An Apology for the Discipline of the Ancient Church, Part 1
A KEY to open the Debate about a Combinational Church, and the power of the KEYES. The firſt Part.
THE chief point of the Controverſie lies in this, to know in whoſe hands the power of the Keys ſhall be, or rather who ſhall be the Prime ſubject of the Keys.
Of this I finde three opinions.Cotton, Burton, Goodwin, Nye, Aſſert the name. Bayly, p. 132. The firſt defended by the Independents or Combinationals. A ſecond defended by the Presbyterians; and a third by the Prelates.
1. The Combinational Churches are divided in this point; for ſome ſeat power in the whole Congregation ſo ſoone as aſſociated in Covenant, even before they have any Officers. Others after the Officers are choſen ſettle it in them alone. A third even then conjunctim, make the whole body the ſubject of the Keys. Which of theſe, or whether any of theſe is like to be true, will appear if we conſider theſe two or three things.
1. That the Presbyters and Ruling-Elders cannot be the prime ſubject, is apparent, becauſe that the Keys were ſeated in ſome, before they were in them, if you be conſtant to your own principles; For how came they to be Elders and Rulers? were they not created by the power of the Keys? and who created them? was it not they who did elect and ordaine? The prime power then muſt be in the electors and ordai…ers, not in the elected and ordained, whence it will follow inevitably, that the Ruling Elders are not the prime ſubject of power; for a power there is which precedes theirs.
2. After Election and Ordination, they, viz. Ruling Elders cannot be ſo neither, becauſe it is your common Tenet, that the Congregation may again upon diſpleaſure reſume the Key, Depoſe, Excommunicate, caſt out their own Elders, which they could not do, were they not the prime ſubject of the Keys, and authority primarily in them.
3. But if you ſhall ſay, that conjunctim, people and Elders together are the prime ſubject, this cannot be neither. Becauſe before they are thus conjoyned, the Electors and Ordainers had the true eſſence of a Church (as you teach) both for matter and forme, though they had no Officer nor Elder, and then muſt radically and originally be inveſted with this power in the firſt combination, without any reflexion on this conjunction. So that as they are an organical Church heightned by Rulers and Elders, it makes them not the prime ſubject of the Keys, for this you ſay they had before.
That the people diviſim without the Elders and Rulers are not the prime ſubject of this authority, I prove in this Tract demonſtratively. I onelyonly here adde, that the power of the Keys conſiſts in binding, looſing, preaching, adminiſtring Sacraments, &c. which till you can prove to be in the people originally, I ſhall never yeeld the power to be originally in their hands.
The difficulties are ſo many, and the ſubtleties ſo nice among you in this diſpute, that they have forced your fineſt heads, Robinſon, Cotton, Goodwin, Norton, to invent ſo many diſtinctions, diviſions, ſubdiviſions, that a man muſt needs think himſelf in a maze that reads them; the foreign of the Schoolmen, which you ſo much complaine of, are exceeded by you. And yet when all's done, by theſe you could never yet ſatisfie your own party, and therefore expect not to ſettle others. It ſhewes you are in a Labyrinth, and would faine help your ſelves out by the ſmall threads of theſe prettily invented diſtinctions. In a word, that there are very many knots and objections, to which your Tenet is liable. For you know that all diſtinctions were invented to give light to that which is very perplexed, intricate, dubious, ambiguous, and ae…uivocal.
2. That this your aſſertion is mainly denied, oppoſed, battered and beat down by the Presbyterians, I need not tell you, or that they deny the the Congregation to be either conjunctim, or diviſim, the prime ſubject of the Keys, and ſettle it upon the Elderſhip primò, immediate, adaequatè Finalitèr & objectivè; they will grant you that the whole Church is the ſubject; but autoritativè & formalitèr, they place it in the Guids, or Presbyters without a Biſhop. And of this opinion Rutherford is an foreign. But he runs into the ſame inconvenience with your Rabbies. For to make his thoughts good, he hath ſo many nicities, ſo many new-coined diſtinctions of power, of the Church, of I know not what, that he is able to confound any Reader, and indeed drives on the point till he becomes almoſt unintelligible. Is not this think you a rare device in him and in yours to finde out a Truth, and ſettle a conſcience about Church-government?
3. The P…elates are oppoſite to both, they deny the Congregation conjunctim or diviſim to be the firſt ſub…ect of the Keys: They deny the Preſbyterian Elderſhip to be the prime ſubject of Church power. And they place it under Chriſt in the Apoſtles, and their ſucceſſors; and for this they plead our Saviours promiſe, Matth. 16. and his donation, John 20. They plead again the Apoſtolical practice extant in the Scriptures, Acts 8.17. Acts 14.23. 1 Tim. 4.14. 1 Tim. 5.22. 2 Tim. 1.6. Tit. 1.5. and again the perpetual practice of the Catholick Church ever ſince: according to that of Jerome, Decretu… eſt toto or…e, ut unus è Presbyteris electus ceteris ſuperponeretur, which teſtimony I have at large afterwards cited and opened at full.
This is the ſtate of the whole queſtion, and which of theſe is likelyeſt to be moſt true, I ſhall leave it to the unbyaſſed Reader to judge after he hath read over this Treatiſe.