The Government of the Churches of Christ, Book 3 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI.
Some Exceptions made against the last Argument, as not Conclusive removed, how we are to consider the Churches, as at first planted by the Apostles as patterns, and Examples to us.
TO this Argument, there are many Exceptions, which I shall consider.
1. It is excepted, That the first Churches, though but single Congregations, having Elders in them, which did or might exercise all Church-Acts, cannot yet be drawn into an ordinary pattern; because the first must, out of a necessity, do that which afterwards when multiplied single Congregations, that can Associate, may not do. Even as though Cain at first Marryed his Sister, yet that is no Warrant for us, now to do the like, when Men and Women are multiplied; so neither can the Instance of the Church of Hierusalem, or any other first Churches, be the pattern to Warrant single Churches now multiplyed, to do that which they then did.
Answ. 1. The Apostles did not stay in places, till there were a sufficiency to set up a Church, but if that a Presbyterian Government, over many Congregations, had been the Rule of Christ; and that they must of necessity have been set up; they would have rather staid, or sent an Evangelist to Convert so many, as to make up a sufficient Presbytery for a classical Church. If Adam could, with his Breath, have made Men and Women, though he had staid a while, Cain should not have Marryed his Sister. And therefore, if that, by the Ordination of Christ, a Presbyterial Church were the first Church; God would have staid, and the Apostles would have staid, as God staid giving the Ark, and the Tabernacle, and the Law of the Government of a National Church, till such time as the Jews became so many, as to rise to a Nation.
Answ. 2. It lies upon those, that affirm it, to prove that the endowing single Congregations at first with an intire power, was an act of necessity, and not voluntary, and as it should stand in all Ages. Had a Presbyterian Church Government been according to Christ's Institution, the Apostles would have Taught Christians to remove out of the places, where they could not make up Presbyterian Churches, and to go into Cities, where they might make them, that so Churches might be set up in their fulness at first.
Answ. 3. The power of a single Congregation, to have acted as a Presbytery at the first, was not grounded on a case of necessity (because there were no other Churches existing, to associate with, and so was accidental to them) but this one alone Congregation, was essentially and innately and intirely compleat in it self, and within it self, as much as when afterward there were many. To say the power of Eleven Apostles, as combined, was defective; because but over one Congregation, and but out of an extraordinary necessity, would be the greatest Derogation in the World. And if there could be a supposition, that there had been other Churches existing, or coming to Hierusalem, this Presbytery of the first Church had not been bound to associate, as not having sufficient power within it self. To affirm these things of this first Presbytery of the Eleven Apostles (as our Brethren suppose it, and it is the main foundation of their case) to have been defective, and their power (now because over one Congregation) to have been founded on an extraordinary necessity only, as for Cain to Marry his Sister, in a way below the Warrant, as of the ordinary Rule: Thus first to cast them (in this Example) into the condition of ordinary Presbyters, to make it an argument for the Presbytery; and then to cast their power at first, below the power of an ordinary Classis, and to make it then to be dependent on a providential necessity; how Derogatory is it to that Transcendent power of such Officers? So then, if they are to be lookt upon, at all, as the pattern of an ordinary Presbytery; then as such now, when over but one Congregation, as much as if they had been over many. For to say, they were but as extraordinary Persons, when over but one Congregation; and afterwards an ordinary Colledge of Presbyters, when many, is too incoherent, and inconsistent with it self, to be affirmed. And then what is the reason that this first existence of an Eldership over one Congregation, should not be as ordinary a pattern to Warrant, as full and sufficient a Presbytery in one Congregation, as it is for the supposed Presbyterial Government over many? So that if it were ordinary, it serves as much for us, as them, and indeed for us first; because that this, as one Congregation, existed first; and they were as much an ordinary Presbytery at first, as at last, and endowed with the same sufficiency of inherent power. And if it were extraordinary, the instance will not serve them at all, first nor last, for a ground of Presbyterial Government. And surely if this Church at Hierusalem, had so many Teachers besides Apostles, as is pretended, when these Congregations came to be Multiplied (as is supposed) and divided, here was (if ever) enough to have made several sufficient Presbyteries, to these several Congregations; and the Association of many Congregations into one can have place but in case of Defect, not of Sufficiency.
2. It is excepted, that we are not to consider Churches, as they were when the Apostles first began, but as they were, when the Apostles left them; and that Ordo intendentis is one thing, and Ordo generantis is another. Thus Nature first makes but a Child, which afterward grows up to a Man.
Answ. 1. As to the first, we argue the Example of those Churches, which the Apostles left, and, when they left them, commended them to the Grace of God, as in Acts 14. when they had chosen them Elders, as having sufficient means to support themselves. And (as Bains argues against Bishops, and their Government over Churches) those whom the Apostles placed as chief, in the first constituting of Churches, and left as their Successours in their last farewell, which they gave to the Bain's Diocesan Tryal, pag. 65.Churches; they had not, nor were to have any Superiour unto them in the Churches, as is evident in the instance of Ephesus, Acts 20. 28. & 1 Pet. 5. 2. So say we, that those whom the Apostles left, having placed Elders over them, and left as their Successours at their last farewell, commending them to the Grace of God, and so constituted, without mentioning of Association for Government, with other Churches; they, by Apostolical Warrant, were not to enter into such Associations, for matter of Government and Jurisdiction.
Answ. 2. As to that other part of the Exception, we reply, that certainly those Churches that the Apostles did thus leave, and the power in them, and the Presbyteries thereof, to do all Church-acts as a Presbytery now at first, were as perfect Churches the first Day (as Adam was a perfect Man, when first Created) as afterwards they could be supposed to be. If Nature at first do beget a perfect Child, with all the parts, it may indeed grow in Stature; but all the Natural parts it hath when a Man, it hath when a Child; and though it may grow in Stature, it doth not grow in perfection, nor is defective of any of its Natural powers, when a Child; but all exercise their Natural Functions, when a Child, as truly as when a Man. And beside, joyn a Thousand Children together, they will not make one Man.
3. It is expected, that although no Churches may give away their Right, yet they may joyn with them, that will Corroborate their Right: So if the Congregation, that had a Presbytery afore, be multiplyed into another Congregation, it retains the same Presbytery, and is one Church still.
Answ. 1. Either it is at their liberty to Retain their proper Presbytery, proper to themselves; and the other Congregation goes from them to have anew, or not. If it be at liberty, then Jesus Christ hath Instituted two Forms of Government, made two several Seats or Subjects of intire Church-power, for Men Arbitrarily to cast themselves into, which they please. This is to make two ordinary Patterns, of two sorts of Church-Government, one of a single Congregation, the other of the Presbyterial over many; and to Warrant the sufficiency and compleatness of either, when either of them have a sufficient Presbytery. But that Christ should leave the Government of his Church so indefinite, cannot be imagined; not only because it is impossible, that one of them should not be better than the other, but (also as hath been said before) in respect to the Congregations themselves; because the one makes a vast difference from the other, in the point of fixedness and unfixedness of Officers; and further, because one would destroy the other. For allow but this Principle, that all Congregations that may have a sufficient Presbytery, may retain the Right and whole Government within themselves, as the first Subjects of it, as agreeing with the Pattern, and what Church will subject it self to the Presbyterial Government? And that this is not indifferent to all our Judgments, the Contentions on all hands do Testifie. If it be Arbitrary, then it would have been unlawful for any Congregation in the Primitive Times, to have Retained the Right that was first setled upon them; and to have in exercise all power within themselves as whole, as when Churches did multiply. If it be given as a liberty by Christ; voluntary Subjection is not to take it away, and that Form of Government, which it doth give up its right to, being a new change of Government (as was said afore) there must be as much an Institution for it, as there was for that Right it had afore. It is impossible there should be two Rights to the same thing, whereof the one is incompatible with the other; for if the Congregations can claim it as its Rights, then the Presbytery cannot; for that both should exercise it, is impossible. There may be differing interests of power, in the same politick Body, but that one and the same, while power should be in one, and also in a greater, and in another, cannot be imagined.
Answ. 2. To the second part of the Exception, viz. that it is a strengthening of the power of Congregations, and not a taking of it away, it being an intrinsecal Government, We Reply. 1. That of all other Answers, we wonder at that; for if a Master of a Family, that Ruled as a Master afore, should have his power, in governing of his Family, committed into the Hands of other Masters of Families, together with himself; would he account this a strengthening of his power, as he is a Master of a Family, or a loosing of it? Masters of Colledges would judge it a taking away of their power, not a strong thing of it, for by this they lost it as Masters. And 2. If that all these do Rule in common, and so the Major Vote of them, in common, carries it, multitude of cases will fall out (whereto tho' he gives a Negative) that shall be carryed by the Major Vote, so as he utterly looseth his power, it being thus swallowed up by the greater number, how is this a strengthening of it then? And in this case, is it not an extrinsecal power to that Congregation, which▪ overrules it, as well as in the case of Bishops; when as the Votes of their own Officers that are proper to them, and fixed to them, whom they have chosen to watch over them, shall not carry matters that belong unto them, as afore they did. 3. The strengthening of Churche's power, lies in countenancing of what Churches have done, after they have done it, out of an Honour to them, and not lightly to hear Appeals from them; but it is not confirmed, by taking the power out of their Hands, and doing their acts for them Thus Kingdoms, in a League, strengthen each other's acts, when as they do not Foster Traytors, against each other; but if they should mingle powers in common, this were to destroy their power and right, as they be politick Bodies.
If it be said, it makes Churches equal still: It is granted that it's true, it makes Churches in a like condition indeed; but how? Not in the priviledges of Churches, it makes them in like condition of Subjection, but not of freedom, as they are Churches, or incorporate Bodies to judge within themselves. As if Incorporate Towns should have their priviledge of Life and Death, within themselves, given up to a Combination of many Incorporate Towns together, they were pares indeed, compeers, and here is an equality they are brought unto in this condition, but what equity there were in it, we see not.
That I may conclude, if, when Congregations were thus multiplied, a Congregation that before had the Government intire in it self, being invested with it, began anew to Associate with others for Government: Either the Classical Elders Associated, have taken up the whole Government and Jurisdiction, and left to that Congregation and Elders, which once were invested with it, no part of it (which once they had proper to them afore) but as this exercised in common; or else there is a parting and a dividing of that power, and acts of Government they had afore. If all be taken away, let that be affirmed and practised, and a Warrant for it shewed, let the classical Presbytery choose, and ordain their Deacons, let them Suspend from the Sacrament, let them only Admonish, let them admit their Members, let them choose their Elders, let them do all. If they part it, either it must be Arbitrarily, as themselves please, (we will retain this, and you shall have that) and if so, then they Arbitrarily part with that which was once given them by Jesus Christ; or else they part with all by a Rule, and a Command from God, putting the bounds between what the one shall have, and what the other shall have; let these bounds then be shewn, or any instances, in the Primitive Churches, be assigned of such alterations when Churches were multiplied, which in this case is necessary. This will breed also a great alteration and change, in the constitution of these Congregations themselves, and their Relations to their Officers, as is obvious to any one who considers it.