Survey of the Survey of that Sum of Church Discipline by Hooker, Book 1 · Chapter 23
CHAP. XXIII.
Whether Mr. Hooker doth concludently refute this which Mr. R. holdeth, That he who is a Member of one Congregation, is also a Member of all Congregations on earth.
1. LEt it be remembred, in what sense I make profession and Baptism to have influence in Membership.
2. That I make not Peter a member of this congregation A man is not one and the same way a member of the Catholick integral visible Church, and of a single congregation.onelyonly, and of the whole integral Catholick Church, or of all congregations on earth, one and the same way, for though the right to Christ the Head, to Ordinances and Seals, be one, yet Peter is a fixed member of this congregation, a transient member to all other congreg…tions. 2. He is a proper member, and nearer of this congregation, and a more common and remote member to all; as the thumb is a nearer and proper part of the hand, and a more common and remote part of the whole organical body; and Richard a near member of Norwich, and a more remote and common member of the Kingdome of England.
3. I am constrained to take in some Arguments transposed by Mr. H. that were in the former Chapter.
Mr. H. To be a member of the Cathol…ck Church firstly to a Par. 1. p 63.whole, which a man neither did, nor can see nor do any homage to, nor receive any influence or direction from for Government, is a sublimated imagination.
Ans. This makes the Doctrine of Oecumenick Councels holden by Calvin, Melancthon, Luther, Whitaker, and all the learned Divines in the Christian world, to be a sublimated imagination, and Mr. Cotton his associate to be sick of the same imagination; and the decrees, foreign of the Apostles and Elders, Acts 16. 4. by which the Churches were established, ver. 5. to have no influence of Government upon the Churches.
2. It must be a sublimated imagination, That the whole Churches of Jews and Gentiles, who could not see the faces of all the Apostles, nor do any homage to them, nor receive any direction (except in their Writings, which yet may be) from them, should be governed by the Apostles; and it must be an imagination, That the Apostles were members of the Catholick integral Churches, and never fixed and married members of the single congregation: and could every one of the ten thousands of the congregational Church of Ierusalem, as our Brethren will have it be, be governed by the whole Church, except they had seen the faces of all the thousands that governed them?
Mr. H. If a man that is a Member of one Congregation, …e Page 64.also a Member of all Congregations on earth; then he can perform the duties of a Member to all: but that is impossible.
Ans. The duties we owe to members of the integral Catholick We may be members of all congregations on earth, though we cannot discharge all sorts of duties to all these congregationsChurch, are,
1. Common and personal, as Church-praying, Church-praising, Church-fasting for the evils of sin or judgement, Isa. 62. 6. Psal. 122. 6. Eph. 6. 18. & 3. 14. Rom. 12. 18. 1 Cor. 12 26. they being members of the same body with us, Eph. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. and their good or hard condition being known to us, (which say also they are one visible body with us) these duties are possible and necessary, if the meaning be, of occasional duties of love, not in word but in deed, as giving of alms to brethren, There be two sorts of duties common and personal, which we owe to members of other Churches.I judge of all congregations beside our own: Iam. …. If a brother or a sister be naked, &c. of what ever congregation on earth, where providence cast your lot to be, 1 Ioh. 3. 17. If, I say, he mean such duties of members to forreign Church-members, as Church-members, be impossible, I much differ from Mr. H. it is contrary to 2 Cor. 9. 1, 2, 3. Gal. 6. 10. And the like I say of duties, of occasional comforting, rebuking, warning one another, even in order to Church-members, and Church-duties; They are this way impossible, that physically I cannot be in all places to discharge these duties. But to fetch an Argument as watery, I might say, A man in Musc…via cannot be to a Scottish-man a neighbour, whom he is to love as himself. A man in Morpeth cannot be a fellow-member both with another m…n in Morpeth, and with another English Subject who dwelleth four hundred miles from him whom he never saw, not can see. Why, its impossible he can discharge the duty of neighbour-love to the one that he never saw, nor possibly can see; or that of a fellow-subject of England, as toward the other: Yea, by this its impossible one can discharge the duties of personal watching over five thousand members of the congregation (as they say) of Ierusalem; for while as he watches over one, he must neglect fourscore of hundreds, and above.
2. What liberty and power a man hath in one particular congregation Mr. H. Arg. 2. par. 1 p. 64, 65.as a member, he hath the same in all, because he is a member every where: Then he hath power in choosing the Officers, and in maintaining them; and these Officers must be sought in casting him out.
Ans. What liberty and power a man hath jure, habitu, actu primo, by the right as a visible professor in one congregation as a member; that same moral right of Saintship (taken in a right sense) he carries about to all congregations on earth, whithersoever he comes, as is clear by Letters of Recommendation (which I said, and its never answered, onelyonly declare, but give no new right to Church priviledges) which our Brethren give Way of the Churches of N. E. c 6. sect. 6. p. 103 ibid. sect. 7. M. Cotton keys c. 4. p. 17.to members, by which they have right to the seals in other congregations. But it follows not, what liberty and power a man, as a fixed, nearer and proper member hath in his own congregation, that same liberty and power he hath actu secundo, and that he may actually exercise in all congregations; for to the actual exercise of it, is required the actual knowledge of him, and his right and qualification, that they with him, and he with How he that is a member of one congregation, hath Church-power … habitu and … prim…, in all congregations, and how not.them, may act in a Church-way, in other congregations and forreign Churches: And also he cannot act with that power in all congregations, as in his own; not because he hath not the power in habit, and actu primo, but both he cannot orderly exercise it, and without scandal of usurpation, until he first evidence he hath such power; and also because he cannot physically be in many places at once: as a Citizen of London hath power and liberty to do the duties of a Subject of England, such as to save the life of a Subject, and to apprehend a publick Robber that waftes the countrey, in all cities and places in England; but its impossible that he can be physically present in all places of England, where his help may be useful for the performing of these duties.
2. Nor will it follow that he should give hire to any but to his own personal feeders, from whom he receiveth the benefit of feeding, Gal. 6. 6. 1 Cor. 9. 1 Tim. 5. 17, 18.
3. It is also an untoward consequence, Therefore be cannot be cast out of one congregation, unless the Officers of all others did cast him out: for that is physically impossible, God will have the Catholick integral Church to purge it self in its parts, and its no more necessary nor convenient that the whole integral Church should, or possibly can pass an actual sentence for the casting out of every person, than all England can convene in Parliament for the passing sentence upon every English Subject guilty of Felony, Murther, Sodomy, Blasphemy, Drunkenness, Swearing, &c. and all guilty of these faults, are both Members of either Cities, Counties, or Shires, and also Subjects of the Kingdome of England: and the Argument is as strong in the one as in the other, even suppose Great-Britain were but one Kingdome. Nor
4. Will it follow, that a guilty person can require the convening of the whole integral Catholick Church to judge his cause: for he can have no moral right, but such as all in case of scandal have, why he should more decline the Churches judging, Christ hath given no power to unjust appeals that are physically impossible.than their feeding by the Word. Now since such a convening of all Officers to judge every scandal, is physically unpossible, it is not to be thought that Christ hath given a moral liberty to all delinquents without exception, to appeal to all the Officers on earth; for the infinite wisedome of God gives not moral power to physical impossibilities, that are physically destructive to edification.
Mr. H. If he that is the member of one Congregation be a member of all, I cannot see but of necessity it must follow, that Pa…. 1, pag. 65…one particular Congregation must be another, Ephesus must be Smyrna, and Smyrna must be Thyatira: for where there be the same individual members, there be the same whole integral body; and the ground is undeniable from received Rules: Integrum est totum cui partes sunt essentiales. Therefore the same members carry the same essence to the whole. I assume, there be the same individual members of all the particular Congregations: For if one particular professor be a member of every particular Congregation, then all particular professors must be so; and so all of them members of one particular Congregation, and so of every one. Hence there being the same members of every particular Congregation, every particular Congregation is the same: and thence it will follow, that Ephesus is Smyrna, and Smyrna to be Thyatira. Hence when Smyrna is destroyed, yet Smyrna remains.
Ans. Its a pity to black paper with such Wind-mills. Where there be the same individual members, there must be the same individual whole or totum integrale. All the individual members of a mans body, either similar parts, flesh, and blood, and bones; or the Organs, eyes, ears, feet, hand, and all the rest taken together, as united, are the whole organical body of man; and so all the Congregations on earth, taken together, are, and make up the whole integral Catholick visible Church, existing in all the Kingdomes and States of the earth. But what follows? therefore the hand is the foot, where there be the same proper and nearer fixed members, the thumb and the Mr. H. proves not that Ephesus is Smyrna, or Smyrna is Ephesus, because the same individual persons are common members to them both, & to all the Churches on earth, except he conclude that the little finger is the thumb by the same reason; for the thumb and the little finger are both nearer members of the hand, and common and remote members of the whole body.little finger of the hand, and also the same common and remoter members (the same thumb & little finger) of the whole organical body, there is the same individual integral whole, so as the one member is affirmed of another, the thumb is the little finger, and the little finger is the thumb: for all the organs are members proper, the eyes, ears, nose, of the head, the fingers of the hand, the toes of the feet, and all the rest, arms, legs, belly, shoulders, and all these same members are common and remote members of the whole body: Just as Peter is a fixed and near member of this Congregation, and also a common and remoter member of the whole integral Catholick Church. And as all the Citizens of London are fixed and near members of London, and proper parts thereof, and yet common and remote members and Subjects of England. Hence by Mr. H. his own Argument, Where there be the same individual members, thereof necessity must be the same whole integral: So I assume (saith he.) But there be the same individual members of all the particular Congregations. I assume also, Iohn, Richard, Thomas, Citizens of London, of York, are all in their very individual natures, individual Subjects of England. Ergo, London must be York, and York must be London; and Iohn Citizen of London, must be Richard Citizen of Yo…k. And contrary. Again I assume, the same individual thumb, and individual little finger and toes, and individual eyes and ears, are all members of the hand, or congregation of fingers, of the feet and society of toes, &c. and they are also common members of the whole organical body. Therefore by Mr. H. his Logick, the thumb must be the little finger; and when the thumb is cut off, the thumb remains. Let Mr. H. or any for him, answer Mr. H. his Sophism.
2. Mr. H. makes an Assumption, but could not infer any conclusion, nor frame a Syllogism. This connexion is never proved, There are the same members, common, remote, of every particular Congregation, or of all the Congregations on earth, therefore every Congregation is the same, and Ephesus must be Smyrna. Put Mr. H. or any man for him, to prove the connexion, and they must be silenced; These Congregations must be the same, and the one must be affirmed of the other, which have the same individual persons to be common members to both. Nothing more false: and so Mr. H. his received Rules vanish. For Congregations and all Churches differ not in their essence & last specifick nature, as Mr. H. wou…d make us believe, but onelyonly in meer accidents.say that all Citizens of York were Citizens of London, and Citizens of London were also Citizens of York, and they had the same common Laws, City-priviledges, the same Rules, it follows onelyonly they differ not in nature, but in number and accidents; but no Logick can infer, Erg…, York is London, and London is York; or that the one is affirmed of the other, as Ephesus is said to be Smyrna. So nothing follows, but onelyonly Ephesus and Smyrna are not Churches different in essence and nature, but onelyonly in number, which is that which we teach.
Mr. H. Mr. R. yieldeth, that one Church hath not power over Rage 65, 66. …another; but if one, who is a member of one Congregation, be a member of all, then the members of this. Province may send messengers to the Synod of another Province.
Answ. Mr. H. would do well to prove his deductions; for common members as common members send not Commissioners, nay, nor one Church to another: but as God is the God of order, so such a Church in an association do send to a larger Church.
Mr. H. It is folly to seek differences (saith Mr. R.) between Congregations, from a Chu…ch covenant, which is common to all Congregations. It is true (saith Mr. H) particular Congregations, and Church covenants differ not in essence and nature; but there is a real difference from this Church in another Church, in their specificating, and individual formality. The rule of old was, Genus cum forma constituit speciem.
Answ. It is great folly to seek differences essential, when all Congregations agree in the last specifick difference: This Congregation and that Church differ only in accidents, except Mr. H. shew us essential and specificating differences between one Christ the head, one faith, one Baptism, one hope of Glory, one Lords Supper, one Bread in all Churches, Eph. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4. 1 Cor. 10. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 13. one power of binding on earth, one and the same body, Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17, 18. Ioh. 20. 21, 22. 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. from the same Christ, the same Faith, the same Baptism, &c. in another Congregation: and when the Church of the Jews, and the Church of the Gentiles differ only as two Sisters, Cant. 8. 8. and in regard of age (which is a meer accident) as Mother and Daughter, Isa. 54. 1, 2. Isa. 49. 20, 21. Cant. 3. 4. It is folly for Mr. H. to trouble us with new Logick, such as the specificating formality in Peter, for that is no new degree of essence in Peter which was not in man, but the same contracted to the individual differences of time, place, figure, &c. Let Mr. H. shew a specifick difference between Christ and the seal in this and in that Congregation.
2. That Genus cum forma constituit speciem, is neither old nor new rule, the true rules are Genus & differentia constituunt speciem & compositum Metaphysicum, and materia & forma constituunt compositum se… corpus Physicum.
3. Whereas Mr. H. saith that this and this Congregation and this Church-covenant differ really ut res & res, and if they differ in accidents, these must be either common or proper; it's answered.
1. Mr. Cotton and Mr. Hooker are not two new kinds and species Pag. 66. Because Congregations differ ut res & res, they doe not differ in nature, for members of the same Congregation differ ut res & res, and the faith, profession and baptism of Peter differ from the faith, profession and baptism of Iohn his fellow-member of the same Congregation ut res & res. Then there must be ten thousand species and kinds of members and faith in the one Church of Ierusalem.of Pastors, because officers of divers Congregations, and Iohn and Peter members of the same Congregation differ ut res & res; and so in the Church of Ierusalem there shall be five thousand species and kinds of members, five thousand kinds of Church-covenants, of Baptisms, of Lords Suppers, of new species of rights to the Seals in one single Congregation. For they differ really ut res & res, when as they differ only in number: and it were good that Mr. H. had expressed to us, what be these proper accidents by which Congregations differ among themselves. It is true the particular combination gives distinct being to the Classis; but it gives not a being distinct in nature and essence, but only in individual properties from the being of other Classis.
Mr. H. How comes it this Church hath power over this person, Pag. 66, 67.which another Church hath not, but from some speciall engagement?
Ans. It is from no marriage engagement, but from providential conveniency; the wise Lord seeing it Physically impossible, that the whole Catholike Church so numerous can be fed in the same field, by the same men, therefore he divided them in sundry little flocks, over which the shepherds combined, have power not as married husbands but as meer servants.
Mr. H. The peculiar and individual formalities of engagements difference all voluntary covenants; should a man say, I am a Master of servants, therefore thou art my servant: servant-covenant is common to all, there is only a difference in number and some accidents: a people might say to a Pastor of another Congregation, The covenant between Pastor and People is common to all, and makes no difference, but in number and accidents; therefore thou art our Pastor: that a man should be a general husband to all women, and a woman a general wife to all men, because marriage-covenant is common, seems folly; we are content to bear the charge of folly.
Answ. 1. I am far from charging folly on these godly men, but weakness should appear in the Argument, If Mr. H had framed an Argument thus; if all Covenants of Master and servant, of husband and wife, agree in essence and nature, and differ in number and accidents only, then may a Master claim all men on earth to be his servants, and then may a husband claim all women on earth to be his married w…ves.
This is most false, and not proved by Mr. H. for the just contradiction is true.
If covenants between Master and Servant, between Husband The covenants of master and servant, and marriage covenants be of the same nature, and differ onelyonly in number, it follows not that a master may claim all men on earth to be his servants, or that a husband may claim all women on earth to be his wives; but the contrary.and Wife differ in number; then must a Master make a covenant in number different with servants; one with this servant, and another covenant different in number from that, with another; or then he can claim neither the one nor the other for his servant, because covenants between master and servant, are all of the same common nature: nor because Abraham married Sarah, and all marriage-covenants are of the same essence and nature, can Abraham claim Hagar and another third woman, and a fourth for his wives, and except he have a marriage covenant with Hagar different in number from the marriage-covenant with Sarah, and a third marriage-covenant with the third different in number, he cannot claim any of them for his wives: for Hagar may say, though all marriage-covenants be of the same essence and nature; yet because Abraham never made a marriage-covenant with me by name, which is essentially required in all covenants of that kind, he is not my husband, nor am I his wife. So a people cannot say to a Pastor of another Congregation, thou art our fixed, proper Pastor, obliged to reside with us, and to imploy thy labours ordinarily upon us only, except they had particularly chosen him by name; but this will not hinder, but all elections and covenants with Pastors, as fixed and ordinary labourers with them, are of the same essence and nature, and differ only in number and accidents; nor can this hinder but a Pastor of another Congregation is a Pastor habitu and actu primò, to all Congregations on earth, and no married husband to that Congregation: though it be physically impossible, and contrary to reason, to say he can be a fixed, proper chosen Pastor to all the Congregations of the earth; for fixedness and election of the people is not of the essence of a Pastor.