of the long-contended for Diſcipline among men; viz. with the godly, the meer reputation of their Miniſters that ſtand for it; and with many of the ungodly, the nonexecution of it, becauſe they find it to be tooth-leſs, and not much troubleſom to them? Verily Brethren, if we get the late Prelates carnal wiſdom and go their way to work, by ingratiating our way of Government with the ungodly multitude, by the meer neglect of practice, and the befriending of their ſins, we may well look for the ſame bleſſing and iſſue as the Prelates had. If once our Government come to be upholden by the votes of thoſe who ſhould be corrected or ejected by it, and the worſt men be friends to it, becauſe it is a friend to them in their ungodlineſs, we then engage it againſt the Lord, and he will appear as engaged againſt us. Set all the execution of Diſcipline together that hath been practiſed in a whole County ever ſince it was ſo contended for, and I doubt it will not appear ſo obſervable as to draw godly people into a liking of it for the effects. How can you wonder if many that deſire deeds and not words, Reformation and not the meer name of Reformation, do turn over to the ſeparated Congregations, when you ſhew them nothing but the bare name of Diſcipline in yours? All Chriſtians value Gods Ordinances, and think them not vain things; and therefore are unwilling to live without them. Diſcipline is not a needleſs thing to the Church: If you will not difference between the precious and the vile by Diſcipline, people will do it by ſeparation. If you will keep many ſcore or hundreds in your Churches that are notoriouſly ſcandalous, and contemners of Church-Communion, and never openly (nor perhaps privately) reprove them nor call to Repentance, nor caſt them out, you cannot marvel if ſome timorous ſouls do run out of your Churches as from a ruinous aedifice, that they fear is ready to fall upon their heads. I pray you conſider, if you ſhould do in the ſame manner with them in the Sacrament, as you do in Diſcipline, and ſhould only ſhew the bread and wine, and never let them taſte of it, could you expect that the name of a Sacrament ſhould ſatisfie them, or that they ſhould like your Communion? Why ſhould you think then that they will be ſatisfied with the empty ſound of the word, Church-Government? And conſider but what a diſadvantage you caſt your cauſe upon in all your diſputations with men of another way. If your principles be righter then theirs, and their practice be righter then yours, the people will ſuppoſe that the Queſtion is, Whether the name or the thing, the ſhaddow or the ſubſtance, be more deſirable? and they will take your way to be a meer deluſory formality, becauſe they ſee you but formal in the uſe of it, yea that you uſe it not at all. I ſpeak not againſt your Government, but for it, all this while; and tell you, that its you that are againſt it, that ſeem ſo earneſt for it; while you more diſgrace it for want of exerciſe, then you credit it by your bare arguments: And you will find before you have done, that faithful execution will be your ſtrongeſt argument. Till then, the people will underſtand you as if you openly proclaimed, We would have no Publike Admonitions, Confeſsions or Excommunications; our way is to do no good, but to ſet up the naked name of a Government. Doubtleſs it was a ſault more paſt all diſputation, for the Prelates to deſtroy Diſcipline and do little or nothing in it, then for them to be Prelates; and if they had but done the good that Diſcipline is ordained for, Prelacy might have ſtood to this day for ought I know; I am ſure it would have had no oppoſition from many a hundred godly people that have oppoſed it. And again I ſay, if you will run into their error, you may expect their fate.
And what are the hindrances now that keep the Miniſters of England from the Execution of that Diſcipline which they have ſo much contended for? I hear not all ſpeak: but I hear ſome, and ſee more. The great Reaſon as far as I can learn, is, The difficulty of the Work, and the trouble or ſuffering that we are like to incurr by it: We cannot publikely reprehend one ſinner, but he will ſtorm at it, and bear us a deadly malice. We can prevail with very few to make a publike profeſſion of true Repentance. If we proceed to excommunicate them, they will be raging mad againſt us: They will be ready to vow revenge againſt us, and to do us a miſchief: If we ſhould deal as God requireth with all the obſtinate ſinners in the Pariſh, there were no living among them; they would conſpire in hatred againſt us to the hazard of our lives. We ſhould be ſo hated of all, that as our lives would be uncomfortable, ſo our labours would become unprofitable; for men would not hear us when they are poſſeſſed with a hatred of us; therefore duty ceaſeth to be duty to us, becauſe the hurt that would follow would be greater then the good; and affirmatives bind not ad ſemper.
Theſe are the great Reaſons for the non execution of Diſcipline, together with the great labour that private admonition of each offender would coſt us. And to theſe I anſwer.
1. Are not theſe reaſons as valid againſt Chriſtianity it ſelf in ſome times and places, as now againſt Diſcipline? Chriſt came not to ſend us peace; we ſhall have his Peace, but not the worlds; for he hath foretold us that they will hate us. Might not Mr. Bradford, or Hooper, or any that were burnt in Queen Maries daies have alledged more then this againſt duty? They might have ſaid, It will make us hated, if we own the Reformation, and it will expoſe our lives to the flames. How is he concluded by Chriſt to be no Chriſtian, who hateth not all that he hath and his own life for him! and yet we can take the hazard of our life as a reaſon againſt his work; What is it but hypocriſie to ſhrink from ſufferings, and take up none but ſafe and eaſie works, and make our ſelves believe that the reſt are no duties? Indeed this is the common way of eſcaping ſuffering, to neglect the duty that would expoſe us thereunto. If we did our duty faithfully, Miniſters ſhould find the ſame lot among profeſſed Chriſtians, as their predeceſſors have done among the Infidels. But if you could not ſuffer for Chriſt, why did you put your hand to his plough? and did not firſt ſet down and count your coſts? This makes the Miniſterial work ſo unfaithfully done, becauſe it is ſo carnally undertaken; and men enter upon it as a life of eaſe, and honour, and reſpect from men and therefore reſolve to attain their ends, and have what they expected by right or wrong. They looked not for hatred and ſuffering, and they will avoid it, though by the avoiding of their work.
2. And as for the making your ſelves uncapable to do them good: I anſwer, That reaſon is as valid againſt plain preaching, reproof, or any other duty which wicked men will hate us for. God will bleſs his own Ordinances to do good, or elſe he would not have appointed them. If you admoniſh, and publikely rebuke the ſcandalous, and call men to repentance, and caſt out the obſtinate, you may do good to many that you reprove; and poſſibly to the excommunicate: I am ſure it is Gods means; And it is his laſt means, when Reproofs will do no good: It is therefore perverſe to neglect the laſt means leſt we fruſtrate the foregoing means, when as the laſt is not to be uſed but upon ſuppoſition that the former were all fruſtrate before. However, thoſe within and thoſe without may receive good by it, if the offendor do receive none; and God will have the honour, when his Church is manifeſtly differenced from the world, and the heirs of heaven and hell are not totally confounded, nor the world made to think that Chriſt and Satan do but contend for ſuperiority, and that they have the like inclination to holineſs or to ſin.
3. And I would know whether on the grounds of this objection before mentioned all Diſcipline ſhould not be caſt out of the Church, atleaſt ordinarily; And ſo is not this againſt the Thing it ſelf, rather then againſt the preſent ſeaſon of it? For this reaſon is not drawn from any thing proper to our times, but common to all times and places. Wicked men will alwaies ſtorm againſt the means of their publike ſhame; and the uſe of Church cenſures is purpoſely to ſhame them, that ſin may be ſhamed, and diſowned by the Church. What age can you name ſince the daies of the Apoſtles wherein you would have executed the Diſcipline that you now refuſe, if you go on theſe grounds, ſuppoſing that it had not been by Magiſterial compulſion? If therefore it be Diſcipline it ſelf that hath ſuch intolerable inconveniences, why have you ſo prayed for it, and perhaps fought for it, and diſputed for it as you have done? What muſt all diſſenters bear your frowns and cenſures, and all for a work which your ſelves judge intolerable, and dare not touch with one of your fingers? When do you look to ſee all theſe difficulties over, that you may ſet upon that which you now avoid? Will it be in your daies? Or will you wait till you are dead, and leave it as a part of your Epitaph to poſterity, that you ſo deeply engaged and contended for that which you ſo abhord to the death, that you would never be brought to the practice of it! And doth not this Objection of yours plainly give up your cauſe to the Separatiſts? and even tell them that your contending is not for your way of Diſcipline; but that there may be none, becauſe it will do more harm then good. Certainly if this be true, it would have been better to ſpeak it out at firſt, before all our wars, and tears, and prayers, and contentions, then now in the concluſion to tell the world, that we did all this but for a name or word, and that the thing is ſo far from being worth our coſt, that it is not tolerable, much leſs deſirable.
4. But yet let me tell you, that there is not ſuch a Lyon in the way as you do imagine; nor is Diſcipline ſuch a uſeleſs thing. I bleſs God upon the ſmall and too late tryal that I have made my ſelf of it, I can ſpeak by experience, it is not vain; nor are the hazards of it ſuch as may excuſe our neglect.
But I know that pinching reaſon is behind; They ſay that, When we pleaded for Diſcipline, we meant a Diſcipline that ſhould be eſtabliſhed and impoſed by the ſecular power: and without them what good can we do? when every man hath leave to deſpiſe our cenſures, and ſet us at nought: and therefore we will not meddle with it (ſay they) without authority. To which I anſwer, 1. I thought it once a ſcornful indignity that ſome fellows attempted to put upon the Miniſtery, that denyed them to be the Miniſters of Chriſt, and would have had them called the Miniſters of the State, and dealt with accordingly. But it ſeems they did not much croſs the judgements of ſome of the Miniſtery themſelves, who are ready to put the ſame ſcorn upon their own calling. We are ſent as Chriſts Embaſſadors to ſpeak in his name, and not in the Princes; and by his Authority we do our work as from him we have our Commiſsion. And ſhall any of his Meſſengers queſtion the Authority of his commands? The ſame Power that you have to preach without or againſt the Magiſtrates command, the ſame have you to exerciſe Paſtoral Guidance and Diſcipline without it. And ſhould all Miniſters refuſe preaching if the Magiſtrate bid them not? yea or if he forbid them? 2. What mean you when you ſay, you will not do it without Authority? Do you mean the Leave, or the Countenance and approbation, or the Command upon your ſelves, or do you mean a Force or Penalty on the People to obey you? The Magiſtrates Leave we have; who hindereth or forbiddeth you to ſet up Diſcipline, and exerciſe it faithfully? Doth the ſecular Power forbid you to do it, or threaten or trouble you for not doing it? No, they do not. To the ſhame of the far greateſt part of the Miniſters of England it muſt be ſpoken (for we have ſo opened our own ſhame that it cannot be hid) we have had free Liberty to have done the work of Chriſt, which we have deſired and pleaded for, and yet we would not do it. What might not the Miniſters of England have done for the Lord, if they had been but willing? They had no prohibition, nor any man to riſe up againſt them, of all the enemies whoſe hearts are againſt their work: and yet they would not do it. Nay more, for ought you know, you have the Approbation of Authority. You have the commands of former powers not yet repealed. You have the Protection of the Laws and preſent Governors: If any one ſeek revenge againſt you for the ſake of Diſcipline, you have not only Laws, but as many willing Magiſtrates to reſtrain and puniſh them as ever you knew I think in England. And what would you have more? Would you have a Law made to Puniſh you if you will not do your duty? What! dare you tell God that you will not do his work unleſs the Magiſtrate drive you to it with ſcourges? I confeſs if I had my will it ſhould be ſo; and that man ſhould be ejected as a negligent Paſtor, that will not rule his People by Diſcipline (though yet I might allow him to be a Preacher to the unchurched) as well as he is ejected as a negligent Preacher that will not preach. For Ruling is as Eſſential a part of a Paſtors office as preaching I am ſure. And therefore ſeeing theſe men would fain have the Magiſtrate interpoſe, if he did eject them for unfaithful negligent Paſtors (were it not for the neceſſity of the Church that hath not enow better) I know not well how they could blame him for it. Its a ſad diſcovery of our carnal hearts, when man can do ſo much more with us then God, that we would obey the commands of men, and will not obey the commands of Chriſt. Is he fit to be Chriſts Officer, that will not take his Command as obligatory?
But I know the thing expected is, that all the people ſhould be forced under a penalty to ſubmit to our Diſcipline. I confeſs, I think that the Magiſtrate ſhould be the hedge of the Church and defend the Miniſtery, and improve his power to the utmoſt to procure an univerſal obedience to Chriſts Laws, and reſtrain men from the apparent breach of them, eſpecially from being falſe Teachers and Seducers of others. How far I am againſt the two extreams of Univerſal Licence, and Perſecuting tyrannie, I have frequently manifeſted on other occaſions. But I ſhall now ſay but this. 1. Doth not this further diſcover the carnal frame of our hearts, when we will not do our duty unleſs the Magiſtrate will do his to the full, and all that we conceive may be his duty? What! will his neglect excuſe yours? Hath Chriſt bid you uſe the Keyes of the Kingdom, and avoid a ſcandalous ſinner upon condition that the Magiſtrate will puniſh him with the ſword? Is not this your meaning if you would ſpeak it out, that you find a great deal of difficulty in your work, and you would have the Magiſtrate by terrifying offendors make it eaſie to you? for if it be not ſafe and cheap and eaſie, you are reſolved you will not do it; And ſuch ſervants Chriſt may have enough. Nay is not your meaning, that you would have the Magiſtrate to do your work for you? Juſt as your pious people have long cryed and prayed for Diſcipline, and called upon Miniſters to do it, but we cannot get them to reprove offendors and deal with them ſeriouſly and lovingly for their good and inform the Church-Officers of them that are obſtinate. So do we toward the Magiſtrates: The work of God is ſo much beholden to us, that we would all have it done, but few w…ll do it. We can eaſilyer cenſure and talk againſt others for not doing it, then do it our ſelves. O the guile and hypocriſie of our hearts!
2. But further, What is it that you would have the Magiſtrate to do? I pray you conſider it how you will anſwer it before God, that you ſhould willfully neglect your own duty, and then make it your Religion to quarrel with others. Is it not a fearful deceit of heart for a man to think himſelf a godly Miniſter for finding fault with them that are leſs faulty then himſelf? I ſay, leſs faulty. For tell me truly. Whether the Magiſtrate do more of his part in Government, or you in yours. I am no more a flatterer of the Magiſtrate then of you; nor was ever taken for ſuch, that I could underſtand: but we muſt deal juſtly by all men. Would you have the Magiſtrate to puniſh men eo nomine, becauſe excommunicated, without any particular cogniſance of the fact and caſe? 1. That were unjuſt; Then he muſt do wrong when ever we miſtake and do wrong; If an honeſt man were an hangman, he would be willing to know that he hanged not a man that was unjuſtly condemned: However the Magiſtrate is not the meer executioner of the Miniſters, but a Judge: and therefore muſt be allowed the uſe of his Reaſon, to know the cauſe, and follow his own judgement, and not puniſh men againſt it. 2. And excommunication is ſo great a puniſhment of it ſelf, that I hope you do not think it nothing, unleſs the Magiſtrate add more: If ſo, then the temporal puniſhment might ſerve turn, and what need of yours? But I ſuppoſe that this is not your ſenſe, but you are ſo juſt, that you would have the Magiſtrate to puniſh a man as an offendor, and not as excommunicate. And if ſo, I think it is not nothing that he doth. Are all the penalties againſt Swearers, Curſers, Drunkards, Peace-breakers, Sabboth-breakers, &c. nothing? Certainly the Laws of the Land do puniſh much ſin againſt God. Well! What do you as Church-Governors againſt theſe ſame ſins? The Magiſtrate fineth and impriſoneth them: that is his part: It is your part to bring them to open Repentance, or to caſt them out: Have you done this as oft as he hath done his part? Doth not the Magiſtracy of England puniſh ten, twenty, what if I ſay an hundred Swearers, Drunkards or Sabboth-breakers by the ſword, for one that the Elders of the Church do puniſh by cenſures or bring to publike Repentance for the ſatisfaction of the Church? Brethren, theſe things ſeem ſtrange to me; that the caſe ſhould ſtand thus as it doth, and yet that the deceit of our hearts ſhould be ſo great, that we ſhould go on to account our ſelves ſuch blameleſs godly men, whom Magiſtrates and people are all bound to reverence, and to ſpeak againſt the Magiſtrate ſo much as we do. I believe they are all ſlack and faulty; but are not we much more faulty? What if they ſhould pay us in our own coyn? What language might they give the Miniſters, that after ſo many years talk of Diſcipline will do nothing in it! I ſay nothing in moſt places: To meet together for conſulation, is no exerciſe of Diſcipline, nor reformation of the Church, which our meetings ſhould conduce to.
3. And I give you this further anſwer: What had the Church of Chriſt done till the daies of Conſtantine the great, if it had no better Paſtors then you that will not Govern it without the joynt compulſion of the Magiſtrate? Diſcipline, and ſevere Diſcipline was exerciſed for three hundred years together, where the Prince did not give them ſo much as a Protection, nor Toleration, but perfecuted them to the death. Then was the Church at the beſt, and Diſcipline moſt pure and powerful; ſay not then any more for ſhame, that it is to no purpoſe without a Magiſtrate, when it hath done ſo much againſt their wills? O what an aggravation is it of our ſin! That you cannot be content to be negligent and unfaithful ſervants, but you muſt alſo flie in the face of your Lord and Maſter, and obliquely lay the blame on him! What do you elſe, when you blame Churchcen…ures as uneffectual, when you ſhould blame your lazy ſelf ſeeking hearts, that ſhift off the uſe of them? Hath Chriſt put a leaden ſword into your hands, when he bids you ſmite the obſtinate ſinner? Or are you cowardly and careleſs, and then blame your ſword inſtead of uſing it, as thinking that the eaſier task? Are the Keyes of Chriſts Kingdom ſo unmeet and uſeleſs, that they will not open and ſhut without the help of the ſword? or are you unskillful and lazy in the uſe of them! If they have contracted any ruſt, by which they are made leſs fit for ſervice, next to the Prelates we may thank our ſelves, that let them lie ſo long unuſed.
4. And I muſt tell you, that too much interpoſition of the ſword with our Diſcipline, would do more harm then good. It would but corrupt it by the mixture, and make it become a humane thing. Your Government is all to work upon the conſcience; and the ſword cannot reach that. It is not a deſirable thing to have Repentance ſo obſcured by meer forced Confeſſions, that you cannot know when men do mean as they ſpeak; and ſo it will be the ſword that doth all, by forcing men to diſſemble, and you will not diſcern the power of the Word and Ordinance of Chriſt. I confeſs ſince I fell upon the exerciſe of ſome Diſcipline I find by experience that if the ſword did interpoſe and force all thoſe Publike Confeſſions of ſin, and Profeſſion of Repentance, which I have perſwaded men to by the light of the word of God; it would have left me much unſatisfied concerning the validity of ſuch Confeſſions and Promiſes, whether they might indeed be ſatisfactory to the Church: And I find that the godly people do no further regard it then they perceive it hearty and free; and if it were forced by Magiſtrates, they would take him for no Penitent perſon, nor be any whit ſatisfied, but ſay, He doth it becauſe he dare do no otherwiſe.
And I muſt add this word of plainer dealing yet. You blame the Magiſtrate for giving ſo much liberty; and is it not long of your ſelves that he doth ſo? You will ſcarce believe that ſuch enemies to Liberty of Conſcience, are the cauſes of it: I think that you are; and that the keeneſt enemies have been the greateſt cauſes. For you would run too far to the other extream, and are ſo confident in every controverſie that you are in the right, and lay ſuch a ſtreſs upon many Opinions of your own as if life or death did lie upon them, (when perhaps the difference may prove more verbal then real, if it were ſearcht to the quick) that this occaſioneth Magiſtrates to run too far the other way; and if they look on ſuch as—and dare not truſt the ſword in ſuch hands, you may thank your ſelves. Truly Brethren, I ſee by experience, that there is among many of the moſt injudicious of us, ſuch a blind confuſed zeal againſt all that is called error by their party, that without being able to try and make a difference, they let flie pell mell at all alike, and make a great outcry againſt errors, when either we know not what they are, nor how to confute them, nor which he tolerable in the Church, and which intolerable, nor how far we may hold or break Communion with the owners of them, and perhaps are the erroneous perſons our ſelves. The obſervation of this hath made the Magiſtrates ſo over-jealous of us, that they think if they ſet in with a party in each contention, we ſhall never be without blood and miſery. And I confeſs I ſee in ſome Miniſters ſo little of the fire of Divine Love, and Chriſtian Charity, and compaſſion, nor heavenly mindedneſs, nor humble ſenſe of their own infirmities, and ſo much of the zeal that Iames deſcribeth (Iam. 3. 14, 15.) which is kindled from another fire, that makes them full of ſuſpicions and jealouſies, and keen and eager againſt their Brethren, cenſuring, defaming and unconſcionably back-biting them, and ſtraining an ill ſenſe out of their well meant words and actions, and living towards them in plain envy and malice inſtead of Chriſtian love and peace; I ſay I ſee ſo much of this in many that affect the Reputation of Orthodox, while they are indeed factious, that I am the leſs ſorry that the Magiſtrate doth ſo little interpoſe. For were the ſword in ſuch envious angry hands, there would be little quiet to the Church: For there is no two men on earth but differ in ſomething, if they know or believe any thing. And theſe men muſt ſquare the world to their own judgements, which are not alway the wiſeſt in the world: They that dare ſo rail at others as Blaſphemers, when they know not what they ſay themſelves, durſt ſu…e ſmite them as Blaſphemers, if they had power. This may poſſibly make the Magiſtrate think meet, (ſeeing we are ſo quarrelſom and impatient) to let us fight it out by the bare fiſts, and not to put ſwords into our hands till we are more ſober and know better how to uſe them: For if every paſſionate man, when he hath not wit enough to make good his cauſe, ſhould preſently borrow the Magiſtrates ſword to make it good, truth would be upon great diſadvantage in the world! Magiſtrates are commonly the moſt tempted and abuſed men, and therefore I know not why we ſhould call ſo lowd to have them become the Arbitrators in all our quarrels, leſt error have two victories where truth gets one. I could wiſh the Magiſtrate did more; but if he do but give us Protection and Liberty (ſpecially if he will but reſtrain Deceivers from preaching againſt the great unqueſtionable truths of the Goſpel, and give publike Countenance and Encouragement to thoſe maſter-truths) I ſhall not fear by the Grace of God, but a prudent, ſober unanimous Miniſtery will ere long ſhame the ſwarm of vanities that we think ſo threatning.
But I have been too long on this. I ſhall only conclude it with this earneſt requeſt to my Brethren of the Miniſtery, that they would ſpeedily and faithfully put in execution, at leaſt all the unqueſtionable part of the Diſcipline, that they have ſo much contended for. When we were ſo offended with the Parliament for their enumeration of ſcandals, as too defective, and a Proteſtation was publiſhed that we acted only on ſuppoſition that it was defective, ſure we little thought then that we that were ſo earneſt to have had more power, would uſe none and we that muſt needs have authority to reject more then the Parliament did enumerate, would cenſure ſo few even of them as we have done, ſince we have had more liberty to do it.
But one objection is common, which I forgot: They ſay, We are but ſingle Paſtors, and therefore cannot excommunicate men alone, unleſs we ſhould make every Paſtor a Pope in his Pariſh, or a Biſhop at leaſt.
Anſw. For my part I have no mind to obtrude my own opinion on ſuch (for the power of a ſingle perſon to excommunicate) I have ſufficiently already proved my ſelf a Noveliſt and ſingular with ſome, by aſſerting antient and moſt common Truths. But yet 1. I could with theſe men ſo much moderation, as to be ſure that they are in this as much wiſer then the contrary-minded, as their confidence doth import, before they proceed in calling them Popes: Leaſt as the cunning of the times is by making many Antichriſts, to make none; ſo theſe men ſhould contrary to their intention, credit the Pope, by making ſo many Popes, and the Prelates too by making ſuch kind of Prelates.
2. A Pope is the pretended head of the Catholike Church, and an univerſal Biſhop to govern it; Are ſingle ruling Paſtors ſuch? A Dioceſan Biſhop is the Ruler of all the Paſtors and Churches in a Dioceſs: Is ſuch a Paſtor one of theſe?
3. Why do you in your diſputes againſt the Prelates maintain that every Miniſter is a Biſhop of his own Church; and do you now abhor it?
4. What if you might not excommunicate, may you not therefore do the reſt? may you not perſonally and publikely reprove them, pray for them, &c.
5. Muſt not the people avoid a Notorious drunkard. &c. whether you bid them or not? If not; why hath God commanded it? If yea; why may you not bid them do that which is their duty?
6. Have you none in your Pariſh, not one or two to make Ruling Elders of, that by their conjunction you may be authoriſed to do more then now you do? I mean, according to your own principles; for I confeſs its not according to mine.
7. And what hindereth but you may joyn together if you will? If it muſt needs be many Paſtors conjunct, that muſt exerciſe any act of Diſcipline, why is it not ſo done? Doth any forbid them, or threaten them if they do it? If you ſay, I am alone, becauſe no neighbour Miniſter will joyn with me. You ſpeak hardly of all the Miniſters about you? What! are they all ſo negligent? Blame us not then to reprove them. But its an incredible thing that they ſhould be all ſo bad that are of your judgement, that no one or two will be perſwaded to aſſiſt you. And I think you will confeſs that two or three may do it authoritatively, though no one elſe in the County do it. I could wiſh that the Prelates had not ſuch an argument given them as this: No one Presbyter hath the Power of the Keyes, by their own Confeſſion: therefore two or three have not; leaſt they go further in proving the conſequence then you expect. But if it muſt be ſo, I could yet wiſh that no ſingle Paſtor for the excuſing of himſelf, would lay ſuch a reproachful charge upon all the Miniſters in the Country that be of his own Judgement, as to ſay that Diſcipline is caſt aſide, becauſe they can get none to joyn with them in the execution! at leaſt till they have throughly tryed whether it be ſo indeed, or not.