The Government of the Churches of Christ, Book 5 · Chapter 2
CHAP. II.
What power Synods composed of the Elders of particular Churches occasionally assembled, have in case of Male-Administrations, by any particular Church.
AS we acknowledge elective occasional Synods of the Elders of many Churches, as the Churches have need to refer cases of difference to them: So in case of Male-Administration, or an unjust proceeding, in the Sentence of Excommunication, and the like we acknowledge Appeals or Complaints may be made to other Churches; and the Elders of those Churches met in a Synod, who being offended, may as an Ordinance of Christ, Judge and Declare that Sentence to be Null, Void, and Unjust; and that not simply, as any company of Men may so Judge, giving their Judgments of a Fact done; but as an Ordinance of Christ in such cases, and for that end, Sanctified by him to Judge and Declare in matters of Difference. And the Church and Eldership of a particular Church, that proceedeth so unjustly, ought to look at this their Determination, as an Ordinance of Christ to them; and entertaining it as such, more sadly to review their own Act and Proceedings, to consider the grounds which the Synod gives why it is unjust, and themselves ought to acknowledge it such, and receive the Brother again with acknowledgment of their Sin, and of the wrong done him: Yet not with an Implicit Faith, because the Synod hath so Determined, as having a greater power from Christ to Restore the Man.
In case this Church will not own this Petson thus wrongfully Ejected; these Churches, or any of them, upon this Determination of their Elders (the Churches at their return approving their Sentence) may both receive the party in among themselves, and so Relieve the Man; and further also profess to hold no Communion with that Church, if they perceive that Church doth continue obstinate, having either for the manner proceeded therein, against the common principles of Equity and Right (such as in Judging of matters of Fact, civil Courts proceed by, as when matters are not sufficiently proved, &c.) or against, and besides the Principles whereby Churches are to proceed (as for the matter of Excommunication it self) which that Church it self hath, and doth hold forth and profess.
If it fall out that a Person be thus cast, first by his own Church, and now by a Synod of many Churches, to whom he Referred his cause, and appealed, he is bound rather to sit down, than Cursitare (as Cyprians word and advice is) run up and down, still to other and greater number of Churches, and to suffer wrong rather (as in 1 Cor. 6. the Apostle in another case exhorts) than engage Churches against Churches (which may prove the event) in his own private quarrel.
In Christian Commonwealths, Appeals may be made in all such cases of wrong to the Magistrate, as to the other Churches, the Subject matter of Excommunication, being but such things as are against the common profession of Christianity, in Doctrine and Manners, and (not the niceties and curiosities in Theology) and such as the Laws of the Magistrate approve of; and the manner of proceeding for the proof of the Fact, being the same that are to be in all other Courts civil.
Now these things being premised and acknowledged by us; we proceed to the Negative part, what power we deny to Synods in point of Male-Administrations, which our Brethren would give them, and herein the points in difference are three.
1. We deny them to have power to Rescind a Sentence, but only Doctrinally to Judge a Sentence of Excommunication, to be void and unjust. Now the power to Rescind a Sentence, according to the acceptation of the words imports, 1. An Act of the same kind of Ministerial power, that gave the Sentence: It imports the same power to make it void, that did establish it; yea, a power containing in it all that the inferior hath, and is withal Superior to it. The Christian Magistrate hath a power over Churches, in case of wrong, not only to declare the Sentence to be unjust, as he is a Christian Magistrate, but to cause that Church that pronounced it, to Revoke it as such; but yet the Assembly will not, that they have power to Rescind the Sentence, as they say Synods may. Therefore this word (as in Synods the Assembly would place the power of it) must import not simply power of Judging and Declaring the Sentence unjust; for that is refused, but further, a power of the same kind, and yet Superior, by vertue of which the Sentence is made void, Coram Ecclesia, before the Church, and is now so to be conceived of all. And as in the Act of the Church that Excommunicated the Man, there was a further power put forth, than a bare Declaration, that he was to be Excommunicated; for they actually, with the power of Christ, did cast out, and deliver the Man to Satan: So here in this Act that bears the Name of Rescinding, there must be supposed a power, not simply to declare the Sentence unjust; but further, a power upon their Sentence, to make void the other's Act, that the Person before Excommunicated, stands now Coram Ecclesia, Unexcommunicated.
2. A Second power which we deny to Synods, which is contended for by our Brethren, which also the word Rescind imports, is the like coercive power in this Synod given them by Christ, whereby to compel this Church to acknowledge their Sentence unjust, and to Receive that Brother again. And the punishment by which they are enabled to compel them to it, must be of the same kind with that which these supposed inferior Churches have over their Members, if they did not obey; Namely, to Excommunicate and deliver up to Satan that Church, Classis, or Province, that hath thus unjustly proceeded; and will not receive this Man in again, upon their Rescinding it. And this it imports in the Sense of our Brethren, for otherwise they do but intend that Government in these cases to be in Synods, which we the Dissenting Brethren contend for; which is, that these Synods, and the Churches under them, may in some cases withdraw Communion from other Churches offending, but not presume to Excommunicate, or deliver them to Satan, or Unchurch them; and lay a Law upon their Consciences, to shut up their Church-Meetings, and to be all Heathens and Publicans to one another, as well as to the Synod and their Churches. And yet this which we contend for, is cryed down with this common prejudice, that it is no Government, because this power of Excommunication is wanting. Again, when they Restore the Party wronged, is it to their Communion only, or to the Communion with that Church, out of which he was Excommunicated also? If only to their own, then still it is no more than what we acknowledge Neighbour Churches may do, in case of wrong; and it is a Relief to the party. But if also they have power to Restore him to the Church he was cast out of actually; then they must have power to compel that Church to receive him. In this case these whole Churches and their Officers, would be Subjects to be dealt with by these Synods; For 1. The appellant wronged is one party, and they another. And 2. The Excommunication was a publick Church Act, wherein the Elders and the People are involved, especially when they all stand to own him, and to execute the Sentence.
3. A Third thing wherein we differ, is concerning matters of Appeals. We taking them as importing, in the Sense of our Brethren, a Juridical Superior power, in the Superior Synods to be appealed unto. Concerning which we say, 1. That such appeals are not so absolutely necessary to the Government of the Churches, nor doth the Law of Nature necessarily require them: 2. Especially not such appeals as should acknowledge a Superior power in the Synod appealed unto, either by making the appeal afore the Sentence is given in particular Churches, and so the matter is taken out of their Hands, by vertue of a Superior in Synods, or by making the appeal after Sentence given, we deny them to be such fixed and solemn Courts of Judicature.
First, As for that Rescinding power pretended, if more than Declarative is intended, we conceive that the Nature of the Sentence of Excommunication, when untimely executed is such, that by what ever Court (that is the first Subject of pronouncing it) it is pronounced and executed, it is not capable of being Rescinded. It is capable of being declared Void, Null, or Unjust; but not of being Rescinded, in the Sense afore explained, in matterts civil, one Court having a Superior power, may in a true and proper Sense, Rescind the Sentence of another; because it hath a greater power of the same kind, by vertue of which, it can make that Act void, which stood before by vertue of the inferior power as valid, each Act depending upon that power, which on Earth is set up; and so the greater may undo, and Reverse what the former did. But thus to Rescind a Sentence of Excommunication, no power on Earth is able to do. Which is evinced thus.
There are two parts of that Sentence, one outward, which the Church performs (which is Ejection out of Communion.) The other inward, which God accompanies the Sentence with. And if the Sentence were formally no more but a casting out of the outward communion of the Church on Earth, then a greater power in Earth, might have power to Rescind their Sentence, and Restore him to communion; but there is a further Judicial Act annexed unto it, which is binding in Heaven, and delivering to Satan, &c. which must be supposed such a special Judicial Act of God; some Men's Sin is in some Sense bound in Heaven, till he Repents, when he commits it, and is Admonished by any Christian, whether he be in the Church or no, and whether he be brought before the Church or no for it; and so the Brethren that Admonish him in order to Excommunication, may be said in some Sense, to bind his Sin. But there is a further Judicial Act of God's put forth, when the Church hath Ministerially Sentenced the Man aright; for the Church so binds Sin, as no private Brother can; or else it might be said, that a Brother may deliver to Satan. Hence that Assembly, which is the first Subject of this power from God, hath the promise of this, and God is supposed by us, to have performed it upon their Sentence; and then it is impossible there should be a Superior power of the same kind on Earth to Rescind it, or unbind it in Heaven, and to whom a further promise is made, that when they pronounce it void, there is an unbinding in Heaven. So as suppose the Congregational or Classical Church (be it either the one or the other, that is acknowledged the first Subject of this power, and which of these should be, could never yet be brought to the Debate) hath bound the Man; and the Provincial confirms it, and binds him also: If the National hath power to Rescind this, it hath then one Key to unloose what these three Keys have lockt. The answer to this is only, that this Argument goes upon a false Supposition, that appeals should be, when the Excommunication is just, whereas they are only when the appeal is unjust, and so the Sin is not bound in Heaven. To which it is Replyed.
1. In case of appeals. That's the thing still in question between the Parties, whether it be just or unjust? And therefore to suppose that all appeals fall out only in cases of real unjustice and wrong, cannot be a sufficient answer. Yea,
2. The Sentence is to be judged by all the Churches (till the matter is examined, and cleared to the contrary) to be a right Sentence of Excommunication, and that his Sin is bound in Heaven: For they are rather to Judge that the Church hath proceeded rightly, than to Judge on the Appellants side, until the matter is cleared: And so still it goes up as a Sentence binding in Heaven.
3. Whether the Sentence be just or unjust, the matter is capable of no more than declaring and adjudging it such accordingly; and therefore it is capable of no such Act as may be called Rescinding. For if it be Just, no Sentence on Earth can Rescind God's Act upon that first Sentence, for it is bound in Heaven, and Man cannot alter God's Act; and if it be unjust, then there needs no power to Rescind it, but only to declare it to be unjust and void; and so to hold the Man, as if he had never been Excommunicated. And if Synods have but such a Declarative power, then let no more be affirmed, and we will not contend about it.
4. If they have power of Rescinding the Sentence, then the Act done by the inferior Courts, is made void by their sole Sentence, without any Act of Reversing, by the consent of those Congregations or Churches, that have pronounced it. For no Superior Court hath that power to Rescind the Sentence of another; but hath it so, as by their Act the Sentence is made void, without any Act of Revocation by the lower Court. Thus the Honourable House of Parliament, if it Rescinds an Act of an Inferior Court, sends not down to that Inferior Court to Reverse it; but doth it without them. And if that be the intent of this Rescinding, let it be so declared.