Concerning the Church of Jesus Christ Upon Earth, Section 4
Section. IV. Containing the anſwer to the fourth queſtion: Whether the churches of England were at firſt rightly conſtituted?
IF the people of England were conſtituted a Church, or gathered into a church-way, in that way and after that manner that the Apoſtles did conſtitute a church, or Churches, or gather a people into a Church-way at firſt, then the people of England were at firſt rightly conſtituted a Church, or gathered into a Church-way:
But the people of England were at firſt conſtituted a Church, or gathered into a Church-way in that way and after that manner that the Apoſtles did conſtitute a Church, or Churches, or gather a people into a Church-way, Therefore the people of England were at firſt rightly conſtituted a church or gathered into a Church-way.
The major propoſition is undeniable; the minor I thus prove:
If the people of England were conſtituted a Church, or gathered into a Church-way, upon their receiving of the word, forſaking of heatheniſh ſuperſtitions and idolatry, and embracing the faith of Jeſus Chriſt, & engaging to ſerve him:
Then they were conſtituted a Church, or gathered into a church way, Acts 2. chap. 19.in that way and after that manner, that the Apoſtles did conſtitute a Church or Churches, or gather a people into a Church way,
But the people of England were conſtituted a Church, or gathered into a Church-way upon their receiving of the word, forſaking of heatheniſh ſuperſtitions and Idolatry, and embracing the faith of Jeſus Chriſt, and engaging to ſerve him,
Therefore they were conſtituted a Church or gathered into a Church-way, in that way, and after that manner that the Apoſtles did conſtitute a Church, or Churches, or gather a people into a Church way.
The ſequel of the major propoſition is undeniable; The minor propoſition is proved by all the hiſtories relating to thoſe times, which declare that the Infidel, Pagan people of England, by the preaching of ſalvation through Jeſus Chriſt were converted unto the faith, forſaking heatheniſh ſuperſtition and Idolatry: And indeed our own ſence and reaſon muſt needs induce us to be perſwaded of this; for if this were not a truth, how then came they our progenitors by the name and religion of Chriſtians; which we their ſucceſſors do retaine to this day, being derived from them to us.
The name of Chriſtian, by which they were called, the exerciſe of Chriſtian religion, which they practiſ'd upon the preaching of the Goſpel doth abundantly prove that relinquiſhing Paganiſme and Idolatrous worſhip; They did imbrace the faith of Jeſus Chriſt.
And that they did alſo at that time covenant to take and own Jeſus Chriſt as their Lord and only ſaviour by ſerving him and ſubmitting to his holy ordinances, the very act of their Baptiſme is ſufficient to informe and convince all intelligent and conſiderate perſons; For what Infidel, or Infidels (I mean ſuch as were ſo brought up, and ſo lived for many yeares) were ever baptiſed before they had given evidence of their faith in Chriſt, repentance, and reſolution to own Chriſt as their Lord and King for the time to come.
That the Apoſtles baptiſed none that were brought up in Paganiſm and Infidelity without ſuch evidence, and engagement as before, is very clear in the Scriptures, yea, ſo evident, that it is paſt doubt or queſtion: Shall we then think or dare to ſay that thoſe who tooke upon them to be Miniſters of Jeſus Chriſt in thoſe dayes, when England was an Infidel & Pagan Nation, and were ſent hither to preach the Goſpel to this Nation, then in ſuch eſtate as before, I ſay ſhall we dare to judge or think, or ſpeak that theſe baptiſ'd the people then of this Nation without evidences of faith & repentance, and engagements to own and ſerve Jeſus Chriſt as their Lord, and God, I am ſure if they did ever or could but read the Scriptures, they could not be ignorant whom they ought to baptiſe, and upon what evidence, and far be it from me to judge or think that they would be wittingly and knowingly ſo injurious to the truth, the Sacrament of Baptiſme, and practiſe of the Apoſtles, as to baptiſe the then people of this Nation without ſome manifeſtations of their faith and repentance, and reſolutions to own and ſerve Jeſus Chriſt for the time to come, as their Lord and Saviour:
I can hardly believe that any man will cenſure the firſt converters, & Baptiſers of our nation, either to be men ignorant of, or malitious againſt the truth, one of which they muſt needs judge them to be, if they ſay they baptiſed without ſuch evidences of faith and repentance as before.
But if theſe firſt converters did by the preaching of Jeſus Chriſt to the Pagans of England turn them from their Idols to embrace the ſaid faith, and upon the ſaid evidences of faith, repentance and reſolutions to cleave to Jeſus Chriſt as their only redeemer, did admit them to be baptiſed, then they did rightly conſtitute them a Church, or gather them into a Church-way according to the manner and practice of the Apoſtles recorded in the Scriptures, which that they thus did, is both a probable and charitable judgment, That they did not, is a raſh and unchriſtian like cenſure:
Ob. But the Church of England had its conſtitution from Rome, therefore it was never rightly, conſtituted, neither is a true Church;
Sol. To this I anſwer, that the antecedent is not altogether true, poſſibly it may be, grant it in relation to a part, not in relation to the whole.
For ought I know, or any one can diſprove, there might be a Church of Chriſt in England nere as ſoon as there was one in Rome.
The Scriptures do indeed declare that there was a Church in Rome in the Apoſtles times, and therefore we may believe it; The Scriptures do not deny that there was a Church of Chriſt in England in thoſe dayes, the Chronicles and Hiſtories, relating to thoſe times affirme it, and therefore I ſee not why it ſhould be contradicted.
Tis true thoſe Hiſtories ſay not that the whol Nation of England did embrace the Faith of Chriſt when it was firſt preach'd unto them (as is conceived either by ſome of the Apoſtles, or Apoſtolicall then, as Philip, or Simon Zelotes, or Joſeph of Arimathea) but part of the Nation did, and were then gathered into a Church-way;
For about ſix hundred years after this, when Auguſtine was ſent from Rome, by Gregory, the then Biſhop of Rome, to endeavour the converſion of the whole Nation, he found both a Ministery and Churches of Jeſus Chriſt ſetled in the Land:
For at his firſt coming, he (as the Hiſtory relates) aſſembled together the Biſhops and Doctors of Britaine to diſcourſe and reaſon with them; and to requeſt their aſſiſtance for the converſion of the Pagan Engliſh, So that we may ſay, and that truly, that Chriſtianity was in England propagated, but not at firſt planted by Rome.
But grant this that Auguſtine was the firſt that planted the Chriſtian faith in England, and that there were neither Miniſtery nor Church, before ordained, and gathered by him, and his aſſiſtants, what is this to the now unchurching of the Church in England, or the wrong conſtitution of it at the time.
Obj. The miniſtry and churches of England were ordained and conſtituted by Auguſtine and his aſſiſtants who were ſent from Rome.
Therefore the Miniſtery and Churches of England had no right conſtitution and Ordination.
Sol. I deny the conſequence; & if any man will go about to prove it, it will be neceſſary that he prove and make appeare that the Miniſtery, and Church of Rome were at that time a falſe and Antichirſtan Miniſtery and Church:
But I think it is a clear caſe that the Church of Rome was then (though a corrupt) yet a true Church, & ſo continued for many yeares after that time.
Yea, it is the opinion of ſome Godly, learned, and judicious, (from whom I ſee no Reaſon to diſſent) that the Church of Rome did not quite fall off from Chriſt, or turne utterly Antichriſtian untill the Councel of Trent, at which time the ſaid Church of Rome did by a publick Councel diſowne and deſtroy the very fundamentalls of Chriſtian religion, which ſhe never did before that time; at which time theſe abſurd & antichriſtian and unchurching errors were decreed and publiſhed as the faith of the Church of Rome, and all were accurſed and excommumicated that aſſented not unto theſe abominations,
1. Popes ſupremacy.
2. Dividing the bread and wine in the Sacrament, allowing the people no wine.
3. Juſtification by works.
4. Worſhipping of images.
5. That the people ought not to read the Scripturess.
6. That Traditions ought to be believed as Scripture.
Now theſe abominations, which make deſolate (I mean unchurch) the Church of Rome, were not ſet up by publick decree and conſent in the ſaid Church untill the ſaid Councel of Trent:
'Tis true the Mystery of iniquity did work before, and theſe abominations as before were creeping into that church, but they were corrected & exploded by ſeveral Councells.
The Councels of Calcedon, Affrick, Conſtantinople, Milevi, Baſil, decreed againſt the Popes Supremacy; the Councel of Baſil decreed communicating in both kinds.
The divine worſhipping of Images was forbid by the ſecond Nicene Councel; the Councel of Nice decreed that no Chriſtian ſhould be without a Bible: To believe Traditions to be equall with the Scriptures, to hold juſtification by works was never decreed by any Councel, nor held out as the Faith of that Church before the Councel of Trent.
So that I may ſay, though the Myſtery of iniquity was many hundreds of years a working, yet the diſeaſe came not to its full height and ſtate, ſo as to deſtroy the body until that time, I mean the Councel of Trent.
So that the Church of Rome not having declared a publick diſowning of the Faith and Goſpelfundamentalls untill the Councel of Trent, I ſee no reaſon as yet, why ſhee may not be called a true Church untill that time; I ſay a true Church, though a Church very corrupt; As a man may be called a true man, though never ſo ſick, and weak, and diſeaſed, until by the extremity and height of the mallady he becomes dead; ſo a Church, may truly be called a Church, though very ſick, diſeaſ'd & corrupt, untill by making ſhipwrack of the Faith, and erring in fundamentalls, it expires.
Thus it is clear that grant it were ſo (as it was not) that the Miniſtery and Church of England, as to the whole, were ordained and conſtituted by Auguſtine and other aſſiſtants from Rome, yet this concludes nothing at all againſt the right ordination and conſtitution of the Miniſtry and Churches of England, becauſe the Church of Rome was at that time (though very corrupt) yet a true Church.
Ob. But it is objected the churches of England were not rightly conſtituted, becauſe the people became Chriſtians not by the miniſtry of the word, but by the commands and edicts of their Kings who after they were converted, commanded all their ſubjects and people to embrace the ſaid faith and religion.
Sol. To this I anſwer that the matter of this objection is wholly falſe and Scandalous;
It is wholly falſe that the Pagan people of England became Chriſtians after the converſion of their Kings, by penal Laws and edicts of their ſaid Soveraignes.
After Auguſtine had converted Ethelberg King of Kent to the Chriſtian faith, let any one, if he can ſhew any ſuch act or edict, put forth by him to enjoyne all his ſubjects to embrace the ſaid religion upon any penaltie or forfeiture; If there were any ſuch thing, it would ſurely be upon record.
But we read the contrary of him, we read of this King Ethelberg that after he was converted, Innumerable others dayly came in, Mr. Fox Acts Monuments 1. vol. page. 1656.and were adjoyned to the Church of Chriſt, whom the King did ſpecially embrace, but compelling none, for ſo be had learned, that the faith and ſervice of Chriſt ought to be voluntary and not coact.
And ſo I read of the other Kings that then reigned in this Land; that after they were converted to the Faith of Jeſus Chriſt, they encouraged Miniſters to go into their Countries, and preach to their Subjects; and by this means became the Pagan people of England to be Chriſtians, & a Church, by the preaching of the Goſpel to them, and not by compulſatory Laws of their Kings: And they that do gainſay this, it will be eaſy to prove that they are either ignorant or perverſe.
Mr. Cotton late of New-England, a man of great learning and reverence, though he fully aſſented not to ye way of the Churches of England, and therefore ſeparated from them, yet he never found fault with their conſtitution at firſt, for as to this he declares himſelf thus:
The efficient inſtruments of their firſt plantation (meaning the Churches of England) which were neither Apoſtles, or Apostolicall men, whether Phillip, or Joſeph of Arimathea, or Simon Zelotes, as any of our Country men may read in Mr. Fox's Book of Acts and Monuments, out of Gildas, Tertullian, Origen, Beda, Nicephorus, which being ſo, we cannot but conceive the Churches in England were rightly gathered and planted according to the rule of the Goſpell: And all the corruptions found in them ſince have ſprung from Popiſh Apostacy in ſucceeding Ages, and for want of thorough and perfect purging out of that Leaven in the late times of Reformation, in the dayes of our Fathers: Cottons way Churches New-England.So that all the work now is, not to make them Churches which were none before, but to reduce and reſtore them to their Primitive Inſtitution: Thus Mr. Cotton. And it being granted that the Churches in England were rightly conſtituted and gathered at firſt, it will eaſily be proved that there hath continued a true Church in this Land unto this day, though very corrupt and impure, eſpecially when ſubject to the Papall yoke: Yet in thoſe ſaddeſt times of corruption and perſecution, God had his Church and Miniſtery in England, who witneſſed to the Truth, and appeared for a Reformation of ſuch corruptions & abuſes in the Church, though many of theſe by the power of a prevaling faction in ſuffered for ſuch zeal and love to the Church the Truth.
I ſay, the Church in England under the greateſt Corruption, was never without ſome Witneſſes, ſome Names, which ſuppoſe they were but a few, in compariſon of the greater part that corrupted themſelves, and were made drunk with the wine of fornication ſpoken of, Rev. 14.8. Yet will not God diſown that to be a Church when theſe (though but few) names be found.
God own'd them to be a Church in *Rev. 3.1*verſe 4.Sardis, and yet tells them they had but a few names which had not defiled their garments. And though the Church in England might be reproved of corruption in Doctrine, yet this did not unChurch her, no more than it did the Church of Pergamus, which God owned to be a Church, though they held the Doctrine of Baalam.Rev. 2.14.
Though the Church in England might be juſtly reproved of corruption in manners, and diſcipline, yet this did not un-Church her, no more than it did the Corinthians, whom St. Paul calleth a Church of God; though in the ſame Epiſtle he reproveth them both for their corruption in manners and diſcipline.1 Cor. 11.21
Though in the Church of England by the power of a prevalent factious party, cha 3.1, 2, 3 chap. 5.many of the precious Saints of God were put to death, yet this doth no more un-Church her than the ſame ſin did the people of the Jews, whom God al along own'd as his Church, though a prevalent, wicked, factious party among them killed the *Mat. 23.37.Prophets, and ſtoned the Meſſengers of the Lord that were ſent unto them.
The Church in England ſince its firſt Inſtitution unto this day, cannot be juſtly charged to have made ſhipwrack of the faith of Jeſus Chriſt, by diſowning, or erring in any thing fundamentall to that Faith, or neceſſary to the eſſe or being of a Church: Therefore the Church in England continues to be a Church of God ſtill.
As for her many and grievous corruptions both in Doctrine, diſcipline and manners, they are ſadly to be bewailed, and diligently to be reformed: Theſe blemiſh and disbeautify a Church, and juſtly provoke God againſt it: Theſe are inconſiſtent as to the well being, but not to the being of a Church.
And though the Church in England did joyne with and own the Church of Rome, whilſt the ſaid Church held the fundamentals of Chriſtian Religion, and was ſound in matters of Faith; yet when the ſaid Church of Rome did begin to faulter there, to deny fundamental verities, and make ſhipwrack of the faith, which ſhe hath done ſince the Councell of Trent, at that very time did the Church in England refuſe her the right hand of fellowſhip, diſown, and ſeparate from her, and ſo continues unto this day.
After this manner alſo did the reformed Churches in Germany, Suevia, Denmark, France—ſeparate themſelves from that faction of Rome, and likewiſe ſo continue at this day.
They that deny the Miniſtery and Churches in England to be a true Miniſtry and true Churches, muſt of neceſſity alſo aſſert, defend and affirm theſe (to me) moſt horrid and deſperate Concluſions.
Firſt, Conc. 1 That the reformed Churches beyond the Seas, are no true Churches, but falſe and Antichriſtian Churches and Miniſtery.
The Reaſon is, becauſe the Church in England and theſe Reformed Churches reach out the right hand of fellowſhip to each other, have the ſame Baptiſm, the ſame Ordinances, the ſame Ordination, the ſame Diſcipline as to the ſubſtance of it: Therefore if the one be falſe and Antichriſtian, the other cannot be a true and Chriſtian Church, or Churches.
Secondly, Conc. 2 That Luther, Calvin, and all thoſe famous Lights, and happy Reformers of the Churches beyond the Seas, were falſe and Antichriſtian Miniſters.
Thirdly, Conc. 3 That Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, Tayler, and many more, who laboured much the Reformation of the Church in England from Romiſh ſuperſtition, and were famous inſtruments, as to that work, and afterward ſealed unto the truth with their blood, and are now Triumphing in heaven, that all theſe were limbs of Antichriſt, and no Miniſters of Jeſus Chriſt.
Fourthly, Conc. 4 That there hath been no true Church nor Miniſtery of Jeſus Chriſt for many hundreds of years upon earth: For if neither in England nor beyond the Seas, where then hath it been?
Now if Satan did ſo prevail againſt the Church, as utterly to raze the very foundation of it, how will this conſiſt with that word of our Saviours? *Mat. 16.18Ʋpon this Rock will I build my Church, and the gates of Hell ſhall not prevail againſt it. If there hath ever ceaſed to be a true Miniſtery upon earth, how will this again conſiſt with that promiſe of our Lords, *Mat. 28.2.Loe I will be with you unto the end of the world?
Fifthly, Conc. 5 That there hath been no true converſion of Soules unto God for theſe many hundreds of years in England; but that all have continued dead in ſins and treſpaſſes, Children of wrath, without Chriſt, aliens from the Commonwealth of Iſrael, ſtrangers from the Covenant of Promiſe, having no hope, and without God in the world: This was the condition of the Epheſians whilſt they were no Church, Epheſ. 2.nor had a Goſpel-Miniſtery amongſt them: And this hath been for many hundreds of years, and ſtill is the ſad condition of England, if without a Church and true Miniſters of Jeſus. I cannot ſee how that ture converſion ſhould be wrought by a falſe and Antichrichriſtian Miniſtery, *Jer. 23.32.I ſent them not nor commanded them, there fore they ſhall not profit this people at all ſaith the Lord. Therefore by what Miniſtery a people profit, & are converted from ſin and Satan, to ſerve the Lord and fear him, from living profanely, ungodly, rudely, to live ſoberly, and righteouſly, and godly in the world, it is a ſure ſigne that Miniſtery is from God, owned, and ſent by him:
Therefore ſeeing by denying the Church and Miniſtry in England to be a true Church and Miniſtery, ſuch abhorred concluſions as before muſt alſo be aſſerted, it ſeems to me not onelyonly to be an error, but a furor, a phrenſy in ſome men, to run themſelves upon ſuch dreadfull Rocks as theſe.