A Little Stone Found to be Counterfeit, Treatise · Part 2 · Section 7
SECTION VII. Mr. Lockiers 2. Aſſertion touching Presbyteries of many particular Congregations combined (whether Claſſicall or Synodicall) and their power conſidered, and the true ſtate of the Controverſie touching this matter between Presbyterians and Independents layed forth.
section 1 IN the former Aſſertion the Author would throw the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven, the power of the Government of the Church, out of the hands of them whom Chriſt has appointed to be Rulers over the Church, his Officers, to put the ſame in the hands of all and every one of the people. And in the ſecond he would ſo put them in the hands of one particular Congregation (may be, of ſeven or ten perſons: For of ſo many may a Church be compleatly conſtitute by their way) as that they ſhall exerciſe all that power, even to the higheſt acts thereof, Independently as the ſupream Tribunall in Eccleſiaſtick Government under Jeſus Chriſt, upon earth: So as that if there ſhould be any errour committed by ſuch a particular Congregation, ſuppoſe the greateſt errour or hereſie in Doctrine maintained by it, or a man unjuſtly Excommunicated and caſten out of the Church, there is no Eccleſiaſtick authoritative remedy under Heaven to redreſſe ſuch an errour: No Eccleſiaſtick Judicatory, to which a grieved perſon may have recourſe, by appeal for Authoritative recognition, or redreſſe of his grievance: But ſee we his Aſſertion.
section 2 That Preſbyteries or Elderſhips without the particular Congregations, exercing authoritative and coercive power over it, are an invention of man. Having thus propounded his Aſſertion, He explaines the ſubject of it thus. By Preſbyteries or Elderſhips without the Congregation, I mean ſuch an Elderſhip as is choſen out of ſeverall particular Congregations, aſſuming to themſelves, ſuperiour and deciſive power over them. Afterward he calls it forrain Elderſhip, SECT. 20. And ſo forth in the reſt of his Book. And then again undertaking to explain the nature thereof, ſayeth, I find among our Brethren themſelves that Elders and Brethren, ſent and impowered from their ſeverall Congregations, reſpectively, to tranſact, and conclude ſuch and ſuch Eccleſiaſtick affairs within ſuch a limited bounds, ex ſua poteſtate, are a forrain Preſbytery. A note or two upon theſe things and then we ſhall more clearly and diſtinctly ſet forth the true ſtate of the Controverſie, and what is our Doctrine therein. 1. Whereas he propounds to himſelf to Diſpute againſt the Authority of an Elderſhip or Preſbytery without the particular Congregation, i. e. as he calls it afterward, forrain to the Congregation, he but enters in a conflict againſt his own fiction. And whereas he ſayeth, SECT. 20. that he finds, amongſt their Brethren. (he means Presbyterians) that a Presbytery ſent from ſeverall Congregations is a forrain Presbytery. I humbly conceive, for ought I can remember of any of them, he wrongs them exceeding much. I do not remember of any Presbyterian, that acknowledges the Presbytery of ſeverall Congregations aſſociat in Government, to be a forrain or extrinſecall Presbytery, to theſe Congregations: Nor is it ſo indeed. It cannot be called a forrain Presbytery to all the Congregations aſſociat under it; Becauſe it is made of their own ſeverall Elderſhips: Nor yet can it be forrain or externall to any of them; Becauſe every one is a part of it, and in it as a part of the whole. As a Parliament cannot be called a forrain Judicatory to the whole Kingdom whereof it is the Parliament, nor unto any of the ſeverall Cities or Counties, which are parts of the Kingdom, and are in the Parliament by their Deputies or Commiſſioners, as parts conſtituents thereof. Indeed the Prelate and his Cathedrall conſiſtory taking to themſelves the Government and Juriſdiction over all Congregations in the Dioceſe were an externall & forrain Judicatory to theſe Churches, becauſe they excluded the other Congregations and their Elderſhips from all collaterall concurrence and copartnerſhip with them in the Government. But the Presbytery we ſpeak for, is made up of the Elders of the ſeverall Congregations which it governs, as intrinſecall collaterall parts conſtituent thereof, and therefore cannot be called forrain to theſe ſeverall Congregations. 2. When as he expreſſeth the power of theſe Preſbyteries againſt which he propounds this diſpute, under the name of coercition, calling it a coercive power. He ſeemeth on purpoſe to choiſe an odious word, to render it ſuſpicious by the very name: For the word of coercing, in the common uſe, moſtly ſeemeth to import, outward bodily or civill force exerciſed upon perſons or things to ſtop and repreſſe their actions, ipſis etiam renitentibus, we aſcribe no ſuch power unto Presbyteries: But a power of executing ſpirituall cenſures which have no externall force upon perſons, yea nor Phyſicall neither, but only Morall, as adminiſtred by the Elderſhip: Tho they may be accompanied by God, With a Phyſicall (I mean a reall) operation upon the perſons, either in mercy or judgement. And if at any time thoſe who are for Preſbyteries over more Congregations, ſpeaking of their power, call it coercive, they mean no other thing, but a power of Spirituall juriſdiction exerciſed in Spirituall cenſures, ſuch as the Author himſelf and theſe of his way, attributes to particular Elderſhips of a ſingle Congregation together with the Congregation over every member thereof. If the Author had dealt ingenuouſly with us, he ſhould not uſed ſuch a word without explanation of the thing, he knoweth we mean. But now let's ſee the clear ſtate of the controverſie in this mater.
section 3 The ſubject in generall, whereupon the Queſtion runneth between us and the Independent Brethren, is a Presbytery or Elderſhip of more Congregations then one. Concerning which, there are ſome things, confeſſed and uncontroverted, where of we ſhould take notice in the firſt place that we may the better ſee where the difference and contoverſie lyeth. 1. 'Tis confeſſed by our Brethren themſelves that conſociation of more particular Churches or Congregations in one Presbytery or Elderſhip is lawfull and uſefull Hooker Surv. p. 4. c. 1, 2. 2. That theſe conſociations are and may be of ſeverall ſorts and degrees, ſome leſſer, ſome greater, Claſſes, Synods, and theſe Provinciall, Nationall, Oecumenicall, Idem, Ibid: So then there is no controverſie about the being ſimply of Elderſhips and Presbyteries of more Congregations conſociated, that they may lawfully be, and of diverſe ſorts is confeſſed. But there are theſe points eſpecially concerning them of which there is controverſie between us and our Brethren.
section 4 The 1. is concerning the nature of their power over the ſeverall Congregations or Churches conſociated in them. Our Brethren of the Independent way attribute no other power unto them but of counſel, & perſwaſion to informe and hold forth unto the Churches what is commanded by the Word of God, & to exhort & perſwade them to their duty, to obedience of what they find commanded in the Word; But allow them no authority and juriſdictionall power to enjoine their determinations from the Word authoritatively under pain of Eccleſiaſticall cenſures. So Mr. Hooker, in the forecited place, pag. 2, 3. 'tis true he calls this power of counſell, by the name of Authority. And ſo Mr. Lockier from him, Sect. 30. but an authoritative power of meer counſell, advice and perſuaſion may be juſtly counted a Chimaera. But we ſhall not contend about names; Call it authority or power or what you will, the thing it ſelf is nothing elſe but brotherly counſell, which hath no binding force formally as iſſuing from the Presbyterie: But bindeth meerly vi materiae, materially in regard of the thing which is propounded by them, as it is a Scripture truth or command, as is confeſſed by Mr. Hooker; And this is no more then one Brother may do towards another, and one ſiſter Church may do to another. Mr. Cotton in the Keyes, ch. 6. ſeemeth to attribute more power to a Synod. They have (ſayeth he) power not onelyonly to give light and counſell in mater of truth and practice: But alſo to command and enjoine the things to be believed and done. The expreſſe words of the Synodicall letter imply no leſſe, Act. 15. 27. It is an act of the power of the Keyes, to binde burdens, and this binding power ariſeth not only materially from the weight of the maters impoſed (which are neceſſary neceſſitate praecepti from the word) but alſo formally from the authority of the Synod, which being an ordinance of Chriſt, bindeth the more. For the Synods ſake. This in the letter of the words is a flat contradiction to what Mr. Hooker ſayeth. He ſayeth they have only a power of Brotherly counſell M…. Cotton not only that, but alſo to command and enjoin. He ſayeth they bind only materially, becauſe what they determine is either expreſſed in, or infallibly collected out of the Word: Mr. Cotton, not only materially, but alſo formally, from the authority of the Synode. Yet I conceive for all ſuch fair words, in the intention and reall meaning of the Author, little more is underſtood than what Mr. Hooker ſayeth, at moſt nothing more but a Doctrinall power, which is competent to any ſingle Paſtour as M. Caudrey ſheweth Vindiciae clav. c. 6. pag. 53. We, on the contrare aſſert that by warrand of the Word of God, the Presbyteries of aſſociated Churches, Claſſicall or Synodicall, have a power and authority of Spirituall juriſdiction, whereby they authoritatively diſcerne maters Eccleſiaſticall and impoſe theſe decrees under pain of Eccleſiaſtick cenſures, and may inflict Eccleſiaſtick cenſures upon the diſobedient and refractory in the particular Congregations within the combination or aſſociation. Only let it be obſerved here, that this authoritative and juridicall power we attribute to ſuch Presbyteries of diſcerning maters Eccleſiaſticall, and impoſing their determinations under pain of cenſure, is not Autocratorick and abſolute, binding abſolutely, by vertue of their authority; But Miniſteriall, and adſtricted in its determinations to the rule of the Word of God: So that that obligation formall which floweth from the authority of the Judicatory into the decree in actu exercito, preſuppoſeth that materiall obligation of the thing decreed, as contained in the Word of God, elſe it hath not place.
section 5 2. Point of Controverſie is, that the Independent Brethren doe not allow the ſtanding uſe of ſuch aſſociated Preſbyteries: But only occaſionall: We aſſert that by warrand of the Word of God ſome ſuch Preſbyteries are of ſtanding uſe as ſtanding ordinary juridicall Eccleſiaſticall Courts. We ſay that Claſſicall Presbyteries, in the ordinary ſettled caſe of Churches are neceſſary ſtanding Courts for adminiſtration of Eccleſiaſticall Government, and alſo that Superiour Presbyteries, Synodicall, may be warrantably of ſtanding uſe where and when conveniently, moe Presbyteriall or Claſſicall Churches may have and injoy actuall combination, as of Yearly Provinciall Synods, as in the Churches of the Low Countries are more frequent Provinciall Synods, and yearly Nationall Aſſemblies, as in the Churches of this Kingdome of Scotland.
3. Point is concerning ſubordination of leſſer Aſſemblies to greater. The Independent Brethren deny altogether ſubordination of Inferiour Aſſemblies to Superiour as juridicall Eccleſiaſticall Courts. Albeit they acknowledge that difficulties ariſing in a particular Congregation in matters of Government, there may be a going out to an Aſſembly of more Churches, and if need be, full ſatisfaction and clearing not being found there, there may be a going forth yet to a greater and more large Aſſembly. Yet they ſay, that is elective and only by way of reference and arbitration, and only for counſell and direction, and aſſert, that a particular Congregation, is the ſupream Eccleſiaſticall Juridicall Tribunall under Jeſus Chriſt upon earth. So that a perſon although wronged by an unjuſt ſentence there (as they are not in their determinations infallible) ſuppoſe ſentenced to Excommunication (which cutteth him off from the benefit of Church Ordinances and fellowſhip of Chriſtians in all the Churches of the World) he may have no appeal from their ſentence to another Superiour Judicatory to have his proceſſe juridically recognoſced, and the injurious ſentence reſcinded, but muſt ly under it without any Eccleſiaſtick remedy till death, unleſſe that particular Congregation be pleaſed themſelves to revoke their ſentence. So doth Mr. Hooker tell us, Survey, par. 3. c. 3. pag. 40, 41, 43. and par. 4. pag. 19. We, on the contrary, aſſert that both the Law of Nature, and the poſitive Law of God revealed in his Word, both in the Old and New Teſtament, holdeth out to us a juridicall ſubordination of leſſer Aſſemblies Eccleſiaſticall unto greater, ſo that appeals may be made from Inferiour and leſſer, to Superiour and greater Aſſemblies, That it is both againſt the Law of nature and the poſitive Law of God to place a ſupream, Independent Eccleſiaſticall juridicall power in a particular Congregation, yea, or in any leſſer Aſſembly when as a greater and Superiour is to be had and may conveniently be had. We aſſert alſo that, that ſeries and gradation of this ſubordination which is acknowledged and maintained by Proteſtant Churches, viz. of Congregationall, Claſſicall, Provinciall and Nationall Aſſemblies is lawfull and agreeable to the Word of God.
section 6 Whereas there are theſe three principall points of Controverſie concerning the matter in hand. The thing Mr. Lockier propoundeth to diſpute againſt in his Aſſertion, is that which is aſſerted by us in the firſt point: Yet ſome of his Arguments afterward uſed, toucheth not at that, but againſt the third, a ſeries of ſubordination of Inferiour Aſſemblies to Superiour. But come we now to conſider his proofs ſuch as they are, and let the Reader have before his eyes the true ſtate of the Queſtion as laid forth by us.