A Dissuasive from the Errors of the time, Chapter 10

A Dissuasive from the Errors of the time · Chapter 10

p. 196CHAP. X. Independencie is contrary to the Word of God.

God is the Author of the union and dependencie of particular Churches.THe Divine Wiſedome which found it expedient for man before the Fall, not to live alone, hath made it much more needfull for man to live in Society after his weakning by ſinne; Woe to him that is alone, for if he fall who ſhall raiſe him up? The beſt wits of themſelves are prone to errors and miſcarriages, and left alone, are inclined to run on in any evill way they have once begunne: But engagement in fellowſhippe, eſpecially with the Saints, is a preſervative againſt the beginnings of evill, and a retractive therefrom when begunne. Every gratious neighbour is a Counſellour and Pedagogue, the greater the incorporation is of ſuch, the better is every Member directed and the more ſtrengthened. Hence the goodneſſe of God hath ordained not onelyonly the planting of particular men into a ſmall body of one ſingle Congregation, but for the greater ſecurity both of Perſons and Congregations, the Lord hath increaſed that Communion of Churches by binding neighbour Congregations in a larger and ſtronger Body of a Presbytery, or Claſſis; yea a number of Presbyteryes by the ſame hand of God are combined in a Synode; neither this onelyonly, but for the ſtrengthening of every ſtone and of the whole building, the Lord hath appointed the largeſt ſocieties that are poſſible, the very Church univerſall and the repreſentation thereof, an Oecumenick Aſſembly. This congregative way is divine; the diſſolution of humane ſocieties, eſpecially of Eccleſiaſticke Aſſemblyes, muſt be from another Spirit.

The firſt we know to have oppoſed the holy Societyes we ſpeake of, were Anabaptiſts, who liking a Catholicke anarchy in all things, and preſſing an univerſall liberty, did ſtrive to cut in peeces all the bands, as of Politicke and Oeconomick union whereby Kingdomes and States, Cities and Familyes did ſtand, ſo alſo of the Eccleſiaſticke conjunction, making every perſon at laſt fully free from all ſervitude, and ſimply independent, or uncontrolable in any of his owne opinions or deſires, by any mortall man.

p. 197Their firſt follower among the reformed,From them Morellius and Grotius learned the Tenet. was one John Moreau a Pariſian, who in the French Churches did vent the Independency of Congregations from Synods, and the popular government of theſe Independent Congregations: But his ſciſmatick pamphlet came no ſooner abroad then the French Divines did moſt unanimouſly trample upon it. In their generall Aſſembly at Rochell, moſt Reverend Beza Moderator for the time, and in their next Aſſembly, Learned Sadeell with others, did ſo fully confute theſe Anabaptiſtick follies, that thereafter in France this evill Spirit did never ſo much as whiſper; only in Holland, in the Arminian times, it began to ſpeake by the tongue of Grotius, and others of his fellowes, who being conſcious to themſelves of Tenets whereunto they deſpared the aſſent of any Synode, yea fearing to be prejudged in the propagation of their errours by a croſſe Sentence of a Nationall Aſſembly, did ſet themſelves to call in queſtion, and at laſt to deny the Authority and Juriſdiction of all Church meetings. But when the goodneſſe of God in that happy Synode of Dort, did cruſh the other errours of that Party, this their fanſie did evaniſh, and ſince in theſe bounds hath beene buried in Oblivion. By what meanes this Anabaptiſtick roote which neither France nor Holland could beare, when Grotius and Morellius did aſſay to plant it, doth thrive ſo well in England, after Browne and Barrow with their followers did become its dreſſers, I have declared at length before.

However the Novelty of the Tenet,Laying aſide all prejudice we will reaſon the matter. the Infamie of its Authours, the evill ſucceſſe it hath had whereever yet it hath ſet up the head, doth burden it with ſo juſt contempt, that all further audience might be denyed thereto; yet in this impudent and malapertage, where the greateſt abſurdityes will importunately ingyre themſelves, and require beleefe as unanſwerable and moſt covincing truths, unleſſe in a full hearing their naughtineſſe be demonſtrate, we are content without all prejudices to reaſon the matter it ſelfe from the ground, and to require no man to hate this errour for its Authours, or any externall conſideration, unleſſe it be cleerely ſhowne to be contrary to the revealed will of God.

The ſtate of the Queſtion hath no perplexitie,The ſtate of the Queſtion cleared. if its termes were cleared. The Browniſts affirme that every Pariſh Church, that p. 198every ſingle Congregation, is Independent from any Presbytery, any Synod, any Aſſembly: This we deny, affirming the true dependence and ſubordination of Parochiall Congregations to Presbyteries, and of theſe to Synods: to which we aſcribe power, authority, and Juriſdiſdiction.

Before wee fall to reaſoning, let us underſtand the words, which in this debate doe frequently occurre. Firſt, what is a Parochiall Church, or ſingle Congregation. Secondly, What is its independence. Thirdly, What is a Presbytery, and a Presbyteriall Church. Fourthly, What is a Synod. Fifthly. What is Authoritie and Juriſdiction Eccleſiaſticall. We intend no definitions, but ſuch popular deſcriptions as may make cleare what the parties uſe to underſtand by theſe words.

A particular Church, a Pariſh or Congregation in this Queſtion, is taken for a company of faithfull people, every one whereof in the face of the whole Congregation, hath given ſo cleare tokens of their true grace and regeneration, as hath ſatisfied the minde of all: A company, I ſay, incorporate by a particular Covenant and Oath to exerciſe all the parts of Chriſtian Religion, in one place under one Paſtor: Our Oppoſits affirme, that in one Church there muſt be but one Paſtor, aſſiſted indeede with a Doctor, and three or foure Elders, yet no more Paſtors but one. They will admit into a Church no more people then commodiouſly, and at their eaſe, may convene in one houſe; how few they be they care not; ten families, or forty perſons to them are a faire Church: you have heard that ſome of their Churches have beene within the number of foure perſons.

Independencie is the full liberty of ſuch a Church to diſcharge all the parts of Religion, Doctrine, Sacraments, Diſcipline, and all within it ſelfe without all dependence, all ſubordination to any other on earth, more or fewer, ſo that the ſmalleſt Congregation, ſuppoſe of three perſons, though it fall into the groſſeſt hereſies, may not be controlled by any Orthodoxe Synod, were it Oecumenicke of all the Churches on earth.

A Presbytery, as it is called in Scotland, or a Claſſis, as in Holland, or a Collogue, as in France, is an ordinary meeting of the Paſtors of the Churches neerly neighbouring, & of the ruling Elders deputed therefrom, for the exerciſe chiefely of diſcipline, ſo farre p. 199as concernes theſe neighbouring Churches in common.

A Presbyteriall Church, is a company of Profeſſors governed by one Prysbytery, who for the exerciſe of Religion meete in diverſe places, or who have moe Paſtors then one.

A Synod, is a convention of Paſtors and Elders ſent and deputed from diverſe Presbyteries, meeting either ordinarily or upon occaſion for the affaires that are common to thoſe that ſent them.

Eccleſiaſticke Juriſdiction, is a right and power, not onelyonly by advice to counſell and direct, but by authority given of God, to injoyne and to performe according to the rule of Scriptures theſe things which concern the Ordination of Miniſters, the deciding of Eccleſiaſticall Cauſes, the determination of Doctrines, the inflicting of Cenſures, &c. The ſignification of theſe words being preſuppoſed, the ſtate of the Queſtion, or minde of the parties, can not be obſcure.

The firſt Argumen for the truth I caſt into this Forme.That ſingle Congregations are not Independent is proved; firſt, from the 1 Tim 4.14. becauſe they have not the right of Ordination.1 Tim 4:14 Every Independent Church hath alwayes, and ordinarily, the right of Ordination, and power to lay hands on Paſtors. But, no ſingle Congregation, or Parochiall Church huth that right and power. Ergo ▪ No ſingle Congregation is an Independent Church. The Major is not queſtioned by the adverſe party, for they place the nature of their Independencie in a right and power intrinſecall and eſſentiall to every the leaſt Congregation of Ordaining, Depoſing, Excommunicating, and exerciſing all acts of Juriſdiction upon all their own Members, as well Paſtors as others. I ſaid alwayes, and ordinarily, for we queſtion not now what at ſome times in ſome extraordinary caſes may fall out to be lawfull and neceſſary, not onelyonly to ſingle Congregations, but even to ſingle perſons: Alſo the power which our adverſe party diſputeth for, is not Hypotheticke, which ſometimes on ſuppoſition of ſuch and ſuch caſes belongeth to a Church, but abſolute, which is inherent to every Congregation at all times.

The Minor we prove thus: What is proper to a Presbytery the right thereof belongs not to any ſingle Congregation:Ordination belongs to the Presbytery. But Ordination, and impoſition of hands is proper to a Presbytery, as appeareth from 1 Tim. 4, 14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by Propheſie with the laying on of the hands of p. 200the Presbytery. The Apoſtle maketh that right proper to the Presbytery, which he will have to remaine in it, and not to be removed therefrom, notwithſtanding ſundry extraordinary caſes which might have excuſed the removeall of it. For Timothy was a Paſtor not altogether ordinary, and inferior, but an Evangeliſt; he had for the ground of his Office the extraordinary call of ſome Prophets when he was ſent out to Preach, Paul himſelf laid hands upon him; notwithſtanding all this, that the due and juſt right of the Presbytery migh be proclamed, the Apoſtle marketh that the gift, office, and grace of Preaching the Goſpell was conferred on Timothy by the laying on of the Presbyteries hands.

For the proof of the laſt Maior, we neede not much deſcant on the Word Presbytery, and the ſenſe of it in the fore-named place, nor to refute the miſinterpretations which ſome make of it, eſpecially they, who under the miſ-alledged authority of Calvin, would underſtand not the convention of any men, but the Office of a Presbyter, as if an Office or any accident could have had hands which might have beene laid on Timothies head. Paſſing therefore ſuch digreſſions, we prove the Maior in hand, thus: No ſingle Congregation is a Presbytery, nor any wayes neceſſarily hath a Presbytery within it ſelfe; yea if our adverſe party may be beleeved, no Congregation can have, at leaſt ſhould have in it ſelfe ſuch a Presbytery whereof Paul ſpeaketh. Ergo. What is proper to a Presbytery, the right thereof may not be uſurped by any ſingle Congregation. Of the conſequence there is no doubt: the Antecedent hath three parts: onelyonly the firſt is needefull to be proved; but for more abundant ſatisfaction, we ſhall aſſay to prove them all.

No Congregation is a Preſbytery.The firſt, thus; A Presbytery is a member and part of a Congregation, according to our adverſe party (we love not to ſtrive for words, be it ſo that the meeting of a Miniſter and Elders governing ſingle Congregations, which we call a Seſſion, as over-Sea it is called a Conſiſtory, may goe under the name of a Presbytery) Ergo. No Congregation is a Presbytery. The Conſequence is clear, for no member may be affirmed in the Nominative of its owne whole, eſpecially Heterogeneous: The body is not the head, the finger is not the hand; he doore, or the Window is not the houſe.

Concerning the ſecond part of the Antecedent, that no Congregation p. 201hath a Presbytery any wayes neceſſarily within it ſelfe,No Congretion hath within it ſelfe neceſſarily a Preſbytery. this is cleare from the common practiſe of our adverſe party: very oft their Churches have neither Seſſion, nor Paſtor, nor Doctor, nor Elder at all; they make not any of the Officers neceſſary parts of the Church either eſſentiall or integrall, without the which the Church may not ſubſiſt; yea, as the moſt learned, and moſt acute Mr. Rutherfoord hath well obſerved, pag. 272. their grounds take away the neceſſitie of any Miniſtry at all. Mr. Paget tells us that their chiefe and Mother-Church at Amſterdame, through the miſ-government of their Paſtor, Mr. Can, hath wanted now for ſome yeares both a Doctor and Elders and a Seſſion, or Congregationall Presbytery.

But the pith of the Argument is in the third part of the Antecedent, that no ſingle Congregation can have,No ſingle Congregation ought to have within it ſelfe Pauls Presbytery. or (which is all one when we ſpeake of right and wrong) ought to have within it ſelfe Pauls Presbytery. This we prove. No ſingle Congregation may, or ought to have moe Paſtors than one. Ergo. Neither Pauls Presbytery. The Antecedent is the Doctrine of our adverſe party. The Conſequence leaneth on this Propoſition. In Pauls Presbytery are more Paſtors, which thus is proved: Where there are many layers on of hands on Paſtors, there are many Paſtors: But, in Pauls Presbytery are many layers on of hands on Paſtors; for in the alledged place, not one, but many lay on their hands with Paul on Timothy. The laſt Maior leaneth on this ground, that onelyonly Paſtors lay hands on Paſtors, ſo that many laying hands on Paſtors, muſt be many Paſtors, and by Conſequence, in one Congregation, where there are not many, but one onelyonly Paſtor, (yea none at all whenſoever by impoſition of hands a new Paſtor is to be ordained to that Congregation,) the act of Ordination can not be lawfully performed by the proper members of that Congregation.

That which alone remaineth to be proved, that onelyonly Paſtors lay hands upon Paſtors, is cleared by an Induction,OnelyOnly Paſtors lay hands on Paſtors. againſt which no inſtance can be brought. 1 Tim. 5.22. Lay hands ſuddenly on no man. 2 Tim. 1.6. Stirre up the gift of God that is in thee, by the putting on of my hands. Tit. 1.5. I left thee in Crete that thou ſhouldeſt ordayne Elders. Acts. 13.1.3. Certaine Prophets and Teachers laide their hands upon them, and ſent them away. Acts. 14.23. They p. 202ordained them Elders in every Church. In all theſe places both the firſt Ordination, and poſterior Miſſion to preach the Goſpell, is the Act onelyonly of thoſe who were Paſtors, neither elſe-where reade we that it was otherwiſe.

The ſecond Argument from the Apoſtolicke Churches which exerciſed full juriſdiction, the chiefe whereof, if not all, were Presbyteriall and not Parochiall.The ſecond argument: Every Independent Church, exerciſeth ordinarily within it ſelfe, by its owne members all acts of Eccleſiaſticke Juriſdiction. But, this no ſingle Congregation doth ordinarily. Ergo, no ſingle Congregation is an Independent Church. OnelyOnly the Minor is dubious, which we prove thus; Every Church ordinarily exerciſing all acts of Eccleſiaſtick Juriſdiction is Presbyteriall: But, no ſingle Congregation is a Presbyteriall Church. Ergo. No ſingle Congregation exerciſeth ordinarily all acts of Eccleſiaſtick Juriſdiction. The Minor is cleare from the nature of a ſingle Congregation and Presbyteriall Church, as in the ſtateing of the Queſtion both were deſcribed. The Major is proved by a full Induction of all the Churches which in the New Teſtament we reade to have had the full exerciſe of all Eccleſiaſtick Juriſdiction▪ that all ſuch were Presbyteriall and not Congregationall; We prove it thus: A Church which cannot all convene in one houſe for the publicke Service of God, a Church which hath more Paſtours then one, is Presbyteriall, not Congregationall, according to the grounds of our Adverſaryes. But all the Churches we reade of in the New Teſtament to have had the full exerciſe of all Eccleſiaſtick Juriſdiction, did meete in more places for divine worſhippe, and had more Paſtors then one. This we demonſtrate of the cheife, the Church at Jeruſalem, Samaria, Rome, Corinth, Epheſus, Antioch, neither can a reaſon be given why the reſt of the Scripturall Churches ſhould not be of the ſame kind.

Such was the Church at Jeruſalem.Beginne with the Mother-Church of Jeruſalem. A company conſiſting of many thouſand perſons, and wanting a publicke houſe of meeting, could not convene into one place for worſhippe: for this very day when Chriſtians have gotten moſt ſtately and ſpacious Palaces for Churches, hardly one thouſand can commodiouſly be together for ſolemne worſhippe; and if we looke to the practiſe of the Adverſaries, a few ſcores of men will be a large Church.

As for the State of the Church at Jeruſalem. Firſt, It is granted that for many yeares after the Apoſtles, neither it nor any other p. 203company of Chriſtians in any part of the world had a publicke place of meeting. Secondly, That this Church did conſiſt of many thouſand people, the following places prove Acts. 2.41. The ſame day were added unto them about three thouſand. Alſo chap. 4.5. The number of the men were five thouſand. And where there were ſo many men, if yee looke to the ordinary proportion, there were of women and children twice or thrice ſo many. Neither did that Church ſtand at the named thouſands, for Acts. 5.14. more multitudes both of men and women were added to the Church, and the number of the Diſciples was yet more multiplyed, chap 6.1 Alſo that which we reade chap. 2.47. The Lord added to the Church daily, ſeemeth to have continued for a long time.

To that which is replyed by ſome, that a great part of the named multitudes were ſtrangers, and not Inhabitants at Jeruſalem, and ſo no Members of that Church; We anſwer, that this is ſaid without warrant. That of the three thouſand mentioned in the third chapter, ſome part were ſtrangers, we will not deny to be likely; but that the moſt part were ſo, or that of all the thouſands named in the fourth, fifth, and ſixt, any one was a ſtranger, it cannot be proved from the Text.

As for that which they bring from the 2 chap. 44.How the Church commeth together. All who beleeved were together: as if the whole Church had alwayes come to one place for the publicke worſhippe. We ſay that it was ſimply impoſſible for three thouſand people, not to ſpeake of twenty thouſand and above, to meete in one private houſe, for they had none publicke, neither did they in the ſtreetes celebrate their Sacraments. So we are neceſſitated to take the Churches being together, one of three wayes: either for the conjunction of their minds, as the following words doe import (they continued with one accordin the Temple) or elſe their meeting together muſt be underſtood diſtributively in divers places, not collectively in one, as the words in hand will alſo beare where the celebration of the Lords Supper, and breaking of bread is ſaid to be not in any one houſe onelyonly but from houſe to houſe. The Church meete thin a third way together when not all the members but the Officers with a part of the people convene in a Presbytery as appeareth from the 15 and 21 chapters.

p. 204The Church of Samaria alſo was Presbyteriall.The caſe is no leſſe cleare of the Church of Samaria Acts 8.6.10.12.14. verſes the People of that City with one accord from the leaſt to the greateſt both men and women did beleeve, in ſuch a number that the cheife of the Apoſtles Peter and John, were ſent from Jeruſalem to aſſiſt Philip in their inſtruction. Could this whole City which was amongſt the greateſt of Canaan convene all to Gods worſhippe in one private roome, or be ſerved with one Paſtor, who required for a time the attendance not onelyonly of Philip but further of two prime Apoſtles?

So that of Rome.Come to the reſt. The Roman Church was one Body. Rom. 12.6. yet ſo great that it could not meet in one private roome. For in the 16. chap. beſide the Church which met in the houſe of Aquila v. 5. there are a number of houſes ſet downe, in which, beſides divers Saints named, there were many others alſo unnamed which worſhipped with them, v. 14, 15. So great were the multitudes of Chriſtians then at Rome that their fame was ſpread over all the world. chap. 1.8. and chap. 16.19. In the City of Rome were many hundred thouſand men, the halfe of which according to Tertullian, were Chriſtians the age after the Apoſtles; and a little after Cornelius recordeth that more then forty preachers did attend the inſtruction of that people who yet had no publick place of meeting.

And of Corinth.The ſame was the caſe of the Church at Corinth at its very beginning, Acts. 18.8. It did conſiſt of a multitude both Iewes and Gentiles; beſide all which, God had much people in that City, v. 10. which by the continuall labours of Paul for 18 monthes were converted, v. 11, for whoſe inſtruction beſide Paul, Apollos, Timotheus, a great number of other Doctors attended, 1 Cor 4.15. not to ſpeake of a multitude of falſe Teachers; they had alſo a number of idle and vaine Teachers who kept the foundation, but builded upon it hay, ſtubble and timber. Could all theſe meete together in one private place? unleſſe yee would underſtand their meetings diſtributively, or for the convention of their Officers with a part of the people for diſcipline.

And of Epheſus.Alſo at Epheſus was but one Church. For Acts. 20.17. Paul called to him the Elders of that Church, in the ſingular; yet that in Epheſus there was ſo great a number of Chriſtians as could not commodiouſly ſerve God in one private roome, it ſeemes moſt p. 205cleare; for in that moſt noble Mart Town Paul did preach whole two yeares. Acts 19.10. yea he ceaſed not day nor night for full three yeares, cha. 20.31. The feare of God fell on all that people both Jews and Gentiles, and the name of Jeſus was magnified, cha. 19.19. So great a multitude even of Scholars was converted that the Profeſſors of curious arts alone did make a fire of Bookes to the value of 50000 peeces of ſilver; ſo mightily grew the word of God there, v. 20. Further, in the Church of Epheſus were many Paſtors; for Acts. 20.17. Paul called for the Elders, not one onelyonly. That divers of theſe if not all, were Paſtors and Doctors, it appeareth from v. 28. where they are appointed by the Holy Ghoſt, to be feeders of the flocke and get a Commiſſion to oppoſe falſe Doctors, about the which they went faithfully, as the Lord beareth them witneſſe, Revel. 2.2. Now the charge of the Doctrine to try and examine falſe Teachers, lieth principally on preachers.

This is alike true of the Church of Antioch:Alſo of Antioch and the reſt. The hand of the Lord was in the City, and a great number beleeved, Acts 11.21. Thereafter by Barnabas labour there was much people added, v. 24. yea, by the joyned paines of Barnabas and Paul for a yeare together, there was ſuch a multitude converted, that the name of Chriſtians was firſt impoſed upon them. Here, as in the Metropolitane City, not onelyonly of Syria, but all Aſia, beſide Barnabas, Paul and other Prophets, v. 27. Peter alſo, and many other Doctors had their reſidence, Gal. 2.11. It were too long to ſpeake of the reſt of the Apoſtolicke Churches, whoſe condition was not unlike the former.

Our third Argument:Our third argument from the ſubordination of the Church of Antioch to the Synod at Jeruſalem, Act. 15.Acts 15 No Synod hath authority to impoſe Decrees upon an Independent Church: But ſome Synods have authority to impoſe Decrees upon particular Churches, whether Presbyteriall or Congregationall. Ergo, Particular Churches, whether Presbyteriall or Congregationall are not Independent. The Maior is not controverted; our adverſe party acknowledgeth the lawfull uſe and manifold fruits of Synods: They grant it is the duty of every good man, and much more of every Church, and moſt of all of a Synod conſiſting of the Meſſengers of many Churches, to admoniſh, counſell, perſwade, and requeſt particular Curches to doe their duty: But, that any company on earth, even an Oecumenicke Synod, ſhould preſume to injoyne with p. 206authority the ſmalleſt Congregation, to leave the groſſeſt hereſies under the paine of any cenſure, they count it abſurd. Upon this ground, that every Congregation, how ſmall ſoever, how corrupt ſoever, is an Independent body, and not ſubordinate to any ſociety on earth, how great, how pure, how holy ſoever.

The Minor thus is proved: The Synod of Jeruſalem impoſed with Authority, her Decrees upon the Church of Antioch. Ergo, Some Synod; and if you pleaſe to make it univerſall, every lawfull Synod may impoſe its Decrees upon particular Churches. The Antecedent is to be ſeene, Acte 15.20. It ſeemed good to the Holy Ghoſt and to us, to lay no further burden on you then theſe things neceſſary. The Conſequence is good, for Antioch was among the chiefe of the Apoſtolicke Churches; in it Barnabas, Paul, and other Prophets inſpired of God were Preachers: If this Church was ſubject to the Authority of Synods, what Church may plead a freedome from the like ſubjection?

Anſwer to the Replies.Many things are here replied, as uſually it hapneth when no ſolid anſwer can be brought: The chiefe heads of the Reply are three; Firſt, that the meeting at Jeruſalem was no Synod. Secondly, What ever it was that it did injoyne nothing, authoritatively to any other Churches. Thirdly, That other Synods may not pretend to the priviledges of that meeting ſince its Decrees were indited by the Holy Ghoſt, and ſtand now in the holy Canon as a part of Scripture.

The meeting of Jeruſalem was a true Synod.To the firſt, we ſay, that the meeting at Jeruſalem is either a true Synod, or elſe there is no paterne in all Scripture for Synods, even for counſell, or advice, or any other uſe. But, this were inconvenient; for they acknowledge that Synods are lawfull meanes for many gracious ends in the Church: Now, to affirme that any Eccleſiaſticke meeting is lawfull, neceſſary, or convenient for gracious ends, whereof no patterne, no example can be found in Scripture, were dangerous.

But beſide this argument, towards our adverſe party, we reaſon from the nature of the thing it ſelfe. A meeting conſiſting of the Deputies of many Presbyteriall Churches, is a true Synod; but, the convention at Jeruſalem, Acts 15. was ſuch a meeting. The Maior is the eſſence of a Synod; there are many accidentall differences of Synods; for according to the quantity and number of p. 207the Churches who ſend their Commiſſioners, the Synod is ſmaller or greater, is Provinciall, Nationall, or Oecumenicke: according to occaſion, the Churches ſending Commiſſioners, are ſometime moe, ſometime fewer, ſometime neerer, ſometime further off: alſo according to the commodity of place, and neceſſity of affaires, they come from one Church moe, and from others fewer: all theſe are but accidentalls, which change not the nature of the thing. Unto the eſſence of a Synod; no more uſeth to be required then a meeting of Commiſſioners from moe Presbyteriall Churches. The Minor is cleare; That the Church of Antioch and Jeruſalem were moe Churches, no man doubts; that both were Presbyteriall, it was proved before, that from both theſe Presbyteriall Churches, Commiſſioners did ſit at that meeting, it is apparent from that oft cited, Acts 15. Yea, that from the other Churches of Syria and Cilicia, beſides Antioch, Commiſſioners did come to Jeruſalem, may appeare by conference of the 2. verſ. of the 15. chap. with verſ. 23. for that with Paul and Barnabas Commiſſioners for the time from the Antiochians, others alſo did come, it is certaine: that thoſe others, at leaſt ſome of them, were Deputed from the Churches of Syria and Cilicia, it is like, becauſe the Synodick Epiſtle is directed expreſly no leſſe to thoſe than to this of Antioch; alſo thoſe, no leſſe than this, are ſaid to be troubled with the Queſtions which occaſioned that meeting. But to paſſe this conſideration, it is cleare that in the Convention at Jeruſalem were preſent, not onelyonly the Commiſſioners of ſome few Presbyteriall Churches, but alſo they whom God had made conſtant Commiſſioners to all the Churches of the world, to wit, the Apoſtles; their preſence made all the Churches legally ſubject to the Decrees of that Synod, though they had no other but their grand and conſtant Commiſſioners to Voyce for them in that meeting.

The ſecond Anſwer is clearely refuted from the 28. verſ. where the Decrees are not propoſed by way of meere advice,It doth not onelyonly adviſe but command. The Decrees of that Synod at their firſt making had onelyonly Eccleſiaſtick authority. but are injoyned and impoſed as neceſſary burdens, with Authority, not onelyonly of the Synod but of the holy Ghoſt.

Concerning the third, we ſay that the meerely Divine, and more than Eccleſiaſtick Authority of theſe Decrees in their firſt Formation, is not made good from this, that now they ſtand in p. 208holy Scripture, and are become a part of the Bible; for a world of Acts meerely indifferent, and which without doubt in their Originall had no more then Eccleſiaſticke Authority, are Regiſtred in Scripture. Was the Presbytery of Lyſtraes laying on of hands on Timothy any other then an act of Eccleſiaſtick Ordination? The Decree of the Church of Corinth for the inceſtuous mans Excommunication, or relaxation after Repentance, was it any more then an act of Juriſdiction meerely Eccleſiaſticke? Pauls circumciſion of Timothy, his Uow at Cenchrea, the cutting off his haire at Jeruſalem, were free and indifferent actions: The nature of theſe things, and many moe of that kinde, is not changed by their Regiſtring in the Booke of God. Neither alſo is the meerly Divine Authority of the Decrees at Jeruſalem proved by this, that in their firſt framing they were grounded on cleare Scripture, and after proclamed in the name of the holy Ghoſt; for that is the condition of the lawfull Decrees of all gracious Synods. Did not of old the Fathers of Nice, and of late the Fathers of Dort, through the inſpiration of the holy Ghoſt, who remaineth with the Church, eſpecially with gracious Synods to the worlds end, pronounce from the holy Sctipture their Decrees of the Godhead of Chriſt againſt Arrius, and of the grace of God againſt Arminius: Shall we for this cauſe aſcribe to the Canons of Nice or Dort any greater authority then Eccleſiaſtick and Humane? Howſoever, that the Apoſtles in framing the Canons at Jeruſalem did proceede in a way meerely Eccleſiaſtick, and farre different from that they uſed in dictating of Scripture, and publiſhing truths meerely Divine, appeareth from this; firſt, that theſe Canons were brought forth by much Diſputation and long diſcourſe, But, Divine Oracles without the proces of humane Ratiocinations are publiſhed from the immediate inditing of the Spirit, 2 Pet. 1.21. The Propheſie in old time came not by the will of man, but the holy men of God ſpake as they were moved by the holy Ghoſt. Secondly, Oracles meerely Divine are publiſhed onelyonly in the name of God, Thus ſaith the Lord; but, theſe Canons are proclamed, not onelyonly in the name of God, but alſo in the name of man, It ſeemeth good to the holy Ghoſt, and to us. Thirdly, The Oracles of God are dictated to the Church by the Miniſtry only of the Prophets and Apoſtles, and men inſpired with an infallible Spirit, p. 209Epheſ. 2, 20. Being built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apoſtles. But, the Canons of that Synod, Acts 15. are declared to be the worke, not onelyonly of the holy Ghoſt, …d the Apoſtles, but alſo of the Elders, and of all who Voyced to them. So it is cleare, that in the making of theſe Canons, the Apoſtles, as elſe-where oft, did come downe from the eminent. Chaire of their Apoſtolike, and extraordinary authority to the lower place of Ordinary Paſtors, that in their owne perſons they might give an example to ordinary Paſtors in what manner holy Synods might be rightly celebrated to the worlds end. Had not this been their end, how eaſie had it beene either for Paul or Barnabas at Antioch, without the toyleſome voyage of a long journey to Jeruſalem, or for Peter or John, or James, or any one of the Apoſtles at Jeruſalem, without the ſuperfluous paines of any convention or diſputation, as infallible Apoſtles to have pronounced Divine and irrefragable Decrees of all the matters in queſtion.

Our fourth argument. A Church ſubordinate is not Independent; but, a Parochial Church is ſubordinate to a Presbyteriall:Our fourth argument from the ſubordination of fewer to moe, appointed by Chriſt, Matth. 18.Matt 18 For a leſſer Church is ſubordinate to a greater, as a part to its whole wherein it is contained. Now a Parochiall Church is leſſer and the leaſt of all Churches; a Presbyteriall Church is greater. Of the quantity, that the one is leſſer, the other greater there is no doubt; but of the matter it ſelfe there is queſtion whether there be any ſuch thing as a Presbyteriall Church. Now this was proved before and hereafter alſo will be more cleare; the cheife plea here is againſt the ſecond major which we prove thus: A ſmaller number of the faithfull is ſubordinate by Chriſt to a greater number of the faithfull. But, a leſſer Church is a ſmaller number of the faithfull, and a greater Church is a greater number of the faithfull. The Major is proved from the 18 of Math. v. 15.16.17.18. If thy Brother treſpaſſe againſt thee, &c. Here the Lord in admonitions and Church cenſures inſtitutes a ſubordination, a gradation, a proceſſe from one to two or three, from two or three to moe. Underſtand thoſe moe not abſolutely and at randoun but in a ſociety bound togeather by the orderly ligaments of divine policy, ſuch as we ſuppoſe the Churches to be from the ſmalleſt to the greateſt till you come to the very Church univerſall.

Here they diſtinguiſh the Major, granting that in this place a p. 210ſubordination is appointed by Chriſt of fewer to moe within the ſame Church but not without it. We might oppugne the application of the diſtinction to the Minor, and prove that a Presbyteriall Church is a greater number of the faithfull within not without the ſame Church; for a Congregationall Church may not unfitly be compared with a Presbyteriall as a part with its whole; eſpecially if you compare the meeting of the Officers which rule the Pariſh with the Presbytery, theſe two are not extrinſecall the one to the other; for the Seſſions, or Conſiſtories, or Claſſis, are in the Presbytery which is compoſed of the Commiſſioners from Seſſions as of its owne and intrinſecall Members.

Chriſts ſubordination is to be extended to the utmoſt bounds of the Church univerſall.But leaving this, we oppugne the ground of the diſtinction as it lyeth in the Major, breaking the one halfe of it upon the other. The ſubordination of fewer to moe in the forenamed place is eſtabliſhed ſay they within the ſame Church. Ergo, ſay we, without the ſame Church, we meane with them without the ſame Parochiall Church: the conſequence we prove by three arguments. Firſt, there is a like reaſon for the ſubordination of fewer to moe without the ſame Church as within the ſame; for the cheife reaſon why the Lord ordaines us in admonitions to proceed from one to two or three, from two or three to a number ſitting as Judges in the Seſſion of one Congregation, is, becauſe in the admonitions of two or three, more authority, gravity and wiſedome are preſuppoſed to be than in the admonitions of one alone: and that a Delinquent is ſtriken with more feare, ſhame, and reverence by the faces and mouthes of many who ſit as Judges in the name of the whole Congregation, than he would be by the mouth of two or three onelyonly. Doeth not this power, virtue and weight of admonition increaſe with the number of admoniſhers, as well without as within the ſame Congregation? For as the admonition and cenſure of tenne ſitting in the name of one Congregation, hath greater weight then the admonition of two or three of that ſame Flocke who repreſent none but themſelves; ſo the admonition of thirty Miniſters and Elders repreſenting in a Presbytery fifteene Congregations, whoſe commiſſioners they are, ſhall have more weight then the admonition of ten which repreſent but one flocke: for it is according to reaſon, that thoſe thirty Members of the Presbytery ſhould exceede in wiſedome, p. 211zeale, gravity, and other qualities which adde weight to an admonition, theſe ten which in a Seſſion repreſent one Congregation, ſo farre as thoſe ten goe beyond the two or three ſeverall perſons of that Congregation.

Secondly, unleſſe in this place be eſtabliſhed a ſubordination of fewer to moe, as well without as within the ſame Congregation, the remedy brought by Chriſt will be unable to cure the ill for which it was brought. The Lords meanes will be diſproportionable and unequall to its end; but this were abſurd to ſay of the wiſeſt of all Phyſicians. The reaſon of the Major is this, Chriſt is preſcribing an helpe and cure for brotherly offences; now one may be offended by a brother as well without as within the ſame Congregation: and as well by many brethren as by one; yea, as well may we be offended by a whole Church as by one member thereof: Now, if after the minde of our adverſe party, the ſubordination of fewer to moe might not be extended without the bounds of one Congregation, the Lords medecine were not meete to cure very many ordinary and daily ſcandals; for what if a man be ſcandalized by the neighbour Church? To whom ſhall he complaine? When the Church offending is both the Judge and party, it is likely ſhe will miſregard the complaints that are made to her of her ſelfe. What if a man be ſcandalized by his owne Church or by the moſt, or by the ſtrongeſt part of it? What if that Church to whom he complaineth, take part againſt Juſtice and reaſon with him upon whom he complaines? It will be impoſſible to remedy innumerable offences which daily fall out among brethren, unleſſe appeales be granted, and the ſubordination eſtabliſhed by Chriſt be extended, not onelyonly without the bounds of one Pariſh, but as farre and wide as the utmoſt limits of the Church univerſall: for upon this place is rightly grounded by the Ancients, the Authority of Synods even Oecumenick of all the Churches.

Thirdly, the ſubordination eſtabliſhed by Chriſt, Matth. 18. is ſo farre to be extended in the Chriſtian Church as it was extended in the Church of the Jewes; for Chriſt there alludeth to the Jewiſh practiſe. But ſo it is, that in the Iewiſh Church there was ever a ſubordination of fewer to moe, not onelyonly within the ſame Synagogue, but within the whole Nation, and ſo within the p. 212whole Church Univerſall: for all Synagogues everywhere in the world were under the great Councell at Ieruſalem. No doubt of the Minor; the Major is builded upon this ground, that what ever Chriſt hath tranſlated from the Synagogue to the Church, eſpecially if it be of naturall equity, hath as great force now amongſt Chriſtians, as of old among the Iewes. Now, that the ſubordination of Synagogues to the great Councell is of naturall equity, it appeareth thus: A Synagogue was the loweſt Eccleſiaſticke Court, the Councell was the higheſt; but the ſubordination of the loweſt Court to the higheſt, is of naturall right; for Nature hath ever dictated to all Nations, as well in things civill as religious, a ſubordination of the loweſt to the higheſt.

Our fifth argument from the evill conſequents, which reaſon and experience demonſtrate to follow Independency neceſſarily and naturally.Our fifth Argument: That which taketh away all poſſibility of any effectuall remedy againſt Hereſie, Idolatry, Schiſme, Tyranny, or any other miſchiefe that wracks either one or moe Churches; is not of God: for God is the Author and conſerver of truth, purity, union, order, liberty, and of all vertue; God of his goodneſſe and wiſedome hath provided for all and every one of his Churches meanes and remedies, which if carefully made uſe of, are ſufficient to hinder the firſt ariſing of Hereſie, Schiſme, or any other evill: and when they are riſen to beate them downe▪ and aboliſh them: ſo that what ever cheriſheth theſe miſchiefes, and is a powerfull inſtrument to preſerve them ſafe, that none with any power, with any authority, for any purpoſe, may get them touched, that muſt be much oppoſite to the Spirit of God, and good of the Church: But, ſuch is Independencie, as both reaſon and experience will prove. Behold firſt ſeverall Churches; Suppoſe, which too oft hath falne out, that the Paſtor become a pernicious Hereticke; let him beginne with the venome of his Doctrine to poyſon the hearts of his people, what ſhall be the remedie? Independency bindes the hands of Presbyteries and Synods. Paſtors of Neighbouring Congregations, have no power to binde, or expell that ravenous wolfe: in the deſtroyed flock there is no Paſtor, but the wolfe himſelfe. Be it ſo that the people in their judgement of diſcretion perceive well enough the wickedneſſe of the falſe doctrin whereby they are corrupted; yet the office, charge, and authority to cure their Paſtors diſeaſe, lyeth not on them. The Spirits of the Prophets are ſubject to the p. 213Prophets: the Paſtor is not to be proceeded againſt with cenſure by the people of his flocke; for ſo the order which God hath eſtabliſhed in his Church, ſhould be inverted, if they whom hee hath commanded to obey ſhould rule: and they whom he hath ſet above and over the flocke, ſhould be under it. Further, Suppoſe the Paſtor to be moſt gracious, what if the flocke, or the greater part of the flocke become ſo wicked as to abuſe their Paſtor, or to abuſe the moſt godly of the Congregation? What if a wicked ſpirit of Hereſie, Schiſme, or Tyranny, ſet the moſt part of the flocke againſt God, againſt their gracious Paſtor, and the godly of the flocke, what ſhall be done in this pitifull, and very poſſible, yea, oft contingent caſe? Ind…pendency cloſeth the doore of the troubled Congregation, that no man may goe out to cry for any powerfull helpe to neighbours, though their kindled houſe ſhould burne them all to death; within there is no remedy; for all moſt goe there by the number of voyces, and the moſt part oppreſſeth the beſt, the moſt wicked go on againſt the Councells, the intreaties, the prayers of the reſt, and ceaſe not till they have either corrupted or caſt out their Paſtor, Elders, and all of their fellow-members who are conſtant in goodneſſe, that ſo their wickedneſſe without controle may domineere in the whole ſubdued Congregation. So long as Independency ſtandeth, no effectuall authoratative or powerfull helpe can poſſibly be found for the preſervation of any ſingle Congregation againſt ruine and totall ſubverſion.

Further, Independency hazards the being of all Churches as well as of every one. For who ſhall hinder any member of a corrupted Congregation to infect all the neighbour Churches with the poyſon of his doctrine and manners? If a ramping Lyon, a viperous Serpent, a crafty Fox ſhould goe and devour all the Lambs of the neighbour flocks; Independency doth hinder any order to be taken with that limbe of Sathan, no ſword of cenſure can be drawne againſt him, he muſt be referred abſolutely to his owne Congregation; other Churches may intreate, adviſe, and pray him not to make havoke of them: but ſhould he trouble, infect, and deſtroy twenty, an hundred, a thouſand neighbour Congregations, no Eccleſiaſtick cenſure may paſſe upon him but by his owne Church: and when complaints of him come to his p. 214owne Church, his miſdeedes there are excuſed, defended, commended; his Hereſies are proclamed ſound doctrine his devouring of ſoules is declared to be zeale and painfulneſſe to win ſoules to CHRIST.

Our Argument is backed by experience, as well as by reaſon; The firſt Independent Church we reade of, was that company which Mr. Browne brought over from England to Middleborough; how long did it ſtand before it was deſtroyed by Independency? when once Anabaptiſtick novelties, and other miſchiefes fell among them, there was no remedy to prevent the companies diſſolution. When Mr. Barrow and his fellowes, aſſaied at London to erect their Congregation, the ſucceſſe was no better; their Ship ſcarce well ſet out was quickly ſplitupon the Rocks, was ſoone diſſipate and vaniſhed. When Johnſtoun & Ainſworth would make the third aſſay, and try if that tree which neither in England nor Zealand could take roote, might thrive in Holland at Amſterdam, where plants of all ſorts are ſo cheriſhed, that few of the moſt maligne qualite doe miſcarry; yet ſo ſingular a malignity is innate in that ſeede of Independency, that in that very ground, where all weedes grow ranke, it did wither: within a few yeares new Schiſmes burſt that ſmall Church aſunder: Johnſtoun with his halfe, and Ainſworth with his made ſeverall Congregations, neither whereof did long continnue without further ruptures; Behold who pleaſe, with an obſervant Eye theſe Congregations which have embraced Independency, they ſhall finde that never any Churches in ſo ſhort a time have beene diſgraced with ſo many, ſo unreaſonable, and ſo irreconcileable Schiſmes.

Neither the duties of charity, nor the authority of the Magiſtrate can remedy theſe evills.Againſt theſe inconveniences they tell us of two remedies, the duties of charity, and the authority of the Magiſtrate; but the one is unſufficient, and the other improper The duties of charitie are but mocked by obſtinate Hereticks and heady Schiſmaticks; to what purpoſe are counſells, rebukes, intreaties imployed towards him who is blowne up with the certaine perſwaſion that all his errors are divine truthes, that all who deale with him to the contrary are in a cleare error, that all the advices given to him are but the words of Satan from the mouthes of men tempting him to ſinne againſt God?

p. 215As for the Magiſtrate, oft he is not a Chriſtian, oft though a Chriſtian, he is not Orthodoxe, and though both a Chriſtian and Orthodoxe, yet oft either ignorant or careleſſe of Eccleſiaſticke affaires; and however, his helpe is never ſo proper and intrinſecall to the Church, that abſolutely and neceſſarily ſhe muſt depend thereupon. Now all our Queſtion is about the ordinary, the internall, the neceſſary remedies which Scripture aſcribes to the Church within it ſelfe, as it is a Church even when the outward hand of the Magiſtrate is deficient or oppoſite.

Our ſixth and laſt Argument: That which everteth from the very foundation the moſt eſſentiall parts of diſcipline,Our laſt Argument, Independency is contrary to all the diſcipline that ever was knowne in Chriſtendome before the Anabap…iſts. not only of all the reformed, but of all the Churches knowne at any time in any part of the world, till the birth of Anabaptiſme, it can not be very gracious. But, this doth Independency: The Minor is cleare by induction: That the Government of the Scottiſh Church by Synods, Presbyteries and Seſſions ſworne and ſubſcribed of old, and late by that Nation in their ſolemne Covenant; that the ſame diſcipline of the Churches of France, Holland, Swiiz, Geneva, as alſo the Politie of the High Dutch and Engliſh, and all the reſt who are called Reformed, is turned upſide downe by Independency, no man doubts; for this is our Adverſaries gloriation that they will be tied by no Oathes, Covenants, Subſcriptions: they will be hindred by no authority of any man, no reverence of any Churches on earth, to ſeperate from all the reformed, that ſo alone they may injoy their divine and beloved Independency.

If you ſpeake of more ancient times, either the purer which followed the Apoſtles at the backe, or the poſterior impurer ages; that the Politie of theſe times in all Churches, Greeke and Latine, is trodden under foote by Independency, all likewiſe doe grant: and how well that new conceit agreeth with the diſcipline practiſed in the dayes of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, or in the dayes of Moſes and the Prophets, the preceding arguments will ſhew. I confeſſe ſuch is the boldneſſe of the men, againſt whom we now diſpute, that although they glory in their contempt of the authoritie of all men, dead and living: yet they offer to overwhelme us with teſtimonies of a number, as well ancient as late Divines: But who deſire to ſee all that duſt blowne back in their own eyes p. 216who raiſed it, and the detorted words againſt the knowne mind and conſtant practiſe of the Authors, clearely vindicated and retorted, let them be pleaſed to take a view of Mr. Pagets Poſthume Apologie, where they will finde abundant ſatisfaction in this kinde.

The firſt Objection or Argument for Independency from Matth. 18.Matt 18For the other ſide, a great bundle of arguments are alſo brought; we ſhall conſider the principall. Firſt: To whom Chriſt hath given the right of excommunication the greateſt of all cenſures, they in all other acts of Juriſdiction, and in all acts of Eccleſiaſtick diſcipline, are Independent: But Chriſt hath given the right of excommunication to every Congregation, and to theſe alone. Ergo, &c. They prove the Minor. Unto the Church Chriſt hath given the right of excommunication Mat. 18. Goe tell the Church, if he heare not the Church, let him be to thee as an Ethnicke: But every Congregation, and it onelyonly▪ is the Church, becauſe in the whole Scripture the word Church where ever it is not taken for the Church univerſall, or inviſible, is ever underſtood of a ſingle Congregation, which in one place with one Paſtor ſerveth God. Anſwer. Paſſing the Majors, we deny the Minors, and affirme that no where in Scripture the word Church may be expounded of their Independent Congregation, and leaſt of all in the alledged place; If we will adviſe either with the old or late Interpreters, or with the beſt and moſt learned of the Adverſaryes themſelves, who affirme with us that by the Church Math. 18. no Congregation can be underſtood, unleſſe we would bring in among Chriſtians moſt groſſe anarchy, except we would ſet down on the Judgment ſeates of the Church every member of the Congregation, men, women, young, old, the meaneſt and weakeſt part of the people to decide by the number, not the weight of their voyces the greateſt cauſes of the Church, to determine finally of the excommunication of Paſtors, of the nature of haereſie and all doctrine, and that with a decree irrevocable from which there may be no appeal, no not to an Oecumenicke Synod. Wherfore beſide the reſt of the Interpreters a great part of the Adverſaries by the Church in this place underſtand no whole Congregation, nor the moſt part of any Congregation, but a ſelect number thereof, the Senate or Officers who cognoſe and diſcerne according to the Scriptures.

p. 227This is enough for anſwer to the argument: but if further it be inquired, the Senate of which Church is pointed at in this place, whether of a Parochiall Church, or Presbyteriall, or Nationall, or Oecumenicke, or of all theſe. Anſ. It ſeemeth that the Senate of all the Churches muſt here be underſtood, and eſpecially of a Presbyteriall Church, at leaſt not of a Parochiall onelyonly and independently as our Adverſaries would have it. By no meanes will we have the Seſſion of a Pariſh prejudged, and are well content that the authority of Parochiall Seſſions to handle their own proper affaires ſhould be grounded upon this place; onelyonly we deny that from this place a Church-Seſſion hath any warrant to take the cognition of things common to it ſelfe with the Neighbouring Congregations, or yet to governe her proper affaires abſolutely and independently ſo that none may attempt to correct her when ſhe erreth, or by cenſure to put her in order when ſhe beginneth by hereſie ſchiſme and tyranny to corrupt her ſelfe and others.

That in this place principally the Senate of a Presbyteriall Church is underſtood, is cleare; for of ſuch a Church Chriſt here ſpeaketh, as were the Churches at Jeruſalem, Antioch, Corinth, and others in the new Teſtament which we proved before to have bin presbyteriall. The Senate of ſuch Churches attending on government, and diſcipline, is here called the Church, as elſewhere, Act. 5.20. It ſeemed good to the Apoſtles, Elders and whole Church: The Church met to cognoſce on the queſtions from Antioch, cannot be underſtood of all the thouſand Chriſtians at Jeruſalem; it muſt then be taken of the Presbytery to which the cognition of ſuch queſtions doth belong. In the fourth verſe of the ſame chapter, Paul is ſaid to be received of the Church, the word may well be expounded not of the whole Body, but of a ſelect number thereof; even the Presbytery; as in the 21 he is ſaid to be received of the Apoſtles and Elders, before the multitude had met together.

Only obſerve that however we affirme the Senate of a Presbyteriall Church cheifely here to be eſtabliſhed, yet we underſtand not this in a way independent from provinciall, Nationall, or Oecumenick Synods; for all theſe meetings in their owne place and order are alſo grounded on this paſſage, as before hath beene declared.

Their ſecond Objection: The practiſe of the Church of p. 218Corinth, The ſecond Objection is taken from the practiſe of the Corinthians, excommunicating the inceſtuous man.approved by the Apoſtles is the due right of every Parochiall Church and ſingle Congregation: But, the cenſure of Excommunication was the practiſe of the Church of Corinth approved by the Apoſtle, 1 Cor. 5.12, 13. Do we not judge them that are within? therefore put away from you that wicked perſon. This judgement is authoritative, and this putting away is the cenſure of Excommunication, cutting off from the body of Chriſt, which cenſure is here committed unto the Corinthians, being gathered together in one, verſ. 4. and ſo to them all, and every one of them: for to them all the Epiſtle is written, and not to the Presbytery onelyonly. Anſw. The Maior muſt be denied for two cauſes; Firſt, The practiſe of the Corinthians was grounded not onelyonly upon the expreſſe command of the Apoſtle, but alſo on the ſingular preſence of the Apoſtles Spirit and authority with them in pronouncing the ſentence of Excommunication againſt that inceſtuous perſon, v. 3. I as preſent in Spirit have judged already. This ſingular priviledge of the Corinthians is not a ground of common right to every Church who wants the authority of the Apoſtles expreſſe command, and ſingular preſence. Secondly, we may not argue from the Church of Corinth to every Congregation; for it is proved before, that the Church of Corinth was not Congregationall, but Presbyteriall, conſiſting of ſo many as could not meete commodiouſly in one private roome; alſo it had within it ſelfe a Colledge or Senate of many Paſtors, Elders, and Prophets; to ſuch a Church we grant willingly the exerciſe of all acts, both of Ordination and Juriſdiction.

The Minor alſo cannot be admitted but with a double diſtinction; the act of Excommunication is given to the Church of Corinth, not according to its whole, but acording to the ſelect part, to wit the Presbytery thereof. It maketh nothing againſt this, that the Epiſtle is written to the whole Church; for what is written to the whole Church indefinitely, muſt be applied according to the matter and purpoſe, ſometime onelyonly to the Paſtors excluding the people: ſometime onelyonly to the people, excluding the Paſtors: ſometimes to both together, to Paſtors, and Flock. The firſt Epiſtle, Chap. 1. verſ. 12. Every one of you ſaith, I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, and I of Cephas; this cannot be taken of the Paſtors, but of the people following Schiſmatically ſome one, ſome p. 219another of the Paſtors. Likewiſe, Chap. 4. verſ. 1. Let a man ſo count of us as of the Miniſters of Chriſt, muſt be taken of the people, as Chap. 3. verſ. 12. (Now if any man build on this foundation gold, ſilver, precious ſtones) is to be underſtood of the Paſtors, as Chap. 4. verſ. 2. Alſo it is required in Stewards that a man be found faithfull; but the moſt of the other places are to be expounded of both. Now that the preceding paſſages concerning the Church-cenſures, are not true of the whole Congregation, it appeares; for beſide the abſurdity of confuſion & Anarchy, it would follow that very women have right judicially to Depoſe, and Excommunicate by their voyces their Paſtors, which the very Adverſaries profeſſe to reject as abſurd, albeit not congruouſly to their Tenets; for it is not reaſonable that the right which from theſe places they aſcribe to every member of the Church, ſhould be taken away from women, upon this onelyonly reaſon that in 1 Tim. 2.11. a commandement is given to the women not to teach, but in ſilence to learne; for as the brethren of our Adverſaries, the Anabaptiſts have marked, that place taketh away from women the publicke charge of Preaching, but not of ſpeaking in judgement or giving their voyce in Church-judicatories. Surely, nowhere abſolute ſilence in Church-judicatories is injoyned to women, we truly give the power of witneſſing, and of ſelfe-defence as well to women as to men in all Church-judicatories. However that the cenſure of the inceſtuous man was not inflicted by the whole Church, it appeares from the 2 Epiſt. Chap 2. verſ. 6. Sufficient to ſuch a man was the puniſhment which was inflicted of many. Who were theſe many but the Officers who were ſet over the Church in the Lord?

Another diſtinction alſo would be marked, that whatſoever right we aſcribe to the Church of Corinth, whether according to its whole, or according to any of its parts, whether we take it for a Presbyteriall or a Parochiall Church, all that right is to be underſtood not abſolutely, nor independently, which here is the onelyonly queſtion. For the Church at Corinth had no greater priviledges then the Church of Antioch. Now that in a dubious and controverted caſe, and in a common cauſe the Church of Antioch was ſubordinate unto a Synod, it was before proved.

Their third objection. That which the Holy Ghoſt gives unto p. 220the ſeven Churches of Aſia, The third Objection from the example of the ſeven Churches of Aſia.muſt be the right of every ſingle Congregation. But, the Holy Ghoſt gives unto the ſeven Churches of Aſia all Eccleſiaſticke Juriſdiction within themſelves. Revel. 2.2. Thou canſt not beare with them which are evill, and thou haſt tryed them which ſay they are Apoſtles, and haſt found them lyars. And ver. 14. I have a few things againſt thee, becauſe thou haſt there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam. And ver. 20. I have a few things againſt thee, becauſe thou ſuffereſt the woman Jezabell to teach. Here the Churches of Epheſus, Pergamus, and Thyatira, are prayſed, when they proceeded with cenſure againſt thoſe who deſerved it: and are diſprayſed when they held in the ſword of excommunication, and did not caſt out Hereticks and prophane Perſons.

Anſw. Both the Propoſitions are vitious: The Major becauſe the Churches in Aſia were Presbyteriall, not Congregationall. This we proved of Epheſus, and we know no reaſon why the reſt ſhould not be of that ſame condition. Secondly, Albeit the Churches of Aſia at that time in the firſt preaching of the Goſpell, and ſo in the great paucity of Churches ſhould have had no Neighbours with whom commodiouſly and ordinarily they could keepe ſociety: what is that unto the Churches of our dayes who live in the midſt of many Siſters? The Minor alſo may not be granted; for that which the Text aſcribeth to the Angell, may not by and by be applyed to every Member of the Church. We grant that great reaſon and many authorities doe prove and evince that the Angells in thoſe places cannot be expounded of the ſingle perſons of Biſhops, but of the whole Body of the Presbytery in the which there was one man choſen by the Suffrages of the reſt Preſident for a time; but that by the name of Angell ſhould be underſtood every Member of the Church, no reaſon will carry it. Beſide, there is no conſequence from one act of reproofe to the whole right of Eccleſiaſticke government even in every caſe; for a common cauſe and an appearance of errour and many other things, will inforce a neceſſity of ſubordination.

Their fourth Objection from the practiſe of the Church of Theſſalonica and Coloſſe.Their fourth argument: The right of the Church of Theſſalonica and Coloſſe belongs to every Church: But, the Church of Theſſalonica and Coloſſe had right to exerciſe every part of Eccleſiaſticke diſcipline within their owne bounds. Of the firſt, ſee 2 Theſſalonians 3.6. Withdraw your ſelves from every Brother p. 221which walketh diſorderly, and ver. 24. Note that man, and have no company with him that he may be aſhamed. Of the ſecond, ſee Col. 2.5. Joying and beholding your Order. Anſ. Let the Maior be true of all the Churches of the ſame Species and Nature with theſe of Theſſalonica and Coloſſe, that is, of all Presbyteriall. That the Church of Theſſalonica was ſuch, that it had moe Paſtors, it is proved from the 1 to the Theſſalonians 5.12. Know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord and admoniſh you: that theſe were Paſtors, it is the minde of the beſt Interpreters.

Alſo that in Coloſſe, beſide others, Epaphras and Archippus did labour in the word and doctrine, is manifeſt from chap. 1. ver. 7. and chap. 4.17. Further, let the Maior be true of all Churches of that ſame ſtate and condition with thoſe named, to wit, when it falls out that few or no Neighbour Churches can be had with which ſuch a ſociety may be kept. Concerning the Minor, ſuppoſe that both the right and the exerciſe of all Eccleſiaſticke acts were granted to the foreſaid Churches, yet the queſtion is not touched except you adde independently and in every cauſe and caſe even of aberration, and that without all remedy of appeale to any Synode; VponUpon this hinge the Queſtion depends, and of this the argument hath nothing.

Their fifth argument:Their fifth objection from the Epiſcopall tyranny of the Presbyterie. That which aboliſhes our liberty purchaſed by Chriſts blood, and puts upon out necke a yoke equall to the Antichriſtian tyranny of Biſhops, is intolerable: But, the dependence of Congregations upon Presbyteries and Synods doth ſo. Anſ. The Minor is falſe; for the ſubordination of Churches imports no ſlavery & taketh away no liberty which God hath granted; it is Gods Diſcipline and Order, it is the eaſie yoake of Chriſt not to be compared with the cruell bands of Biſhops, ſince the one is humane, the other divine: by the meanes of the one, one man commandeth, either according to his free will, or according to the Canon-Law of the Pope; but by the meanes of the other, moe men adviſe in common according to the acts of the Reformed Churches grounded upon the Word of God: The judgement ſeates of Biſhops are meerely externall to the Church which they governe: But, Presbyteries and Synods are Courts internall, for the onelyonly members whereof they conſiſt, are the Comiſſioners of the Churches which they govern; theſe Churches p. 222they repreſent, the minde and deſire of theſe Churches they doe propoſe, unto theſe Churches they give account of all their adminiſtration, they confirme and eſtabliſh the rights of Congregations, they doe not aboliſh nor labefactate any of them.

Their ſixt Objection from the Congregations right to elect their Paſtor.Sixthly, Theſe who have power to chuſe the Paſtor, have alſo the right of the whole Eccleſiaſtick Diſcipline. But every Pariſh hath that power. Anſw. The Major is not neceſſary; for there is a great difference betwixt the Election of Miniſters, and Miniſters Ordination, Depoſition, Excommunication, and many other acts of Diſcipline: Election is no act of Authority or Juriſdiction. The Minor alſo is not true, if you underſtand it of all the members of the Congregation; for it is not needfull that Miniſters ſhould be choſen by the expreſſe voyce of every man, muchleſſe of every woman of the flocke: Yea, that Election doth not alwayes belong to the whole flocke, except yee take election as many ſeeme to doe, for a conſent with reaſon, to the which is oppoſed, not every, but a rationall diſſent grounded upon cleare equity and juſtice: certainely it is needfull at ſometimes to miſregard the peoples conſent in chuſing of a Paſtor, for why ſhould not a flocke infected with hereſie be ſet under an wholeſome and Orthodox Shepheard whether it will or not, and be rent from under the Miniſtrie of an hereticall Shepheard, how much ſoever againſt its owne minde?

Their ſeventh Objection from pluralitie of cures caſt upon one Paſtor.Their ſeventh argument: That is not of God which maketh Paſtors Biſhops of other mens Dioceſſes, and layes upon them the care of other Congregations then thoſe to which the holy Ghoſt hath made them Overſeers: But, the ſubordination of Pariſhes to Presbyteries and Synods doth this. Anſw. The Minor is falſe, for neither doth every member of a Presbytery become a Paſtor to every Congregation ſubordinate to that Presbytery, neither are Congregations conſociated and conjoyned in a Presbytery altogether, without the reach of the care and inſpection of neighbour Paſtors. This is cleare, not onelyonly by the arguments formerly deduced from Scripture, but by the daily practice of the Adverſaries; for themſelves profeſſe their care to overſee, and admoniſh, and rebuke, and to uſe many other gracious actions as they have occaſion, towards neighbouring Churches, without any blame of buſie Biſhops, There is almoſt no difference at all of p. 223their acts and ours toward neighbouring Churches, ſo farre as concernes the matter; the onelyonly queſtion is concerning the fountaines and grounds of theſe acts, they aſcribing their actions onelyonly to charity, we not to charity alone, but to authority grounded upon the former reaſons: This difference belongs not to the preſent plea.

Their eight argument.Their eight Objection from Chriſts immediate government of his Church. OnelyOnly Chriſt hath authority over the Kingdome of God, the Houſe of God, the holy Jeruſalem, his owne Spouſe, his owne Body. But, every ſingle Congregation is the Kingdome of God, &c. Anſw. Paſſing by the Minor. The Major is falſe and Anabaptiſticke: for by the ſame reaſon the Anabaptiſts exempt from all authority both Eccleſiaſticke and Civill, not onelyonly every Congregation, but every ſingle perſon who are the members of Chriſt and his Spouſe, and in whom the Kingdome of God doth dwell. The high and excellent ſtiles of honour which the Scripture gives not onelyonly to whole Churches but to every particular Saint, exempts neither the one nor the other becauſe of their immediate ſubjection to God and Chriſt, from the bonds and yoake of any authority, either Eccleſiaſticke or Civill, which the Lord hath appointed in holy Scripture. Chriſts internall government of ſoules by his Spirit albeit never ſo immediate, taketh not away the externall adminiſtration of men either in the Church or Common wealth.

Who pleaſe to ſee much more upon this Queſtion, let them conſult with Mr. Rutherfoord his Peaceable Plea, with Appolonius and Spanheim, with the Author of Vindiciae Clavium, eſpecially with the Divines of the Aſſembly, their Anſwers to the Reaſons of the diſſenting brethren; of purpoſe I have abſtained from making uſe of any of theſe Writings at this time, waiting for the Independents laſt Reply for their Reaſons, and the Modell of their poſitive Doctrin which they have made the world to waite for too too long a time.