The Government of the Churches of Christ, Book 4 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI.
The Incongruities which flow from the Elders of a Presbytery, sustaining special Relation of Elders to all the particular Congregations.
I have proved, that if a Presbytery be set over many Congregations, the Presbyters thereof must bear a special Relation of constant, and established Elders to all those Congregations: I shall now evince, that for these Elders already fixed to several charges, to sustain also a special Relation of Ordinary and Standing Elders to all these Congregations, as one Church; and all the people thereof, as Members of that Church; carries with it Great and Manifold Incongruities, and Inconsistencies also, with what the Scriptures hold forth concerning Elders, and other Officers of Churches, as also with the Principles professed by the Reformed Churches themselves.
1. This breeds an Incongruous Disproportion, between the Relation of the Officers of a Church, of this sort of Officers, Namely Elders, in the extent of their Relation and Power; and of those other sort of Officers of the Churches, acknowledged by the Reformed Churches, viz. Deacons. Now let us therefore put it to the examination of the consciencious, whether what the Scripture speaks of Elders, and of their Commission, Duties, &c. in their several Relations to the Flock under them, will afford clearer characters of the extent of their standing Government, to be Congregational to one Congregation, than of its being classical over many. Yea, let us see whether the Descriptions of Elders, and Exhortations given unto them concerning their several charges, do not plainly overthrow any such Relation of Elders (as Elders) unto many Congregations, as Inconsistent thereunto. Surely unto us, there appear many great and unanswerable Incongruities and Inconsistencies, in this classical Government
If we compare the extent of this Office of Elders in their Relation, with the extent of other Church Officers in their Relation; we shall find, that what holds true of one sort of ordinary Officers of a Church, according to the word, may well be supposed to hold true of another; or else there is a disproportion between the several Relations of Officers; and the one is not of like extent with the other, which yet the Scriptures make commensurable, and to be of equal extent. More plainly, if the Scriptures had intended, and held forth many Churches, as making one Church; and the Elders of those many Churches, to have been Elders in common to those Churches, as one Church; then the Deacons of all those Churches, should make up a common Deaconry, and be Deacons in common, unto all those Churches in an ordinary way, as the other are Elders. But this is contrary to the practice of the Reformed Churches, though subject to the Presbyterial Government, in which the Deacons have the ordinary Relation of Deacons, in no respect extended further than to a particular Congregation: Nor do they exercise Acts of that Office, in a set way to other Congregations, nor to Neighbour Congregations more than to another; much less is there a common Deaconship of them all. And yet why should not this common Deaconry be erected over all those Churches, as one Church, as well as a common Eldership, especially if in matters of this Nature, a parity of Reason should carry it? For,
1. A Church in Scripture, and all the Officers are alike Relatives, as a Church and the Elders are. The best of the Presbyterial Arguments for this common Presbytery, are founded upon the commensurable extent and relation of Church and Elders; that if any Churches make one Church, then the Elders of them all make one Eldership, and they are Elders in common unto them; then why not the Deacons also? Now this Reason of theirs, fetcht from this Mutual Relation of one Church, and one Eldership or Elders thereof, will require the like for Deacons: for every Church, as it is a Church, being a Body, hath a Relation to all its Officers, as Organical Members thereof: As we have it asserted, Rom. 12. 4. As we have many Members in one Body, and all Members have not the same Office, so it is also in the Church of Christ; and the Members have several Offices in the Church, which be mentioneth, ver. 8. and so if that Church of Rome were one Body, and a Church of many Churches; then the Deacons were Deacons in common of those many Churches, as they all were one Church. For as the Pastors and Teachers Office is held forth in that following Description, ver. 8. He that Exhorteth, and he that Teacheth: So the Deacons in that, He that Giveth. And in the Analogy of the Natural Body (to which there the Apostle refers us, to exemplifie this of a Church organized with Officers, as a Body to Christ) though one Member may be less and inferiour to another, in bulk or use; yet it is a Member of that whole Body in its use. The little Finger, is a Finger of the whole Body, as well as the Arm is a Member of the whole: The Foot that serves the whole Body, is a Member in its Office, as fully as the Hand; and the extent of its Jurisdiction or Use, according to its kind, is the same, by vertue of the same Relations. If therefore these are Elders in common, or an Eldership do Rule in common those Congregations as One Church, and as Organical Members thereof, as one Body; then why should not the Deacons in as ordinary a way, perform their Office in common, and bear the Relation of Deacons in common unto all, as One Church? And
2. The Scriptures do confirm this like commensurable extent of the Deacons and Elders Office, as Relating to a Church: For the Apostle Writing to Philippi, a Church in a City (which therefore we suppose our Brethren will needs have to have been a Presbyterial Church, of many Congregations, lest any one instance of a compleat Congregational Church, should be left unto us) He Writes to the Bishops (the Elders) and the Deacons of that Church. And Acts 6. the Deacons of the Church of Jerusalem (if there were many Congregations, as our Brethren suppose) were chosen by the whole Multitude, when gathered together by the Twelve; and therefore were Deacons of that whole Church, as well as the Elders were Elders thereof. Now if the Deacons Office should thus be extended to all the Congregations, as the Elders is; then why should not each Church be bound to bring Contributions to the Deacons of each Church, to be distributed in common; and so our Purses should be subject to the Deacons in common, as far as our consciences to the Elders in common; and they might challenge the same power in their Office over the one, that the Elders do over the other: And then also each Congregation were in as ordinary and standing an obligation, bound to Relieve all the poor in those Churches, as well as those in their own: Not only by the common Law of charity, but by vertue of a special Relation of their being one Church; which Relation in all these things, doth beget the like obligation, that it doth in Government: And so all things in this Nature, should be alike common to all and each; and there should be a common Treasury for this one great Diaconate Church (as we may in a Parallel Allusion, to that other Name of Presbyterial call it) as there is a common Regimen or Government, for this great Presbyterial Church. This strange Disproportion between the Officers or Members of this Body, which the Presbyterial Government doth make, seems to us, at least, unnatural: Whereas this (as all other things) fall in suitably and naturally, when the Relation of Elders and Elderships, is extended no further than each Congregation; which, as it is to be an Original Body unto Christ, so the Officers and Members thereof, according to the Law of Nature, are alike Members of, and for that Body; and the Use, Service, Relation, of all and each in their several kinds, bear alike proportion to the whole. And that even by the practice and judgment of the Reformed Churches themselves, the Deacons are confined to each particular Congregation, is to us a Testimony (as the remaining Office of Overseers for the poor under the Episcopal Government, hath been judged a pregnant evidence of the Deacons Office once in the Church) that the limits of a Church and Elders were all once within a particular Congregation, although the Elders, because a Superior Office, have assumed to extend their power and jurisdiction in their kind, further than the other more inferior in theirs.
But let it be supposed, that some reason of difference might be given of this Disproportion in the Elder's Office, and the Deacons, and that a common Deaconry would not follow upon a common Presbytery. Yet
2. There are other as great Incongruities will fall upon the very Relations of the Elders Offices themselves, which this Frame of fixed Elders to some Congregations respectively, and yet of ordinary Elders to all of them, causeth. God hath made some Preaching Elders; some Ruling Elders (as the Reformed Churches allow) or Church-Governours to assist the Pastors in Government. And to Preaching Elders, both Preaching and Ruling belongs; which are conjunct in that Office, according to the Principles of the Presbyterial Government, and the Scriptures. But the business of Ruling, belongs only to the other; and by this they are distinct, as two Subordinate Species, or as the Sensitive and Reasonable Soul, whereof the one hath Sense only in all its Acts, the other both Sense and Reason, and yet are Specifically distinct.
Every Church of Christ, is a Body ordered, Coloss. 2. 1. Rejoycing (says Paul) to see your Order. And the intent of the Presbyterial Government, is professed to be, to preserve Order in the Church; and if in any thing this Order is most to be seen, it is in the Distinction and Order of the Officers thereof. Now this Frame of Government, brings in a great Disorder in the Offices and Officers, and confounds them, and their Relations. To Demonstrate this, let us consider the Pastors, or Preaching Elders. They are all undeniably Preaching Elders, to their particular Congregations, of which they are the fixt Pastors; and yet they have another Relation of Elders (by means of this Presbyterial Government) to all these Congregations, considered as one Church: And if these Pastors be any way Elders to both; they must Sustain the Title of both sorts of Elders in these two differing Relations, which is an evident confounding of both these Offices, in one and the same person. For,
1. It is evident, that they do each apart, bear the Title and Relation of preaching Elders unto their particular Congregations; and such pastors, or such preaching Elders, they can be to no more or other than those they ordinarily preach unto; for they Labour in the Word and Doctrine, unto no other; and this is the character of Distinction from the other Elders and Governours, in 1 Tim. 5. 17. And it is evident, that they being fixt each as Pastors to their particular Congregations, cannot Labour in the Word and Doctrine to them all; therefore they sustain this Title in Distinction of Elders, only unto those their several charges. And it is certain, that all Offices have their Distinction and Denomination, from that special Praxis or Function they are ordained unto: As that is an Eye to the Body, whose Praxis or Function is to see for the whole Body. They can therefore be said to be Preaching Elders to no other of this classical Church, than that Praxis of Preaching is extended unto. It is an Argument which Whitaker useth against the Pope; and our Divines make use of it against the Bishops: That nor he nor they, can be said to be Pastors unto all they yet pretended to be Pastors unto, because they are not able to exercise the Function of Pastors unto them. Therefore,
2. We ask what sort of Elders the Pastors are that are in this common Presbytery? What sort of Relation of Elders do they bear to this one Presbyterial Church, over and above that Relation, they, as Pastors, bear to their own? (And this Church and Elders, as Elders, are Relatives, as well as the particular Congregations and their Elders, or else this Great Church, must want its correlative of Elders to it) Surely they bear no other Relation, than of Ruling Elders, if they be Elders at all (and to make them no Elders, and not to have the Relation of Elders to this Great Church in this Presbytery, we believe will not be affirmed) And if they be Elders, then the Notion of their being Elders, must have one of those two forementioned Formal Differences annexed to it, either of Preaching Elders, or meerly Ruling: And this Difference and Denomination must be fetcht (as was said afore) from the differing Praxis, or use they serve for. And it is evident, that the ordinary Acts they serve for, and exercise in those common Presbyteries, are meerly Acts of Ruling Elders (in all which therefore, Ruling Elders concur in common with them) and accordingly it is called the Presbyterian Government.
And further, the power of an Office in the Church (though exercised but as conjoyned with others) is a Relation in respect to some Administration in a constancy; now the constant and ordinary Administration they serve for in such a Presbytery, is only Ruling, not Teaching, there being no Acts but such, that Ruling Elders joyn in. So as by this Frame, the same Preaching Elder or Pastor, must bear two sorts of ordinary Offices, in these two Relations, of a Preaching, and a meer Ruling Elder, as if one were both a Physician and a Chirurgeon, and were fixed to one of the Companies in the City, to practice Physick to them, he sustained the Office of a Physician to that Company; and if he were besides, called to practice Chirurgery, to many other Companies, he were certainly only a Chirurgeon unto them, as truly as a Physician to the other. So as we shall not need to Dispute the point of Ruling Elders any more; for here are such as are Elders, acknowledged such by all sides, and yet for the sort of their Office, but plain Ruling Elders, and deserve properly in this Relation, no other Name, if we hold the Presbyterial Government; and they are as truly and properly to this Presbyterial Church such, and no other, as those Governours that Preach not at all, are unto those they are Elders unto.
And this Incongruity, no Distinction will Salve; call them Elders in this Presbytery, in what Sense you please, whether in Sensu diviso, or Conjuncto, yet Elders they are; and if so, then one of these two sorts of Elders, they must be to this Presbyterial Church, either both Preaching and Ruling Elders, or meerly Ruling. Their being Elders together in this Presbytery, cannot be supposed to Divest them of the Title of some sort of Elders (and there is not a third sort) no more than the Elders of a Congregation, met in a Presbytery, do thereby loose the Title of Elders, which they sustain to that Congregation, or no more (as was even now instanced) than when the Body hath two Eyes, that always concur in one Act of sight, either of them should not be Denominated Eyes unto the Body apart, and the one called the left, and the other the right.
The Disorder and Confusion hereby, may be further set out, 1. That by this means, the same Officer hath a full Relation to one Church, and but half a Relation unto another; and it causeth him to perform the whole of his Offices to one Church (the particular Church) to which he hath Relation, and but the half thereof to the other. And 2. It makes an ordinary Pastor, not only perform the work of two Officers, but to bear the Relation of two Offices; for in his several Relations to these two several Churches, his Congregational and Classical, his Relations are parted and divided.
And it brings up the same Absurdity which was put upon Episcopal Government; That a Bishop professing himself to bear the Relation of a Pastor to the whole Diocess; yet was but a Ruling Elder to them, not a Teaching.
3. To extend a Pastor's power of ordinary Ruling, beyond the extent of his ordinary Teaching, is against the order which Christ hath set (and all extent of power, must as well have an Institution of Christ, as the Power or Office it self; for the difference of Evangelists, and of ordinary Pastors, lay but in extent of power) and then we argue thus; if the extent of a Pastor's ordinary Ruling Power, as a Pastor and Elder, be but to the Flock, as his whole Flock, which he is able to Feed: Then to bear the Relation of a Pastor or Elder for ordinary Government, to any more than he is able, and doth thus Feed, May not be. But the extent of a Pastor's ordinary Ruling power, is but to that Flock, as his whole Flock, which he is able to Feed. And this Argument, as also the former; besides that, it serves to make up more Incongruities of this Presbyterial Government, so it might stand alone, and make a compleat Argument of it self against it; for if the Pastor's ordinary power in Ruling, be not to be extended further than of his ordinary Preaching; then this ordinary standing Government of Pastors fixed for Preaching to their own Congregations, may not be over those many in common.
Now that the extent of a Pastor's ordinary Ruling power, reacheth only to that Flock which he is able to Feed, I prove 1. By Scripture. 2. By Reason.
1. I prove it by Scripture, Acts 20. 28. Take heed to your selves, and to all the foreign.Flock (the whole Flock) over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Over-seers, to Feed the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own Blood. Here are 1. Elders, (ver. 17.) spoken to. 2. Their having Relation to a Flock, an whole Flock is mentioned. 3. They are enjoyned to Feed the Flock, and the whole Flock: And all these are commensurable. Whence 1. We see that the special Limitation of their extensive Power and Relation to a Flock, and to all the Flock, is set by the Holy Ghost, and not by Man; and therefore is not to be extended by Man, further than the Holy Ghost hath appointed. 2. The extent of that Relation, is to that Flock; and the whole Flock they Feed, and they are to Feed all that Flock alike: And if they be Preaching Elders, then they must Feed it by Preaching; and therefore are Overseers to them, to Feed them, and because they Feed them. 3. He speaks to Preaching Elders especially, that Feed by Doctrine: For 1. He propounds his own Example to them, ver. 20. that he had Revealed the whole Counsel of God. And 2. He says, ver. 30. Some of you shall arise, speaking perverse things. And 'tis Pauls farewell; and (as Baynes argues against Bishops▪) those to whom at last the Apostles commended Churches, were the ordinary Governors left; but he commended them not to a Bishop, but ordinary Elders. Thus we argue also, for the extent of the Relation of those Elders that they are to Govern only that Flock that they are able to Feed; and therefore they have not the Office of Overseeing, as ordinary Elders over those whom they Feed not. And Peter seconds Paul in this, 1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the Flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, the Flock, foreign among you, is that Flock that any of them had Relation to, as his Flock Respectively. Thereupon Writing unto the Churches in a whole Nation, in chap. 1. ver. 1. (whereas in Acts 20. 28. the charge is to the particular Elders of Ephesus, to that whole Flock) he therefore puts in that Note of Respectiveness foreign among you, that is, that which Respectively belongs to you, answerable to which is that Text, Col. 1. 17. Who is for you a Faithful Minister, that is, your proper Pastor: And Acts 14. 23. They ordained Elders Church by Church, Elders to them, that is, proper Elders to them, so the Flock foreign signifies your several proper Flocks that belong to you. Hereby it appears, that their Feeding, and their oversight over any of those Flocks, are commensurable; and that Flock which they are not able to Feed, they have not the oversight over, for they are both of the same extent. Thus also, Heb. 13. 7. 17. Remember them that have the Rule over you, and have spoken to you the Word of God, which he speaks of Preaching Elders, for the extent of their Rule and their Preaching is all one. And of Ruling Elders he speaks, ver. 17. Obey them that have the Rule over you; for they watch for your Souls, as those that must give an account. And not to Dispute, whether these places note out two sorts of Officers, Preaching Elders, v. 7. and Ruling Elders, v. 17. Or but one sort, and so but several Acts of the same Office; yet this is certain that these are commensurable; for they are Officers together in the same Church: And if the Pastor's power of Ruling extends no further than his Preaching, then the meer Ruling Elders power, or his that is assistant to him, must extend no further also. 1. Remember those that have spoken the word to you. 2. Obey and Submit to those that watch for your Souls. This is the Natural Obligation to Obedience, and so is the measure to set the bounds of the extent of ordinary Church-power. 'Tis one Argument used against Episcopal power, that they are enforced to obey him that speaks not the Word to them, nor watcheth over their Souls; and this holds as well against these Presbyterial Offices; and when a Man comes before such to be Excommunicated, he may say, I am not bound to obey you in such an Authoritative way, nor do I owe a Subjection as to a power of Censure in you; for many, nay most of you, have never spoke the word to me, nor do watch over my Soul: Nay, perhaps the Man can say, he never saw their Faces afore. And it avails not to say, that they they may occasionally Preach; for the Apostle, 1 Thess. 5. 12. speaking of respect to their Officers, Know them (says he) that Labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and Admonish you. These two, Those that Labour, and are over you, are commensurable, and they are meant, who make it their callings to have the care of the Flock, which the many Pastors and Elders in a common Presbytery do not. But in what is it they Labour, the 1 Tim. 5. 17. expounds it to be, That Labour in the Word and Doctrine; The Elders that Rule well, as worthy of double Honour, especially those that Labour in the Word and Doctrine. And whether you expound this latter known place of Teaching Elders only, or of Ruling and Teaching both (as the Reformed Churches do) however it affords this to us, that the extent of Ruling, in either the one or the other, is but as large as Teaching. And if it be meant of Teaching Elders only, that both Rule and Labour in the Word and Doctrine; yet if they be limited in labouring in the Word, as being fixt Pastors to their own Congregations, then in Ruling also. And if it be meant of Ruling Elders (as distinct from them) yet their Ruling is of the same extent, that the others labouring in the Word; and that is extended but to one Congregation, whereas Pastors they are fixed. And
2. Though in a Pastor's Office, in which Preaching and Ruling is joyned, yet his power of Ruling flows in him from, and is the Adjunct of his power to Preach; and to be sure, it is not extendable further. And however, yet there is the same proportion of either; and then by just Reason, the extent of the Church, which is the Subject of his ordinary Ruling, cannot be extended larger than what is the ordinary Subject of his Preaching, and so those Relations are of equal limits, (which is the present case of a Pastor's Authority, appropriated to a Congregation, and extended but to his own in an ordinary way) and to make the ground of a Relation narrower, than the extent of it is absurd. If a Father hath the power of Governing as a Father, then it is extendable only to those he is a Father to. And that a Pastor hath his ordinary Ruling power, annexed to his ordinary power of Preaching, we prove by these Reasons.
1. If he hath no this Ruling power upon this ground, then must be assigned some other. He hath it not by any special Faculty or Office, over and above this of Preaching; for then he should be made a Ruling Elder, over and above his being first a Preaching Elder, as a new Faculty given him: Nor hath he it by being made a Ruler first, and then having this of Preaching Superadded (as the Bishops first made Deacons, then Presbyters.) For
2. All the Keys are given him at once, the Keys of Ruling, with the Keys of Knowledge. The power of the Staff intrinsecally follows, his being a Pastor or Shepherd; and though the one is a power of meer Order, Namely that of Preaching, and that of his Ruling is of Jurisdiction (to be exercised in many cases with others, and not alone) yet still his receiving power to joyn with others in those Acts of Rule of Jurisdiction, is from this power of Order; and the ordinary extent of his Authority therein, is extended no further than his ordinary call to Preaching. Yea,
3. The extent of the power of the Apostles themselves, in Ruling in all the Churches, was founded upon, and extendable with their Commission to Preach; and their very Call and Obligation being not to Preach in a set and fixt Relation, as an ordinary Pastor's calling is; but to all Nations, and in all Churches, hence their power of Ruling was answerable. It was their very Call to be Universal Pastors, and therefore Universal Rulers; Yea, and their Authority of Ruling, was narrower in the extent of it, than of their Preaching. The Apostles might preach to Heathens, and their Call was so to do, to convert them; but they had not power to Rule all Men, What have I to do to Judge them that are without? says the Apostle, 1 Cor. 15. 12. But in this way of Presbyterial Government, though they also may occasionally Preach, where they may not Rule; yet the proportion of their ordinary Ruling, is extended beyond the proportion of their ordinary Preaching, which was not so in the Apostles themselves. Let but the same Line of proportion equally be drawn over the Apostle's power in these and theirs, according to their several measures. Their Call to Ruling, was Uniform to Preaching in all Churches, though their Preaching was larger than their Rule, Namely, to those without; but ordinary Pastors have a standing fixt Call to Preach, but in one Congregation; let their Call and power of Ruling, be Uniform to it, and they can have an ordinary standing power to Rule, but in that Congregation; either extend both further, or contract both to this. It is no answer, to say that they may Preach as Pastors in Neighbour Churches occasionally; for so they may Preach to any Reformed Church, as in Scotland, where yet they have not so much as an occasional Call to Rule, and in such occasional Acts of Preaching also, they have but the proportion, which the Apostles had, whose power in Preaching, was larger than of Ruling; for it was extended to them without. But still if an ordinary standing power in Ruling, although with others (for the Apostles exercised their power with others) should be stretcht where they have not an ordinary standing Call to Preach, it should exceed the proportion of the Apostles in that respect.
4. And Fourthly, From hence ariseth another Disproportion between these Officers, Ruling and Preaching Elders, compared among themselves; and it is such a Disproportion, as is like to the former, alledged between the Deacons and the Elders. For this Government makes the extent of the Ruling Elders Office and Relation, to be larger than that of the Teachers or Pastors: For the Pastor as Pastor, is limited to his particular Congregation he is fixt to, as the Deacons also are: But the Ruling Elders Office, as Ruling Elder, is extended over all these Congregations in this Presbytery. The Ruling Elder performs his Office, in the highest perfection of it, as to Admonish, Excommunicate, &c. to all in these Churches; but the Pastors are limited as Pastors, in the Highest Work of their Callings (which preaching is; and more excellent than Ruling, yea, than Baptizing) unto one Congregation. That place in 1 Tim. 5. 17. (interpret how you will) Justifies what is asserted.
Now these are strange Disproportions, which are occasioned by this and the Presbyterial Government. And this greatly makes for the Congregational way, wherein as to these particulars, no such Incongruities are found, but all things fall naturally Uniform.
2. A Second Head of Incongruities and Inconsistencies, which will follow upon this Government, concerns the Mutual Duties required, that do necessarily follow upon this standing Relation, for a constant Government of these Elders, to all this people of these Churches, and of the people to these Elders.
1. The people of all these Elders (according to what the Scripture speaks of, as due to standing Elders) owe at least Honour and Esteem to them; yea, Maintenance to all of them, whether they ordinarily Rule them, or Preach to them; and they owe it on both accounts, 1 Tim. 4. 17, 18. Let the Elders that Rule well, be counted worthy of double Honour, especially that Labour in the Word and Doctrine; Which Honour is, (ver. 18.) in the Analogy of that Law, Not to Muzzle the Mouth of the Ox, that treadeth out the Corn: And this is certainly due to Elders, on account of what is the Work of Elders, whether performed apart or together, by way of Jurisdiction. And it cannot be denyed, but that their constant Ruling, as in the Presbytery, is one great part of the Work of Elders, here intended and mentioned with Preaching, for which an especial Honour is due. God appoints no constant work in the Ministry, but he appoints a Reward from those, for whom it is performed. And as they owe a Duty of Ruling to every one in the Flock, as Acts 20. 28. So there is a due of Maintenance and Honour, due from all this people, to all and every one of those Elders, to those that Rule, as well as to those that Labour in the Word and Doctrine. And in Reason, if the Elders that Rule well, and perform the lesser Acts of Ruling in their particular Congregations, are to have this Honour from them, in their Relations; then all these Elders that Rule well in the common Presbytery, and perform the greatest Acts of Ruling, are to have the like from all of that classical Church; for the Emphasis being put upon Ruling well, and in those Acts done by them, the Excellency of Ruling consisting; therefore to these, is this Honour due from this Great Church, more especially, than from the lesser Congregations, Respectively unto their proper Elders. Neither will the Distinction of being a Presbytery in common salve it; for if the particular Elders of Congregations, are to have this Honour for what is done by them in their joynt Acts of Ruling in the particular Presbyteries; then these are to have it in what is done in their common Presbyteries also. And the precept is, not to Honour Presbyteries in common in an abstract Notion, but to Honour Elders; because the particular persons of the Elders, are to be the Object of it; and those most, who excell most in that Rule, that Rule well, or best. But when there are many Congregations apart, who have their proper fixt Pastors and Elders, whom they maintain for performing one part of the Elders work (for they perform but one part of it) how shall they perform this due to all the rest, for that other part of the work? How Burthensome, how confused would this be? And yet due it is, for they are all one Church to them. And then how can this Duty be proportioned (suppose it should not be Maintenance, but Honour and Esteem) for the people will not be able well to judge of it, not only because they cannot be present at their Work, and so cannot judge of it; but because either it must be proportioned to them that are constant, as Preaching Elders, or as Ruling. For the ground it is there, (1 Tim. 5. 18.) required upon is, that they tread out their Corn, and the Apostle says, Esteem them for their Work sake, that Labour among you, 1 Thess. 5. 12, 13. So as it is to be proportioned to the Work of a Pastor, as Pastor; but to Honour or Esteem them as Ruling Elders only, were to Honour the Preaching Elders, below the Rank and Degree of their Office.
2. It also brings the like Incongruity, upon the performance of those Duties of Elders, which the New Testament indifferently requires of all those that it acknowledgeth to be Elders unto a people; and therefore no such constant Relation of Elders, to so many Churches may be. 1. One Duty is praying with the Sick, Send for the Elders of the Church, to pray for them, Jam. 5. 14. What! are these Elders of the Presbyterial Church bound to this? And this Duty lies in common upon Elders of the Churches; and how shall we Distinguish, when the Scripture doth not? 2. Another Duty is visiting from House to House, as Paul in his Example instructs the Elders of Ephesus, Acts 20. 2. 3. Another Duty is watching over Men's Souls, as those that must give an account, Heb. 13. 17. and that the people should obey them; and no Warrant is given to obey others in the way of an ordinary Rule. And to watch, is not to stay till causes are brought by Appeals, or so, from the Congregations; but personally to watch over them, as Souls committed to them. 4. Another Duty is Preaching (if they be Preaching Elders) in Season, and out of Season. The Bishops said, the Flock was theirs, and the whole care committed to them; and to Salve the Incongruity, of not being able to preach themselves to them all, they professed a Derivative delegated Power to Inferior Pastors, whom they called their Curates. This was plain dealing; but these Elders make all the whole Flock theirs, and this from those Scriptures, that speak of Elders and Flock; and yet themselves have no Curates, and so are personally obliged according to the Rules in Scripture, and yet cannot perform the obligation, which is a worse Incongruity. 5. It will be their Duty also, to attend to all causes, which so many Churches will fill their Hands with sufficiently; for Churches will be full of Scandal, and there will be cases of Difficulty. What a deal of Work, did one Church of Corinth find Paul? And 'tis the Duty of each Elder, to attend to all those that come in his cognisance, as if he alone were to Judge; for he is to give his Judgment of them all, as one that is to give an account. 'Tis an Argument against Episcopacy, that they cannot take the care (according to what the Scripture seems to require of an ordinary Officer) of so many Churches in a Diocess; now this Work (suppose of Ruling only, as in a Presbytery) lies upon each of these Elders, as if he were but one, as to the matters of attending thereto (as was said) though each is helped by the Suggestion of others. And besides the common Work that must needs arise from all these Churches, they are to attend to all cases of Conscience, and of Temptations, in their particular Congregations, or from elsewhere, if those Churches will have Recourse to them. If it be said, that they may part these Duties among them, and perform only to the whole, those that are in common: The answer is plain, Ʋbi Scriptura non distinguit, nec nos debemus distinguere, Where the Scripture makes no Distinction, we ought not to Distinguish. Now all those Duties are spoken of, as owing from Elders to the Flock, without any Distinction. Paul saith to those Ephesians, Feed the whole Flock, Acts 20. 28. Peter says the like to those he Writes to, that they Respectively should Feed, and take the oversight over the Flock, foreign, which was among them. The Apostles tells the Hebrews, that their Elders watched over their Souls, Heb. 13. 17. And to the Thessalonians, he Describes them to be those that are over them, and Labour and Admonish them, 1 Thess. 5. 12. When these Injunctions are thus laid upon all, how shall the Conscience of Elders be able to part and distinguish themselves out of the discharge of them, and to say, though I am an Elder in common to all in these Congregations; yet I am bound but to govern them in greater matters, and to Admonish them as with others, when publickly met in a consistory, and to no other Acts of Eldership; and yet to my own particular Congregation, I am obliged to private Admonition, Rule and Watchfulness, &c. Where hath the Scripture set these bounds, or thus parted them? Therefore certainly all these places hold forth singly, only the Elders of a particular Church fixed thereto, and their Duty to it, as knowing no other. And indeed it was necessary that Christ should set the bounds, and give the Distinction, and not indifferently lay all these Duties upon all: And either in these places, the Duties of Elders in a common Presbytery are contained, or they are not to be found in the New Testament.
Lastly, That which is Inconsistent with the ordinary way of the Call of Elders held forth in the Word, and by the Reformed Churches allowed. May not be: But such is this Presbyterian Government. It is the Call, which breeds Relation between Elders and Church, and is the Foundation of it. None are to assume the Honour of Ruling the Church of Christ, that are not called thereto, as Aaron was not to have been over all the Church, but that he was called of God.
There are two parts of this Calling, 1. Choice. 2. Ordination.
1. As for Choice, Chamier in the Name of all the Reformed Churches, allows to the People, the Approbation of their Elders; and so it is in Scotland. And if the Apostles themselves, allowed them the choice of the Deacons that had the charge of the Church Treasury, and took care of their Bodies; then much more of their Elders that have to do with their Consciences. Look what ever Right of the People, is in the choice of those who should preach to them, there is as much Reason they should have the exercise of it in the choice of these, that in a common Presbytery do Rule over them; for they perform one part of the Elders Duty, Namely Ruling, as the preaching Elders do the other; and therefore by the equity of the same Law, that speaks of Elders indefinitely, if they choose any Elders as Elders to them, they are to choose these also, there being no Distinction put of choosing preaching Elders only, but Elders indefinitely. And further, the greatest and highest Acts of power over them, are committed in an ordinary way unto them, as of Excommunication, which is of all punishments, the most Formidable, and so there is put as much, if not more than every Mans Life (that is a Member of that classical Church) into their Hands. The enjoyment of all Ordinances for ever, and the power of Deposing their Ministers, already fixt to them, and the power of Refusing to ordain them they shall approve, is lodged in this classis. And therefore in the Primitive Church, the Persons of the Bishops, who had the power of all these, were chosen by all the people, and by panegyrical Meetings.
And the Argument is strengthned by this further parallel. A Minister's call hath two parts, 1. Ordination, which belongs to the Elders, 2. Choice, in which the people have some interest; therefore these Elders as Elders in common, and these Congregations as one Church, being Relatives, that interest which a Church hath as Church, is commensurable to the interest of these Elders as Elders. If therefore in Ordination, all the Elders in a common Presbytery, joyn to Ordain an Officer; then all the people as a Church, must joyn in choosing and approving him; for the common Right of choosing, cannot be swallowed up by the interest of their Elders Ordaining him. And if it be said, they all choose by vertue of the general Law of Combination, as in the Shires they do Parliament Men: It is answered, that the constitution of the State makes it so, and if the like be found in Scripture for this other, it will be sufficient; but if not, but that this interest must be common to the people of the classical Church, it is asked, when a fixt Pastor is to be chosen to a particular Church, what Office he shall be chosen to, with respect unto the people of the other Congregations? Not to a Pastor's Office; for he is not to be such to them: If he be chosen to be a Ruling Elder only, then besides that he hath two Offices, he must have two choices, and two Ordinations; we choose him for our Pastor, says the particular Church he belongs to; and we, say the other, to Rule us. And besides the people have an interest of presence, and joyning in Fasting and Prayer, at his Ordination: And this therefore must be performed either in a panegyrical Meeting of all, which cannot be as the practice is, or in all the several Churches, which will multiply the Ordination of him.
The Government OF THE Churches of Christ.
BOOK V.
The Jurisdiction of Synods Debated. That Appeals are not necessary to the Government of the Churches; and therefore there is no necessity of Synods upon that account. What power may be allowed to a Synod, occasionally meeting to consider the Male-Administration of any particular Church. That they have not that grand Prerogative of power given by Christ, to Excommunicate other Churches; and so by that Rod, to inforce them to Revoke their Sentence of Male-Administration, and to receive a Person wrongfully Excommunicated by them. The Subordination of Synods, Considered and Refuted. Though particular Churches are not Subject to the Jurisdiction of Synods; yet they are not wholly independent, but there is a communion, which they ought to hold one with another.