Reply to Rutherford, Treatise · Chapter 19
CHAP. XIX.
Of the Appeales of Luther and Cranmer: and of the power and juriſdiction in generall Councells denyed by Mr. Rutherford; whether therein he do not contradict himſelfe, and alſo overthrow the juriſdiction of Claſſicall, Provinciall, and Nationall Aſſemblies.
IN his page 482. alledging Mr. Tompſon and me, pag. 16, 17. Hee reports us to ſay, that though ſome have appealed, as Luther and Cranmer from the Pope to a generall Councell, yet not from a Congregation to a generall Councell.
Anſw. As he one of theſe pages hath nothing at all concerning this matter, and therefore might well have been ſpared, ſo neither of them both doth make any mention of Luther, either of one purpoſe or other: and therefore it is ſome marvaile, why he ſhould be mentioned as thus ſpoken of by us, who do not ſpeak of him at all ſo much as one word, for any purpoſe whatſoever. Nor do the reſt of the words of appealing from a Congregation to a generall Councell agree with ours, as we have ſet them downe in the 16. page alledged; and therefore that our mind and meaning may appeare, let me relate our own words which are theſe, How this example (ſc. of Cramners appealing to Councell, related by Mr. Fox) doth ſuit the preſent queſtion, we do not underſtand; for his appeale was not from a particular Congregation, but from the Pope: nor was it from a Synod, but to the next generall Councell, which from that day to this hath not yet been aſſembled nor called. If we muſt hold a neceſſity of appeales to ſuch a Iudicatory as Cranmer appealed unto, then the ſupremacy of Synods provinciall, and nationall is utterly taken away. Theſe are our words in the place alledged by Mr. Rutherford: now what doth he anſwer thereto?
In matters doctrinall, ſaith he, ſome as Luther, and others have juſtly appealed from Congregation to a generall Councell, though Luther and Cranmer did it not.
Anſw. Say it be true, that Cranmer did it not, yet for Luther how can it be that he ſhould be an inſtance, both of ſuch as did it not, and of ſuch as did it? for Luther and others have juſtly done it, and yet Luther and Cranmer are two of them that did it not, theſe are ſayings which ſeem not to agree. Againe, if Luther did ſo appeale, why is no proof alledged for Confirmation of what here is affirmed? which if there had been, we might have conſidered thereof. But ſith there is not, we may be allowed to forbeare aſſent, till that which is here nakedly affirmed, be further ſtrengthened by ſome proofe or other, to make it good. Laſtly, if Luther or others have juſtly appealed from a Congregation to a generall Councell, then why will it not be lawfull for others upon like occaſion to do the like? And if ſo, then (as we argued in the anſwer) the ſupremacy of Claſſicall, Provinciall, and Nationall Presbyteries is utterly taken away: and ſo, by this meanes cauſes and controverſies may ſtill be depending, and never come to be determined ſo long as this world ſhall endure; which whether it be agreeable to the wiſdome of Chriſt, and good of his people let the wiſe judge.
Though verily, I profeſſe, I cannot ſee what power of Juriſdiction to cenſure ſcandalls, can be in a generall Councell; there may be ſome meerly doctrinall power, if ſuch a Councell could be had, and that is all.
Anſw. For my part, I am altogether of the ſame minde. But here I have a quere or two to propoſe to our reverend Brothers ſerious conſideration; firſt of all, how this paſſage doth agree with that which himſelf hath written, pag. 387. where he ſaith, It may be made good that a power Dogmaticall is not different in nature from a power of Juriſdiction, and that we read not of any ſociety, which hath power to meet to make lawes and decrees, which have not power alſo to back their decrees with puniſhment. Yea, he ſaith further that if the Jewiſh Synodry might meet to declare judicially what was Gods law in point of conſcience, and what not, farre more may they puniſh contraveners of the law: For Anomothetick power in a ſociety, which is the greater power, and is in the fountaine, muſt preſuppoſe in the ſociety … leſſer power, which is to puniſh. Anomothetick power miniſteriall cannot want a power of cenſuring. So that whereto in the place we have in hand, he ſaith, there may be in a generall Councell, ſome … doctrinall power without any power of juriſdiction to cenſure, in this other place, he ſaith, theſe powers do not differ in nature, nor can the former be without the latter; but doth alwayes preſuppoſe the ſame, as that which is leſſer, and which it cannot want. Now how theſe things do agree I am not able to underſtand: next of all how doth this paſſage we have in hand agree, with that which is written p. 308, 309. Where he ſaith, it is by accident, and not through want of inate and intrinſecall power, that the court of a Catholick Councell can not in an ordinary and conſtant way exerciſe the power which Chriſt hath given to her; and what that power is he expreſſeth in two or three lines proceeding, viz. A power of juriſdiction to Excommunicate and relax from Excommunication even nationall Churches. If the Lord ſhould be pleaſed to give the Chriſtian Churches a generall Councell this day, might lawfully in a juriſdictiall way declare the faction of the Romiſh pretended Catholicks to be myſticall Babylon—which in Excommunication in the eſſence and ſubſtance of the act. And againe, This of our Saviour, Tell the Church, is neceſſarily to be applyed to all Churches and Courts of Chriſt, even to a generall Councell. And in page 304. He tells in that a power of juriſdiction (though he call it extraordinary and remote, and which is but rarely to be put forth in acts) is given to the Catholick viſible Presbytery, of the whole Catholick viſible Church. In all which places he plainly affirmeth there is a power of juriſdiction to cenſure ſcandalls in a generall Councell, which in the place we have in hand he doth as plainly deny.
Thirdly, if there be no power of juriſdiction to cenſure ſcandals in a generall Councell, then how ſhall it appeare that there is ſuch power of Juriſdiction in the Claſſicall, Provinciall and Nationall Presbyteries, which are farre leſſe? Yea, and that there is in theſe Presbyteries a power Independent and Supreame, without appeale to any other. For ſuch power there muſt be in ſome of them, if there be any power of juriſdiction in them at all, ſith we are told there is no power of juriſdiction in the generall Councell to appeale unto. Now how ſhall it appeare that any ſuch Independent ſupream power of juriſdiction is given to any of thoſe Presbyteries? where are the texts of Scripture that ſpeak of ſuch power? For our parts we know of none, but do ſtill think that this power is placed by Chriſt in a ſingle Congregation and its Presbytery, and are the rather ſtrengthened in this apprehenſion, for that the reaſon which is wont to be given againſt the Congregations power, and wherein our Brethren are wont to place their greateſt ſtrength, ſc. that appeals are juris naturalis, and that defects, in the parts are to be ſupplyed and holden by the whole, this reaſon we ſee is now removed and utterly taken away, foraſmuch as all power of juriſdiction is denyed to the generall Councell which is the inevitable. Now if there be no power of juriſdiction within the generall Councell, then there can be no appeals to ſuch a Councell for ſuch an end: and if no appeales to that Councell, then the rule doth not alwayes hold, that there muſt be appeals from the leſſer aſſemblies to the greater: and if this do not alwayes hold, then there may be independent power of juriſdiction in a Congregation without appeals from the ſame, though it be a leſſer aſſembly then the Claſſicall, Provinciall and Nationall Presbyteries, and thus our purpoſe is gained. For how can it be avoided, except this power of juriſdiction (yea ſupream or independent power) which is denyed to the generall Councell, could be proved to be in the Claſſes, Synods, or nationall Presbyteries, which we think cannot be done. Indeed to ſay on the one ſide, that … is no independent power in the Congregation, and to ſay on the other ſide, that there is no power at all of juriſdiction in generall Councells, this doth inevitably lay a neceſſity of ſuch Independent power in theſe intermediat aſſemblies of the Claſſicall, Provinciall and nationall Presbyteries; except we ſhall ſay there is no ſuch power at all appointed by Chriſt in any Church aſſemblies on earth. Now if ſuch independent power be given to the Presbyteries mentioned, (as it needs muſt if it be neither in the generall Councell, nor in the ſingle Congregations) then I deſire to know upon what ſcripture or ſcritures, ſuch power in the ſaid Presbyteries is grounded and built; and whether the ſaid power belong unto them all, or only unto ſome of them, and which they be, and why not to the reſt as well: yea, why not to the ſingle Congregation, nor yet to the generall Councell, as well as to any of them. When this quaere is anſwered, and the anſwer ſufficiently proved by ſcripture, then we ſhall ſee more reaſon for the juriſdiction of ſuch aſſemblies over the particular Congregations then yet we have ſeen. In the mean, time this quaere with the reſt I leave to our Brethrens conſideration.