The Unreasonableness of Separation, Part 3 · Section 16
Sect. 16. If it be said, that notwithstanding this, the neglect and abuse of Discipline among us are too great to be justified, and too notorious to be concealed; I answer,
1. That is not our question, but whether our Parochial Churches have lost their being for want of the Power of Discipline? and whether the Species of our Churches be changed by Diocesan Episcopacy? which we have shewed sufficient Reason to deny. And what other abuses have crept in, ought in an orderly way to be reformed, and no good man will deny his assistance in it.
2. It is far easier to separate, or complain for want of Discipline, than to find out a due way to restore it.Of Confirmation. p. 174, &c. No man hath more set out the almost insuperable difficulties which attend it, than Mr. Baxter hath done; especially in that, it will provoke and exasperate those most who stand in need of it; and be most likely to doe good on those who need it least.
3. The case of our Churches now, is very different from that of the Churches in the Primitive times. For, the great Reason of Discipline is not, that for want of it the Consciences of Fellow-communicants would be defiled (for to assert that, were Donatism) but that the honour of a Christian Society may be maintained. If then the Christian Magistrates do take care to vindicate the Churches honour by due punishment of Scandalous Offenders, there will appear so much less necessity of restoring the severity of the ancient Discipline. To which purpose these words of the Royal Martyr King Charles I. are very considerable.His Majesties final Answer to the Divines at Newport, n. 4. But his Majesty seeth no necessity that the Bishops challenge to the Power of Iurisdiction should be at all times as large as the exercise thereof at some times appeareth to have been; the exercise thereof being variable according to the various conditions of the Church in different times. And therefore his Majesty doth not believe that the Bishops under Christian Princes do challenge such an amplitude of Iurisdiction to belong unto them in respect of their Episcopal Office precisely, as was exercised in the Primitive times, by Bishops before the days of Constantine. The reason of the difference being evident, that in those former times under Pagan Princes, the Church was a distinct Body of it self, divided from the Common-wealth, and so was to be governed by its own Rules and Rulers; the Bishops therefore of those times, though they had no outward coercive power over mens Persons or Estates, yet in as much as every Christian man when he became a Member of the Church, did ipso facto, and by that his own voluntary Act put himself under their Government, they exercised a very large Power of Jurisdiction in spiritualibus, in making Ecclesiastical Canons, receiving accusations, converting the accused, examining Witnesses, judging of Crimes, excluding such as they found guilty of Scandalous offences from the Lord's Supper, enjoyning Penances upon them, casting them out of the Church, receiving them again upon their Repentance, &c. And all this they exercised as well over Presbyters as others. But after that the Church under Christian Princes began to be incorporated into the Common-wealth, whereupon there must of necessity follow a complication of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power, the Iurisdiction of Bishops (in the outward exercise of it) was subordinate unto, and limitable by the Supreme Civil Power, and hath been, and is at this day, so acknowledged by the Bishops of this Realm.
4. The due exercise of Discipline is a work of so much prudence and difficulty, that the greatest Zealots for it, have not thought it fit to be trusted in the hands of every Parochial Minister and his particular Congregation. Calvin. Ep. 136.Calvin declares, that he never thought it convenient that every Minister should have the power of Excommunication: not onelyonly because of the invidiousness of the thing, and the danger of the example; but because of the great abuses and Tyranny it may soon fall into, and because it was contrary to the Apostolical Practice. And to the same purpose, Beza delivers his judgment, who likewise gives this account of the Discipline of Geneva, Bez. Ep. 20.that the Parochial Ministers and Elders proceed no farther than Admonition; but in case of Contumacy they certify the Presbytery of the City which sits at certain times and hears all Causes relating to Discipline, and as they judge fit either give admonition, or proceed to suspension from the Lord's Supper; or, which is a rare case, and when no other remedy can prevail, they go on to publick Excommunication. Where we see, every Parochial Church is no more trusted with the Power of Discipline than among us; nay, the Minister here hath no power to repel, but all that he can doe there is to admonish; and how come then their Parochial Churches to be true, and not ours? Besides, why may not our Ministers be obliged to certify the Bishop, as well as theirs to certify the Presbytery? Codex Eccles. Afric. c. 6, 7, 9, 43.since in the African Churches the matter of Discipline was so much reserved to the Bishop, that a Presbyter had no power to receive a Penitent into the Communion of the Church without the advice and direction of the Bishop; and Saint Augustin proposed it, that whosoever received one that declined the judgment of his own Bishop, should undergoe the same censure which that person deserved; and it was allowed by the Council. Alipius, Saint Augustins great Friend and Legat of the Province of Numidia, c. 10.proposed the case of a Presbyter under the censure of his Bishop, who out of pride and vain-glory sets up a separate Congregation in opposition to the Order of the Church; c. 11.and he desired to know the judgment of the Council about it; and they unanimously determined that he was guilty of Schism, and ought to be anathematized, and to lose his place. And this was the Iudgment even of the African Bishops, for whom Mr. Baxter professeth greater reverence than for any others; and saith, their Councils were the best in the world; and commends their Canons for very good about Discipline. But he pretends that a Bishop's Diocese there, was but like one of our Parishes, which I have already refuted at large, by shewing that there were places at a considerable distance under the care of the Bishops. So that the bringing the full power of Discipline into every Parochial Church, is contrary to the practice of Antiquity, as well as of the Reformed Churches abroad, which plead most for Discipline; and would unavoidably be the occasion of great and scandalous disorders, by the ill management of the Power of Excommunication; as was most evident by the Separatists when they took this Sword into their hands, and by their foolish and passionate, and indiscreet use of it, brought more dishonour upon their Churches, than if they had never meddled with it at all. And in such a matter, where the honour of the Christian Society is the chief thing concerned, it becomes wise men to consider what tends most to the promoting of that; and whether the good, men promise themselves by Discipline, will countervail the Schisms and Contentions, the heart-burnings, and animosities which would follow the Parochial exercise of it. The dissenting Brethren in their Apologetical Narration do say,p. 5. That they had the fatal miscarriages and shipwrecks of the separation, as Land-marks to forewarn them of the rocks and shelves they ran upon; and therefore they say they never exercised the Power of Excommunication. p. 9.For they saw plainly, they could never hold their People together if they did; since the excommunicated party would be sure to make friends enough, at least to make breaches among them; and they holding together by mutual consent, such ruptures would soon break their Churches to pieces. Besides, this would be thought no less than setting up an Arbitrary Court of Iudicature in every Parish; because there are no certain Rules to proceed by; no standing determination what those sins and faults are, which should deserve excommunication; no method of trials agreed upon; no security against false Witnesses; no limitation of Causes; no liberty of Appeals, (if Parochial Churches be the onelyonly instituted Churches, as Mr. Baxter affirms:) besides multitudes of other inconveniencies, which may be easily foreseen; so that I do not question, but if Mr. Baxter had the management of this Parochial Discipline in any one Parish in London, and proceeded by his own Rules; his Court of Discipline would be cried out upon in a short time, as more arbitrary and tyrannical, than any Bishop's Court this day in England: Let any one therefore judge, how reasonable it is for him to overthrow the being of our Parochial Churches, for want of that, which being set up according to his own principles, would destroy the Peace and Vnity, if not the very being, of any Parochial Church whatsoever.
5. That want of Discipline, which is in Parochial Churches, was never thought by the most zealous Non-conformists of old, destructive to the Being of them. Of which I have already produced the Testimonies of Cartwright, Hildersham, Giffard, and many others.