A Little Stone Found to be Counterfeit, Treatise · Part 2 · Appendix
APPENDIX. Wherein is Examined what is ſaid in the forementioned letter of the new Independents of Aberdene, for the Independent Congregationall and againſt the Presbyteriall way of Church-Government.
section 1 THeſe Authors uſher in what they ſay on this purpoſe with this preface. Touching Preſbyterian Government, indeed when thoughts of Queſtioning it were firſt born in upon us, we did a long time ſuppreſſe them as tentations: Becauſe we had ſo ſolemnly (though too implicitely) engaged to the maintenance thereof: Yet afterwards, knowing that Truth cannot loſſe by a ſearch, we brought the maters to the ballance of the Sanctuarie: And now after ſeeking of God, as he was pleaſed to give us grace, and uſing all helps which we could have, we profeſſe ſo far as we can ſee (with reverence to precious and learned men of another judgement) the Congregationall way comes nearer to the paterne of the Word then the Claſſicall forme. And to us it appears, &c.
section 2 Indeed when theſe thoughts were born in upon them, they had juſt cauſe to look upon them as tentations, and for ought that they have brought for juſtifying them here, they may juſtly yet look upon them as tentations, as we truſt ſhall appear in the conſideration thereof. But here 1. It may be juſt mater of enquiry to others, and haply may be of good purpoſe to themſelves to reflect and conſider, when theſe thoughts began firſt to be born in upon them, at leaſt when they began to out any thing of them. Did we hear any thing of ſuch thoughts in them, but ſince the late great revolution of State in this Kingdom, after Worceſter? and how ſoone thereafter did we hear of them by ſome of the number, although others thought fit to ſuppreſſe them ſome longer? This may ſeem to be ground of ſearching of heart, which is deceitfull above meaſure. 2. It ſeemeth by the Authors own confeſſion, that the bearing in of theſe thoughts upon them at firſt has been from no good cauſe or principle; Not from the Spirit of God, unleſſe they will ſay, it has been by an immediate impulſe or Enthuſiaſme. For ſay they, it was after a long times ſuppreſſing of them that they began to conſult with the Word of God about them, for that is, as I conceive, to bring them to the ballance of the Sanctuary. 3. If implicitely they engaged themſelves to the maintenance of the Government deſined and ſettled in this Church, ſure then if they will reflect upon the nature and tenor of the engagement, they may find themſelves to have committed, in the very act, more ſin, than they inſinuate here, or I will name. For let them look back again unto the Nationall Covenant, and they ſhall find that they not only engaged themſelves to the maintenance of the Religion profeſſed in this Church in all the points thereof: But alſo declared and proteſted themſelves under Oath, after due Examination of their own conſciences in maters of true and falſe Religion, to be throughly reſolved of the Truth thereof by the Word and Spirit of God, and therefore to believe with their hearts, confeſſe with their mouth, and ſubſcribe with their hands. I do indeed …ear that many did run unto that Engagement without ſuch conviction of mind upon clear warrand of Gods Word found by Examination of the maters. And as to do this with ſo ſolemne and dreadfull an atteſtation of God, that they did it upon conviction of conſcience, was horrible guiltineſſe: So it may wel be apprehended, that God in his holy judgement, has ſuffered many, for the diſcovery of the falſhood of their hearts (may be in mercy to ſome, may be in wrath to others) to revolt from theſe their former Engagements. I wiſh from my heart theſe Brethren (ſo I will yet call them, if they will yet be ſo called by us) if it be true which they ſay now, that they engaged implicitely, whereas they proteſted before God that they did it upon through conviction, they would conſider this, lay it to heart, and yet againe bring their preſent way to the ballance of the Sanctuary. I have been with others witneſſe of ſome who having engaged in the cauſe of God in theſe lands, and caried themſeves therein for a long time reſolutely and actively, and having afterward foully lapſed into contrary courſes, when they have been brought to Repentance for their backſliding; Have declared that they found that their back-ſliding had ariſen from this, that their engaging in the cauſe at firſt and going on in it formerly, was not upon conviction from grounds of the Word of God, but implicitely and for by and extrinſecall reſpects. 4. It is not competent to me to queſtion, nor will I queſtion their diligence in ſeeking of God when they began to enquire about this matter (tho it be a thing uſuall now-adayes, for men to ſet out naughtieſt wares with this inſcription after ſeeking of God) but as for uſing of all helps they could have to be cleared, I think ſome thing may be queſtioned: For beſides helps of mens Writings upon this purpoſe, might they not have uſed the help of the advice of the Judicatories of this Kirk and repreſented the grounds of their doubting to ſome of them. Acts of Generall Aſſemblies require this, that before men vent any innovations in matters of Religion, they ſhould firſt peaceably repreſent their Reaſons to the publick Judicatures: And albeit, they may haply ſay that the very matters they were queſtioning was the Authority of theſe Judicatories; Yet humility, if they had not overweening conceits of their own wits above the judgement of theſe Judicatures, and charity, if they had ſo much as they ought towards the Church, wherein they were born, baptized, inſtructed, ſome of them had been for ſome years Miniſters, and acting in aſſociation in the eſtabliſhed Judicatures thereof, might, it ſeemeth, led them to ſo much. But if they accounted the Judicatures unworthy the conſulting with, might they not have uſed the help of conference with ſome of theſe precious and learned men, whom they profeſſe to reverence? If they did conſult with any of them before they were determined in the matter, yea before they did vent their new judgement, is more then I know or can learn. But come we to their determination and the confirmation of it.
section 2 So far (ſay they) as we can ſee, the Congregationall way comes nearer to the patern of the Word then the Claſſicall form. Here it may be asked why they ſay only that the Congregationall way comes nearer to the patern, and not ſimply that it is the way, conform to the patern of the Word? What, does the Congregationall way it ſelf come ſomewhat ſhort of the patern, and is there a third way diſtinct both from it and the Claſſicall, that comes full up to it? Is there here a reſervation for a further light? It may be we may hear ſomewhat of this ere all be done. But go we on to their deſinition or propoſition of the Congregationall way. To us (ſay ſay) it appeareth that Chriſt hath furniſhed a Congregation with their Elderſhip with compleat power of Juriſdiction and cenſure within themſelves. There are here two things aſſerted by the Authors which accordingly they intend to prove by their two Arguments reſpectivè, afterward built upon the paſſage of Scripture which they cite. 1. That by Chriſts appointment the power of Eccleſiaſtick juriſdiction and cenſure is in the Congregation (i. e. the body of privat profeſſours) and the Elderſhip jointly (both being to concur formally in the acting thereof) and not only in the Elderſhip. 2. That any one ſingle Congregation with its Elderſhip has compleat power of juriſdiction and cenſure within it ſelf, ſupreamly and without ſubordination to any larger or ſuperiour Pre…yterie. But for further clearing of their minde here it were requiſit they ſhould explain theſe two things to us. 1. Whom they mean by the Congregation contradiſtinguiſhed from the Elderſhip, whether the whole collection of Church-members, or only men and thoſe of years of diſcretion. If the former, then Women and Children muſt be joint with the Elderſhip in the power of juriſdiction and cenſures. If this be their minde we would know it and they would ſpeak it plainly. If the latter, then it is not the Congregation, but ſome part of the Congregation with the Elderſhip that has the power of juriſdiction and cenſure, or elſe Women and Children are not parts conſtituent of the Congregation: and then let them tell me where ſhall they find the name of the Church, in all the Goſpel in this notion, taken for the Elderſhip with the …ale-profeſſours of adult years, excluding Women and Children? 2. Suppoſe the whole Elderſhip of a Congregation be ſcandalous and cenſurable who has the power of juriſdiction and cenſure to exerciſe toward them? If juriſdiction and cenſure ſhould be exerciſed towards them (as I ſuppoſe it ſhould be) who has it, and who muſt do it? If ſome other Eccleſiaſticall Court, then ſhould not a ſingle Congregation have compleat power of juriſdiction within it ſelf, without ſubordination to any other Eccleſiaſtick Court in point of juriſdiction. If the Congregation contradiſtinguiſhed from the Elderſhip, then the Congregation alone by it ſelf has power enough of juriſdiction and cenſure, and then what needed it be ſaid the Congregation with their Elderſhip? And indeed this is the way that ſome Independents goe: In their judgement the Congregation of privat beleevers, does chooſe, ordain and make their Elderſhip, and they may, cenſure, depoſe, and Excommunicat all their Elderſhip. So that theſe Authors when, intending a deſcription of the Congregationall way, i. e. the Independent way, they attribute the power of juriſdictiction and cenſure to the Congregation with their Elderſhip, if they mean (as their words ſeemeth to import, and they muſt be underſtood, unleſſe they minded to aequivocat) that the power of juriſdiction is given to theſe jointly, and not to either of them ſeverally, either they have not been acquainted with the mind of all theſe of the Congregationall way, or they have diſſembled, the latter of which, I have not reaſon to impute to all theſe Authors. The truth is the Authors of the Congregationall way are at a great deal of difference among themſelves, even to ſalt contradictions concerning the ſubject of the power of Eccleſiaſtick juriſdiction, as Mr. Caudry has evidenced in the place cited by us before, P. 2. Sect. Go we on to their probation of their Aſſertion. They cite one paſſage of Scripture firſt (telling us withall that there are diverſe other Scriptures, which they paſſe by: But I beleeve it ſhal be long ere they let us ſee them) viz. Mat. 18, 15, 16, 17, 18. and do build two Arguments on it according to the two things involved in their Aſſertion. The former lyeth thus in their own words.
section 3 The Church there (tell it unto the Church) ſpoken of, has compleat power of binding and looſing, as is clear from v. 17. and 18. but the Church is not the Claſſicall Preſbytery: But the Elderſhip with the Congregation: Therefore, &c. The Aſſumption is clear, becauſe it is not to be found in all the Goſpel, that a company of Elders, whether of a Claſſis or a Congregation, apart from the Congregation is called a Church. Indeed a Congregation with Elders commonly, yea and ſometime contradiſtinguiſhed from Elders, ay ſometime without Elders, is termed a Church. Act. 15. 4. 22, 23. And Act. 14. 23. Now what an abſurdity were it, to reject the uſuall acception of the word in the New Teſt, and without any colour of reaſon to coine a ſenſe which no where is to be found in all the Goſpel, though the word be moſt frequently uſed in it.
section 4 Anſw. To paſſe ſundry things which might be noted upon this Argument and for brevities ſake to inſiſt only upon that which is materiall, the drift of this firſt Argument tends to the probation of the former part involved in the Authors Aſſertion, to wit, that the power of juriſdiction Eccleſiaſtick is not in the Elderſhip or Officers of the Church, but in the community of believers jointly with the Elders: and the weight of the whole Argument lyeth upon the ſignification of the term, Church. And all which is ſaid is but an old ſong that has been an hundred times daſhed by worthy and learned men already: See what we have ſaid already upon the ſame alledgeance by Mr. Lockier, above, P. 2. Sect. 3. §. 2. and 3. For the preſent I ſhall ſay but theſe things on it. 1. When as theſe Authors ſay that in the New Teſtament the name of the Church is taken, ſometimes for the Congregation (i. e. in their ſenſe, the community of beleevers) with the Elderſhip jointly, ſometimes for the Congregation as contradiſtinguiſhed from Elders, and ſometime for a Congregation without Elders, and aſſerteth that here, in this place it is to be underſtood in the firſt of theſe three acceptions, to wit, as it comprehendeth both Congregation and Elders, I would gladly know, how, and by what Argument they prove that it is ſo to be underſtood here, and not rather in one of the other two, for the Congregation as contradiſtinguiſhed from the Elders, or for the Congregation without Elders. For that we ſee only aſſerted by them, but no proof of it brought: Only this much they inſinuat, that it is commonly ſo uſed: But that will not prove that ſo it muſt be taken in this particular place. If they would aſſayed to bring any Arguments to prove that the name of the Church here muſt be taken, not for the Congregation as contradiſtinguiſhed from, or without Elders, but for the Congregation with the Elderſhip jointly; I doubt not but we ſhould found them all to be ſuch, as ſpeaks power of juriſdiction and government in the Elderſhip as contradiſtinguiſhed from the reſt of the Congregation. 2. What though the word Church, be no where elſe in the New Teſtament uſed for the Elders or Governours of the Church as contradiſtinguiſhed from the body of believers; yet this is but a very weak Argument to prove that it is not ſo to be underſtood here, ſo be that the genuine grammaticall ſignification thereof be ſuch, as may well be applyed (as indeed the word anſwering to it in the Hebrew is frequently in the Old Teſtament applyed) to ſignifie a Colledge or Society of Judges or Governours as contradiſtinguiſhed from the people. See Mr. Hudſon. Vindic. of the Eſſence and Ʋnity, &c. 'Tis ſome raſhnes in the Authors to call this ſenſe of the word a coined ſenſe. Even prophane Greek Authors have uſed it in ſuch a ſenſe, I mean for a meeting of Rulers. Demoſthenes uſed the word foreign proconcione magnatum. It is yet more then raſhneſſe, I may ſay it is a great impudency, that they ſay, it is without any colour of reaſon taken in this ſenſe in this place. Theſe Authors ſaid before that they have uſed all helps they could have upon this controverſie. Now let them tell us did they never read in any Writers upon this controverſie of Church Government, who expones the word Church, of the Elderſhip or Governours of the Church ſo much as any colour of reaſon brought by them for expounding the word in that ſenſe? How can they hold up their face and ſay this? Did they ever read Beza his Annot. on the place: Or, Mr. Rutherfurds Peaceable Plea, c. 8. Surely the help of theſe Authors they eaſily might have had? Sure I am, if they have read theſe, to mention no moe, they might have found ſome colour, at leaſt of reaſon brought for the Interpretation. Nay, let them but read the latter of the two over again, & I believe they ſhal find ſuch reality of reaſon brought for it, as they ſhall never be able to avoide. Verily whether we take the word Church here in a different ſignification from that whereby it ſignifies the ſocietie of Viſible Chriſtians generally, comprehending private Profeſſours as well as Rulers, or not, yet that not all and every one comprehended under that ſignification otherwiſe, but only the Rulers are intended as the perſons to whom the publike acts ſpoken of in the place, receiving of publike delations of ſcandals, and inflicting of cenſures does belong, is here invincibly demonſtrate becauſe otherwhere in the New Teſtament theſe acts, as all other acts of Eccleſiaſtick authoritative Government, are committed and attributed unto the Officers of the Church, as ſuch, Math. 16. 18. Iohn 20, 21, 22. 1 Tim. 5. 1, 19. Tit. 1. 13. 1 Theſſ. 5. 12. Heb, 13. 7, 17. 1 Pet. 5. 1, 2. and accordingly to them, as contradiſtinguiſhed from the body of Profeſſours, are given names importing Government and authority: But no where in the Scripture of the New Teſtament, ſhall any man ſhew us, either name or thing of Government given to private Profeſſours. We proceed to their ſecond Argument whereby they would prove from that ſame place that any one ſingle Congregation with their Elderſhip has power of juriſdiction Independent and Supreme, and to take away all juridicall Eccleſiaſtick Courts larger than, and Superiour to a Congregation, Claſſicall or Synodicall.
section 5 The Church (ſay they) ſpoken of in this Text, which has compleet power of binding and looſing, is the firſt Eccleſiaſticall Judicatorie to which belongeth judiciall cogniſance of offences: For if private admonition do not gaine the offender, then the command is, tell the Church: But our Claſſicall Preſbyterie is not the firſt Judicatorie to which appertaines judiciall cognizance of offences: For firſt they come to Seſſions, and only by refers from the Seſſions to Preſbytories. Therefore this Church here ſpoken of, as having compleat power of binding and looſing, cannot be the Claſſicall Preſbytorie, but the Elderſhip with the Congregation. No where do we read in the Goſpel, of juriſdiction in relation to cenſure committed to Claſſicall Preſbytery.
section 6 Anſ. 1. To the Aſſumption or ſecond Propoſition, it ſeemeth theſe Authors have not well underſtood, or been acquainted with the ſtate and way of Presbyteriall Government ſettled in this Church, and therefore have been too raſh and haſtie in condemning it or arguing againſt it, before they underſtood it. For 1. 'Tis not only falſe which they ſay, that the Claſſicall Preſbyterie is not the firſt Judicatorie to which appertaines judiciall cognizance of offences, but that firſt they come to Seſſions, &c. If this be meant Univerſally of all offences. Indeed, offences committed by particular perſons, ſettled members of particular Congregations, and as yet abiding within the bounds of the Congregation, comes firſt to the Seſſion or Elderſhip of the particular or ſingle Congregation. But there are many offences the judiciall cognizance whereof comes not firſt to a Seſſion, but to a Presbyterie, yea may be a Synod, yea may be to the Nationall Aſſembly. When a private perſon having fallen into ſome ſcandalous ſin, and being conveened before a Seſſion, addes refractorineſſe againſt the diſcipline and obſtinacie to his former offence, this is a new offence, and the judiciall cognizance of this offence belongeth firſt to the Claſſicall Presbyterie. So a Claſſicall Presbyterie is the firſt Judicatorie to which belongeth the judiciall cognizance, Of an offence given by a Miniſter, in the Adminiſtration of his calling, Of an offence given by the Elderſhip of a Congregation (and indeed ſuppoſing the firſt part of theſe Authors Aſſertion, viz. that the power of juriſdiction is given to the Congregation with the Elderſhip jointly, if they grant not an aſſociate Presbytery to take judiciall cognizance of their offence, they muſt exempt them from being ſubject to any judiciall cognizance at all: For they cannot come under the judiciall cognizance of another ſingle Congregation) Of an offence wherein more ſingle Congregations are alike concerned, and many caſes more: I wonder that theſe Brethren did not rememher that the firſt judiciall cognizance, of James Grahames offence, of Seaforts, and many other publick Malignant wicked practiſes, was not by Seſſions, and from them came by reference to the Claſſical Presbytery, but by the publick Aſſemblies. 2. It is another groſſe miſtake too that theſe offences which comes to Seſsions or Congregationall Elderſhips to be judicially cognoſced upon, and from them comes to the Claſſicall Presbyterie, or to a Synode, that they come only by r…ferres from the Seſſions to the Presbyteries. For they come alſo by appeal of the party who is under the judiciall cognition of the Seſſion, upon mal-adminiſtration, or ſuppoſed mal-adminiſtration: They may alſo and do often come by way of authoritative viſitation of Seſsions and their proceedings by the Presbyterie.
section 7 2. To the Major or firſt Propoſition. 1. Suppoſe it were granted as it ſtandeth, yet it could not make fully againſt us, to take away altogether aſſociate juridicall Presbyteries of more then one ſingle Congregation: Becauſe, as we have ſhewn upon the Aſſumption, ſuch aſſociat Preſbyteries or Eccleſiaſtick Aſſemblies, may be, and muſt be the firſt Judicatories, in many caſes, to which the judiciall cognizance of offences doth belong, But, 2. If the Major be taken in this ſenſe, the Church having power of binding and looſing is the firſt Judicatorie, to which, &c. And it only, taking it with the excluſive note, as it muſt of neceſſity be taken, to infer that negative concluſion, Ergo, a Claſſicall or aſſociate Presbyterie is not that Church; We deny it as utterly falſe having no proof from the Text. We ſay here that the Church inveſted with authority to cognoſce judicially and inflict cenſure upon offences is the Rulers of the Viſible Church Univerſall, as joined in Collegio, or aſſembled, whether in the leſſer and Inferiour Colledges or Aſſemblies (as a Congregationall Elderſhip is in reſpect of all others; a Claſſicall Presbytery, in regard of Synods; a Provinciall Synod in regard of a Nationall; this in regard of a Synod of more Nations, haply aſſociate for Government) to which as the firſt Judicatory matters may come for judiciall cognizance, or in larger and ſuperiour, (ſuch as is a Claſſicall Preſbytery in relation to a Congregationall, a Synod in relation to a Claſſical Presbytery, &c.) to which, may be the matter cannot come at firſt or as to the firſt Judicatory having power of judiciall cognizance of it. 'Tis true, that in ſuch a caſe as our Saviour inſtanceth in the Text, when offence is given by one particular member of a Congregation ſingle and fixed in its conſtitution and proper Officers (which fixing of ſingle Congregations under appropriated Officers, is not neceſſary by any divine inſtitution: For more Congregations, may be, have been, as it ſeemeth, in ſeveralls of the primitive Churches, and are at this day in ſome orthodox Churches ſerved by the ſame Officers in common without violation of any divine inſtitution) Chriſts command Tell the Church intends that the matter ſhould be brought to the Elderſhip of the Congregation as the firſt Judicature to which belongeth judiciall cognizance of it. Like as if the Congregation be not fixed by its ſelf in its conſtitution and Officers, that Command intends the bringing of the matter at firſt to an Elderſhip common to more Congregations. As alſo if the matter to be judged, be of publick and more common concernment then of one Congregation, that ſame Commandement, warrands by analogie and proportion, the bringing of the matter firſt to ſome more large Presbytery or Colledge of Elders, then the Congregational, as the firſt Judicature to cognoſee judicially upon it: But withall let it be ſo obſerved that when Chriſt inſtituteth this order, that offences when they cannot be removed otherwiſe, ſhould be brought to the Church, that is, to an Eccleſiaſtick Judicature, he ſayeth not, that they may not in any caſe proceed further for judiciall cognition and ſentence upon the mater, then to the firſt Judicature to which the judiciall cognition of it belongeth; Nor is there any ground in his words, whereupon this can by good conſequence be inferred: In a word, there is nothing in this Text either againſt the juridicall power of larger Eiderſhips then Congregationall, ſuch as are Claſſicall Presbyteries and Synods: Nor againſt the ſubordination of Congregationall Elderſhips, to the juriſdiction and authority of ſuch larger Elderſhips. But upon the contrary, there is in them ſolid ground whereupon both have been clearly demonſtrat by ſeverall Presbyterian Writers, and diſcuſſed all contrary exceptions and reaſonings upon the place: for ſhortneſs, I refer the Reader to. Anſw. of the Aſſembly of Divines to, &c. pag. 178. Guliel. Appoll. Conſiderat. of certain Controverſies, cap. 6. pag. 94, 95. and pag. 127. Spanhem. Epiſtol. ad Dav. Buchan. Claſſ. 3. Arg. 2. Hudſ. Vindicat. of the Eſſence and, &c. pag. 156, 157, 158. and pag. 164, 165. Mr. Rutherfurd. Due Right, cap. 10. pag. 310. & ſeq.
section 8 To what the Authors adde, that no where do we read in the Goſpel of juriſdiction in relation to cenſure committed to Claſſicall Preſbytery. Anſw. 1. If the meaning be no where in the Goſpel do we read, this power committed, by a formall precept, to Claſſicall Presbytery by name, or ſpecifically by it ſelf; it may be granted without prejudice to what we aſſert (and I pray where will theſe Authors read in the Goſpel this power committed to the Elderſhip of a ſingle Congregation, ſpecifically, and that as they maintain Independently and ſupreamly?) 2. It is ſufficient for us, if we read in the Goſpel this power of Juriſdiction committed to the Officers and Rulers of the Church as united together in Collegio, either in one ſingle Congregation, or over more Congregations combined and aſſociat together as is moſt convenient for exerciſe of their Eccleſiaſtick communion: And this we read, Mat. 18. 17, 18. for there, Diſcipline and Eccleſiaſtick juriſdiction inſtitute by Chriſt is committed unto the Officers and Rulers of the Church as united in Collegio: Not to Officers of a ſingle Congregation only, as united; but unto the Officers of the whole Catholick Viſible Church of Chriſt, as united in leſſer or larger combinations even to an Oecumenicall Aſſembly. Becauſe the power of Juriſdiction and Diſcipline Eccleſiaſtick there is inſtituted and intended by Chriſt to be a remedy againſt all ſcandalls and offences in his Church; but all and every ſort of ſcandall falling out in the Viſible Church of Chriſt cannot be ſo remeeded or removed by the Colledge of Officers in a ſingle Congregation. They can only be a means for remedying and removing this way ſcandalls and offences concerning their particular Congregation, and therefore there muſt be underſtood, as intended here by Chriſt, larger Eccleſiaſticall Aſſemblies and Judicatures to exerciſe Diſcipline and Juriſdiction for remedying offences and ſcandalls which Congregationall Elderſhips cannot reach. 2. It is ſufficient if we read in the Goſpel approven examples of larger Presbyteries, then Congregationall, Claſſicall, or Synodicall, authoritatively governing and exerciſing Acts of Rule over more particular Churches. We read of ſuch a Presbytery as we call Claſſicall, in Jeruſalem, Epheſus, Corinth, Ruling authoritatively more Congregations, as has been demonſtrat by ſeverall Learned men. See namely, Aſſembly of Divines in their Anſwer to, &c. upon the propoſition 3. of Preſbyteriall Government. Ius Divin, par. 2. c. 13. We read alſo an example of a Synod exerciſing ſuch power and authority, Act. 15.
section 9 With this laſt inſtance, doe theſe Authors meet thus. All the power we find exerciſed by the meeting at Jeruſalem, Acts 15. is dogmaticall, the people and Brethren having their intereſt likewayes, which the Congregationall Divines willingly yeeld, all the certificat they uſe, is, if ye do theſe things ye ſhall do well, but do not threaten thoſe that diſobey with Excommunication. Anſ. Theſe things here alledged to elude this place of Scripture have been often daſhed. For the preſent briefly. 1. Theſe Authors ſpeak warrily in calling that Aſſembly at Jeruſalem by the generall name of a meeting, and not a Synod; It ſeemeth here they remembred that what whereas ſome Congregationall men acknowledges it to have been a Synod, as Cotton cited before, P. 2. and Mr. Lockier; others finding that not ſo advantagious for them, deny it, and ſay only, a reference of one particular Church of Antioch to one particular Church of Jeruſalem, as the Diſſenting Brethren in the Aſſembly at Weſtminſter. Papers of the Aſſemb. pag. 128. and therefore have choſen a name that might ſerve both, and ſo diſpleaſe neither. But that it was a Synod, ſee cleared by Jus Divin. P. 2. C. 14. 2. Suppoſe it did not exerciſe a criticall power, or power of cenſure, yet it followeth not that it had not a power of cenſure to exerciſe. On the contrary, the dogmaticall power of a Synod being of another ſort then the dogmatical power which is competent to a ſingle Paſtour, this being only concionall, and an act of the power of order, this is juridicall and an act of the power of juriſdiction, and of the Key of Diſcipline, it carieth along a power of cenſure with it. Tho this be not alwayes put in actuall exerciſe when the other is: There may be, and ofter is need of a juridicall determination of a caſe by a Judicature, when there is not occaſion of exerciſing of cenſure by that Judicature, as is evident. 3. It is contrary to clear truth that all the power that Synod exerciſed is dogmaticall. For beſides their exerciſing a dogmaticall power in confutation and condemnation of the Haereſie taught by the Judaizing Teachers, and vindication of the truth about the great point of Juſtification by faith alone, without the works of the Law. They do alſo exerciſe a diatacticall power for healing the ſcandall of the weak Jews eſpecially, and their alienation of mind, from the Gentile Chriſtians who neglected their ceremoniall obſervances, by making and enjoining a practicall canon, ordaining the Gentiles, to abſtaine from ſome things that might any wayes occaſion their offence. And alſo a criticall power or power of cenſure againſt the ſchiſme or foreign raiſed by the falſe Teachers, branding them with the black mark of liers, ſubverters of ſouls, and troublers of the Church: This was a degree of cenſure, and a virtuall admonition tending to further cenſure: But actually to have proceeded further to Excommunication, at firſt was not ſeaſonable, prudent nor needfull. 4. If people and private Brethren were in that Synod (as we deny not but they might be) their intereſt in the determinations and conſultations of the Synode was not by way of authoritative and definitive vote: But at moſt conſultative and by way of private conſent and approbation, as we cleared before againſt Mr. Lockier. 5. That recommendation of obedience to the acts of that Synode from the goodneſſe and benefite thereof, expreſſed in the cloſe of the Synodicall letter, doth not argue their conſtitutions not to have been made and enjoined by an authoritative power obleiging under hazard of cenſure. The moſt authoritative acts of any juridicall Court, being ſent in a reſpective way, may be ſo recommended in ſuch a way. Neither that, that in the conſtitutions of that Synode there is not an expreſſe and formall threatning of thoſe that diſobey with cenſure, doth import by any neceſſity of conſequence, that the power they exerciſed was not authoritative, and ſuch as might proceed to cenſure. Juridicall courts do not alwayes adde to their conſtitutions expreſſe and formall comminations of puniſhment: Here eſpecially it was not neceſſarie, it being a clear caſe in it ſelf that thoſe Hareticks and Schiſmaticks who could by no other means be reduced, were not to be ſuffered but cenſured and caſt forth.
section 10 Now is this, which we have been conſidering, the pith and ſtrength of the grounds, whereupon theſe Authors have not only adventured themſelves, to deſert and ſeparate from this Church: But alſo have darred to adviſe the Brethren to whom they directed their Epiſtle, to appear with them upon the head of the buſineſſe, (that is, to put to their hands as chief actours, to throw down to the ground that beautifull order of Government in this Church, by the Officers of Jeſus Chriſt appointed to rule his Church on earth, in Congregationall and Claſſicall Presbyteries, Synodes Provinciall and Nationall, ordered in a ſweet and excellent ſubordination among themſelves, which was after the firſt Reformation, upon much deliberation for many years, ſettled in the Church as warranted and grounded upon the Word of God, was afterward, when oppoſed, born down and oppreſſed, ſealed by many precious ſervants of Jeſus Chriſt, with bitter and grievous ſufferings, of Impriſonment, Baniſhment, and even ſentences unto death (which the only hand of God reſtrained from being put in execution) and was again by the good hand of God upon his people in this land, after long oppreſſion under Prelacie, raiſed up; has been atteſted by forraine Divines and Churches as the true Government of Jeſus Chriſt in his Viſible Church; has been alwayes the hammer to break wickedneſſe and prophanitie, and the hedge to keep out Errours, Haereſies and Schiſmes; made this Church againſt all evil doers and enemies of truth, terrible as an Armie with Banners, which at this day is the eye ſore of all the Sects and Hereticks of the times, & the butt of Satans malice, to throw down and raze this to the ground (which ſome of the ſame Reverend men to whom they wrote, have through the grace of God, to their praiſe in all the Churches, Vindicated againſt all enemies thereof upon one hand and other, and ſtand engaged by ſolemne vows, and the dreadfull Oath of God to maintain and defend to their lives end) to ſet up, I wot not what, and I think the Authors themſelves wots not what) and if they do not this, to threaten them with the ſtreaching out of GODS hand, and to lay upon them the horrid imputation of being ſnares to GODS people? O Lord, how terrible are thy judgements in theſe times as upon outward things, ſo upon the Spirits of men, while men are thus caried about with every winde of Doctrine! What need have theſe that profeſſe the Truth▪ to take heed that they have received it in love, leſt they be given up to believe lies?
section 11 The Authors adde only, That there might be ſomewhat ſaid from antiquity, that the Government of the Church was partly Ariſtocraticall, partly Democraticall, in much of the firſt three hundred years, and that the people had no ſmall influence in maters of Diſcipline, but that they forbear, as deſiring to leane on a ſurer foundation. Anſw. What they have produced of this ſurer foundation, i. e. the Holy Sc…ipture, to leane themſelves upon in their departure from the Church of God in this land wee have ſeen, and how little ground it affords to ſuſtain them, we have ſeen too. I wiſh from my heart they had brought ſomewhat alſo, though it had been but a little, of that which they alledge may be ſaid from antiquitie of theſe ages for their tenent of Church Government, For in truth we profeſſe our ſelves to be ſuch as reverence very much, under the Holy Scriptures (which wee leane to only, as the foundation of our faith in all maters of Religion) the teſtimonie of the Orthodox Churches in theſe ages. Mr. Lockier, as we ſaw before, undertook ſomewhat of this before, magno hiatu, under the name of common conſent, but what he produced to inſtruct it, may bluſh before all men that has any wit, and are not ſtark fools: And I am perſwaded what theſe Authors would have produced, had they aſſayed it, ſhould have proven as little to their purpoſe.
section 12 There are two main points whereof the Independent Government conſiſts. 1. That the power of Eccleſiaſtick juriſdiction is in, and formally to be exerciſed by the communitie of Profeſſours, if not wholly and by themſelves, yet jointly with the Elders and Officers, they as well as the Elders concurring authoritatively, in all acts of Government and juriſdiction. 2. That there is not any larger Judicatories or Aſſemblies Eccleſiaſtick, than of a ſingle Congregation, whether Claſſicall Presbyterie or Synod, juridicall; But that the Judicatorie of every ſingle Congregation is the ſupreme Eccleſiaſtick juridicall court upon earth, Independent upon and without ſubordination to any larger or Superiour Eccleſiaſtick Judicatorie. They grant indeed ſome ſort of Synods, but denude them of all authoritative and juridicall power over particular Churches, leaving them only power of advice and counſell; or at moſt a dogmaticall power to determine caſes and queſtions in Religion: but without power authoritatively to enjoine their determinations upon particular Churches, ſo as to obleige them to be cenſurable in caſe of diſobedience, or to inflict any cenſure at all upon offenders.
section 13 Now 1. ſuppoſe (which yet cannot be granted) that ſomewhat might be brought from antiquitie to ſhew that there was in the Government of the Church then a mixture of Ariſtocracie and Democracie, and that the people had ſome influence in the exerciſe of Government: Yet none dare be ſo impudent as to alledge that antiquitie for the ſecond point of Independent Government. I think theſe Authors, ſome of them at leaſt (for others of them, though they all ſpeak in this Epiſtle referring this to antiquitie, yet we may acquite from all guiltineſſe of acquaintance with antiquitie) knew this very well: And therefore they have wittily enough expreſſed this reference to antiquitie, in that, whereas in their two former Arguments, they affirmed theſe two points of Independent Government diſtinctly, now in this reference to antiquitie, they alledge only generally and confuſedly, that there was then a mixture of Ariſtocracie and Democracie, and that the people had no ſmall influence in Diſcipline. There is nothing more clear and undenyable in humane Hiſtorie then authoritative juridicall Governing Aſſemblies and Synodes of more Churches in theſe ages of the Church. Oecumenicall Synod, there were none (nor could be, becauſe of the evils of theſe times) after the dayes of the Apoſtles untill the Nicen Councel, yet the thing it ſelf was acknowledged, could the benefit thereof been had, as is evident by that of Cyprian, Lib. 1. Epiſt. 8. in Pamel. order. Epiſt. 40. Cum ſemel placuerit, tam nobis quam confeſſoribus & clericis urbicis, item Ʋniverſis Epiſcopis vel in noſtra Provincia, vel trans mare conſtitutis, ut nihil innovetur circa lapſorum cauſam, niſi omnes in unum convenerimus & collatis conſiliis cum Diſciplina pariter & miſericordiae temperatam fixerimus ſententiam. That Provinciall Synods (i. e. of many neigbouring Churches having Colledges of Presbyters and Officers over them) were then in actuall uſe is ſo clear as cannot be denyed. See the Magdeburgen Cent. 2. Cap. 7. in princip. they ſay. Duplex atuem regiminis Eccleſiaſtici forma (ut hoc ſaeculo) ſeſe nobis offert conſideranda, quarum prior communem ſingularum Eccleſiarum Adminiſtrationem: Altera vero plurium aut omnium inter ſe conſociatarum gubernationem complectitur (note here by the way, that thoſe ſingulae Eccleſiae, particular Churches, to which they give privatas Synodos afterward, were not, alwayes at leaſt (as we ſhall ſhew after this) ſuch ſingle Congregations as the Independents ſtand for, which may meet together at one time in one place, but more ample. Then afterward, p. 135. De conſociatione Eccleſiar. they ſay, ſi quando Haereſes oboriebantur aut aliae Quaeſtiones graviores; Tum conveniebant vel omnes provinciales, aut plerique Doctores: Et examinata recommuni judicio ſtatuebant, quod vitandum aut ſequendum eſſet, Euſeb. l. 3. c. 16. Ex Appollinario dicit: etenim fideles per Aſiam multis ſaepe numero Aſiae locis ob hanc cauſam conveniebant, & nuper natas Doctrinas examinabant, & profanas pronunciabant, haereſi… que iſtam reprobantes Eccleſiâ ejiciebant & Excommunicabant. I… …ike manner Cent. 3. c. 7. titul. De conſociatione plurium Eccleſ. in unâ aliquâ Provinciâ, p. 158. Diximus ſuperiori ſaeculo, Eccleſias ejuſdem Provinciae ſolitas eſſe plerum que ad unam aliquam maximè inſignem reſpicere, eam que venerari, & ab ea conſilia & mutua officia petere & recte monitis obtemperare: Ea vero res ut paulatim in conſuetudinem abiit, ita hoc ſaeculo obſervata eſt: Nam in pleriſ que Provinciis, caeterae Eccleſiae, eorumque Epiſcopi & Clerici, ſe ad ejuſmodi alicujus urbis Epiſcopum, Doctrinâ, pietate & conſtantiâ inſignem, & ſacerdotum Collegium aſſociarunt, ut eorum operâ tanquam communium inſpectorum & gubernatorum uterentur. And in the ſame Cent. p. 163. l. 40. De conſociatione Ʋniverſ. they ſay. Si autem graviores Quaeſtiones aut controverſiae incidebant, aut alia negotia quae non ad unius Provinciae Eccleſias attinebant ſed ad plures, tum Eccleſia etiam in diverſis Provinciis ſuas operas conjungebant, in petendis aut dandis conſiliis, in componendis ſchiſmatibus, in refutandis erroribus, in Congregandis Synodis, in Excommunicandis Haeretecis & aliis facinoroſis. See alſo after. pag. 166. l. 22. & ſeq. See alſo. Cent. 4. c. 7. p. 517. l. 21. & pag. 522. l. 8. But why inſiſt we in this, inſtances of Synods of this kind, exerciſing juridicall power authoritatively (I mean Miniſteriall authority ſubordinat to the Word of God) determining Queſtions in Religion, condemning Hereſies, Excommunicating Haereticks, Schiſmaticks, and other flagitious perſons, in theſe ages are notour to all that have read any thing of antiquity. Cyprian alone in his Epiſtles affordeth abundant teſtimony of this. And as for Claſſicall (as we call them) Presbyteries, what elſe were the Biſhop with his Preſbyterium, or Collegium ſacerdotum *VVhichWhich the Centuriſts cal, Synodos privatas ſingularum Eccleſiarum., in theſe times. I ſhall not contend here whether in theſe times there were any ſingle Congregations having a full Preſbyterium within themſelves, albeit I think it ſhall be hard for any man to give any particular inſtance in theſe ages of a Preſbyterium of one particular Congregation ſuch as our Independent Brethren ſpeak for. But certain it is, that the Biſhops (who were then but conſtant praeſidents differing from other Presbyters, ordine tantum non grad… aut poteſtate) with their Preſbyterium, or Collegium Clericor… for the moſt part were Diaeceſan, i. e. over ſuch numerous Churc… as could not be one ſingle Congregation, to meet in one place at one time for divine Worſhip, but behoved to be made up of many ſuch ſingle Aſſemblies (which whether they were fixed or not fixed, we debate not now, nor does the one or the other make any oddes in the purpoſe we are now upon) and ſo was juſt ſuch a Presbytery as we call Claſſicall: ſuch was Cornelius in Rome with his Presbytery▪ and Cyprian with his Presbytery in Carthage, and other Biſhops with their Presbyteries in other populous Cities. Certain it is that theſe Presbyteries were juridicall Eccleſiaſtick Courts: And as certain it is that they were not Presbyteries of one ſingle Congregation, ſuch as Independents ſpeak of.
section 14 As for the other point of Independent Government, if we ſpeak of the authoritative and juridicall Acts of Government (ſuch as are Ordination and poteſtative miſſion of Miniſters, judiciall determination of controverſies in Religion, Excommunication of Hereticall and ſcandalous perſons) I darre affirm that in antiquitie a man may as ſoon find a mixture of Ariſtocracy and Democracy, let be Morellian, or compleat Democracy (which yet is the thing maintained by moſt part Independents) as in ſylvis Delphinum: We ſhall not deny that the people then had an hand in the election of Miniſters, as is evident by many paſſages of theſe times, ſee eſpecially, Cyprian lib. 1. Epiſt. 4. in Pamel. Ord. Epiſt. 68. But election is no act of Eccleſiaſtick Authority or Government, nor doth it conſtitute any one a Paſtour, but is only a deſignation of the perſon, to be authoritatively put in that Office by ordination, or to be applyed to ſome particular charge, if he be one already in Office. Nor do we deny but the people might be preſent at the handling of matters of faith in Aſſemblies, be hearers and witneſſes of the whole proceedings thereanent, give their counſell and advice in conſultation, alſo teſtifie their aſſent and approbation to the determinations: We grant alſo that Excommunication and looſing from Excommunication of perſons was not performed without at leaſt the tacit agreement and conſent of the people. …hey are to concur activè and executivè to both; And therefore when any perſon was to be Excommunicat, the grounds and cauſes thereof were made known to the people: And when perſons Excommunicat were to be received again into the Church, they were brought before the people to make their foreign publick confeſſion before them, as we do in our Churches now, but none of theſe, nor all of them, amounts to an authoritative and juridicall power of Government. But as for ſuch acts as belong directly to authoritative and juridicall Government, as Ordination of Miniſters, judiciall ſentencing perſons to be Excommunicat, or abſolution from Excommunication, giving of definitive ſentence in publick determinations of controverſies of faith, or of matters pertaining to order, and rites to be obſerved in the Church, let our Authors produce any teſtimony, or allowed practice, of the peoples formall influence and concurrence in theſe, if they would ſay any thing from that antiquity for an Eccleſiaſtick Government properly Democraticall, either in whole, or in part.
section 15 Hierome, who was near theſe ages, and better acquaint with their way, then theſe Authors, tells us in the generall, in whoſe hands the power of Government was then, in that remarkable and famous ſaying of his, on the Epiſtle to Tit. c. 1. Antequam Diaboli inſtinctu ſtudia in Religione fierent & diceretur in populo, ego ſum Pauli, ego Apollo, ego vero Cephae, Communi Presbyterorum conſilio Eccleſiae gubernabantur, &c. See what learned Chamier ſayeth on this of Hierome, lib. 10. de Oecumen. Pontifc. 5. §. 22. Anſwering to Bellarmin. his Arg. Reſpondeo ad primum etiamſi Ariſtocratia non ſit totidem ſyllabis nominata, tamen certò ſignificatam his verbis, Communi Presbyterorum conſilio Eccleſiae gubernabantur, &c. And he adds, bonam autem fuiſſe id regiminis formam, inde ſequitur, quod ab initio fuiſſe dicat (Hieronymus) cum in Eccleſiâ id ſit optimum quod veriſſimum, id autem veriſſimum quod primum: Dicit etiam (Hieron.) fuiſſe ex inſtitutionis Dominicae veritate And mark in this ſame Learned Author whoſe words I am now citing, that the very thing he undertakes to demonſtrate in that, c. 5. and ſome following both from Scripture and antiquity, is that the government as well of particular, as of conſociat Churches was pure Ariſtocracy, c. 5. §. 1.
section 16 More particularly. 1. That ordination and impoſition of hands (which only is the authoritative act in the Calling of a Miniſter, and that which conferreth (Miniſterially under Chriſt) a Mininiſteriall power) was in theſe primitive times the proper and peculiar act, of the Miniſters of the Church, or the Presbytery, is ſo evident and clear to all that has read any thing of theſe times, that it were waſte of time and paper to produce teſtimonies for it. Indeed we find in antiquity, that after that once there began a conſtant praeſident to be ſet up in the Presbytery, with the name of Biſhop (which in Scripture is common to all Presbyters) appropriat to him alone, ſomewhat of the Act of Ordination began alſo to be peculiar to him, and as he advanced in his foreign, preheminency above Presbyters, ſo was the power of ordination more and more deferred to him or uſurped by him alone, and hence came that point of difference between a Biſhop and a Presbyter, of which Jerome in his time. Quid facit exceptâ ordinatione Epiſcopus quod non facit Preſbyter? But that ever the people had any formall concurrence in ordination of Miniſters is a thing unknown to antiquity.
section 17 2. That the power and exerciſe of the Keyes of Diſcipline, of binding and looſing, ſentencing unto cenſure, and abſolution from cenſure, alſo was only in the hands of the Colledge of Presbyters in thoſe times of the Church, is as evident to ſuch as are any ways acquainted in them. Origen. Hom. 7. in Ioſuam. tertio admonitum reſipiſcere nolentem, jubet ab Eccleſiae corpore deſecari, per Eccleſiae praeſides. The Centuriators, Cent. 3. c. 7. tels us that then, Jus tractandi de Excommunicandis, aut recipiendis lapſis publice penes Eccleſiae Seniores erat qui ad eam rem convenire ſolebant, and they cite for this, Tertullians Apologetick. The order then obſerved in receiving penitents, that had offended by grievous ſcandalous ſins, is moſt clear for this, they were firſt to compear before the Biſhop and his Clergy, i. e. the Presbytery, (wherein the Biſhop then differed from other Presbyters, ordine tantum non gradu) by them the penitents cauſe was judicially cognoſced, the manner of ſatisfaction preſcribed and enjoyned to them; And having performed that, and made their foreign, before the people, they were actually abſolved, by the impoſition of the hands of the Biſhop and Clergy, or the Presbytery. Cyprians Epiſtles are full of teſtimonies to this purpoſe. It were needleſſe labour to inſiſt in citation of them: Only I think it worth the pains to produce one Paſſage, whereby it may evidently appear that the way of abſolving and receiving penitents was juſt as it is now in the Presbyterian Government, as to the matter and ſubſtance. It is in lib. 3. Epiſt. 11. in Pamel. Ord. Epiſt. 46. from Cornelius Biſhop of Rome to Cyprian, concerning the return of ſome Confeſſours from the Novatian ſchiſm to the unity of the Church there: Cornelius after he has related how theſe Confeſſours, had expreſſed their deſire of reconciliation, to the Presbyters, and taken with the faults laid to their charge in a privat and extrajudiciall way, he proceedeth thus. Omni igitur actu ad me perlato, placuit contrahi Preſbyterium. Adfuerunt etiam Epiſcopi quinque qui & hodie praeſentes fuerunt, ut firmato conſilio, quid circa perſonam eorum obſervari deberet, conſenſu omnium ſtatueretur. Et ut motum omnium, & conſilium ſingulorum dignoſceres, etiam ſententias noſtras placuit in notitiam veſtri perferri, quas & ſubjectas leges. His ita geſtis in Preſbyterium venerunt Ʋrbanus, &c. Et plerique fratres qui ſe iis adjunxerant, ſummis precibus deſiderantes, ut ea quae ante fuerunt geſta, in oblivionem cederent, nullaque eorum mentio haberetur—quod erat conſequens omnis hic actus populo erat inſinuandus ut & ipſos viderent in Eccleſiâ conſtitutos. Having related the peoples expreſſion of their joy he ſets down the confeſſion which the penitents made. Nos errorem noſtrum confitemur, &c. And then addeth, iſtâ eorum profeſſione non moveremur? Ʋt quod apud poteſtatem ſeculi erant confeſſi, in Eccleſiâ conſtituti comprobarent: Quamobrem Maximum Preſpyterum, juſſimus locum ſuum agnoſcere, caeteros cum ingenti populi ſuffragio recepimus. I need not comment upon the place, it ſpeaks plain enough of it ſelf what we are pleading for.
section 18 3. That the giving of definitive ſentence in queſtions of faith, or making Eccleſiaſtick conſtitutions and canons concerning order to be obſerved in the Church, in theſe ages did ordinarily pertaine only to Miniſters of the Church, Biſhops and Elders, & that though others privat Chriſtians might be preſent, hear and conſult, that yet theſe only did ſit and vote as ordinary Judges, is undenyablie clear by the Hiſtorie of all Councels that were then held in the Church: I ſay ordinary. For I deny not but that ſometimes ſuch as were not in any ſuch Miniſteriall office, did alſo ſit and concur in giving definitive ſentence: But theſe were not any whatſoever privat Chriſtians promiſcuouſly: But eminent learned and pious men, and having authoritie and calling thereunto, either by antecedent agreement of the Churches that were to meet in the Aſſembly, or by a ſubſequent aſſuming and calling of them by the Aſſembly it ſelf. Which was an eſpeciall vocation unto the Miniſteriall office, ad tempus and in relation to theſe particular acts which were to be done in the Synode, and in ſo far did exempt them è ſorte, out of the ſtate of meer private Chriſtians: But that ſuch as were meer privat Chriſtians, i. e. were neither ordinary Miniſters, nor had a ſpeciall calling extra ordinem, concurred to give definitive ſentence in Aſſemblies, was a thing unknowne. See what Junius, a man well verſed in antiquitie, ſayeth to Bellarm. Cont. 3. lib. 2. c. 25. n. 2. ſpeaking in relation to ancient Councels. Eorum qui Conciliis interſunt, varia eſſe genera; Eſſe audientes qui in Doctrina & ordine ex auditione informantur: Eſſe doctos, qui ad conſultationem adhibentur: Eſſe denique Epiſcopos & Presbyteros, qui decidunt res ferendis ſententiis: And again, Cont. 4. lib. 1. c. 15. n. 15. qui ſine authoritate Eccleſiae adjunt, eorum alii etiam conſultationibus adhiberi poſſunt, ut docti, praetertim Eccleſiaſtici, ſed dicere ſententiam definitivam non poſſunt.
section 19 I hear of two main Objections which uſe to be be made againſt what I have been pleading for, and for the concurrence of the people in the exerciſe of the Government of the Church. 1. That is alledged of the Magdeburg. Cent. 2. c. 7. p. 134. coeterum ſi quis probatos autores hujus ſaeculi. perſpiciat, videbit formam gubernationis propemodum foreign ſimilem fuiſſe. To which may be added that of learned Whitak. Cont. 4. q. 1. c. 1. ſic partim Ariſtocraticum, partim Democraticum, partim etiam Monarchicum (n. ſi velimus Chriſtum ipſum reſpicere, as he ſayeth a little before) eſt, ſemperque fuit Eccleſiae Regimen. Anſw. That theſe Authors called the Government of the Church, either much like unto a Democraticall, or in part Democraticall, their meaning and intention was not, that the whole body of private Profeſſours did formally concur in the exerciſe of ſuch acts, as are formally authoritative and judiciall acts of Government, (which were requiſite to make the Government formally and properly Democraticall, either in whole or in part) But only becauſe of ſuch things competent to them, as we have mentioned, §. 14. which are no authoritative or judiciall acts of Government. And firſt for the Magdeburg. ſee how they explicate that which they ſay in the next following words. Singulae enim Eccleſiae parem habebant poteſtatem verbum Dei pure docendi, Sacramenta Adminiſtrandi, abſolvendi & excommunicandi Haereticos & ſceleratos, & ceremonias ab Apoſtolis acceptas exercendi, aut etiam pro ratione aedificationis novas condendi, Miniſtros eligendi, vocandi, ordinandi, & juſtiſſimas ob cauſas iterum deponendi—In theſe words there are two things expreſly obſervable to our purpoſe. 1. That they in explicating the Democracy they ſpeak of, ſpeak not of the power of ſingle perſons as to maters of Government, but of ſingle or particular Churches. Singulae enim Eccleſiae (ſay they) parem habebant poteſtatem, &c. whereby it may eaſily and evidently appear, that while they ſay that the Government of the Church was much like a Democracy, they mean this, not to take away the Government out of the hands of Chriſts Officers of the Church, to put it in the hands of the whole people, at leaſt to joine theſe with them in the formall and proper actings of it; But in oppoſition to that authoritative and juridicall ſuperiority of any one particular Chutch over other particular Churches, as the Prelaticall men pleaded for authoritative ſuperioritie in their cathedrall Churches, over all particular Churches in the Diaeceſe, and the Papalins for an univerſall ſuperioritie and ſupremacie in the Church of Rome over all other Churches in the world. 2. It is to be obſerved that among other things which they reckon up as parts of the Church Government which they ſay was much like Democracie, they put in, the Preaching of the Word, and Admiſtration of Sacraments, which themſelves before ſay (and no man of ſound judgment will deny) are acts proper to the called Miniſters of Chriſt: Whence alſo, it is manifeſt that they mean not a Democracie properly ſo called, which putteth the formall power and exerciſe of Government in the hands of all and every one of the multitude, which the Independent Brethren plead for. And indeed will any man conſider, what the particular Churches were, to which theſe Centuriators attribute private Synods (Cent. 2. c. 7. pag. 130.) wherein it may poſſibly be conceived, that Democracie could have place eſpecially, and it may eaſily be perceived that they were ſuch, as the whole body of the people (for whoſe right to concur in juridicall acts, the Independent Brethren pleads) could not poſſibly meet together in one, or be preſent at once, in their Synods when aſſembled for exerciſe of juriſdiction. For moſt part, at leaſt of them which they call particular Churches, were of ſuch amplitude, and ſo numerous, that ſuch an aſſembling of their whole body was not poſſible, and in truth they were Diaeceſan or Preſbyteriall Churches, and not ſuch ſingle Congregations, as the Queſtion between us and the Independent Brethren concerneth. For mark it, in that very place laſt cited, ſpeaking of theſe particular Churches and their private Synods, they bring in the Romane Church for an inſtance: And who knows not how numerous the Chriſtians in Rome were become ere that time. Adde to theſe things that theſe ſame Authors, Cent. 3. c. 7. p. 151. ſay expreſly that jus tractandi de excommunicandis aut recipiendis publice lapſis, penes Seniores Eccleſiae erat, and cite Tertul. Apolog. for it, read alſo c. 6. ejuſdem Cent. pag. 129, l. 30. de ritibus circa claves, and you will finde that the judiciall power of Diſcipline was not common to the people but proper to the Miniſters, only ſome intereſt therein was for honours ſake, given to Martyres. 2, As to that cited from Whittaker, that learned Theologue himſelf in the words immediatly going before theſe cited, clears in what reſpect it is that he ſayes the Government of the Church was alwayes in part Democraticall, when he ſaith. Si totum corpus Eccleſiae (n. volumus reſpicere) quatenus in electione Epiſcoporum & Preſbyterorum ſuffragia ſerebat, ita tamen …t foreign ſemper à Preſbyteris ſervaretur, Democraticum. So then he calls it partly Democraticall, in this reſpect that the people had vote in the election of their Miniſters, which we grant the people ought to have, and if any will in this reſpect call the Government of the Church in part Democraticall, we ſhall not contend about the name, only we will ſay that the election of Miniſters, being no more but the nomination or deſignation of a perſon to the Miniſtry, is no proper or formall act of authoritative power.
The other Objection made uſe of is from Cyprian. Lib. 1. Epiſt. 1…. in Pamel. Ord. Epiſt. 6. Ad id verò quod ſcripſerunt mihi, Donatus & Fortunatus, Novatus & Curdius ſolus reſcribere nihil potui…; quando à primordio Epiſcopatus mei ſtatuerim, nihil ſine Conſilio veſtro, & ſine conſenſu plebis, *Pam…meae, privatâ ſententiâ.meâ privatim ſententiâ gerere. Anſw. How far that grave, pious and zealous ancient was from the Independent way of Church Government, amongſt many places in his Writings, that one famous Paſſage in Lib. 1. de Ʋnitate Eccleſiae, doth abundantly demonſtrate, and cleareth as with Sun-ſhine. Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum: Ego dico tibi, &c. to theſe words. Hanc Eccleſiae unitatem. And again a litle after from theſe words, quam unitatem firmiter tenere, &c. to theſe, quomodo Solis multi radii. This place as it hews down the Antichriſtian Papall Monarchy, ſo it is a clear teſtimony againſt popular and ſupream Independent Government in a ſingle Congregation; while as therein the Author ſo clearly aſſerteth the power of the Keyes to have been given by Chriſt and put in the hands of the Apoſtles, in an equall ſociety of honour and power. 2. That there is one Catholick Viſible Church, and that this Catholick Church, is but one charge. Ʋnus Epiſcopatus cujus à ſingulis in ſolidum pars tenetur. And that, unitatem hanc firmiter tenere & vindicare debent Epiſcopi qui in Eccleſiâ praeſident, ut Epiſcopatum quo que ipſum, unum et que indiviſum probent. Then which nothing could be ſaid more forcibly, againſt that crumbling of the Church into ſo many ſingle Congregations, Independent in themſelves and without all union and conjunction in point of Government. But to the place in hand, cited from Epiſt. 10. lib. 3. Gulartius and Junius Notes on the place, clear the matter well for us. Nempe agebatur de aliqua electione, quam Cypriano quidam è Preſbyterio ſuggeſſera…, eo quod Eccleſia ex perſecutionibus, parte ſui Preſbyterii deſtituta eſſet. Reſpondet nihil ſe in hac cauſa unquam facere voluiſſe, quin & Preſbyterii Conſilium & plebis conſenſum adhiberet. But what is the place and part of the people in election, we controvert not. Nay, we ſay with the ſame Ancient, Lib. 1. Epiſt. 4. Quando ipſa plebs maxime habeat poteſtatem vel eligendi dignos ſacerdotes, vel indignos recuſandi. And as he ſayes afterward; Eligendus Epiſcopus immaculatus & integer praeſente plebe, &c. But ſhew me a place in that Writer aſcribing to the people formall concurrence with the Officers of the Church in any juridicall, authoritative Acts of Government, as, in Ordination of Miniſters, ſentencing perſons to cenſure, to Excommunication, and abſolving from Excommunication, judiciall and definitive determination of controverſies in Religion. But now this Book having grown to bigneſſe beyond my intention at firſt, I will inſiſt no further, but leave theſe Brethren I have been laſt ſpeaking with my hearty deſire to God on their behalf, that he would ſhew them mercy to remember from whence they have fallen, repent and do their firſt works.
FINIS.
End of the text · James Wood, A Little Stone Found to be Counterfeit (1654)