An Apology for the Discipline of the Ancient Church, Part 2 · Section 6 · Subsection 1
1. That there is a National Church, and that this was, firſt, is conſonant to Scripture, to reaſon, to experience.
1. FIrſt it is very conſonant to Scripture. God after Adams fall made a Covenant with mankinde for ſalvation: The ſeed of the woman ſhall break the ſerpents head. The words of the Covenant were obſcure, and therefore God was pleaſed to adde light to them,Gen. 3.15. Gen. 12.3. Gal. 3.8. in that promiſe he made to Abraham; In thy ſeed, i. e. Chriſt, ſhall all the Nations of the earth be bleſſed? That this promiſe was made to the Church, is beyond all queſtion; and who were this Church but all Nations? not to Abrahams ſeed after the fleſh,Rom. 4.13. & 9.8. but to Abrahams ſeed through the righteouſneſſe of faith was the promiſe made; not to the Jewes, but to the Gentiles alſo was the promiſe made, and both go here under the name of Nations; and what ſhould hinder now, but the Church into which both ſhould be gathered, ſhould be called a National Church? The argument is drawn à Denominatis; Natio is Denominaus, National denominativum, Jewes and Gentiles Denominatum; the propoſition then is true, that Jewes and Gentiles make one National Church. Hence it is, that what God ſaid of the Jew,Exod. 19.6. ye ſhall be to me a Kingdome of Prieſts and an holy Nation, is by Saint Peter affirmed of the Chriſtian Church, ye are a choſen generation, 1 Pet. 2.9.a royal Prieſthood, an holy Nation. Which when effected, our Saviours words were fulfilled, other ſheep I have which are not of this fold, John 10.16.them alſo I muſt bring, and they ſhall hear my voice, that there may be one fold, and one Shepherd.
Farther yet a propheſie is extant, Iſa. 2.2.Iſa. 2.2. Mic. 4.1, 2, &c. Jer. 4.2. Iſa. 65.1. Zach. 2.11. Zach. 14.9. Pſalm 2.8. Pſalm 22.27. Matth. 21.43. Rom. 4.17. And it ſhall come to paſſe in the laſt dayes, that the mountain of the Lords houſe ſhall be eſtabliſhed in the top of the mountains, and ſhall be exalted above the hills, and all Nations ſhall flow unto it. Let other texts be compared with this, which ſpeak the ſame thing. Thus it was foretold, and that what was foretold might accordingly be fulfilled, our Saviour gave his diſciples a Commiſſion in theſe general words, Go ye therefore and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Sonne and holy Ghoſt, &c. Matthew 28.19. And I pray call to minde, that when Peter baptized the penitents, Acts 2.39. he comforted them with theſe words, for the promiſe is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as our Lord God ſhall call. And yet after this even Peter himſelf, and the Apoſtles, and the brethren that were in Judaea, of this had but a confuſed notion; for when Peter came up to Jeruſalem, Acts 11. Acts 10.they that were of the Circumciſion, contended with him about it, to whom he was feigne to make his Apology, opening to them the viſion of the ſheet, which when they heard theſe things, they glorified God, ſaying, then hath God alſo granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life. In effect, they atteſted the truth of Peters words,Verſe 34. Of a truth I perceive that God is no reſpecter of perſons, looks now no more upon a Jew, than he doth upon a ſinner of the Gentiles, but in every Nation, he that feareth him, and doth righteouſneſſe, is accepted of him. The partition wall being broken down, what could they be but one church?
I can never ſufficiently wonder at your words, when you call this acceſſe of all Nations a naughty enlargement. What? is that which God by Covenant with Abraham promiſed naught? that naught which he foretold ſhould be? that naught which Chriſt gave Commiſſion to his diſciples to do? that naught which the Diſciples did? All Nations, Iſa. 2.2. All fleſh, Iſa. 66.23. All the kindreds of the earth, Pſal. 22.26, 27. A multitude, which no man could number of all Nations and kindreds, and people, Rev. 7.9. are ſaid to be the people of God under the New Teſtament, and yet you will not allow them the name of a National Church.
But a ſtronger foundation for this Truth there cannot be, than that which Saint Paul hath laid under the ſimilitude of an Olive which had two kinds of branches, natural, verſe 21. and wild, 17.Rom. 1… The natural were the Jewes, the wild the Gentiles; the natural were broken off through unbelief, and the wild by faith graffed in. Theſe wild now being naturalized, are in the ſame condition that the Natural were before they were broken off. But the Natural branches were in the Olive totally, the whole Nation, they and their children, which made the National Church of the Jewes, and therefore the wild branches muſt be ſo inſerted, they and their children alſo, which will make the National Church of the Gentiles, which is the full ſcope and intention of the Apoſtle in that chapter. Finally, the very ſame Covenant that was made with Abraham, 2 Cor. 6.16.is made with the Corinthians, 2 Cor. 6.16. I will be their God, and they ſhall be my people. As that then was extended to the whole Nation of the Jewes,Lev. 26.12. Levit. 26.12. ſo alſo is it now to be extended to the whole Nation of the Gentiles, ſo that all thoſe Nations that have had the Goſpel preached unto them, and anſwering that Goſpel, have received the doctrine of Chriſt, ſubmitting to his Ordinances in the profeſſion of his Name, are to be reckoned as they were,1 Pet. 2.10. Acts 8.12, 13. John 6.66. Acts 11.26. 1 Cor. 1.2. 1 Cor. 12.13. Matth. 8.11. the people of God, 1 Pet. 2.10. Beleevers, Acts 8.12, 13. Diſciples, John 6.66. Chriſtians, Acts 2. Saints by calling, 1 Cor. 1.2. The Church of the Gentiles, 1 Cor. 12.13. The Kingdome of Chriſt, Matth. 8.11. Thus have I ſhewed you that ſince the whole Church quoad materiale doth conſiſt of Nations, there can be no impropriety or abſurdity in it, when we call any part thereof a National Church, or the Church of Beleevers in any one Nation. And now let us ſee what help you can have for the confirmation of this beſides Scripture out of the principles of reaſon.
2. We believe in our Creed the Catholique Church, and Catholique it is called in reſpect of all ages and times, becauſe, before, under, and after the Law it alwayes was: and ſecondly, in reſpect of perſons; for there is not any perſon of what degree, ſex, condition or age, that may not be a member of it. And thirdly, in reſpect of places, in that as formerly the Jewes, ſo now all perſons in all Nations have a capacity to be of the Church of Chriſt. Univerſality then being an attribute of the Church, it cannot be found in any one Church limited either in reſpect of time or place. Either then make your Combinational Church the Catholique, or you muſt extend it farther; and if ſo, why not to a Province? and if to a Province, why not to a Nation, nay many Nations? And be it you ſhould aſſume the name of Catholique, and faſten it to every particular Combinational Church, yet particular Societies of Chriſtians can lay no farther claime to it than they can demonſtrate themſelves to belong to that Church that hath a true and a juſt title to it; which no particular Church can do, but by proving that it holds the common faith once delivered to the Saints without heretical innovation,Ameſ. lib. 1. c. 31. Sect. 20. or ſchiſmatical violation of the Unity and Peace of the Chriſtian world. This being the way for particular Churches to demonſtrate themſelves to be Catholique, neceſſary it is that they be united at leaſt to thoſe Congregations of that Nation; whence we may infer that there muſt needs be a National Church, which alſo that muſt do, and ſhew clearly that it maintaines whole and undefiled the foundations of faith, before it can be acknowledged to be Catholique.
2. That which makes men miſtake in this point, is, that they make the Church to be ſpecies ſpecialiſſima, whereas it is Locale genus, ſuch are other collective words, exercitus, Keckerm. ſyſt. in fin. c. de gen.reſpubl. which kind of genus being but Analogum, muſt have under it ſpecies Analogas, not ſuch as are true, as it is in true Entities, but ſuch as have an Analogy with them, and fall into a Logical conſideration under that ſimilitude. Say then, that this word Church is totum univerſale, then it muſt have partes ſubjectivas under it, and ſo it hath; for Eccleſia Britanica, Belgica, Genevenſis, Germanica, Scotica, &c. are as it were ſo many Species, where you may finde ſo many National Churches that do equally participate of the nature of the Genus, and under them ſo many Individuums as there be particular Congregations in any of theſe Nations. Neither doth Ameſius, Ameſ. Loc. citato Sect. 18.who affirmes the Church to be a Species ſpecialiſſima, give any teaſon for it, but that nullas habet ſpecies propriè dictas, which is illogical; for I told you, that it was Genus analogum; and will any Logician expect ſpecies propriè dictas? it is ſufficient for ſuch a genus to have ſpecies impropriè dictas, by compariſon and reſemblance onelyonly to a true Genus; and ſuch the Church hath as I have proved, and therefore there may be a National Church.
Thirdly, that which is capable of the definition of the Church, may be called a Church. But a National Church is capable of the definition of a Church; therefore there may be a National Church. The major is out of queſtion, and needs no proof. The minor I make good by ſetting down, and applying the definition of the Church to it. Ameſius. Ameſ. lib. 1. cap. 31. 7. Junius de Eccleſia c. 2. Trelcat. lib. 2. cap. de Eccleſia.Eccleſia eſt caetus hominum vocatorum. But his definition though it would ſerve my turn is a little too ſhort. Iunius hath more fully expreſſed it. Eccleſia eſt caetus eorum quos Deus evocat è natura & modulo naturali ipſorum per gratiam in dignitatem filiorum Dei ad ipſius gloriam. Trelcatius gives us three definitions one after another.
Firſt, to the Church in common, which is, Eccleſia eſt caetus eorum quos Deus gratuita vocatione, ad gratiae ſuae & gloriae communionem evocat, Matth. 11.29.
And ſecondly, that belongs to the viſible Church, Eccleſia viſibilis eſt caetus eorum quos Deus externa vocatione, ſeu praeditatione verbi, & Sacramentorum adminiſtratione evocat ad cultum gloriae ſuae, Mat. 28.17.
A third, which belongs to the inviſible Church, which is, Eccleſia inviſibilis eſt caetus praedeſtinatorum, qui vocatione efficaci & ſalutari ex ſtatu corruptionis in dignitatem adoptionis filiorum Dei evocantur, & Chriſto tanquam capiti adun…ntur, non ad cultum tantum, ſed ad fructum gloriae. Luke 1.33.
All which definitions, eſpecially thoſe of Junius and Trelcatius, are full and artificial; for Eccleſia is by all put in the predicament of relation, and all relations are defined mentione ſubjecti, relati, correlati, fundamenti, Keck. ſyſt. Log. cap. de Definit.quod ſupplet locum cauſae efficientis, & Termini vel finis. And in theſe laſt we meet with all theſe. The relatum is vocans, the correlatum is evocati, the ſubject or materiale, Men, or more largely, thoſe who who have a capacity, è natura & modulo naturali ipſorum, to be called, which takes in Angels alſo. The Formale or foundation of this Relation, is that gracious call that God gives; and the end is, that they being adopted for his children, may communicate in his worſhip, grace and glory.
Now what one word is there in any one or all theſe definitions which are not as well applicable to a National Church,Deut. 5.22. Exod. 16.1. as a Combinational? Is this caetus, kahal, an Aſſembly, a Gnedah, a Congregation? that is much more. Doth this conſiſt of men? There are more in that. Have thoſe in this a Call, a gracious call given them by God? ſo have the other. Are they adopted and brought into the ſtate of ſonnes? ſo are they too. I have nouriſhed and brought up children: Are theſe called to worſhip God, to be partakers of grace and glory?Iſa. 1.2. … Cor. 6.18. So are all Nations whom the Lord our God doth call. They then who partake fully of the nature and eſſence of a Church, and to whom all the cauſes that conſtitute a Church may be attributed, of whom the efficient, matter, forme, end are verified, without queſtion are a Church; but ſuch is the National as I have declared; I pray therefore let it have the name.
I know your exception lies againſt the formal cauſe; for that gracious call of God will not ſatisfie you, which hath contented all other judicious Divines before you: But you aſſigne another, viz. a Church-Covenant, fancying that none can be truly members of Chriſts Church, but who have combined and joyned themſelves together in this League of Church-fellowſhip. This ſay you, is the chief eſſential part of a Church, and the true formality of it.
Ameſius teacheth us truly, that Eccleſia is à Deo inſtituta. If ſo, let it be ſhewn where God inſtituted his Church under this condition; produce the precept, bring forth the command for it, or elſe you ſhall never perſwade me that this Inſtitution is from God. Nay, I ſhall yet deſcend lower, Demonſtrate to me the practice of it, or the patterne for it, either in the Apoſtles age, or any age after it, till you aroſe, and you ſhall carry the cauſe. I know that the wiſeſt among you is not able to ſhew me one example for it in all antiquity.
We cannot therefore chooſe but ſet upon it the character of Ionah's gourd, that is, filia noctis, a daughter of a nights growth, it ſprung up ſo lately. The fartheſt the pedegree can reach, is either to the Montaniſts, Novatians, or Donatiſts, thoſe children of Separation; and yet when alls done it doth but reſemble them neither, ſince I read not that they and their parties were ever bandied together by a ſolemne Covenant. They could think themſelves a Church, and indeed the ſole Church without this formality. They had their Biſhops under whoſe juriſdiction all the ſeveral Congregations of their profeſſion were. And therefore I ſhall again repeat my words, that no pattern for this in any age can be found; and I adde to it, no not among Hereticks and Schiſmaticks.
Secondly, we ſhall give a poor accompt of former Churches and Chriſtians, if this Covenant-invention ſhould be of ſuch concernment to Chriſtianity: when it is not eaſie, nor as I beleeve, poſſible to finde a Church anciently ſo bound.
Farther, yet this ſeems to me altogether uſeleſſe and ſuperfluous, and that in two reſpects. Firſt, it ſeems uſeleſſe to them who are ſo bound; for theſe new ſmall bodies are ſo looſly tyed together by theſe ſorry withs of mans invention, that they quickly upon humour, anger and heady animoſities fall aſunder, and break into ſeveral fractions and ſubdiviſions; ſo that they by reciting a certain forme of words, ſeem to meet as pieces of wood finely glued together, which a little ſpittle or wet diſſolves. Then again, it is uſeleſſe to them who are bound already by a higher and more ſolemn Covenant; for this is as it were to binde a man with wiſps of ſtraw, that is already bound with chains of gold. For every true and conſcientious Chriſtian knows and owns himſelf to have upon his conſcience, farre more ſtrict and indiſſoluble ties, not onelyonly of nature and creation, but of the Law and word of God: yea, and of Chriſtian Covenant and Profeſſion by his Baptiſmal vow, beſides that bond of the other Sacrament, that I ſpeak not of his vowes renewed by often promiſes in his prayers, and repentant promiſes: All which binds the conſciences of all good Chriſtians to all duties of piety and charity according to the relations wherein they ſtand to God and man, farre more firmly than any external profeſſion in a Church way can do. An external I ſay; for ſo it is, and being meerly external, it cannot ingredi rei eſſentiam, make any man formally a Church member; that which doth this is the call of God, and not the profeſſion of man. And now having removed this rub out of my way, I ſhall go on to give you a fourth argument for a National Church.
4. That to whom the proper, eſſential and inſeparable notes of the Church belong is a Church; but to a National Church theſe notes belong; therefore a National Church is a Church. The major is certain, for it is nota proprii; the minor I eaſily prove. The eſſential notes of the Church, as Junius hath excellently demonſtrated againſt Bellarmine; Jun. de Eccleſia. cap. 16. Doctor Field of the Ch. lib. 2. cap. 2. Whites Orthodox. cap. 3. Sect. 6.firſt the entire profeſſion of theſe ſupernatural verities which God hath revealed in his Sonne: Secondly, the uſe of ſuch holy Ceremonies and Sacraments as he hath inſtituted and appointed: Thirdly, an union and connexion of men in this profeſſion and uſe of theſe Sacraments under lawful Paſtours and guides, appointed, authorized and ſanctified to direct and lead them in the happy wayes of eternal ſalvation.
Now do not theſe belong to a National Church? is there not in it a profeſſion of ſupernatural verities? is not the Word of God publickly preached in it? are not holy Rites and Sacraments adminiſtred according to Chriſts inſtitution? is there not a ſucceſſion of lawful Guides and Paſtours in it, as I have elſewhere proved? what then can hinder, but there ſhould be a National Church? Whatſoever you can ſay againſt theſe notes, I have ſo clearly as I conceive proved, that I hold it ſuperfluous to adde any more; and therefore I come unto my third proof, experience.
3. Experience is that wiſdome and knowledge of any thing that a man hath by the trial of particulars. For when upon a ſad examination he finds that ſo many Individuums agree in aliquo tertio, he preſently concludes, that they all partake of the ſame nature. Let us then take a view of ſeveral Churches, and thoſe moſt eminent at firſt; and if it appear that thoſe were National, we may from hence eaſily inferre, that the conſtitution of a Church may be National. It is in all Church Hiſtories moſt evident, that as ſoon as the Goſpel was firſt planted, it ſpread from great Cities into the Neighbour Territories and adjacent Countries; which Chriſtians ſo converted, though they exerciſed the acts of Religion in particular Congregations, yet ſtill continued in a fraternal ſubjection, and filial ſubmiſſion to that Biſhop and Presbytery which reſided in the Mother City: It is a foule miſtake for men to conceive of the Church of Epheſus, Smyrna, Thyatyra, &c. of Corinth, Antioch, Jeruſalem, Rome, &c. as confined to that City; whereas he who is acquainted with Hiſtories profane and ſacred, muſt know that under theſe Cities were principalities, and ſo the juriſdiction of that Church was extended to all Chriſtians in that Territory. Which to deny, is to ſleight all Records, and to preferre his own ſingle imagination before all antiquity; Titus was Biſhop of Crete an Iſland; Timothy of Epheſus a Province; Polycarp of Smyrna a Territory; and what is true of theſe, is as true of all the reſt; whence we may conclude, that a Church may be National; for if juriſdiction of one Biſhop may extend over ſo great Cities as they were, being then the chief of the world; why not then to a Province? why not to a Nation? eſpecially ſince by this way, mutual peace, truth and good order is beſt preſerved.
This conſideration cauſed the firſt ſmall company of believers, multiplyed from a Church in one family, to a Church in many Congregations, that could not meet together in one place, yet as branches to continue ſtill united to the root Chriſt Jeſus; and alſo to the main body and bulk of the Church by union to that part whence they deſcended, and to which they related. For reaſon taught them that they ſhould be weaker, and expoſed to more danger, if they ſhould be diſunited and rent from the body, and quickly wither, as boughs ſeparated from the ſtock. I need not minde you of that old Apologue of Menenius Agrippa, that the head and feet quickly ſtarved and windred away, when they would not hear of any longer dependence upon the belly.
He that would be magnified for Simon Magus, or magnus, Simon the great, and wiſe for his invention of rarities and Paradoxes in any art or ſcience, ought to furniſh himſelf not with popular and ſpecious, but with ſolid and ſound arguments, if he intend to winne prudent and ſober men to be of his judgment: for foreign; wiſe men will not be catch't with thoſe ſophiſms, with which it is eaſie to take the multitude. After the flood, there were but eight perſons in the world; they lived together in a family for ſome time, and Noah as a Prince ruled them. But they quickly encreaſed, ſpread, multiplyed, grew into thoſe Nations that now live, and being diſperſed over the earth, they yet joyned in ſocieties, and for their mutual preſervation, thought it fit to be governed that way that we now behold. Suppoſe now ſome great and wiſe Magus, ſhould in theſe words charme and bewitch the people, Non ſic fuit ab initio, in Noahs dayes the ordering of the world was not as we ſee it now; there were then no mighty Monarchs, no ſurly Lords, no Judges, no Magiſtrates. Who then ſpoke of National ſocieties or civil confederations? Oh 'twas a brave world then, when the government was domeſtical; a golden age when no man ruled beyond his own doors, but every one was a King at home. Could we but contrive a way, and live to ſee it ſo in our dayes, 'twould be no queſtion a brave world again.
When Adam dugge and Eve ſpan, who was then a Gentleman?
The like argument to this is uſed by thoſe of the Combination. At Rome they finde a houſeful of Chriſtians; at Corinth another handful met together in the houſe of Cloe. Rom. 16.5. 1 Cor. 16.29. 1 Cor. 1.11.In Aſia there is mention made of ſingle Churches. (but by the way, that theſe were bourd together by a Church Covenant, and a ſeparate, and Independent Congregation, that had no relation to the Presbytery in thoſe Cities, that is not mentioned, not a word of that) Then there were no National Churches; this was afterwards brought in by lordly Prelates: Oh if we might but ſee the Church reſtored again, and all things done according to the pattern in the Mount, then it would be a glorious Church, Gods people, precious people, all Kings, Prieſts and Prophets within their own doors. You then of the people, even the pooreſt Plow-man, and ignoranteſt Mechanick ſhould recover his right, primo queſtu, and be ſubject to no other Paſtours and Elders then were of your own chooſing, nor to them no longer then pleaſed you. Now is not this kind of arguing very plauſible in the peoples ears? Oh how they will hugge themſelves, when they ſhall finde themſelves to become ſome body? Let us, ſay they, but joyne our ſelves in this Combination, and then God knows what goodly great things we may come to be; we may come to be Paſtours to feed; we may come to be Elders to rule the flock; we may come to be Deacons and carry the bag: and if we ſail of theſe our hopes, yet however we have voices in the Election of Church Officers, and the higheſt of them all muſt depend upon us. This is that which tickleth the multitude to reduce the Church to the houſe of Cloe, as thoſe Sophiſts would do the world to the Ark of Noah.
Now one of theſe is as abſurd as the other; as contrary to reaſon to bring back the Church to particular houſes and Combinations, as it is all the ſocieties of men to domeſtical government. Shall an example or two, (which yet comes not home neither) be pleaded againſt a cloud of witneſſes to the contrary? when we can inſtance in Presbyteries conſtituted by the Apoſtles in chief Cities, which were heads of whole Provinces; ſhall we plead that two or three houſes were patterns in the Mount? This is ſo childiſh a fancy, ſo weak and unreaſonable an imagination, as if they would reduce themſelves to their infants Coats, now they are grown men; or think they are bound to wear a leathern girdle, becauſe Saint John Baptiſt did ſo.
To conclude this point, we dare appeal to the conſciences of any of theſe bodying Chriſtians (whom charity may preſume to be godly and judicious)Dr. Gauden. whether they finde in Scripture, or have juſt cauſe to think that the bleſſed Apoſtles ever conſtituted ſuch ſmall bodies of Covenanting Churches, when there were great numbers, and many Congregations of Chriſtians in any City, Province, or Country, ſo as each one ſhould be thought abſolute, independent, and no way ſubordinate to another? Whether ever the Apoſtles required of thoſe leſſer handfuls, thoſe peti-toes and fingers of the body (which might and did Convene in Cloes houſe) any ſuch explicite forms and Covenants, beſides thoſe holy bonds, which by beleeving and profeſſing of the faith by Baptiſme and Euchariſtical communion were upon them? Or whether the bleſſed Apoſtles would have queſtioned or denyed them to be true Chriſtians, and in a true Church, or have ſeparated from them, or caſt them off as not engrafted in Chriſt, or growing up in him, who without any ſuch bodying in ſmall parcels had profeſſed the name of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, in the due uſe of the Word, Sacraments, Miniſtry? who endeavoured to lead a holy life themſelves, and ſought by all means which charity, order, or authority allowed them to repreſſe the contrary in others. The wiſdome of theſe firſt planters of Religion was ſo great, their charity ſo warme, their perſwaſions to unity ſo earneſt; the Character they ſet upon thoſe who ſeparate, ſo black, that it cannot be beleeved that ever they would admit of a rent in that body, which was inſtructed by one head, enlived by one ſpirit, formed by one faith, and quickned by one and the ſame hope. And if theſe excellent Chriſtian vertues had continued, we had not ſeen the ſeam-leſſe Coat of our Saviour rent into ſuch ſmall ſhreds as we behold and lament at this day. And ſo much of this.