Reply to Rutherford, Treatise · Chapter 23
CHAP. XXIII.
Whether the word Church be not given to a ſingle Congregation, and whether a Congregation be a Company or Church, meeting only for Word and Sacraments, and not for any other ſpirituall duties: and whether the divers duties, 1. of Word and Sacraments. 2. Of Diſcipline, &c. muſt needs argue divers Churches.
PAG. 489. The name Church, 1 Cor. 14. 4, 5, 35. 27, 28. is plainly given to that company that did aſſemble and come together for performance of ſpirituall duties, and for the exerciſe of ſpirituall gifts, as Act. 14. 27. and 11. 26. and 15. 4. 22. 30. and 1 Cor. 11. 18, 20, 22, 23, 3 John 6. which places do abundantly ſhew, that a company gathered together in one place, is called by the name of a Church, as Centhera, Rom. 16. 1. which could not contain many Congregations, being but the part of Corinth. And for this paſſage he alledgeth the anſwer. pag. 32.
Anſw. Mr. Herle having ſaid, that the Scripture never uſeth the word Church for a ſingle Congregation, unleſſe happily, 1 Cor. 14. and that many Congregations in one Province or City are frequently called by the name of a Church, we in anſwer to the former of theſe doe give many inſtances, p. 31, 32. where a ſingle C…regation Is called by the name of a Church, not onelyonly in 1 Cor. 14. which Mr. Herle acknowledgeth (though with a perhaps) but alſo in ſundry other ſcriptures, which here Mr. Rutherford quoteth. Now let us heare his anſwer to this paſſage.
Wee ſeek no more, ſaith he.
Anſw. Are we then agreed, that in ſcripture language the word Church is ſundry times given to a ſingle Congregation? If ſo, then for this point the anſwer is not confuted but confirmed.
If it be called a Church which conveeneth for performance of ſpirituall duties, as ſome of your places doe well prove, ergo, no aſſembly ſhould have the name of Church, but ſuch as aſſemble for Word and Sacraments, this now you cann…t affirm and it followeth not.
Anſw. If this follow not, what needs it? we never affirmed it, and our purpoſe that the word Church is given in ſcripture to a ſingle Congregation, is ſufficiently gained without it.
The Church ſpoken of Matth. 18. is not aſſembled to Word and Sacraments, but to binde and looſe: the meeting 1 Cor. 5. is not for Word and Sacraments, but to deliver to Satan; the word Church Act. 14. 27. is not an aſſembly for Word and Sacraments, but to hear how God hath opened the doore of Faith unto the Gentiles.—If to be received of the Church, Act. 15. 4. be matter of Word and Sacraments, let all judge: If to ſend a decree of a Synod, Act. 15. 22. be the act of a Church aſſembled for Word and Sacraments, let the world judge.
Anſw. Reverend Sir, keep to the point, we never ſaid that diſcipline, and all other acts, whether performed by a Church, are Word and Sacraments: and therefore there was no need to prove they are not, and then to triumph as in a great victory: The thing in queſtion is this, whether the name or word Church, be given in ſcripture to a ſingle Congregation: and if this be proved (as the inſtances given, I hope, do prove it ſufficienly) then it matters not what that particular ſpirituall Church action is, for which they do meet: For whether it be that they meet for Word and Sacraments alone; or whether it be for the Word and Prayer alone, and not at that time for Sacraments at all, or whether it be for diſcipline, or for any other Church duty, yet ſtill if they come together into one place, be it for all or for any of theſe ends, they are then a Congregation, (for what is a Congregation but a company ſo aſſembled in one place) and ſo our tenet ſtands good, and our purpoſe is gained: For if they that come together into one place for Church actions and ends, be called in ſcripture by the name of a Church, then the word Church is given to a company that ſo came together; and ſuch a company being a Congregation, it follows that the word Church is uſed for a Congregation. What this Congregation doth when they are come together, is not the queſtion: but if a Congregation coming together for Church duties be in Scripture called a Church, we have our intent.
If the word Church, be a meeting of perſons aſſembled to one place for Spirituall duties, ſometimes for Word and Sacraments onelyonly, ſometimes for acts of juriſdiction onelyonly, then is the word Church by our brethrens argument taken both for the Congregation, and for the Elders of one, or of divers Churches, and ſo we have our intent.
Anſw. Let the antecedent be granted, yet the conſequence is denied: For the word Church may be a meeting aſſembled, ſometimes for Word and Sacraments onelyonly, and ſometimes for acts of juriſdiction only, and I adde, ſometimes for the Word and Prayer only, without exerciſe of juriſdiction or Sacrament, and ſomtimes for ſome other act or acts, then any of theſe that are named, and yet for all this, it may not be taken for the Elders alone of one Church, and much leſſe for the Elders of divers Churches; the reaſon is, becauſe all theſe acts may be performed by the Congregation aſſembling ſometimes for one of them, and ſometimes for another. And therefore your intent is not yet attained; who would have the word Church to be taken ſomtimes for the Congregation, and ſometimes for the Presbyters or Elders alone?
We deſire our brethren to prove (which they muſt if they oppoſe our principles) that the word Church is never taken for the Elderſhip alore, in all the word of God.
Anſw. Muſt we prove a negative: and is that ſaying, Affirmanti incumbit …us probandi, now become unreaſonable, unneceſſary, or of no force? For my part I am ſtill of the mind, that he that affirms, muſt in equity and reaſon prove what he affirms. Beſides for our ſelves we have this to ſay further, that If we prove what we undertook, we have done as much as can in reaſon be required of us, though we do not prove this that Mr. Rutherford would impoſe upon us: And what was that which we undertook to prove? nothing in this place, but onelyonly this, that the word Church is taken for a Congregation, in other Scriptures beſides, 1 Cor. 14. and this we have performed and proved already. Mr. Rutherford himſelf allowing ſome of our proofs for good: And therefore having performed this point, it is more then needs to be required of us, to prove another alſo, which we never undertook to prove, as being quite beſides our queſtion, which we were and ſtill are deſirous to keep cloſe unto, and not to wonder or be diverted from it by any means.
Whereas our brethren ſay, a company gathered into one place (which is nothing elſe but a Congregation) are called by the name of a Church, I anſwer ſuch a company is only (I ſuppoſe this is miſprinted, for is not onelyonly) called by the name of a Church, for a company meeting for diſcipline only, is a Church alſo.
Anſw. If a company gathered into one place, which is a Congregation, be called by the name of a Church, this is as much as we deſire: for our tenent is herein expreſly granted to be true: If a company meeting for diſcipline onelyonly be a Church alſo, yet as long as the former is not denyed, the adding of this other doth no hurt to us at all.
It is falſe that a company gathered into one place, are nothing elſe but a Congregation.
Anſw. Bona verba quaſo: we had thought that as a company aſſembled, is an aſſembly, a company met, is a meeting, a company convocated, a convocation; ſo a company gathered together or congregated, had been a Congregation: But this is peremptorily now condemned as falſe: yet let us hear why.
As you take the word Congregation: for ſo your Congregation is an aſſembly of men and women meeting for Word and Sacraments, with the Elders of the Church.
Anſw. And what if they meet for prayer alſo, what if for the Word and Prayer without Sacraments, for this or that time? what if they meet for the admiſſion of members alſo, or for cenſuring delinquents? Can Mr. Rutherford prove that either of us, I mean either Mr. Tompſon or my ſelf, or indeed any man elſe of that judgement, which he oppoſeth, have denyed an aſſembly meeting for ſuch ends, as theſe to be a Congregation? I ſuppoſe he cannot: And therefore it was not well done to impute unto us ſuch a ſence of the word Congregation, as we never ſpake nor thought of, and then to ſay, It is falſe that a company gathered into one place is a Congregation, as that word is taken by us.
I appeale to the judgement of our reverend brethren, if the Church, Matth. 18. aſſembled to to bind and looſe, if the Church aſſembled, 1 Corin. 5. to deliver to Satan, (and ſundry others are there named to the like purpoſe) be a Congregationall Church aſſembled for Word and Sacraments.
Anſw. If the Word and Sacraments be not mentioned in the places alledged, but other actions and duties, muſt it needs follow that the Churches ſpoken of in theſe places did aſſemble for Word and Sacraments? may not one and the ſame Church aſſemble for diverſe ends and actions? yea, poſſibly for diverſe upon one day? At the leaſt wiſe it cannot be denyed, but at ſeverall times of aſſembling a Church may attend to diverſe duties and actions, and yet ſtill be one and the ſame Congregation or Church, at one time which they were at another. Or otherwiſe we muſt ſay (which were a very unwiſe ſaying) that a Church meeting for diverſe actions to be performed upon one day, as the Word, Prayer, Pſalms, Sacraments, &c. is not the ſame Church is one of theſe actions, that it was in another, but is one Church when they are at Prayer, another when they are ſinging Pſalms, another when they are in exerciſe of the Word or Sacraments, &c. Or if they meet one day, for Word and Sacraments, and another day for Word and Prayer without Sacraments, that n…w they are diverſe Churches, and not the ſame upon one of theſe dayes, that they were upon another, the nature and kind of their Church being altered according to the ſeverall duties wherein they are exerciſed. This arguing I ſuppoſe Mr. Rutherford, would not own for good, and yet for ought I ſee, it is no worſe, but the very ſame with that which himſelf doth here uſe, who becauſe the Church mentioned Matth. 18. 1 Corinth. 5. and other places by him named, is ſaid to meet for diſcipline or other duties, would thereupon have it thought, that the Church mentioned in thoſe places was not a Church that did ever meet for Word and Sacraments, but was ſome other Church of another kinde: which arguing may be good, if theſe which I have here above expreſſed be good, but otherwiſe I conceive it cannot ſtand.