The True Way of Concord of All the Christian Churches, Part 1 · Chapter 10
CHAP. X.
No humane terms, not made by Chriſt, or his Spirit extraordinarily given to the Apoſtles, are Neceſſary to the Being of Particular Churches: But divers humane acts are neceſſary to their exiſtence, and adminiſtration.
§. 1. DIvers men ſpeak diverſly of this matter: 1. Some ſay that no form of the Polity of particular Churches is of Divine inſtitution, but that God hath left all the forming of them to the will of man.
2. Others ſay, that no form of them is lawful but what is of Divine inſtitution.
And of the firſt, ſome ſay that Chriſt inſtituted the Papal form, and ſome ſay General Councils, the ſummam Poteſtatem to the univerſal Church, and left it to them to form particular Churches. Others ſay that Magiſtrates are to do it: And others that the Dioceſane Biſhops of every Nation in National or Provincial Synods may do it. But all agree that the form of particular Churches muſt be made, by ſome that had authority from Chriſt to do it.
§. 2. Of the ſecond ſort (who hold no form of a particular Church lawful, but what is of Divine inſtitution) ſome hold that only a Dioceſan Church (that hath many Congregations and Altars) is of Divine inſtitution, and that the Parochial are not Churches but Oratories or Chapels, or parts of a Church: Others ho…d that only Parochial Churches (of one Altar or aſſociated for perſonal Communion in preſence) are of Divine inſtitution: ſome that both Dioceſane and Parochial Churches are of Divine inſtitution; and ſome that theſe and Provincial, National, Patriarchal (and the Papal) are of Divine inſtitution: Thus do mens judgements vary.
§. 3. A third ſort hold that God hath inſtituted ſome Church forms beſides the Univerſal, and left men to make others: And here ſome think that God inſtituted Patriarchal, and left them to make the Dioceſan and Parochial: ſome hold that God inſtituted only the Dioceſan and left them power to make the Patriarchal and the Parochial: ſome hold that he made only the Parochial (I mean ſingle ſocieties aſſociated for preſent perſonal Communion) and left them by voluntary aſſociations to make the greater over them.
§. 4. Among theſe opinions let us firſt try whether Chriſt hath inſtituted any Church form beſides the univerſal, and 2. what that is.
I. And 1. if Chriſt hath inſtituted a holy Chriſtian ſociety for ordinary holy Communion and mutual help in Gods publick worſhip and holy living, conſiſting of Paſtors authorized and obliged to Teach, and Guide, and ſpeak for the flock in Gods publick worſhip and adminiſter his Sacraments according to Chriſts word, and of a flock obliged to hear them, learn, obey and follow ſuch their conduct to the foreſaid ends] then Chriſt hath inſtituted a form of a particular Church, and its policy. But the antecedent is true, as ſhall be proved: And the conſequent or major is proved, à definito ad denominatum; This definition containeth the Eſſentials of a Church. No man can deny that to be a Chriſtian Church which hath this definition.
§. 5. Here ſtill it is ſuppoſed that the Spirit in the Apoſtles, who were deſigned to be founders and maſter-builders, and to gather and order Churches, and teach them to obſerve all Chriſts commands, was Chriſts promiſed Agent (as Tertullian calls him) and that Chriſt did what the Spirit did by the Apoſtles in their proper work, to which he was promiſed them as their Guide; as it is aforeſaid.
§. 6. And that Chriſt and his Apoſtles inſtituted ſacred ordinary Aſſemblies of Chriſtians for holy worſhip and Communion, is ſo clear in the New Teſtament that it were vain to prove it.
§. 7. And 2. as notorious and paſt doubt it is that the end of theſe Aſſemblies was ſuch as is here mentioned; 3. And as plain that ſuch Paſtors as are here deſcribed were ſet over all theſe Congregations, and authorized and obliged to the foreſaid work, that is under Chriſt the great Teacher, Prieſt and Ruler of the Church, to Teach them Gods word, to intercede under Chriſt for them to God, and from Chriſt to them in prayer and Sacraments, &c. and to Guide them by that called the Keyes of the Church, diſcerning whom to receive by Baptiſm, whom to reprove, exhort, comfort or abſolve, Act. 14. 23. Act. 20. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. and many other places ſhew this.
§. 8. And it is no leſs plain that the people were bound to continue in their doctrine, communion and prayer, and to obey them in that which they were commiſſioned to do: Heb. 13. 7, 13, 24. & 10. 25, 26. 1 Theſ. 5. 12, 13. 1 Tim. 5. 17. & 20. and many other places; ſo that the form of ſuch Churches as conſiſt of ſuch Congregations and their Paſtors is paſt all denyal and juſt doubt.
§. 9. And as to all other Church-forms (Claſſical, Dioceſan, Metropolitical, Provincial, National, Patriarchal and Papal, it is theſe only that fall under reaſonable doubt and controverſie. And 1. for Claſſical Churches, I can ſay but this, 1. That the General commands of holding Chriſtian Love and Concord, and doing all to edification require ſuch Churches as live near together to be helpers to each other, and that counſel and correſpondency is neceſſary hereto, which the Churches have ſtill laudably exerciſed by Synods: And if theſe aſſociations for order-ſake be agreed on, as to ſtated times and numbers and bounds, it is but the circumſtantiating of a known duty: And if any will call this a diſtinct Policy or Church-form, I contend not againſt their liberty of ſpeech, while we agree de re: But I judge it perillous to give the ſame name to ſuch an Aſſembly or. Aſſociation as to a Church of Chriſts inſtitution; leſt it ſeduce men to think that the word is not equivocally uſed. If the Agents of ſeveral Kingdoms met at a common Dyet, I had rather not call them a ſuperiour Kingdom, were their meeting never ſo neceſſary. An Aſſembly that is the Pars Imperans of one body Politick, having Legiſlative power, is one thing; and an Aſſembly of Agents or Princes for meer concord and ſtrength and help of diſtinct Kingdoms, Schools, Armies, &c. is another thing. And I know no proof that ſuch Councils muſt be ordinary, or at ſtated Times and places, but ſometimes that is beſt, and ſometime not, as the caſe ſtandeth, as even the Papiſts confeſs. And when they begin to degenerate from a Council for Concord to a Majeſty or higheſt Governing power, it's time to croſs their claim and interrupt the occaſions of it.
§. 10. And if men at ſuch Claſſes, and Councils chooſe one to keep order as a moderator, yea if they fix him, it is but the circumſtantiating of the Aſſemblies work: But if he will claim hereupon a diſtinct order, office, and proper political Church relation, ſo as hence to make himſelf the Regent part of a species of a Church, yea and claim this as of God and unalterable, I cannot juſtifie ſuch a Church-form.
§. 11. This holds as to the Preſidents of all ranks of Synods, Claſſical, Dioceſan, Metropolitical, Provincial, National or Patriarchal. To uſe them as Preſidents of Councils for Concord is one thing; and to uſe them as the Pars Imperans, or the conſtitutive heads of a diſtinct Church-ſpecies is another. Arch-Biſhop Vſher told me himſelf his judgement, that Councils were but for Counſel and Concord, and not for the Government of each other or any of the members; and that they had no proper Governing power either over their Minor part, or over any abſent Biſhops: Though each Biſhop was ſtill the Governour of his own flock, and their power over their flocks was exerciſed with the greater advantage by their Concord in Councils. Dyets and Councils of diſtinct independent Biſhops are not diſtinct forms of policy or Churches.
§. 12. And if this hold true, that the Councils themſelves are not thereby Rectors of a diſtinct political ſociety, but for Concord of many, then it will follow that a Preſident of ſuch a Council, whether Dioceſan, Provincial, National or more General, is not as ſuch a Rector of the Biſhops under him and their people, but only the Orderer or Guide of the Modes and Circumſtances of the Council as ſuch. And therefore could the Pope prove a right to preſide in General Councils (orbis Romani, vel orbis terrarum) which he cannot, it were no proof that he is Regent Head of the Church univerſal. The ſame I may ſay of the other Preſidents.
§. 13. If it hold that God inſtituted only Congregational or Parochial Churches (as for preſent Communion) then it muſt needs follow that none of the reſt inſtituted by man, have power to deprive ſuch ſingle Churches of any of the Priviledges granted them by Chriſt: And therefore whereas Chriſt hath made the terms of Catholick Communion himſelf, and hath commanded all ſuch to worſhip him publickly in holy Communion under faithful Paſtors choſen or at leaſt conſented to by themſelves (which many hundred years was the judgement of the Churches), no humane order or power can deprive them of any of this benefit, nor diſoblige them from any of this duty, by juſt authority.
§. 14. Nay ſeeing that the univerſal Church is certainly the higheſt ſpecies, none hath authority on pretence of narrower Communion in lower Churches, to change Chriſts terms of Catholick Communion, nor to deprive Chriſtians of the right of being loved and received by each other, or diſoblige them from the duty of loving and receiving each other. Humane power made by their own contracts, cannot change Chriſts Laws, nor the Priviledges or forms of Chriſts own Churches.
§. 15. They that ſay that theſe ſeveral Church ſpecies are of God, muſt prove that God inſtituted them; and that can be only by Scripture: or elſe that he gave ſome power to inſtitute them ſince Scripture times: which till they prove, none are bound to obey them, at leaſt when they over rule Chriſts own inſtitutions.
§. 16. To deviſe new ſpecies of Churches without Gods authority and impoſe them on the world (yea in his name) and call all diſſenters ſchiſmaticks, is a far worſe Uſurpation than to make and impoſe new Ceremonies or Liturgies.
§. 17. Dr. Hammond (Diſſert, cont. Blond. & Annot. in Act. 11. & paſſ.) affirmeth that it cannot be proved that the order of ſubject Presbyters was exiſtent in Scripture times; and conſequently holdeth that Biſhops had but ſingle Congregations (as Ignatius ſpeaketh with One Altar). Now if Dioceſans, Metropolitans, Provincials, Patriarchs, or Pope as conſtitutive of Church-ſpecies were made after, either theſe new Churches were made by the Biſhops of Parochial Churches, or by thoſe that were No Biſhops or Paſtors of any Churches at all (For the Apoſtles were dead, and no inſtitution of theſe but Scriptural can be truly proved. And other Churches beſides the Catholick and Parochial, or ſingle, (diſtinct from a compound of Churches) there were then none.) For the lower to make the higher Churches, is that which they will not grant, who grant not that Presbyters may propagate their own ſpecies; and deny that power aſcendeth ab inferioribus. And that men of no Church, made all theſe new Church-ſpecies is no honour to them.
§. 18. Two contrary opinions herein now reign: One of the Papiſts that think Chriſt inſtituted the Pope with power to make inferiour Church ſpecies. That other is, that Chriſt or his Apoſtles inſtituted Dioceſans, giving them power both as rulers to make Pariſh Churches (or Chapels) under them, and by Contract or Conſent to make the higheſt ſpecies over them, (Provincial, National, Patriarchal, and ſay ſome Papal.) But as to the Papiſts ſo much is ſaid againſt their ſuppoſition that it's not here to be confuted: And it's certain that ſingle Church order was conſtituted by no Pope, and that all the Apoſtles had power thereto. And as for the latter, which affirmeth the lower degrees to make the higher, we ſtill want the proofs of their authority ſo to do: of which more afterwards.
§. 19. As for them that ſay that it is Magiſtrates that have power to make new ſpecies of Churches, I grant them that whatever alterations of Church-Orders may be made, Magiſtrates may do much in them. The Power of Princes, and the Guidance of Paſtors, and the Conſent of the people have each herein their ſpecial place: But what theſe alterations or additions are which they may make, is the chief queſtion: Both the Catholick Church, and ſingle Church aſſemblies being inſtituted by Chriſt are not left to them. The circumſtantiating of other Aſſemblies and Aſſociations are left to them, to be done according to Gods general Law: But that making new Political Societies that are properly called Churches, or Religious bodies conſiſting of the Pars regens, & pars ſubdita, is left to them by Chriſt, I never ſaw proved, any more than the making of new Sacraments. But if that could be proved, yet that theſe humane Churches or their makers may change thoſe that are of Divine inſtitution or deprive them of their priviledges, or forbid them commanded duty, cannot be proved.
§. 20. And it is certain, 1. That if Princes or Biſhops or the people did inſtitute Dioceſan, or Metropolitan, Provincial or Patriarchal Churches, they may yet make more and other ſpecies: And who knoweth how many new forms of Churches we may yet expect? 2. And they that made them, upon good reaſon may unmake them, or alter them when they pleaſe.
§. 21. But though the Legiſlator and not the Subjects be the inſtitutor of the Vniverſal and particular Church-policies, yet men are the conſtitutive matter, and mans conſent and faith is the diſpoſitio materiae without which the form is not received: and mans welfare is part of the final cauſe; and Miniſters are the inſtruments (and Gods word written and preached) for the gathering of Churches by ſuch qualification of the perſons, and alſo of revealing the Inſtitution of Chriſt, and inveſting of particular perſons in their Church-relations.
§. 22. By all this it appeareth that as it belongeth to Chriſt to inſtitute the political ſpecies of Churches (though circumſtantiating may be left to man), at leaſt undoubtedly of the Vniverſal and of the ſingle ſpecies, ſo it belongeth to Chriſt and not to man to inſtitute and deſcribe their terms of Union: For this is the very inſtitution of the ſpecies: And we are not to receive humane Church-policies without good proof of mens authority to make them, and impoſe them.