The Nonconformists Plea for Peace, Section 3
SECT. III.
What Churches we hold to be inſtituted by God, and what not.
Sect. I. OUR own Judgment we ſhall plainly expreſs in this following Order: 1. We ſhall ſhew what Church we judge to be of God's Inſtitution, and what not. 2. What about Churches the Magiſtrates or Paſtors may inſtitute by God's Authority or allowance: And what they may not inſtitute. 3. In what caſes it is lawful to gather Churches where Churches are: In what caſes it is lawful to ſeparate from Churches; and in what caſes neither of theſe laſt is lawful.
Sect. II. 1. All Chriſtians are agreed that Chriſt is the Author of the Univerſal Church, (conſidered both as Baptized, or Externally covenanting and profeſſing, called Viſible, and as Regenera…e and ſincerely Covenanting, called Myſtical) as it is Headed by Chriſt himſelf, and called his Body, and his ſpecial Kingdom.
Sect. III. 2. We doubt not but Chriſt hath inſtituted the Office of the ſacred Miniſtry, to be under him as the Teacher, Ruler, and High Prieſt of the Church, in Teaching, Guiding, and Worſhiping: And that he hath inſtituted holy Aſſemblies and Societies for theſe things to be exerciſed in: And that [a Society of Neighbour Chriſtians aſſociated with ſuch a Paſtor or Paſtors, for perſonal Communion herein, even in ſuch Doctrine, Diſcipline and Wo…ſ…p] is a Church-Form of Divine Inſtitution.
Sect. IV. If they be not [Chriſtians] by Baptiſm, or viſible Profeſſion, they be not viſible Materials for a Church.
If they be not [Neighbours] that is, within reach of each other, ſo as to be capable of ſuch Communion, they are not matter that hath the neceſſary extrinſecal diſpoſition.
If they be not [aſſociated] explicitely or implicitely, by ſome ſignification of Conſent, they may be an accidental Aſſembly, but not a proper Christian Church.
If they be not aſſociated [for this holy Communion] they may be a Civil Society, but not a Church.
If they be not aſſociated [for Perſonal Communion] at ſome due ſeaſons, but only for Communion at diſtance by Delegates, Meſſengers or Letters, they are not a Particular Church of this ſpecies now defined, though they may be members of larger aſſociations, National, Dioceſan, &c.
If they are not aſſociate with one or more Paſtors, they may be a Community of Chriſtians, but not a Political Church, which we now define.
If they are not joyned with a Paſtor that hath all the foreſaid Powers, of Teaching, Ruling by the Word and Keys, and going before them in Worſhip; and if they conſent not to his relation as ſuch, they may make a School, or an Oratory, but not a proper particular Church ſimpliciter, ſo called [but only a Church ſecundum quid, or as to ſome part;] for an Eſſential part is wanting. But it is not the defect of Exerciſe that unchurcheth them, while there is the Power, and that conſented to (for Men cannot be Paſtors or Churches againſt their wills.)
Sect. V. 3. As all Chriſtians grant that the Apoſtles had a general Commiſſion to call Infidels to Chriſt, and to plant Churches with their particular Paſtors as aforeſaid, and to take care that their Paſtor and they do the duties, (not compelling them by their Sword, but by the Word,) ſo we are far from denying that yet ſome Miniſters of Chriſt may, and ſhould ſeek the converſion of Infidels, and plant Churches of the converted, ordaining Paſtors over them by their conſent, and taking due care by their grave adviſe that ſuch Churches walk in the obedience of Chriſt, as far as they can procure it; And ſuch Seniors which have ſo planted theſe Churches and Paſtors by Gods bleſſing on their labours, ſhould be much reverenced by the Churches which they have planted, and their juſt adviſe, exhortations and admonitions ſhould be heard by the People and the Paſtors whom they ordained, and all their juniors: And though the Apoſtles have no ſucceſſours in their extraordinaries, yet that ſome ſhould in this ordinary work ſucceed them, we deny not, becauſe 1. We find that it is a work ſtill neceſſary to be done: 2. And others as well as Apoſtles did it in thoſe times; as Silas, Luke, Apollo, Timothy, Titus, &c. and ſince, all ſuch as have planted the Goſpel among Infidels. 3. Becauſe Chriſt promiſed to be with them that did this work to the end of the world, Mat. 28. 21. But whether ſuch men be of a different office or order from the junior Paſtors; whether any true Presbyter that hath ability, opportunity and invitation, may not do the ſame work with Infidels; and by his ſucceſs, and ſeniority may not ſo ordain Paſtors over the Churches which he gathered; and have an anſwerable right to reverence and regard from thoſe that he ſo planteth, and ordaineth; are controverſies which we preſume not now to decide.
And we cannot prove that this maketh a diſtinct form of a Church, no not in the Apoſtles time and caſe: For we cannot prove that they diſtributed the Countrys into Provinces or Dioceſes peculiar to each Apoſtle; and had any Churches which they ſuppoſed to be peculiarly under this or that Apoſtles Government ſo as that any of the reſt might not with Apoſtolical power have come, reſided, preacht and governed in the ſame: No Scripture tells us of ſuch limits & Provinces. Nay, the Scripture tells us, that many of them were as Apoſtles at once in the ſame places: As at Jeruſalem oft. Paul and John had Apoſtolical power at Epheſus: Peter and Paul (as is commonly held) at Rome: And its probable that as Chriſt ſent forth his diſciples by two and two, ſo the Apoſtles went in company, as Paul and Barnabas did: ſo that ſuch appropriate ſettlement of Provincial or Dioceſan Churches, we cannot ſee proved; though ſuch a Generall Miniſtry is eaſily proved; and we doubt not but by conſent they might have diſtributed their Provinces, had they ſeen cauſe, and that actually they did ſo diſtribute their labours as their work and ends required: But if they had become proper Provincial Biſhops over ſeveral Diſtricts or Provinces, it ſeemeth ſtrange to us that no hiſtory telleth us which were the twelve or thirteen Provinces, and how limited; and that they continued not longer; and that inſtead of three Patriarchs firſt, and four after, and five next, we had not twelve or thirteen Apoſtles or Patriarchs ſeated over all the world, with their known diviſions; And that men ſeek not now to reduce the Churches to this Primitive State, rather than to the ſaid Imperial Conſtitution; and rather to ſubject us all to the Apoſtolical Seats, than to five Patriarchs in the dominions of another Prince, and now moſtly ſubject to an Infidel. Yea it is ſtrange to us that the firſt Seat (Rome) ſhould derive its pretended power from two Apoſtles (as if our Church might have two Biſhops) and the ſecond (Alexandria) from Saint Mark, who was no Apoſtle, and the third (Antioch) from the ſame Apoſtle that Rome did, (as if one Biſhop might have two ſuch Dioceſes,) and the fourth (Ieruſalem) from St. James, commonly ſaid to be no Apoſtle; and the laſt (which became the ſecond or the firſt) from no Apoſtle, nor make any ſuch pretence; if thirteen Apoſtolick Provinces were then known.
But we eaſily acknowledge, that as Apoſtles having planted many Churches ſtaid a while in each, when they had ſetled it, and ſome time viſited it again; ſo they are by ſome hiſtorians called the firſt Biſhops of thoſe Churches, being indeed the tranſient Governours of them: In which ſenſe one Church might at once have two or many Biſhops, and one Biſhop many Churches, and he be Biſhop of one Church this week, who was Biſhop of another where he came the next.
Sect. VI. Chriſtian Community, (prepared to be a Polity) and a Chriſtian family, and a Chriſtian Kingdom, we doubt not may all prove their Divine Right; And if any will call theſe Churches, let us agree of the definition, and we will not ſtrive about the name.
Sect. VII. We know not of any proof that ever was produced, that many Churches of the firſt Rank, muſt (of duty) make one fixed greater compound Church, by Aſſociation, whether Claſſical, Dioceſan, Provincial, Patriarchal, or National: and that God hath inſtituted any ſuch Form: And we find the greateſt defenders of Prelacy, affirming that Claſſes, Provincial, Patriarchal, and National Churches, are but humane inſtitutions; of which more anon.
Sect. VIII. We find no proof that ever God determined the Churches ſhould neceſſarily be individuated by Pariſh-bounds or limits of ground; and that men in the ſame limits might not have divers Biſhops, and be of divers particular Churches.
Sect. IX. We never ſaw any ſatisfactory proof that ever Chriſt or his Apoſtles did inſtitute any particular Church (taken in a Political ſenſe as organized, and not meerly for a Community) without a Biſhop or Paſtor, who had the power of Teaching them, Ruling them by the Word and Power of the Church-Keys, and leading them in publick Worſhip.
Sect. X. Nor did we ever ſee it proved, that any one Church of this firſt Rank (which was not an Aſſociation of Churches) conſiſted in Scripturetimes of many (much leſs many ſcore or hundred) ſuch fixed Churches or Congregations: Or that any one Biſhop of the firſt Rank (that was not an Apoſtle, or a Biſhop of Biſhops) of whom we now ſpeak not, had more than one of ſuch fixed Societies or Churches under him: Or might have more ſtated members of his Church, than were capable of Perſonal Communion, and mutual aſſiſtance at due ſeaſons, in holy Doctrine, Diſcipline and Worſhip: Though we doubt not but as now, there are many Chapels in ſome Pariſhes, where the aged, weak, children, and all in ſoul weather, or by other hinderances may hear, and pray, and occaſionally communicate, whoſe proximity and relation to the Pariſh-Churches do make them capable of Perſonal Communion in due ſeaſons with the whole Pariſh (at leaſt per vices) in thoſe Churches, and in their converſation: And as a ſingle Congregation may prudently in perſecution, or foul weather, meet oft-times in ſeveral houſes; ſo the great Church of Jeruſalem (though it cannot be proved a quarter ſo big as ſome of our Pariſhes) might in thoſe times when they had no Temples, hold their publick Meetings oft at the ſame time in divers houſes; and yet be capable of Perſonal Communion, as it is before deſcribed.
Sect. II. It is not inconſiderable to our confirmation, that ſo worthy a man as Dr. Hamond doth over and over, in his Diſſertations againſt Blondell, and in his Learned Annotations on the new Teſtament, aſſert all the matter of fact which we are pleading for, viz. That the word [Presbyter] and [Paſtor] in the New Teſtament is ever taken for a Biſhop: That it belonged to the Biſhops office to be the Preacher to his Church, to viſit all the Sick, to take care of all the Poor, and to take Charge of the Churches ſtock, to adminiſter the Sacrament, &c. And (as he ſaith on Acts 11. 6.) That although this Title of foreign, Elders, have been alſo extended to a ſecond order in the Church, and is now only in uſe for them, under the name of Presbyters, yet in the Scripturetime it belonged principally, if not alone, to Biſhops, there being NO EVIDENCE that any of that ſecond Order were then inſtituted, though ſoon after before the writing of Ignatius's Epiſtles, there were ſuch inſtituted in all Churches.]
Sect. XII. By this it followeth, that 1. the office of a ſubject Presbyter that was no Biſhop was not in being (that can be proved) in Scripture-times. 2. That no Biſhop had more than one worſhiping aſſembly at once: For all Chriſtians aſſembled for worſhip on the Lords dayes, and their worſhip ſtill included ſomewhat which none but a Miniſter of Chriſt might do, and when there was no other Miniſter in being but Biſhops, and a Biſhop can be but in one place at once, a Biſhop could have but one aſſembly. Though for our parts we think that we have juſt reaſon to believe, that Churches then had more Miniſters than one, when we read how Paul was put to reſtrain and regulate their publick officiating at Corinth, 1 Cor. 14.
Sect. XIII. And it further confirmeth us, that the ſaid Doctor tells us, that for ought he knoweth, the moſt of the Church then were of his mind: And Franciſcus a ſancta clara de Epiſcop tells us, that this opinion came from Scot…: And Petavius, that Learned Jeſuit, was the man that brought it in, in our times, viz. That the Apoſtles placed only Biſhops with Deacons in the Churches, and that it is only theſe Biſhops that are called Presbyters in Scripture. So that the Matter of fact, for the whole Scripture-times, is granted us by all theſe learned men.
Sect. XIV. It being the Divine Inſtitution of the Office of this ſecond Order of Presbyters, which we are unſatisfied about; and theſe Reverend men confeſſing that de facto they were not in being (as can be proved by any evidence) in Scripture-times, and thoſe times extending to about the hundredth or ninety ninth year after Chriſts Nativity (when St. John wrote the Revelation) we muſt confeſs that we know not how that Order or Office can be proved then to be of God's inſtitution. 1. As to the Efficient; who ſhould do it as the certain authorized Inſtruments of God. 2. Or how it ſhall be certainly proved to us to be of God, when Scripture telleth it not to us; and what Records of it are infallible; And whether ſuch pretended proofs of Tradition as a ſupplement to Scripture, be not that which the Papacy is built on, and will not ſerve their turn as well as this.
Sect. XV. And whereas it is ſaid that the Biſhops made in Scripture-times had authority given them to make afterward that ſecond Office or Order of Presbyters: 1. We cannot but marvel then that in ſuch great Churches, as that at Jeruſalem, Epheſus, Corinth, &c. they ſhould never uſe their Power in all the Scripturetimes. And when they had ſo many Elders at Jeruſalem, ſo many Prophets and Teachers at Antioch and Corinth, that Paul was fain to reſtrain their exerciſes, and bid them propheſie but One by One; and one ſaid, I am of Paul, and another, I am of Apollo, &c. there ſhould yet in that age be none found meet for Biſhops to ordain to this ſecond ſort of Presbyters, as well asmen to make Deacons of.
2. But we never yet ſaw the proof produced, that indeed the Biſhops had power given them to inſtitute this other Species of Elders. Sure it belonged to the Founders of the Churches (Chriſt and his Apoſtles) to inſtitute the Species of Eccleſiaſtical Officers, though the Biſhops might make the Individuals afterwards. And where is the proof that the Apoſtles did inſtitute it? If Eccleſiaſtical generation imitate natural, the Biſhops would beget but their like: men beget men; ſo Phyſicians make Phyſicians, and ſo Biſhops may beget Biſhops: But he that ſaith they could morally firſt beget this other Species, muſt prove it.
Sect XVI. When Presbyters were firſt diſtinct from Biſhops, we ſee no proof that it was as a diſtinct Office or Order in ſpecie, and not only as a diſtinct degree and priviledge of men in the ſame Office: Nor hath the Church of Rome it ſelf thought meet to determine this as de fide but ſuffereth its Doctors to hold the contrary.
Sect. XVII. It much confirmeth us in our judgment, that no mere Biſhop then had more Churches than one (as afore deſcribed) when we find that Ignatius (whoſe authority Dr. Hamond Diſſert. cont▪ Blondel: Laieth ſo much of the cauſe upon, and whom Biſhop Pierſon hath lately ſo induſtriouſly vindicated) doth expreſly make ONE ALTAR, and ONE BISHOP with the Presbyters and Deacons, to be the note of a Church Unity and Individuation. And that by one Altar is meant one Table of Communion, or place where that Table ſtood, is paſt doubt with the judicious and impartial. Whence learned Mr. Joſeph Mede doth argue as certain that then a Biſhops Church was no other than ſuch as uſually communicated in one place. Yea, ſaith Ignatius, the Biſhop muſt take notice and account of each perſon, even of Man-ſervants and Maids (that they come to the Church). And this was the Biſhop of a Seat, that after was Patriarchal: Such Biſhops we do not oppoſe.
Sect. XVIII. We find proof thar ordinarily Churches were firſt planted in Cities (there being not then in the Villages Chriſtians enough to make Churches:) But we find no proof that when there are Chriſtians enough to conſtitute Churches, they may not be planted in Villages alſo: Nor yet that there may not be more Churches than one in the ſame City: For ſo Grotius ſaith, There were even then when Chriſtians were comparatively but few, and that they were as the Jewiſh Synagogues in this reſpect. And Dr. Hamond largely aſſerteth that Peter had a Church of Jews, and Paul another of Gentiles at Rome, and that ſo it was in other Cities.
Sect. XIX. Much leſs is it by Divine Inſtitution, that Biſhops, and their Churches or Seats, be only in ſuch as we now call Cities, which by their priviledges are diſtinct from other great Towns and Corporations, whenas the word foreign then ſignified a great Town or Corporation, ſuch as our Market-Towns and Corporations now are.
Sect. XX. But it is the Law of God that all things about Churches and Church-affairs which he hath left to humane prudence, ſhould be done according to ſuch general Rules as he hath preſcribed for their regulation.