Narration of Some Church Courses, Chapter 9 – Chapter 11
CHAP. IX.
Of Church-Communion in generall, wherein it conſists, to whom it doth belong, of corruptions in it, and ſeparation from it.
1. THey ſolicitouſly diſtinguiſh betweene Church-communion, and Chriſtian or religious communion. This latter they hold generally with all whom they conceive to be true Chriſtians, without reference to their Church eſtate, and whether they be in Church eſtate or no: therefore they will conferre, pray with them, &c.lIf by Church were to be meant only ſuch a particular body as is before by them defined, the diſtinction might the rather paſſe. But foraſmuch as the word Church in Scripture ſometimes extends it ſelfe to all, or any beleevers on the face of the earth, without reſpect had to any ſuch congregationall union, therefore Church communion will and may extend it ſelfe to all communion with viſible beleevers in all religious duties whatſoever. For as there is a perſecution of the Church, Gal. 1.13. Prayers of the Church, Act. 12.5. and a communion of Saints without ſuch a reſpect, ſo a communion of the Church in all religious duties, without ſuch a reſpect. But the former they hold onelyonly with ſuch as they acknowledge to be true Churches, and with their Church-members. Anſ. to 9. Poſ. p. 62, 63. Apol. p. 28, 34.
Robinſ. hath a diſtinction not much unlike, of private and publike communion, that he allowes with all Chriſtians, this only with Church-members; concerning which ſee his whole treatiſe of publike and private communion.
2. They call that Church communion which is only in ſuch duties, priviledges and ordinances as are proper to ſuch a particular ſocietie, and belong to none other, as 1. Admiſſion of members into their ſocietie. 2. Mutuall watchfulneſſe of each member over other. 3. Admonition in way to cenſure. 4. Excommunication. 5. Re-acception into ſocietie again upon repentance. 6. Adminiſtration, and receiving of the ſeales. 7. Vocation of Miniſters and all other officers, and depoſing of them again. Anſ. to 9. Poſ. p. 63. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 7. Apol. p. 27-29.
3. As formHere we may ſee how much and how long we have been miſtaken: For when our brethren of that way doe ſo frequently (perhaps fixedly) preach and pray with us not only privately in houſes, but in our publike aſſemblies alſo, we (fooles) thinke all this while, they hold Church communion with us, and do thereby actually own our Miniſterie and Church eſtate as true. But, alas, there is no ſuch matter. It is but Chriſtian communion at the beſt, neither doe they at all preach unto us, or pray with us, as Miniſters ex officio, much leſſe as our Miniſters; No they will not confeſſe themſelves to be ſo much as members of our Churches: but ex deno, only as men well giſted, and ſo able to edifie the church by their gifts, as meere private men, ex communi officio charitatis, as any man elſe may doe that hath a gift to ſpeake to the churches edification. Nay, what doe they more to us in publike then they would do to ſo many Turks or Indians, to whom they would preach, and with and for whom they would pray (I beleeve) as well as they do unto and with, and for us. If they judged any Church communion to conſiſt in any of theſe things they could (following their own principles) no more joyn with us in preaching and prayer, then now they doe in Sacraments. The like is to be thought of their hearing of our Miniſters alſo. preaching, reading and hearing the word, catechiſing, praying, ſinging of Pſalmes, bleſſing the people, &c. though performed by Church officers and members onelyonly, and in the Church Aſſembly onelyonly, yet in theſe, they hold, there is no Church communion at all. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 7, 28. Anſ. to 9. Poſ. p. 62. Apol. p. 26, 34. Rob. justif. p. 192, 195.
4. Theſe things, ſay they, doe not onelyonly belong to Church Communion, but to the Communion of thisnHow doth this agree with that which followes after of adminiſtring and receiving of Sacraments in other Churches by vertue of the communion of churches. particular Church onelyonly, of which one is ſtated a member; and therefore are to be performed onelyonly to the members thereof, and not to the members of other Churches, much leſſe to any ſuch as are not at all in Church eſtate. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 11.
5. Eſpecially Sacraments are to be adminiſtred (as onelyonly by Miniſters of the ſame Churches as after ſo) onelyonly to ChurchoHow is it then that they acknowledge Anſ. to 9. Poſ. p. 63, 64. Apol. p. 6, 7, 21, 40. that ſcattied members of Chriſt may partake of the Sacraments as members of the Catholique Church. Alſo that Sacraments do rightfully belong to all viſible beleevers and their ſced, as ſuch, if ſo be there were any Miniſters now that might lawfully adminiſter the ſame unto them, viz. ſuch as were the Apoſſles and Evangeliſts. And that the reaſon why they cannot now actually partake therein, is becauſe now ordinary Miniſters power extends not beyond the bounds of their own church. Whence I inferre, 1. that then church-memberſhip is not neceſſarie to participation of the Sacraments, of it ſelfe, but by accident only. 2. that beleevers are not uncapable of Sacraments (by their own tenent) through any defect in themſelves but in the miniſterie, (that I ſay not, in God) they indeed are capable of them, but God hath provided no miniſterie to adminiſter the ſame to thē, I mean, to ſcattred Saints. 3. That participation of Sacraments is no part of church communion, ſince of right it belongs as well to all viſible beleevers, as ſuch, though they be no church members at all. 4. That Baptiſme is not given only to a Church body. 5. That it was not intended as a ſeale of the Church-covenant: All which are contrary to their tenents. members, andpHere alſo they ſeeme as before not conſtant to themſelves, who after tell us that by communion of Churches the Miniſter of one Church may adminiſter the Sacraments to the members of another Church: why not then to ſuch as are members of no Church alſo (being beleevers) ſeeing the A poſtles did ſo: and ſeeing ordinary Miniſters have as much power over ſuch as are no members, as over the members of another Church, both being without the Church to them. members of the ſame Church. Anſ. to 9. Poſ. p. 62, 63, 64, 66, 70. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 11, 12, 37. Apol. p. 29, 30, 39, 40, 41. Cott. cat. p. 6, 7. R. M. to E. B. p. 4, 5, 6. R.M. to W.R.
6. They hold that if any ſinne be committed by any in the Church, for want of watchfulneſſe, and admonition in others, all the body is defiled therewith, and made liable to a common judgement, as was all Iſrael by Achans ſinne. Anſ. to 32. q.p. 50. Anſ. to 9. Poſ.p. 75. Diſcourſe of Cov. p. 7. Apol. p. 10.
7. That a man that is ſui juris, may not lawfully ſtand member of ſuch a Church, in which he cannot obſerve and enjoy all Gods ordinances, nor where anyqWho then may ſtand members of their Churches? or will they ſay that there are no corruptions amongſt them ſuffered? doubtleſſe if other Churches may be judges, (not themſelves who are parties) they are faulty one way, as well as others are another way. It may be alſo as hard to reduce as others are. corruption in Gods worſhip, or other ſinne is ſuffered unreformed, but if he be joyned to it, he muſt ſeparate from it, elſe he is defiled therewith. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 32, 33.
Rob. juſtif. p. 15, 16, 197, 200, 201. Johnſ. plea, p. 245. Barr. diſcov. p. 26, 29, 34, 38.
8. Eſpecially where any ſet Leitourgy, orrYet themſelves allow ſet formes of Pſalmes to be ſang as Prayers and Praifes to God, and of benedictions or bleſſing the people, of church covenan (as before) ſome of them alſo ſet formes of catechiſing, and confeſſions of Faith, as H. P. | I C. his Catechiſme of the Church. So Robinſons cat. of Diſcipline, added to the end of Perkins cat. Why then not a ſet forme of Prayer too? whereas they diſlike ſet formes becauſe impoſed: I cannot ſee how bare impoſition by lawfull authoritie of that which is lawfull (ſo far onelyonly as it is lawfull) ſhould make it unlawfull; I ſhould rather thinke it ſhould make it neceſſarie: And whereas they inculcate that our ſet formes have been ſo impoſed as leave no libertie of adding, altering or taking any thing away: I anſwer, we have no ſuch impoſition among us, ſeeing all experience hath ſhewed that any man might lawfully adde, what he would, though by the law, he might not, perhaps, take away or alter ought: But ſuppoſing the worſt that our ſet formes were ſo rigidly impoſed by law, that no man might adde to, or alter, or take away ought, yet if Miniſters did both adde to what they thought defective, and alter what was offenſive, and leave out what they judged unlawfull; I ſee no reaſon why the fault of the impoſers ſhould be imputed to ſuch as obeyed their impoſition no further then it was faultleſſe. ſet forme of prayer is impoſed to be uſed. Anſ. to 9. Poſ. p. 52, 59, 60, 61. Mr M. to J.M. Cott. cat. p. 5, 6. | R.M. to E.B.p. 7.
Johnſ. plea, p. 245, 285. Brown. confeſſ. art. 45. Cannes neceſſ. of ſeparation, p. 110. Rob. juſtif. p. 344.
9. And whereſIf they will walke cloſe to their owne principles; they muſt grant that not onelyonly open and groſſe wicked defile the worſhip of God to all the ſocietie, but alſo unregenerate perſons, and all that give not good evidence of their converſion, yea, even ſecret ſinness alſo (ſuch as Achan was) though perhaps they have the truth of grace, if they be admitted. Of which ſee before Art. 6. But then who ſhall eſcape free? or with what ſocietie can a man joyne to be aſſured not to be defiled? bad men are ſuffred to come to the Sacraments with the good, becauſe thereby both the ordinances, and all that partake in them are defiled. Apol. p. 37. J. D. to L.H.
Barr. diſcov. p. 34. Rob. juſtif. p. 15, 197, 201, 204.
CHAP. X.
Of the Communion of Churches one with another, and of ſeparation from corrupt Churches.
1. THey grant that ſeverall Churches have atIf there be a communion of Churches, then an union, whereby many therefore may be rightly called one. And if an union of many Churches without Covenant, why not alſo of many members in the ſame Church without covenant. Communion amongſt themſelves, whereby they do and mayuHow can this ſtand with their doctrine of the covenant before, which tyeth the members to church duties only to their own Church? and that Sacraments belong onelyonly to the members of their owne Church: and with their doctrine following that Miniſters are Miniſters only to their own people, and cannot doe a miniſteriall act to any but ſuch as by calling them, have given them power over them, which ſome of themſelves perceiving, rather then part with this latter (which they hugge as a precious truth) are content to queſtion the former of the communion of Churches, as S. E. mutually partake each with other in ſome Church-ordinances,*If this may be done in Sacraments (by vertue of Church communion) why not in Ordination and Excommunication alſo? as Sacraments. And that this Communion is both between the Miniſters and members of the ſame. Anſ. to 9. Poſ. p. 62, 78. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 29. Apol. p. 2, 13. | R.M. to E.B. p. 11.
2. By vertue of this Church communion, they ſay; one Church by letters of recommendation may give power to another Church over any of her members for Excommunication, and thexThis Divinitie is ſtrange to me: Themſelves hold the Miniſters power is not his own, but concredited to him by the church, ſo that he is but a Deputie himſelf, & deputat…a non poteſt deputare. How then ſhould he derive his authoritie to another, and convey his power over to him, as his deputie, who himſelfe is but the Churches deputie? Miniſters of one Church may convey power to the Miniſters of another Church for Adminiſtration of the Sacraments to any of their members. Cott. cat. p. 7. Apol. p. 2, 14, 26, 40. | J.W. to T.S. Hence the infants of ſome of Windſor Church in N.E. have been baptized by the Miniſters of the Church of Dorcheſter there. R.M. to W.R.
3. But without ſuch letters of recommendations, and formall granting over of ſuch power, from one Church and Miniſter to another, it wereyThey are very tender of loſing any of their members, and of having them but to communicate for a time with any other churches but their own: but they make no bomes of getting all the members they can from cur Miniſters and Churches, belike we have neither true Miniſters nor Churches, and therefore they may doe with us what they liſt. unlawfull in any caſe to adminiſter any Church ordinance to any Church or members but their owne, or to admit them to any Church communion upon any pretence whatſoever. Apol. p. 14, 26, 40.
4. Though they hold it lawfull by this Communion of Churches for one Church to admit the members of another unto fellowſhip of Church ordinances and priviledges; yet not of every Church. But they thinke themſelves bound to know the Church well (whoſe members they ſo admit, as well as the members themſelves) whether it bee a true Church or a falſe, a pure Church, or a corrupt. Anſ. 10 32. q. p. 29.
5. And that if they ſhould admit any members of a falſe Church, they ſhould offend in ſo holding communion with a falſe Church; yea, if they ſhould admit any members of a corrupt Church, they ſhould be defiled by ſuch communion; unleſſe they did firſt proteſt againſt their corruptions. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 29. | J.C. printed letter, p. 12. yet they hold no ſuchzWhat ground for this diſtinction, of defilement by Church communion, and no defilement by religious communion? defilement by admitting them unto religious communion, though their Church were not only impure, but utterly falſe.
6. They are very ſtraight-laced in denying communion to the members of other Churches that are notaThis is one cauſe and the chief why our moſt godly Engliſh going over thither are yet rejected from all Church communion there: Not becauſe of any perſonall defect, but becauſe of the reputed corrupt eſtate of our Churches, whereof they ſtand, or lately did ſtand as members. conſtirated and governed in the ſame manner with their own which onelyonly they conceive to be conſtituted and governed according to the Rule of Chriſt. Anſ. to 32. q. p. 82, 83, 84. yea, if a companie of approved godly people ſhould ſit downe neer them (where their power reacheth) differing from them onelyonly in ſome points of Church-Government, ſome of them tell us, that not only they ſhould not bebIf upon ſuch ſmaller differences they be ſo ſevere, how much more would they be in greater; Some of their pactie here plead hard to be indulged in ſeſſer differences, yet what thoſe are we may not know, or whether they he leſſer or greater tolerable in a Church or not, and if they be not hearkned unto, they are apt to cry out, Perſecution, perſecution: yet when others deſire the like favour of them, they tell us there is no favour to be expected if we perſiſt to breake any Rule of Chriſt, their meaning is, if we follow them not cloſe in their wayes. So partiall and ſ…lfiſh are ſome men, that they thinke all ſeveritie to others too little, to themſelves too much. owned as a ſiſter Church, but ſhould alſo be in danger of ſevere puniſhment by the civill Magiſtrate. H.W. to P.H. What they hold of our Engliſh Churches and Miniſters ſee in the Poſtſcript.
CHAP. XI.
Of Excommunication and Re-acception into Church-fellowſhip again upon repentance.
N. I find little difference herein betweene them and others of the reformed Religion, more then what is above touched, ſave that
1. I Heare ſome of them have preſt that not only the ſcandalous, but alſo thefAnd no marvell For if none muſt be of the Church but reall Saints, ſuch as have truth of grace, which they cannot have that do not in ſome proportiō grow in grace, therfore it muſt needs follow that ſuch ſhould be caſt out. And by the ſame reaſon cut with all that doe not convincingly ſhew all ſuch evidences of grace, as Divines (from Scripture) do l…y down as demonſtrations of grace in men. But if we cloſely hold to this way of triall of the members of true viſible Churches, we may well make Churches (as the Browniſts) conſiſting of 2. or 3. or perhaps (as our N.E. brethren) of 7, 8, or c. members, but we ſhall rarely (if ever) meet with ſuch numerous Churches as the Scriptures hold forth, and therefore ſuch as all Churches ought to be, as neare as may be. non-proficients, that grow not in grace under the meanes, might be excommunicated; Which was the ground (as ſome of them report) of a groundleſſe courſe ſet on foot amongſt them at Cambridge in N. Engl. That the people met together privately at certain times, weekly or fortnightly, each one to hold forth unto the reſt the work of God upon his or her ſoul, from their firſt converſion unto that preſent day, that ſo their Pastour might know how they grew in grace. A.W. to Mr B.