CHAP. I. The first Instruction. The true Matter of the Visible Church, is visible Saints onely.

BY visible Saints we understand with Bucer, those in whose conversation the necessary Signes of rege­neration appear. For clearing this;

1. We do not mean that the regeneration of the Person can be certainly concluded from such a conversation as we here require, because the heart within may not be answerable; therefore an hypocrite not discerned, may be the true matter of the visible Church.

2. But our meaning is, that the conversation must be such, as if the heart be answerable, it is certaine the Person is regene­rate. To cleare this further by instance. Not only such as are commonly granted scandalous, are here shut out, in whose con­versation as sin reignes, so in their heart; for ought that may appeare at the least; but such also as we commonly call meer­ly civill honest men, because though their hearts be answerable to their conversation, yer are they strangers to regeneration; the Proposition thus cleared, we come to Arguments to con­firme it.

[Page 2] 1. To be visibly of the Church, is to be visibly Abrahams seed; to be visibly Abrahams seed, is to be visibly of his faith, and to be visibly Christ's; Gal. 3.29. Abrahams flesh was to the Jewes the visible bond of the Covenant; but to the Proselytes, and to the Gentile Churches not his flesh, but his faith.

2. To be visibly of the Church, is to be such in the sight of men as they are in the sight of God, who shall indeed be saved; and therefore visibly beleevers, and holy, the people of all the pro­mises, of all the Priviledges of the Gospel, therefore a justified, a sanctified people, a people adopted, a people of Communion with God and Christ, a people of new obedience, a spirituall people, &c.

3. To be the visible Church of God, is to be visibly his Tem­ple, visibly an habitation for himselfe by his spirit; Ephes. 2.21, 22. but such are only they who are visibly regenerate. The Tem­ple was built of old of polisht stones and costly timber, it re­ceived only the clean; the visible Church now is his visible Tem­ple, made up of lively stones into a spirituall house, 1 Pet. 2.5. to abide apart from the unclean, that the presence of God may fill this Temple of his, 2 Cor. 6.16, 17.

4. From the end of the visible Church; which is, that God might have an holy people, separate from the world, enjoying all Ordinances performing in severall Congregations all solemn worship to him, glorifying his name by the light of good works, &c. but only such as are visibly regenerate, are in any measure fit­ted for these ends; wicked men quite contrarily affected; there­fore as he is in no wise to be owned for a Minister of the Church, who is no way fitted for the ends of the ministery, but is manifestly contrary thereto; so neither are they to be owned for members of the Church, who are qualified contrary to the ends of Church-Communion.

5. From Scripture-patterne; who were they that were re­ceived by the Baptist and by the Apostles? Such as being wrought upon by the word preacht, to an holy Profession, forsaking false religions, confessing their sins, professing their faith and re­pentance, desired to be solemnly received, and that when the Profession of Christian Religion exposed to great temptations in the world.

1. For the Baptist, Mat. 3.6. it is a mean conceit at the best, [Page 3]to think such a Confession then served the turne, as was palpably a Prophanation of the name of God, as giving no apparant hopes of repentance; let us hear the judgement of some, the most approved and excellent Expositors. Calvin upon the place thus. This Confession was a Testimony of repentance; — that men may rightly offer themselves to baptisme, the Confession of sins is required of them; otherwise the whole action was no­thing else but an idle toying; furthermore it is to be observed that who are here spoken of, were persons come to years, who we know are not to be admitted promiscuously of the Church, nor by baptisme to be entred into the body of Christ, till they have first been tryed. The same Calvin upon Acts 19.18. having witnessed of those there spoken of, that they did indeed testify that they were throughly affected with the serious fear of God, who did of their own accord confesse the crimes of their former life, least by their dissembling they should inwardly nourish the wrath of God; he addes concerning those who came to Johns baptisme, that by the Confession of their sins, they made pro­fession that they were not feignedly entred into repent­ance.

Beza upon the same place, viz. Matth. 3.6. thus, They are said by the Jewes to confesse their sinnes, who acknowledge themselves all manner of wayes to be sinners, and seek for par­don from the mercy of God, as Dan. 9.3. &c. Hence it ap­peares (saith he) that John admitted none to his Baptisme but such as gave testimony that they seriously embraced the doctrine of the free remission of sinnes; and such a like publique confes­sion was required of the Catechumens in the ancient Church, cal­led by the name of Exomologesis.

Piscator in his observations upon Matth. 3. v. 6, 8, 10. speaks thus, Baptisme is not to be applyed to any of yeares, till he have first made confession of his sinnes, and of his faith in Christ, and further promise of an holy life: all these did John require (saith he) of those that came to be baptized of him; for the first, it is cleare, verse 6. for the second, it is manifest out of the words of Paul, Acts 19.4. where he saith John baptized with the baptisme of repentance, saying to the people, that they should beleeve up­on him who was to come after John himselfe, that is, Christ Jesus. (Compare Acts 8.16.) For the third, it is evident from [Page 4] verse 8.10. of this third of Matth which is particularly declared and applyed to divers kinds of life, Luke 3.10. &c.

Thus we see these excellent men, judicious and sincere in their generation, gather'd no such shuffing conclusions from the history of Johns baptism recorded in Scripture, as many of ours are wont to gather, who plead the numbers recorded by John, as an argu­ment that he did, and we may receive into Church society all comers: for further discovery here, let us look into another Scripture, concerning John and those received by him, together with the judgements of those excellent and true hearted Divines upon the place; the text of Scripture is Matth. 11.12. and it shewes how they were affected at least apparently who came in so great numbers to be baptized of John; compare it with Luke 16.16.

Piscator here, It shewes the effect of Johns Doctrine, to wit, that many embraced that Doctrine with great zeale, and so took the Kingdome of heaven as it were by force.

Beza. The Kingdome of heaven suffereth violence. They break into it as it were by a certaine force: for this treasure of our heavenly father lies open (as it were) to all, earnestly by eve­ry one to be laid hold upon, which he might seeme formerly to have hid, as it is unfolded Rom. 16.25, 26. which compared with this text now in hand, we are given to understand, both how entrance into the Kingdome of heaven is offered us, to wit, by the preaching of the Gospel, and how offerd it is received by us: truly by force made upon our selves for beleeving, and by the persevering heat of zeal.

Take it by force. Beza againe, They snatch it to themselves, or they storme it: a Metaphor taken from Tents, or from some Ca­stle, which is stormed by enemies breaking into it. So that fer­vent force of the spirit is signified, by which the faithfull being transported, are carried with earnest desire and endeavour unto eternal life.

Cabvin. 1. There is no doubt but Christ commends the majesty of the Gospel upon this ground, that it was sought after with the servent desire and endeavour of many; for as God had rais­ed up John to be the Horald of the kingdome of his Son, so he put the efficacy of the spirit into his Doctrine, that it should pierce into the hearts of men, and should kindle that their heat: [Page 5]he addes, from these words of Christ, we learne what is the true nature and manner of faith, verily that men do not coldly and overly agree to God when he speakes to them, but that with an ardent affection they aspire after him, and do as it were by a vi­olent endeavour break through.

Bucer. The violent take it by force; that is, they who are so enflamed with desire of the kingdome, that they cast life and all things behinde their backs, so they may be made partakers of the Gospel, and citizens of the kingdome of heaven; then he re­fers this place to Luke 7.28, 29. & ads, this people, and these Pub­licans, who neglecting all things, received with greatest zeale the word of God first by John, then by Christ and his disciples, justifying God, that is, as well by free confession of their sins, as with most earnest, nor lesse acceptable embracing of offered grace, both acknowledging and proclaiming God just, and the ju­stifier are those violent ones which make force upon the king­dome of heaven, and by force take it; and doth not a man seem to take that by force, for which he runs the hazard of life? by these we are taught, that the treasure of the Gospel befals not any but those who have sought it with most [...] desire, and even love to hazard and lose al things for it. Thus Bucer; hence we see how in the judgement of these worthy lights in the Church, Johns hearers were affected when by him received.

2. For the Apostles, and those received by them. Acts 2.41. to the end, Acts 4.32, 33, 34, 35. Acts 8.36, 37. read the places; see Calvin likewise upon Acts 5.13, where he thus shewes of how pure a constitution the visible Church then was; having observed it one fruit of the Miracle that unbelie­vers affrighted with so remarkable a judgement upon Ananias and Saphira, durst not contemne the Apostles, &c. He addes, though Luke ascribes not this onely to the Miracles, but rather comprehends all things together which might make for the en­creasing the dignity of the Church; for so were all things order­ed, as that a certaine divine majesty shined among them; for they differed no otherwise from others, then Angels do from men; for there is in holy discipline, and the sincere observation of godlinesse, a secret kinde of majesty which awes even the wic­ked whether they will or not; but we are at this day strangers to it; nay, by our prophane libertie of living wickedly, we [Page 6]render our selves together with the Gospel contemptible. Thus much for the fifth Argument.

6. From expresse Command of the Churches separation from the openly wicked, 2 Cor. 6.17. with the former verses. Object. The wicked here are heathen and profest Infidels. Answ. 1. The Apostle urgeth in his expostulation, v. 14, 15, 16. such a repugnancy in the Churches Communion with those wicked ones, as betwixt light and darknesse, righteousnesse and unrigh­teousnesse, Christ and Belial; that the Church then may answer that part of the comparison which belongs to her, (be those wicked ones who they will,) she must consist of a righteous people. 2. If the Church must separate from them, because darknesse, unrighteousnesse, &c. then from those who are such in life, whatsoever in word they professe, being as evill in Scrip­ture account, as such heathen and termed infidels or unbelee­ving, Tit. 1.15, 16. worse then profest Infidels, 1 Tim. 5.8. and those who have a forme of Godlines, (and therefore in word professe the true God at the least.) but deny the power of it; guilty of open wickednesse, are to be turned from, 2 Tim. 3.5. 3. Otherwise manifest Prophanation of the name of God with a palpable lye, 1 John 1.6, 7. should entitle to the great honour of Church-Communion, & the great Priviledges thereto belong­ing; and the visible Church should be no Temple refusing the unclean, but a common Inne for all Commers, a Cage of un­clean birds, a Sty for swine. 4. Many most abominable here­ticks may in word professe the true God, to whom yet it is granted generally that Church-Communion is to be denied. Adde, Ishmael, Esau, &c. profest the true God, yet they were not of the Church.

7. From the doctrine of discipline; Mat. 18.15. &c 1. The visible Church is a brotherhood. If thy brother sinne, &c. and this brotherhood founded in Christ, John 20.17. but doth Christ owne as brethren, God as children, any but such as are in some degree sanctified? apparantly so, that they may be ap­parantly owned. 2. The duties by our Saviour required in the exercise of discipline, from any Church member indefinitely, cannot be expected from any other, both here admonishing in the three degrees with aime at gaining a brother, &c. 1 Cor. 5.2. It is required of the Church that they be mourners when [Page 7]any proves scandalous among them; to the Church of which the people are a maine part, is the power of Christ committed, for casting out and delivering up to Satan, v. 4, 5. in case of neg­lect hereof the whole lump is leavened, viz. the whole Con­gregation is under guilt; neglect here is a sin tending to the dis­churching of Churches, Rev. 2.14.20. &c. with all scandalous of the Church, familiar society is to be refused by every Church­member, v. 9.10. [...] such severity herein is required as cannot be exercised towards all scandalous, with whom we must needs have commerce in this world, v. 11. the scandalous within the Church, when any prove such, are by the Church to be judged; v. 12. and put away, v. 13. the end of all is to humble, shame, and recover the fallen sinner. Now how can these things be ex­pected from the Church, if wicked Persons shall be allowed the matter of the Church? Can they deliver to Satan that are them­selves delivered to him? &c. have they share in the power of Christ, who are themselves under the power of Satan? what is there in a company of wicked Persons, to humble and shame a wicked Person? how shall they act in any of their duties de­pending upon discipline, who have no Principles for it? 2 Thes. 3.6. If he that walks inordinately, having been formerly re­ceived, must be withdrawne from, then such a one not yet re­ceived, is not to be received; and generally, forasmuch as scandalous when in, are to be cast out; not in, they are to be left out.

They who confine all Church-power to the officers alone, will here take offence; that in following this Argument, we al­low a share of that power to the people; to that we shall speak more fully and purposely hereafter in due place.

8. From the Testimonies given to the Churches in most of the Epistles, especially about the beginning, as Rom. 1.8, & c. 15. v. 14. 1 Cor. 1.4. to 10. Phil. 1.3. to 9. 1 Thes. 1.2. to the end. 2 Thes. 1.3. to 8. read the places; so of those seven Asian Churches, some very pure, as Smyrna and Philadelphia, so as no fault found with them; others, as Ephesus, Pergamus and Thya­tira, a very faire Testimony of them, both what they had beene, and what in part they were, though not a little lapsed, but both against them, and the other two most corrupt, Sardis and La­odicea, their dischurching is severely threatned, except they shall [Page 8]returne to a purer state. Object. The Apostle gives a faire Te­stimony to the Church of Corinth, yet were there many great enormities among them. Answ. 1. His Testimony is to the Church generally, but with exception of such as walke disorder­ly in the Church, as appears in that. 2. He requires the Church to proceed in way of discipline against such, so as in case they persevere in their evill Course, to cut them off from the Commu­nion of Saints; whence 3. it appears that in their admission they were not discovered such; whence that which may hence be gathered is, that a Church rightly constitute, is not pre­sently upon her degenerating in many of her members to be forsaken, but they so degenerating to be cut off 4. The retai­ning of such in the Church, involved the whole Church in guilt and threatned wrath, 1 Cor. 5.6. and c. 11.30. so Rev. 2.14, 15, 16, 20. &c. whence we may lay down this Conclusion, such persons are not the true matter of the Church, the retaining of whom in the Church makes evidently for her destruction; but such are the openly wicked & foul hereticks 5. However the Church of Corinth was by her false Teachers first staggered out of the way in something of doctrine, and thence grew remisse in discipline for a time; yet it appears by their speedy and sound repentance, 2 Cor. 7. that they were generally and habitually a very holy people.

9. From the practise of the primitive Churches after the A­postles times, in two things it appears how choice the matter of the Church then was.

1. The [...] all of their Catechumens, when any formerly hea­then, wrought upon by the preaching of the Gospel, professed their embracing of the Christian Religion, renouncing their for­mer folse worship, and desired the Church to take them into her care for their spirituall state; the Church accordingly took them into her care for instruction and edifying, but did not receive them into her fellowship, any further then to heare the word, till they gave a good account both of their Christian knowledge and Christian conversation, and that in time of greatest Persecu­tion; and all the time that they stood thus upon tryal, and under instruction rending to prepare them for admission, they were called Catechumens; when after a certaine time of tryall they moved to be admitted into Church fellowship, they were called [Page 9]Competents or desirers; when they were admitted, it was by baptisme, and then were they compleat members of the Church, and called the faithfull; This was one sort of Catechumens; Another sort there was; the children of Christian Parents, who having been in their infancy baptized, yet when they were grown to years, they were under the Churches instruction and tryall, just in the same manner as the former, and held the place and name of Catechumens, till they were for knowledge and holinesse of conversation approved experimentally by the Church; then up­on their desires they were received into Church-fellowship by solemne imposition of hands, and so admitted to the Lords Sup­per, and brought under discipline, and were now compleat mem­bers of the Church; this imposition of hands being grounded up­on, Heb. 6.2. whence by the corruption of Popery, it degene­rated into that spurious Ordinance of confirmation as they cal­led it.

2. Their severity towards the lapsed; it is well knowne to all acquainted with the manner of the Church in those times, that as they diligently cast out the scandalous, so they stood up­on strict termes with them, before they would upon their pro­fession of repentance receive them againe; this, together with the state of those times considered, times of great persecution, it may be gathered, that they received only such into Church-fellowship, as whom they might conceive so principled▪ as to prefer the truth and purity of Gospel Profession to their own lives. Let us here sprinkle some few Testimonies found in the Fathers of those times, touching the purity of the Church in the matter of it. Tertullian in his Apologetick, c. 2. alledgeth Pli­ny an heathen, Deputy-Governour under Trajan an heathen Emperour, about a hundred years after Christ, giving this Te­stimony to the Christians generally, That besides their stiffe re­fusall to sacrifice, he found nothing in their religious worship, but that they had meetings before day to sing to Christ and to God, and by mutuall agreement to constrme discipline, and that they forbad murder, adultery fraud, treachery, and other wickednesses: The same Father who himselfe lived a little more then two hundred years after Christ, he is much in challenging the persecuting powers, to make good any of those crimes which they charged upon Christians, as atheisme, incest, infant-murder, treason, char­geth [Page 10]them that they warre with the name of Christians; that an innocent name in innocent men is by them hated and per­secuted.

In the 39 ohapt. of his Apologetick, thus, We are a body made up of the conscience of Religion, of the unity of Disci­pline, of the Covenant of hope; then speaking of their worship in the publique Assembly, he addes for discipline; there like­wise are Exhortations, Castigations, and Divine Censures; for with great weight is judgement past, as among those that are certaine that the eye of God is upon them, and it is the greatest fore-judgement of the judgement to come, if any one shall so offend as that he is cast out from the communication of prayer, of assembling, and of all holy commerce. He mentions in the same chapter the love of the Christians to be such one towards another, that the Heathen were wont with indignation to say of them, Behold how they love one another, and are ready to die one for another. In the 46. chapt. of his Apologetick he shewes how they bore not with any of evill conversation, comparing the Christians with the Philosophers. The Philosophers, saith he, have an apish affectation of the truth, and by their affectation cor­rupt it, as hunting after their owne praise. The Christians ne­cessarily desire it, and performe it intirely, as providing for their owne salvation; He adds a little after this objection; But some of ours depart from the rule of discipline; to which he answers; they are no longer owned for Christians by us; and he reproves it in the Philosophers, that such among them as walk not accor­ding to the rules of Philosophy are yet called by the name, and have still the honour of Philosophers. In his Book to Scapula, who was a Deputy-Governour under the Romane Emperour, and a persecutor, he gives this character of the Christians, besides their unshaken piety towards God, refusing the Heathen sacri­fices against the greatest torments, We defraud none, we adul­terate the mariage of none, we handle Orphans religiously, we relieve the needy, to none do we render evill for evill; let them who bely our profession look to it: (that is, they who in word professe themselves Christians, but walk not accordingly) whom we our selves refuse. Who is there that complaines of us upon any other ground but onely that we are Christians? for so great innocency, for so great honesty, for righteousnesse, for chastity, [Page 11]for faith, for truth; for the living God are we burned.

In his Book of Repentance, chapt. 6. speaking of the necessi­ty of sound repentance, and that on the Catechumens part, be­fore baptisme; I deny not, saith he, the divine benefit; that is, remission of sinnes to be altogether safe to those that shall go into the water; that is, that shall be baptized; but that thou mayest come to that, thou must be diligent; for who will afford thee, a man of such faithlesse repentance, one drop of any water? A little after, let no man flatter himself, that his ranck is yet but among the Catechumens, as though he might therefore take liberty to sin; as soone as thou hast known the Lord, fear him; as soone as thou hast beheld him, receive him;—is Christ one to the baptized, another to the hearers, or Ca­techumens? That Laver is the sealing up of faith which faith is both begun and commended from the faith of repentance; we are not therefore washed, (viz. baptized) that we may cease to sinne, but be­cause we have ceased, because we are already washed in heart; this is the first baptism of the Catechumen, entire fear. In his book of [...] Prescriptions against the hereticks, c. 41 he makes the promiscuous matter of the Church the property of the hereticks. I will not omit (saith he) the description of the hereticks conversation; how frivolous, how earthly, how humane it is, without gravity, without authority, without discipline, such as agrees with their faith; first of all it is uncertaine who is a Catechumen, and who is one of the faithfull, they go together alike; they hear alike; they pray alike; Nay if the heathen should come among them (in their Assemblies) they would cast that which is holy to dogs, and Pearls (though no true ones) to the swine, their Prostration of discipline they call simplicity; our care of it, they call an over-curious trimming, they receive all promiscuously to the Lords Supper, — with them the Catechumens go for perfect before they be throughly instructed. He chargeth it upon them, that they are more in labouring for number then due matter. No where saith he are more easie termes then in the tents of the rebels; where this very thing to be is to de­serve. In his Book of Baptisme, Cap. 18. he thus speaks. That Baptisme is not rashly to be betrusted, let them know whose office it is; Give to every one that askes, hath its proper title belonging to Almes. That rather is to be heeded; Give not that which is holy to dogs; and do not cast your Pearls to swine; and lay hands sudden­ly on no man, that thou beest not Partaker of other mens sins, &c. [Page 12]Where (by the way) he interprets imposition of hands there to point at solemne admission of Church-members; Thus for some gleanings out of Tertullian. The like we might observe from others; as in Cyprian, who will have the Church to con­sist of the ministery and the standing people; and against what temptations did they then stand? and for their Communion, they were most impatient of hereticks and all scandalous. In his 55. Epist. writing to Cornelius then Bishop of Rome, about such as having formerly fallen, were now seeking to be againe received into the Church, thus he speaks; For some, their crimes are so much against them, or the brethren (that is the standing people,) do so firmely and stiffely resist, that they can by no means be received [...] with the scandal and danger of very many;—O if thou couldst (most beloved brother) be here with us, when those evill and perverse ones returne from their schisme, thou shouldst see what a do I have to perswade our brethren (the People) to Patience, that they would, having allayed their grief of mind, consent to the re­ceiving and taking care of the wicked; for as they rejoyce and are glad, when such as are tolerable and lesse faulty returne, so on the other hand they murmure and contend earnestly when deplored Per­sons, and stubborne, and such as are defiled with adulteries, or with idols, or such as are proud, come back, &c. but I will be no fur­ther tedious in quotations of this nature. If any man desire any further satisfaction, let him read the last Section of the sixt Chap­ter in the three first Centuries. Magdeburg. Concerning the conversation and discipline of Christians, afterwards in Austins time, when some would have it, that the Profession of the Christian faith should entitle to baptisme, though accom­panied with a wicked life, He writes a book entitled of Faith and Works, proving such a Profession to be as no Profession.

10. From the state of new Jerusalem, Rev. 21.27. from this and the last Argument it is manifest, that before the mystery of iniquity prevailed farre, and after it shall cease, the visible Chur­ches owne no scandalous sinners of their society; the promis­cuous state then of the Churches in this degeneration, is the outward Court unmeasured, and the Holy City trod under foot by the Gentiles. That voice then Rev. 18.4. calling the people of God out of Babylon, cals for the Churches separation from [Page 13]such; this Confusion now obtaining, being one straine of Popish corruption, with Popery beginning and ending.

CHAP. II. Discipline is an Ordinance of Christ, for ordering the visible Church in her severall Congregations.

WE shall now briefly, (but yet so as to omit none that seem to have any weight in them,) endeavour the answer of Objections.

[Page 14] 1. Such as are generall; as

1. That there were so many wicked among the Jewes, and yet that Church was not to be forsaken;

Answ. 1. That ministration was more carnall, and therefore a more carnal might then passe, Heb. 9 10. As the Gospell mi­nistration is more spirituall, Heb. 8.10, 11. so that the Gospell people may appear to be the people of that ministration, they must in appearance be more spirituall.

2. Nor otherwhere for that time could Church-communion be enjoyed, God having confined it to that nation, to that Priest­hood, and that Temple; and therefore though their Priests and People generally proved as great Idolaters and Persecutors as the Church of Rome this day, yet the faithfull among them must there remaine, to offer sacrifice and worship God; but in the times of the Gospel, where any Church turnes idolatrous and Persecutors of the truth, there is liberty otherwhere to settle Church-Communion purely.

3. That People were holy in their admission. 1. In Abra­hams family, Gen. 18.18, 19. 2. In their nationall planting, Judg. 2.6, 7, 10. hence that Testimony given of them, that they were planted a noble vine, wholly a right seed, Jer. 2.21.

4. It was by rule provided for among them, that none exter­nally wicked should enjoy Church-Communion; the mixture, that was beside the rule, and therefore no plea at all. 1. None were circumcised but such as were externally holy; their in­fants by descent from Abraham, being borne Church-members within the ministration of the Covenant, the flesh of Abraham entitling that nation to the Covenant, and there was their claim to circumcision, that they were that seed of Abraham, whatever their immediate Parents were; and they in their infancy had done nothing to make void that claime.

The Proselites that they might be circumcised, must give evi­dence of Abrahams faith, and walk in his steps, and then they being Abrahams adopted seed, their children had the same title to circumcision, as the children of the Jews.

In the Gospel Churches there must be a visible descent from Abraham according to the faith, for right unto baptisme, whe­ther for our selves or seed, baptisme being the Seale of that Co­venant which blesseth all the nations of the earth in the seed of Abraham by faith.

[Page 15] Thus they were holy in their circumcision. 2. For other pe­culiar Ordinances, there was a threefold barre to such as were openly wicked.

1. Ceremoniall; divers cases of Ceremoniall uncleannes which debarred Communion in the peculiar Ordinances; and they that were most carelesse of the holy things of God, would oftenest be taken in these Ceremoniall snares.

2. Judiciall; the same Covenant that entitled them to the Church, entitled them likewise to that land, whence divers sorts of wicked persons were to be cut off from life; not only blas­phemers, but idolaters; nor only murthers, but adulterers; nor only traitors, but disobedient to Parents, &c. hence the whole nation enjoyned, (as in Asa's time,) to swear a solemne Cove­nant for seeking the Lord God of their fathers, with all their heart and all their soule, and to performe it under penalty of death, whether great or small, whether man or woman, Chron. 2.15, 12, 13. Now had the judiciall law been executed accord­ing to divine rule, partly so many wicked ones had been coct off; and partly the rest had been so formidably warned, that here had been a great prevention of that mixture in their Church-Communion.

3. Ecclesiastical; Ezek. 22.26. difference to be made by Ecclesi­astical power, as well betwixt the holy and prophane, (and those are morall termes,) as betwixt the clean and unclean, (which are ceremoniall termes) A generall rule for this, understood by the learned of Ecclesiasticall cutting off Numb. 15.30, 31. the stranger there the Proselyte of the Covenant; further Testimony to this rule, that the openly wicked were ecclesiastically to be cut off, is the ordinance of excommunication among them, in the three degrees of it; Niddui Cherem, and Maran-atha. A thorow discourse about this, for further satisfaction, see in Gillaspies Aa­rons Rod blossoming.

Thus much for this Objection, which is wont much to be stood upon; but how sandy a foundation it is, fit for so rotten a building, as many endeavour to set upon it, I hope by this time appears.

Obiect. 2. The Parable of the tares, Matth. 13.24. to the 31. and 37 to the 44 verse.

Answ. 1. The field is the world, v. 38. the good seed are [Page 16]the children of the Kingdome, the tares are the children of the wicked one. ibid. these make the visible Church in the world according to the minde of the parable; both these are to grow together untill the harvest, v. 30. what will hence follow? that Persons apparantly wicked, must be received into, and retained in the visible Church? this puts the parable upon the rack, and forceth it to speak what it intends not. 1. It warrants not the receiving wicked Persons into the Church. v. 25. 1. The hus­bandmmen were not so watchfull as they should have been, when the enemy sowed these tares; and it is the enemy not the Lord of the field that sowes them. 2. Nor the retaining them; then should our Saviour here be against himselfe otherwhere, where he hath appointed the Ordinance of Church censure for casting out such, and that under so great a penalty, as for­merly we have seene, Matth. 18. 1 Corinth. 5. Revel. 2. &c.

1. If then the gathering up these tares, desired by the ser­vants, v. 28. and forbidden by the master, v. 29. be meant of Ecclesiastical casting out; these cares must not be the openly wick­ed, but close hypocrites; yet by some of the servants of more piercing judgements then others discerned; the reason given may seem to favour this, v. 29. They were such as were so hard­ly discerned from the wheat, that there was danger of rooting up the wheat, if these tares should be gathered up; to this pur­pose Jerome witnesseth, that in those countryes there are certain tares, so like to wheat in their first springing, as hardly to be discerned from it; thus Cyprian understands it; taxing the in­solency of Novatian, who would not receive the lapsed againe into the Church, though they exprest never so much repentance; How great arrogance is this (saith he) that he should think he can do that which our Saviour granted not to the Apostles, that he should discerne the tares from the wheat?—If he will make himselfe the searcher and the judge of the heart and reins, &c. Cypr. Epist. 52. but in casting out the openly wicked, there is no danger of this.

2. Some think it not to be meant of Ecclesiasticall casting out; and therfore let the tares be granted for the openly wicked, this parable gives them no place in the visible Church. 1. This ga­thering up the tares is their rooting up, (for that expression con­cludes [Page 17]no lesse, lest ye root up also the wheat with them, v. 29.) and therefore the final destruction of these wicked Per­sons; but Church censure is not for destruction, (except of the flesh) but for salvation of the Person. 2. This gathering up desired here by the servants and by the master for the present denied, is that which shall be at the end of the world, the finall destruction of the wicked, v. 40, 41, 42. they shall not then for the present gather them up, that is, not knowing of what spirit they are, call for fire from heaven against them. The like interpretati­on is made of the drawnet and the separation of the good from the bad, gathered together by it, v. 47. &c.

Object. 3. Judas received the Supper, at least the Passeover which was a Sacrament; and the Sacraments belong only to those of the Church.

Answ. 1. If we shall hence conclude that the openly wicked have right to the Sacraments, and so are the true matter of the visible Church. 1. We must deny any such Ordinance as discipline. 2. By the same reason we must affirme that a minister of the Church, openly knowne to be such an one, as hath his heart set to overthrow the Gospel, and betray the Lord for money, is to be retained in the ministery, nay, that such an one so knowne before-hand is to be chosen into the ministery; for all this Christ knew of Judas, therefore 3. Judas his wickednesse was knowne to Christ as God, but not as man; but for casting out of the Church, the offence must be knowne to the Church, in a Church way, that is by experience and proof.

Object. 4. The Apostles received such as offered themselves suddenly, among the rest Simon Magus.

Answ. But yet upon such evidence, as amounted in the judge­ment of rationall charity, to the evidence of regeneration; for this, 1. Consider upon what ground they offered themselves, the Word powerfully preached, and mightily by miracles de­clared the Word of God. 2. What was the state of those times. 1. They were times wherein according to former Prophecies the spirit was plentifully powred out, by the ministery of the A­postles. 2. They were times of great Persecution of the Chri­stian faith; nothing of outward advantage to move, but all to the contrary; to preach the Gospel then among the Jewes, was as it would be now to preach the truth among the Papists; to [Page 18]preach it then in the other nations, was as it would be now to preach it among the Turks. If upon the powerfull preaching the truth in the maine points of religion, contrary to the maine Popishand Turkish tenets, whereof they are most zealous, such and such in the midst of the Popish and Turkish dominions, should against manifest and great temptations openly embrace and professe the truth, such a Profession would amount to ano­ther kinde of evidence, then is generally pleaded for from those examples among us. 3. God for vindicating his name a­gainst scandalous Profession, put forth his revenging judgements against the deceitfull and hollow, as in Ananias and Saphira's case, whence many were much deterred from joyning with the Church; Acts 5.13. thus for the state of those times. Then thirdly consider what a faire profession Simon Magus made, and for some time continued in, which argues seemingly no small change, Acts 8.13. it is said he beleeved, he continued with Philip; he was taken with admiration, &c. so Ananias and Sa­phira made a faire Profession to sell their Possession for reliefe of the Church. 4. When Simon discovers his rottennesse, then, not till then, Peter perceived the wickednesse of his heart, v. 23. and when he perceives it, he professeth he hath no lot among them, because his heart is not right, v. 21. yet was not Peter without hope but he might repent, v. 22, and something hope­full still doth Simon appeare; v. 24. And now the answer to this instance may cleare all other of the like nature. There is a fifth,

Object. 5. The scandalous mentioned in some of the Epi­stles, as in the Church of Corinth; but this hath been answered before in the eighth Argument; and these are all the objecti­ons I know that have any colour in them or at the least in the answers to these, the grounds are laid for answering the rest. We come now

2. To peculiar Objections, respecting the generality of our people in this kingdome.

Object. 1. We are all of the Church by baptisme al­ready.

Answ. 1. From the beginning it was not so, that all should be so promiscuously received; therefore it behoves us to returne to the first patterne; what right have they to baptisme for their [Page 19]seed, themselves having been baptized, who had none for themselves, were they unbaptized? 2. Ishmael and Esau were circumcised, yet afterward unchurched; so were the Sheche­mites circumcised; Many Heathens in America baptized by the Spaniard, yet none of these ever of the Church.

3. To receive to baptisme for themselves or seed grosse igno­rants, who understand not the ground, nature, and end of that Ordinance, is 1. To make the service of God in so maine an Ordinance an unreasonable service. 2. To make up the visible Church in her several congregations by an implicit faith. 4. To admit the scandalous in like manner for themselves or seed, is not to set the Seale to the Covenant, but to passe it against the Covenant. 5. The Reformed Churches receive not to the Lords Supper and other priviledges of Church-Communion, such as were baptized in their infancy, but upon tryall of their knowledge and Christian conversation; which, when approved, they solemnely admit them; understanding Imposition of hands, Heb. 6. to point at the solemne admission of such. So Calvin upon the place, pleading thence for infant-baptisme. Reply. But children may have right by former Ancestors. Answ. 1. Visible administration must have visible grounds; it must therefore upon particular evidence appeare to the Church, that such Ancestors they had; in whose name they may have right. 2. How farre may we go back, and where must we stop? 3. Offer such reasoning to thy Prince, will it passe for currant, if thou shouldest claime the Armes and Honour of some noble family, meerly upon this supposition, that it may be some of thine Ancestors were possessed thereof? 4. Such as could not finde their register for the line of the Priesthood, were as polluted, put from their office, Ezra 1.62. 5. This will prevent the distinction betwixt the Church and the world, and keep off for ever the baptisme of growne men. 6. As for the children of wicked Parents circumcised among the Jewes, this stone hath been removed before, they had by Abraham visible right under whom they fell.

Object. 2. But all sorts among us have likewise received the Supper.

Answ. 1. But the greatest part besides the rule, as is evi­dent upon the same grounds now pleaded against promiscuous [Page 20]baptisme. 2. In the Reformed Churches, when any member of one Congregation transplants to another, notwithstanding he hath received the Supper formerly in the Church whence he came, yet doth the Church to which he is come, examine and approve him for knowledge and conversation, before they re­ceive him to the Supper.

3. How or by what right have the Sacraments been ordinari­ly administred in diverse of our Congregations, where the word hath not been ordinarily preached?

From the doctrine of the matter of the Church, we may lay downe some further Practicall Conclusions.

1. The Saints are to separate from the wicked, into Church-Communion. 1. Otherwise the Church cannot be made up only of its due matter; God cannot have his Temple. 2. The Command is expresse for it; as we have seen in the sixth Argu­ment, the Saints as expressely called to this, as Abraham out of Caldea, as the people of God out of Babylon. 3. To this sepa­rate Communion belongs far greater blessings, then to belee­vers in promiscuous standing, 2 Cor. 6.17, 18. generally what­ever blessings belong to the visible Church, may be clearlyest ex­pected, and are most fully bestowed upon the Church, when most truly and purely setled in her Congregations; the presence of Christ, Rev. 2.1. his Protection and Defence and Comforts, Isa. 4.5. the power of Christ, 1 Cor. 5.4. When we have spo­ken to the discipline, we shall have further evidences of this Conclusion.

2. No Person habitually scandalous is to be received to the Sacrament, though he humbles himselfe before the Church, till some time of tryall.

He is not true matter of the Church, who is not habitually in the Churches eye righteous. But the Sacraments are peculiar Church-Ordinances.

Object. He that hears not the Church, is to be refused; but he that hears her, is to be received; now he that humbles himself before the Church upon her admonition, hears her.

Answ. 1. That rule If he hear not the Church, is concern­ing a brother, one within, Matth. 18.15. 1 Cor. 5.12. but no Person habitually scandalous is a brother, as the doctrine of the matter of the Church hath evinced.

[Page 21] 2. For a brother fallen into some scandalous sinne, and hum­bling himselfe; it follows not, that he is not to be cast out, therefore he is suddenly to be received: he is neither to be sud­denly cast out, nor suddenly received to the Sacrament, but to stand under further tryall; otherwise 1. Church-admonitions will be turned into a meer mockery, execution of censure a­gainst the most impudent for ever prevented, who will quickly in appearance humble themselves if that may serve the turne; such a course of discipline will in stead of humbling, harden, like the Papists absolution, upon their formal auricular confession and indulgences. 2. For him in such a case to desire sudden re­ceiving, is scandalous, an evidence that he is not humbled; which if he were, he himselfe would not venture so soone upon his own heart.

Object. Matth. 18.21, 22. with Luk. 17.3, 4.

Answ. It is a Precept against revenge; it is Personal, not Ecclesiastical forgivenesse here commanded; forgivenesse of the heart, not of the Court; of an injury against me, not of a sinne against God, and even betwixt man and man; this forbids not but a man may prosecute the law against the trespasser in diverse cases, and yet from the heart forgive him and pray for him.

3. Conclus. Hence the vanity of that argument, used by some who refuse to joyne apart from the scandalous in a true way of Church-Communion and discipline; To the pure all things are pure; therefore the wickednesse of others defiles not me, receiving the Sacrament with them.

Answ. Thy sin defiles thee, and it is thy sin to keep off from the true way of the visible Church.

Suppose in a setled Church, a Person justly excommunicate; thou shouldst defile thy selfe, if thou shouldest receive with him, because thou violatest the order of the Gospel; so here.

CHAP. III. The second Instruction. Discipline is an Ordinance of Christ, for ordering the visible Church in her severall Congregations.

MAt. 18.15. &c. 1 Cor. 5. 2 Thes. 3.6. Rev. 2.2, 14, 20. 1 Tim. 5.20. These Scriptures perused, shew us both that there is a discipline, and what it is.

For the nature and use of discipline, together with the obli­gation, lying upon Christians in their places for indeavouring it, I shall gather something out of Dr. Ames that excellent Di­vine. Medull. l. 1. c. 37.

1. Holy discipline is the Personall application of the Will of God by censures, either for preventing scandals, or for re­moving them out of the Church of God.

2. In the preaching of the Word, the Will of God is pro­pounded and really applyed for begetting and increasing of faith and obedience. In the administration of the Sacraments the Will of God is personally applyed by Seals, for confirming faith and obedience. In the exercise of discipline the Will of God is personally applyed by censures, for removing of sins which fight against true faith and obedience.

3. This discipline is instituted by Christ, Mat. 16.19. and Mat. 18.15, 16, 17. and is therefore plainely of divine right; nei­ther may it by men at pleasure be taken away, diminished or changed.

4. Nay he sins against Christ the Author and Ordainer, who­soever doth not what in him lies to settle and promote this dis­cipline in the Churches of God.

5. The persons about whom it ought to be exercised, are the members of the visible institute Churches, without any exce­ption, Matth. 18.15. 1 Cor. 5.11. and no others, verse 12. To all and onely those it belongs, to whom it belongs to receive the Sacraments. An institute Church is a particular Congregation of visible beleevers, joyned together by special bond, expresse [Page 23]or implicite for exercising the communion of Saints constantly among themselves, cap. 32.

6. In those persons it hath respect to sinnes and scandals; for it is an healing medicine for the wounds and diseases to which the sheep of Christ are subject, 1 Cor. 5.5.

7. Because it doth effectually urge obedience to Christ, there­fore not without singular reason, a great part of the Kingdome of Christ, as he doth visibly rule his Church, is by the best Divines placed in this Discipline. Hence likewise the Keyes, (and one of them is the Key of Discipline) are called the Keyes of the King­dome; and the operations of this Key, binding, loosing, open­ing and shutting the Kingdome of heaven, have upon them the stamp of Christs kingly authority.

8. And this is the true reason why in so few Churches, the Discipline of Christ, together with the Doctrine, is throughly setled and exercised, because very many of those who will seeme to know Christ, and to hope in him, do yet refuse to receive the whole Kingdome of Christ, and to give up themselves altoge­ther unto him.

9. And as it is part of the Kingdome of Christ, so by the same reason, it is part of the Gospel; for it is an holy manner of pro­moting the Gospel, appointed in the Gospel it selfe; therefore they do neither receive the whole kingdome of Christ, nor the whole Gospel, who reject Discipline.

10. But because every part of the kingdome of Christ is in its place necessary, and that part especially which doth effectually represse sinne; therefore we may not safely enough rest in those Churches which want Discipline, except that publique want be made up by private care and mutuall watching.

11. The parts of this Discipline, are two

• Brotherly admonition.
• Excommunication.

Which in case of repentance approved to the Church, is succeed­ed by Absolution.

12. Brotherly admonition is to be exercised in case of any sin, for which Discipline is appointed as a medicine, but after a diverse manner, according to the difference of secret and open sins. In secret sins, those three degrees are to be observed which Christ prescribed in order, Matth. 18.15, 16, 17, but in publike [Page 24]sins those degrees are not necessary, 1 Tim. 5.20.

13. Full Excommunication is not to be exercised, except stub­bornnesse be added to the sin, Matth. 18.17. for the sinner duly admonished, must needs either appeare penitent or stubborne; the penitent is not to be excommunicate, therefore onely the stubborn.

14. When the matter may sufferdelay, it is agreeable to Scri­pture and reason, that Excommunication be begun by suspending from the Lords Supper, and such like priviledges of the Church, which is commonly called the lesse Excommunication.

15. But in this degree we must not rest, but repentance is by this meanes, and in this space to be urged, of which if there be no hopes, we must then go on to a compleat separation from the communion of the faithful, which is commonly called the greater Excommunication.

16. But because the stubborne sinner cannot be separated from the faithful, except the faithful also be separated from him, and this makes for the wholsome shaming of the sinner, 2 Thess. 3.14. therefore they who are justly excommunicate, are to be shunned by all Communicants; not as to duties simply morall or otherwise necessary, but as to those parts of conversation, which are wont to accompany approbation and inward familiarity.

17. From the bond of Excommunication no impenitent per­son is to be loosed, neither ought Absolution to be denied to a­ny penitent; but it is not sufficient repentance for a man to say, I repent me, I will do no more; except he otherwise make proof of true repentance; but such tokens of true repentance ought to appeare, that the Church may be bound to rest in them; other­wise hypocrisie is nourished, and both the Church and Christ himselfe are mocked.

From this discourse of Discipline, besides the nature of it, appears

1. The weight of it, binding to wrath, or loosing from it, retaining, or remitting sins, opening the kingdome of heaven to the penitent, or shutting it against the impenitent, casting out of the commonion of the faithfull, cutting off from the body of Christ, delivering over to Satan or readmission into the com­munion of the faithfull, reimplanting into the body of Christ, rescue from their subjection to Satan; and so as all this done [Page 25]here upon earth, where rightly administred, is confirmed in hea­ven.

2. The necessity of it; 1. Standing upon so cleare a pre­cept and institution of Christ; therefore being a Gospel ordi­nance, unchangeable: 2. Being so maine a part of the visible kingdome of Christ as Mediator. 3. From the ends of it; for reclaiming and gaining of offending brethren; from deterring others from the like offences, for purging out that old leaven which might infect the whole lump, for vindicating the honour of Christ, and the holy profession of the Gospel; and for pre­venting the wrath of God which might justly fall upon the Church, if they should suffer his Covenant and the Seale thereof to be prophaned by notorious and obstinate offenders.

CHAP. IV. The third Instruction. To the people of the Church it belongs by divine right to chuse their Officers.

THat Christ hath appointed Officers in his Church for the ad­ministration of the Word, Sacraments and Discipline, we need not prove; The confirmation of this Proposition, that the choyce of Officers is the peoples right, makes not a little for the due setling the Church. For this, I shall do three things, 1. Point to the Scriptures teaching this truth. 2. Adde some reasons accor­ding to Scripture. 3. Give in the testimonies, first of the Primi­tive, then of the reformed Churches.

1. For the Scriptures, Acts 1.15. with 23. The Disciples go as farre as is possible for man to have an hand in chusing an Apo­stle, who must have his commission immediately from God; they appoint two, and give forth lots, Acts 6.3, 4, 5. The whole multitude chuse their Deacons, and present them to the Apostles for Ordination, Acts 14.23. It is said of Paul and Barnabas when they had ordained Elders to the Churches; the word tran­slated ordained, signifies solemnely to appoint to office upon the [Page 26]peoples vote or choyce, or suffrage: So Stephen in his Treasure of the Greek tongue renders it to make or create by suffrage. See Calvin and Beza afterwards.

2. For reasons 1. The Officers are given for the good of the Church, Ephes. 4, 11, 12. therefore she may in a certaine and ordinary way procure them, which yet in many cases she cannot do, if she have not right to chuse them. 2. They are given to the Church, 1 Cor. 3.21, 22. therefore she hath a right to call them to her selfe: If she depended upon either Magi­strate or Patron, or any other for a right to call her Officers, they were then rather given to them on whom she should so depend, then to her. 3. Otherwise the Church, sc. the company of Be­seevers should be in a worse condition then any Society as to the setling of her selfe in her best state; no people without rulers over them and Officers for their good but may settle such a­mong themselves, as the experience of all Common-wealths shews 4. In this choyce of the faithfull is laid the founda­tion of greater love betwixt the people and their Officers, and so the ministry of the Officers becomes more fruitfull. 5. The faithful are to hear the true Teachers, to shun the false, to try the spirits, which imports 1. Morall ability for chusing; 2. A right of chusing or applying themselves to the true Ministers; add to these, Christian practise and experience; what faithfull soule makes any scruple of leaving a faithlesse and unedifying Minister at home, to go abroad for enjoying a faithfull and edifying mi­nistry? which yet might not be allowed if Christians had not a right to chuse their own Officers.

3. For testimonies, 1. Of the ancient Church, Cyprian who lived a great light of the Church, about 240 yeares more or lesse after Christ, is plentifull herein.

As in the Scripture testimonies it appears, so in those times ac­cording to the Scriptures, and so in the reformed Churches, Or­dination of Officers succeeded their Election. Hence Cyprian to the Presbyters, Deacons and all the people, in the Ordination of ministers [Most dear brethren, we are alwayes wont to ad­vise with you, and to weigh the manners and merits of every one by Common Counsel] Epist. 33. according to Pamelius Edition at the beginning.

Cyprian to the people, to avoid the faction of Felicissimus [Page 27]and five Presbyters siding with him; speaking of them E­pist. 40.

They mindfull of their conspiracy, —against my Episco­pacy, (Episcopacy distinct from Presbytery had then place in the Church, though of a far purer stamp then our Prelacy▪) nay against your suffrage, (or Election by vote,) and the judgement of God, renew their old opposition, &c. he justifies his own stan­ding by the peoples choice of him; to the same purpose upon the occasion he speaks Epist. 55.

Cyprian to Antonianus a brother, about Cornelius chosen Bishop of Rome by the people and the ministery. And Novatian seeking to make himselfe Bishop, Cornelius is thus justified; that he was made Bishop by the judgement of God and Christ; by the Testimony of almost all the ministery, by the vote or suffrage of the people then present, &c. Here was the ministers testimony, but the choice the peoples. Epist. 52. the same Cor­nelius he justifies against Novatian, and that with the concur­rent judgement of a councel assembled upon the same ground, the suffrage of the ministry and people. Epist 67.

Cyprian to the ministry of Spaine. Cyprian with his fellow-Bishops assembled, praiseth the ministry and people of Spaine; that they had by lawful Election placed Sabinus and Felix in stead of Basilides and Martial, lapsed Bishops; we have here most pregnant testimonies and proofes of the peoples right in chusing.

They when they had met together, read letters out of Spaine, desiring their advice; where in answer Cyprian with the rest of the Bishops, first urging of how great [...] it is that the mi­nister or Bishop be holy, he thus speaks further; Wherefore it behoves that with full diligence and sincere tryall they be cho­sen to the ministery, who are such as God may heare their Prayers. Neither let the people flatter themselves as though they might be free from guilt, communicating with a sinful mini­ster or Bishop, and affording their consent to the unjust and un­lawfull Episcopacy or ministery of him that is set over them. A little after, Therefore the people obeying the Lords Command­ments, and fearing God, ought to separate themselves from a sinful Church ruler, neither mixe themselves at the sacrifices of a sacrilegious Priest, forasmuch as they have the greatest pow­er, [Page 28]either of chusing the worthy Priests (that was the language of those times for Bishops or Ministers,) or refusing the unwor­thy, which thing we see also to descend from divine authority, that the Bishop or Minister be chosen, the people being present, in the sight of all, and be approved worthy and fit by publicke judgement and testimony, as in Numb. 20.26, 27, 28. adde Le­vit. 8.3. &c. God commands the Priest to be [...] before the whole Assembly; that is, he teacheth and sheweth that Ordination of Priests ought not to be, but with the joynt knowledge of the people assisting, the people being pre­sent, either that the crimes of the evil may be discovered, or that the merits of the good may be declared; and it may be a just and lawfull Ordination, which hath been examined by the suffrage and judgement of all; he still goes on; which thing af­terwards is observed according to divine Precepts in the Acts of the Apostles, when Peter speaks to the People about ordain­ing a Bishop in the place of Judas, Acts 1.15. (Cyprian he un­derstands those one hundred and twenty names, the people of the Church, and makes use of this place for the peoples Electi­on;) he addes, and we take notice the Apostles observed this, that not only in the Ordination of Priests, (that is Bishops or Ministers) but of Deacons also, Acts 6.2, 3. which verily was therefore so diligently and warily done, the whole people be­ing called together, lest some unworthy should have crept in; &c. he addes that it is most diligently to be kept, from divine tradition and Apostolicall observation, which among them, and almost throughout all the Provinces is observed, that for the right celebrating Ordinations, all the next Bishops of the same Province meet with that people to whom the Ruler is to be or­dained; and the Bishop being chosen, the people being present, &c. —which we find observed by you (saith he) in the Ordi­nation of Sabinus, that the office of a Bishop was conferred up­on him by the suffrage of the whole brotherhood, and the Bi­shops who were present, Epist. 68. This testimony is cleare and full for many things worthy our observation. 1. That Ordi­nation was after Election. 2. That the people have right of chu­sing the highest officers in the Church. 3. That they have the greatest power of chusing or refusing. 4. That they have right, and it is their duty to separate themselves from such as having [Page 29]been placed over them prove wicked. 5. That all this is by divine authority. 6. That they have the same right to chuse all Church-officers. 7. That this is the way to keep out the unworthy; whence we may conclude the people owned for true matter of the Church then, were an understanding and holy people. Pameli­us in his Annotations upon the place, though no great friend to the peoples power here, yet proves the presence and suffrage of the people for some ages after in Africa, Augustines Suc­cessors so chosen; the same practice in Greece in Chrysostomes times, in Spaine, in France, in Rome, and this custome to have continued till Gregorie the first, nay till the times of Charles and Lewis Emperours; the like testimony from the first times of all immediately succeeding the Apostles, Clemens Ro­manus (the same who is mentioned Phil. 4.3.) writing an E­pistle to the Corinthians and taxing a great schisme among them, casting off some of their faithfull ministers, he tels them it is an unjust thing to remove them from their publick mini­stry, who had been placed by the Apostles, or after them by ex­cellent men, the whole Church consenting, or it seeming good to the whole Church, &c.

2. For the Testimonies of our Reformers; it is well known to be the doctrine of the reformed Churches generally; I shal give an instance or two. Calvin upon that word [...], Acts 14.23. they two saith he, viz. Paul and Barnabas created the Elders, but the whole multitude as it was the cu­stome of the Grecians in their Elections, declared with their hands lifted up whom they would have. So the Romane Histo­rians speak many times; the Consuls who held the Assemblies created new Magistrates, for no other reason, but because they received the votes, and moderated the people in their choice. Institu. l. 4. c. 3. Sect. 15. Againe Paul and Barnabas are said to chuse the Elders; do they this as a duty proper to them? nay rather they permit the matter to the votes of all; therefore in ordaining Pastors the choice of the people was free; but least any thing should be done tumultuously, Paul and Barnabas have the leading plaes or rule them as Moderatours; and so ought the decree of the Councell of Laodicea to be understood, which forbids the choyce to be left to the people. Calv. in Acts 14.23. Beza upon the same place, this word (translated, ordained, [Page 30]but signifying as formerly we heard, to chuse by hands lifted up) ariseth (saith he) from the custome of the Grecians, who gave in their votes and suffrages with their hands stretched out; And the force of this word is to be observed, (he still goes on) that we may know Paul and Barnabas did nothing of their owne pleasure, nor exercised any Tyranny in the Church. Then maintaining his owne calling and the calling of the rest of the Reformers to their ministry, First he denies that Ordination or Consecration by Imposition of hands to be lawfull, which is used among the Papists, upon a double ground. 1. Because there was no lawfull choyce before it. 2. Because the Ordainers a­mong them deserve excommunication, and in these two cases Ordination is void by the Canons they boast of. Secondly he layes down the certaine notes of their call, (his owne with the other ministers of the Reformation,) that they were approved of both for life and doctrine, by the lawfull Testimony of their Churches, that they were by them chosen, and lastly with calling upon the name of God confirmed in their mini­stery.

Bucer. The Holy Ghost requires, that they who are ordain­ed to the Holy ministery, be first tryed and proved, and so farre as is possible approved to all in the Church; and this he argues from the unfruitfulnes of the ministry otherwise;—adds; wise­ly, and not according to humane wisedome only, but divine, did Leo Bishop of Rome write, that no reason would admit, that he that should take care of the Church, should not be both proved & desired by that very Church,—which Paul consider­ing, (viz. how much it made for the fruit of his ministry,) la­bours so earnestly to preserve his love and esteem among the Corinthians, and to restore the same among the Galatians. Bucer. of the lawful Ordination of Ministers, p. 242.

Furthermore great care is to be had of this, that those mini­sters may be given to the Churches, whom they may love, e­steem and honour; and that this may be brought to passe, no man at all is to be admitted to the sacred ministeries of the Church, who is not before religiously tryed and approved to the whole Church where he ought to administer, p. 243. p. 244.

In this tryall of those that are presented to the services of the Church, not only is this to be required who are made fit for [Page 31]those ministeries by God, but likewise that they may be ac­knowledged, received and accounted such, by the Churches, their tryall is so to be ordered and carryed thorough, that it may be knowne and throughly beheld by the whole Church to which any one is to serve, who are to be received by them, as given and sent of the Lord unto them: who are to be refused by them, as not given and sent by the Lord unto them; And then he brings in that of Cyprian formerly mentioned. Epist. 68. Let these suffice for instance.

Object. But the people are ignorant, irreligious, and many wayes unfit.

Answ. 1. For their abilities in learning, for their judgement in the highest and mysterious most points, and the like, who are to be chosen, they are by learned Ministers (where it may be) to be tryed. 2. There is a great use of the guidance and direction of able and approved Ministers, for ordering the proceeding in the choice, that it be done with due care and peaceablenesse. 3. The People of the Church are not to be supposed ignorant, irreligi­ous, &c. they that are so are no true matter of the Church, nor to be owned, as formerly this hath been proved; [...] this very right and duty of the People addes a further proof, because it belongs to them to chuse their officers, therefore they must not be such a People, and in all these testimonies we find them supposed of another stampe. 4. Suppose that assistance of mini­sters cannot be had, as in case God should enlighten with his truth a company of people in the midst of Rome, might not they by divine charter settle among themselves a ministery? In other cases, when the helpe of ministers cannot be had, the reasons formerly given, especially the first, second, third and fifth will conclude the Peoples right without them. Otherwise this would further ensue after a generall Apostacy, as that of the Papacy, though God should enlighten never so many Peo­ple, except withall he should enlighten some of their Priests, there must be an impossibility of Church-Reformation. 5. Though such a concurrence of ministers, where it may be had, is for the help of the Church, as in the respects above na­med, yet may they not devest her of this native right, to put upon her any but whom she shall chuse and approve.

It is true, to a wicked People no true matter of the Church, [Page 32]a minister may be sent to preach the Gospel, though they hate him, (so farre from chusing him;) but it is one thing to be a Preacher to a People, another to be their Pastor, and ruling elder in way of discipline; Only the Saints (visible) combined, are capable of Pastorall and disciplinary interest.

Quest. How is this right of the people preserved, to be judged by officers of their own chusing, in the ordinary way of the Classis, when the sentence shall be carried against an whole Congregation, by officers of other Congregations, never cho­sen by them? how? was it not fairlier preserved in the way of primitive Episcopacy? All the people chusing the Bishop and all the Ministers. Cyprian Epist. 68. supr. So Clemens for the Mi­nisters. Supr.

CHAP. V. The fourth Instruction. Christ hath committed the power of Discipline, not to the Officers alone, but to the Church, that is, to the Officers and the brotherhood.

THere is in the Church of Christ a twofold power; of

• Order.
• Office.

The power of order ariseth from Church-fellowship, and be­longs to the brethren so joyned together.

The power of office ariseth from Commission for rule; and belongeth to officers set over the brethren.

[Page 33] The power of Order is

• To be exercised by the brotherhood, whilest yet without Officers; and it is the power of chusing their Officers formerly spoken to.
• To be exercised by the brotherhood toge­ther with the officers; and it is the power of Discipline in
  • Or binding by Excommuni­cation, for which Admonition makes way; withdrawing partly makes way for it, partly followes upon it.
    Binding by
    • Admonition.
    • Withdrawing.
    • Excommuni­cation.
  • Loosing; or Absolution.

The power of Order is here ta­ken in a sense very different from that School use, where it is distingushed from jurisdiction, or rather against it.

Admonition in case a Brother sinne scandalously; Withdrawing, in case he hear not the Admonition; Excommunication, in case of stubborne persisting in his sinne against the Admonition of the Church.

Excommunication exprest by

• Judging. 1 Cor. 5.
• Putting away. 1 Cor. 5.
• Taking away. 1 Cor. 5.
• Purging out. 1 Cor. 5.
• Delivering to Satan. 1 Cor. 5.
• Stating among the Heathen. Matth. 18.17.

Loosing or Absolution in the Churches

• Forgiving. Upon Repentance 2 Cor. 2.7, 8.
• Comforting. Upon Repentance 2 Cor. 2.7, 8.
• Confirming her love. Upon Repentance 2 Cor. 2.7, 8.

This power of Discipline, is one of the Keyes of the King­dome of Heaven: The Key is twofold, of

• Doctrine,
• Discipline;

Luk. 11.52 and here the opening and shutting of the Key is the same with binding and loosing formerly. Matth. 16.19. with Matth. 18.15, 16, 17, 18.

[Page 34] The power of discipline thus briefly declared, we now come to confirme the instruction, that not to the officers alone, but to the Church it is committed, that is the brotherhood with the officers.

1. It belongs to the Church, Matth. 18.17. but the Church never signifies the officers alone, throughout the new Testa­ment frequently the officers and brethren together: as in the inscriptions of the Epistles to the Church at Corinth, &c. some­times the people distinct from their officers; when they were possessed of officers, Acts 15.4. the Church there distinct from the Officers whether Apostles or Elders, and this Church the brethren, v. 22, 23. so Rev. 1.20. the starres are the mini­sters, and the candlesticks are the Churches; before they were possessed of officers, Acts 14.23. there is the Church as the candle­stick, before the candle be put into it. If any man shall say that in Matth. 18.17. the Church signifies the officers alone, in stead of proving he begs the question.

2. The Apostle enjoyning the exercise of this power for

• Binding, 1 Cor. 5.
• Loosing. 2 Cor. 2.

ascribes it to the brotherhood together with the officers.

First, for Binding, 1 Cor. 5. he writes to the whole Church. 1. To the same here, to whom he inscribes the Epistle, but he inscribes it to all the Saints in Corinth, with all in every place, as com­prehended in his salutation, and concerned in the institutions of this Epistle, though particularly sent to the Church at Corinth. 2. The same who were puffed up when they should have mourn­ed, v. 2. are to be gathered together in the name, and with the power of Christ, Pauls spirit joyning with them, though he was absent in body, v. 4. to deliver such an one to Satan, v. 5.3. The same whose glorying is rebuked, the whole lump lea­vened, v. 6. are to purge out that leaven, v. 7. whence the A­postle digresseth from publick leaven, the scandalous sinner, to personall leaven, malice and wickednesse, v. 8.4. The same to whom he gives direction for avoiding familiar society with a scandalous brother, interpreting the meaning of a former E­pistle, v. 9, 10, 11. they are to judge of those within, v. 12. and put away from among themselves that wicked person, v. 13.

[Page 35] Secondly for loosing, 2 Cor. 2. the same whom he had for­merly made heavy, v. 1, 2. by rebuking in the former Epistle, that from their obedience and repentance, he might have much joy of them, when he should come to them, v. 3, 4. whom in part he clears v. 5. They are the many by whom the incestu­ous Person was rebuked v. 6. and they are to forgive and com­fort him, v 7.8. The same to whom the Apostle wrote to make proof of their obedience, v. 9. with whom as he formerly joyned in binding, so now in loosing, v. 10 they are stil the same, whom formerly he had made heavy, and in whom now he re­joyced, cap. 7. v. 8. to the end. He that can now cast such a mist, as shall darken so faire and cleare a context, and make us meet with the officers only in all this, missing the People, I shall allow him this testimony, he hath profited very well in the school of darknesse. Some footstep of the Peoples power here we had in the ruines of discipline by the Prelates, in that the ab­solved Party was wont to aske the Congregation forgive­nesse.

3. Every brother hath a power, and his duty it is to admonish first singly, then jointly before a witnesse or two, the case so re­quiring, and there is waight in that admonition for gaining a brother, Mat. 18.15, 16. how comes it to passe, that after the offence is brought to the officers, there is no waight in the pub­lick admonition, and consequently censure of the whole brotherhood.

The end of the Censure is to shame and humble the sinner, and is there no waight in the solemne judgement of any, nor all the brotherhood, but only of the officers for this end?

4. If this judgement belong only to the officers, then Christ hath so instituted this Ordinance, as many times it cannot ob­taine its end, without the sin of the Church; this is cleare thus; in case the Church or brotherhood apprehend the sentence un­righteous, they cannot without sin withdraw from him; the Party sentenced, (suppose by officers proceeding as wickedly, as some­times our Prelates and their creatures were wont to do, passing sentence of excommunication for refusing impious Ceremonies, or the like,) if they shal not withdraw, the end is not obtained, the sentence not obeyed; but to say that Christ hath so institu­ted this or any other Ordinance, is to taxe his wisedome and holinesse.

[Page 36] Quest. Suppose some few apprehend the sentence unrighte­ous, what shall they do?

Answ. Modestly declare their dissent, and for their parts forbeare to act it.

5. That the Church (or brotherhood) hath some share in the power of the keyes, appears by her honourable relation to Christ; the Elders are stewards, but the Church is his wife.

Object. That is the universall Church.

Ans. Every particular Church or company of combined Saints hath the whole nature of the universall Church, and the same re­lation to Christ, that all the Saints together have, 1 Cor. 12.27.

Object. Then women and children should share in the power of the keyes, for they are of the Church of beleevers.

Answ. This is a most trifling objection, 1. It is granted by many who make this Objection, that the brethren have right to chuse their officers, who yet deny women and children any share therein. 2, A power may belong to such an Order, yet not to all in that Order; the Lords Supper belongs to the Or­der of beleevers, not to officers only; the children of beleevers are in Church-account beleevers, yet the supper belongs not to them. I will adde, that honour which belongs to such an Order, reflects upon them in that order, who are yet debarred Personal application; the honour of circumcision, sealing up the Jews into Gods family, had reflection upon their women; they were of the circumcision in opposition to the Gentiles, who were the uncircumcision, though they could not be circumcised; it is a priviledge and honour of our Nobility in England, that they make one House of Parliament; and who can deny that the wives and children of Nobles are concerned in this Honour, though it belongs not to them to sit in the House?

Let us now adde the testimonies first of the primitive, and then of the reformed Churches in some of their choicest Divines. 1. For the primitive times, Cyprian, To the Presbyters and Deacons;

As for that which my fellow Presbyters, Donatus and Fortu­natus, Novatus and Gordius wrote about, I could write nothing in answer, forasmuch as I have determined from the beginning of my Episcopacy, to do nothing of mine owne mind, or by [Page 37]mine own sentence, without your counsell and the consent of my people. But when I shall come to you, (he was now in exile,) by the grace of God we will then deale about those things in common, which either are done, or are to be done, as mutuall honour requires, Epist. 6. at the end. The like to this, in the 18. Epistle, about the demand of some of the lapsed, (that is those who had fallen in time of Persecution,) desiring to be restored, having for that end obtained the Confessors letters, (the Con­fessors were such as were imprisoned for the truth.) This thing (saith he) since it belongs to the counsell and sentence of us all, I would not judge it beforehand, neither dare I challenge to my selfe alone a common businesse.

When some Presbyters had over-hastily received some of the lapsed to the Lords Supper, He tels them they must make ac­count to plead their cause before himselfe, the rest of the Ministers, the Confessors, and the whole People. Epist. 10.

When he yet in exile was consulted with by letters by his Presbyters about certaine who had fallen, and were now retur­ned, desirous to be received againe of the Church, he an­swers;

I cannot be judge alone in this case; many of the ministers are ab­sent; and this case requires exact handling, not only with my fel­low ministers, but with the whole People; for the thing is to be weighed with well-poised moderation, and so to be sentenced, as may for after times settle an example about the ministers of the Church, Epist. 28.

The ministery of Rome to Cyprian, (there being at this time no Bishop at Rome,) In this great businesse it seemed good to us, which thou also hast formerly handled, that the Peace of the Church be upheld; furthermore, so conference of counsels being had with the Bishops, Presbyters, Deacons, Confessors, and in like manner with the standing People to handle the cause of the lapsed, Epist. 31.

Cyprian to the People, concerning Felicissimus and the five Presbyters of his faction; By the Providence of God they under­go the punishment they have deserved, that not being cast out by us, they should cast out themselves; —According to your divine suf­frages, conspirators and wicked men should of their owne accord drive themselves out of the Church; (he here cals the suffrage of [Page 38]the people divine, not because infallible, but because it is ac­cording to Scripture that they should have their vote) Againe, They alone beare the punishment of their conspiracy, who formerly according to your suffrages, now according to the judgements of God, have deserved to undergo the sentence of their conspiracy and Per­versenesse. To the same People; about the businesse of the lapsed in generall for receiving or still refusing them. Cyprian decla­ring his hope shortly to be restored together with his fellow mi­nisters; Whom being present, (saith he according to your iudgement either way, (arbitrium,) likewise, and the Common Counsell of us all, we may order and exactly handle the things that are to be done, as once it seemed good, Epist. 40. A further Testimony we have formerly set down at the end of the ninth Argument, for the matter of the Church; shewing at once how the People of the Church were qualified, and what power they had for keeping out the unworthy. Epist. 55. More Testimonies of like nature might be alledged out of the same father, but these shall suffice.

I shall not need here to observe, how he ascribes to the Peo­ple in point of censure, as their right; counsell, consent, vote or suffrage, judgement either way, or arbitrium, nor how generall his Testimonies are, as including the rest of the ministry; the ministry of Rome likewise giving the like Testimony.

We come now to some few Testimonies out of some of the choycest Divines of the Reformed Churches. Calvin, Let us ob­serve that this temper is to be held in excommunication, that this dis­cipline be exercised by the Common Councell of the Elders, and with the consent of the People, and this is the remedy whereby Tyran­ny is prevented, in 1 Cor. 5.4. That is the warrantable proceeding in excommunication which Paul shews, if not only the Elders do it apart, but with the knowledge and approbation of the Church, viz. in that manner that the multitude of the People do not rule the action, but observe it as a witnesse and keeper, that nothing be done by a few at their pleasure. Institut. lib. 4. cap. 12. sect. 7.

Bucer. This power (of the keyes,) is in the whole Church, but the authority of the ministry is in the Elders and Bishops, as of old at Rome the Power was in the People, the authority in the Se­nate, in Mat. 16.18, 19. The same Author expounding, Matth. [Page 39]18.15. &c. If the offending brother heare not the second admoniti­on, let his stubbornnesse be declared to the Church, that he may be the third time admonished by the whole Congregation, of those a­mongst whom he is, or whereof he is a part; and if he heare not the Church, being admonished by her, let him be accounted as an hea­then and Publicane. Againe: of the Power of binding and loosing, that is of shutting out, or receiving into the Church, whether at the beginning or after wickednesse committed, I have spoken before; Mat. 16. but here it is clearly set forth that this power, that is, the keyes of the kingdome of heaven, is in the hands of all those who meet together in the name of Christ, that is in faith; because theirs is the spirit of the Lord and his word; for such only meet in the name of Christ, that is, trusting upon Christ, and grow together many members into one body, &c. Then in­terpreting the 19. v.—when two of you shal agre together to ask any thing, &c. he thus speaks of private admonition, and absoluti­on in the hands of the brethren; the Lord speaks here especially of praying for pardon on their behalfe who had offended. Hence therefore we may learne the fruit of private admonition and ab­solution; for if two shall agree together, to beg the pardon of a sin; that sin must be known to them both, and acknowledged as a sin, here therefore the private admonition, or confession of that sin must have had place. Now forasmuch as true prayer shuts out doubting of obtaining, it must needs be that a brother may confirme a brother, that pardon is granted, and by apply­ing it to him, may render him secure in the Lord; hence the bre­thren in private, according to Christs institution, exercise in part the power of the keyes, and thence their right of publick exercise of them, it being of the same kind, wil evidently follow, as he there speaks. It is true, saith he, the Lord hath uttered this Promise concerning a few, that he might teach how he approves and embraceth us, agreeing and consenting together in him­selfe, though we be never so small a number; but we shall please him more, if many amongst our selves shall agree together in him, and we shall be able to doe things innumerable in his name. The same Author. The Apostle blames the Corinthians, that the whole Church had not appointed mourning, that is, fasting and publick deprecation of the wrath of God for this wickednesse, and that she had not cast out the incestuous Person out of her Communion,—He [Page 40]did no losse solemnely exhort the Corinthians, that after his repent­ance, they would receive him into the favour of the Lord and his Church, lib. de regno Christi c. 9. p. 43. There is much more in the same grave Author to the same purpose up and down in his works; I shall adde only one short testimony more out of Peter Martyr. We conclude saith he without the consent of the Church, (that is the People of the Congregation,) no man can be excommunicated. loc. com. de excommunicat. sent. 9. This right belongs to the Church, neither ought it to be taken from her sent 10.

We shall forbeare further quotations, it being generally the doctrine of the Reformers, as is well known to such as are ac­quainted with their Writings.

CHAP. VI.

THis Chapter shall be taken up with certaine Conclusions, de­pending upon the former about discipline.

1. As the Prelates, stripping both the People and the El­ders of the power of discipline, violate the Gospe-order in two maine degrees, (we may adde a third, in that they take it into their owne hands who have nothing to do with it,) so they that will have the Presbyterian Government so exercised, as all pow­er shall be confined to the Elders excluding the People, vio­late the Gospell-order in one maine degree at the least.

2. Forasmuch as the People of the Church have a power of Church-order for the exercise of discipline, both privately and publickly, hence we may now clearly see of what necessity it is, that the matter of the Church be only visible Saints according to the doctrine and explication of the matter of the Church formerly laid downe. Many there are, who loosing this Peg in the Tabernacle of the Peoples power for discipline, they then loose another, concerning their qualification for the due matter of the Church, and thence a third, their right of chusing officers, and a fourth, the due limits for the Sacraments, and so the whole frame growes ruinous, I much admire the wisedome of our king and lawgiver of his Church, who hath so ordered all, [Page 41]as where his Patterne is observed, there must be a beautifull Temple; To instance in this particular, because the People have their share in the power of the keyes, and the exercise of it: therefore they must be a knowing and a holy People, without which they have no Principles for such duties. 2. Had this been observed, Prelacy had never got footing in the Churches. 3. Much lesse Primacy over all, that which the man of sinne claims to his pretended chaire; the slacking of this joint made way for the mystery of iniquity in the world, and the infirming of it must make for the destruction thereof.

3. In setling a disciplinary Congregation, there is the substance of a Church-Covenant, whether in word exprest or not. What is the substance of a Church-Covenant? The mutuall consent of the faithful for walking together in one Congregation, according to the rules of the Gospel, for faith, obedience, communion in Worship and Discipline; in setling the Church in her Congrega­tions: here is the substance of this, these things are visibly done; what objection then can there be of weight against the solemne profession of it by word? 1. The Scripture seemes to hold it forth, as Isa 44 5. So Israel of old was taken into Covenant, and how often the Covenant renewed with them, even upon singular reformations. 2. In the Primitive times the Catechumens when received into Church fellowship, gave up themselves by solemne profession openly exprest unto the Church. 3. When members are admitted in the reformed Churches, they professe their purpose for religions walking in Church-fellowship, and for subjection to the Discipline. 4. In this, as in other cases, by open profession and covenanting, we lay a stricter tye upon our selves, for all duties of Church-communion. 5. We do more expressely witnesse our high esteeme of Gods institution for Church-order and priviledges,

This confederacy according to the order of the Gospel, seems to give immediate right to the sealing Ordinances, as visible inte­rest in the Covenant of grace gives the first right.

1. It was not interest in the Covenant of grace alone that gave immediate right to Circumcision, and the Passeover of old, but there must be a profest joyning with the Church of the Jews in her Discipline and Policie; therefore Job (for instance,) was not to be circumcised, because not so adjoyn'd.

[Page 42] 2. Where there is full communion in Church-priviledges, there must be the exercise of Discipline for keeping that com­munion pure, under paine of highest displeasure from the Lord, 1 Cor. 5. throughout; but where there is communion in the sealing Ordinances, there is full communion in Church priviledg­es; therefore there must be this reall confederacy for disci­pline.

3. If the sealing Ordinances may (at least ordinarily) be ad­ministred to such as refuse confederacy for discipline, then may the Ordinance of discipline for ever be refused by the Churches: but this may not be, as hath more largely been proved. Instruct. 2. cap. 3.

To me (saith grave and learned Bucer,) the Church without the most frequent use of mutual admonition, Mat. 18. [...]ct. 4. p. 386 seems the same with a kingdome that is without judgement, without the use of laws, and as a city brought indeed under the Power of the Prince, but as yet not so orderd and setled by him, as that it should have the forme of a city and of a Common-wealth, Magistracy being put upon it, and laws setled; thus he; and what authentick right can there be of publick administring the peculiar Priviledges of the Common-wealth, to the free borne subjects in a city so un­setled? so for the Church undisciplined.

Object. Those baptized by John, and the Eunuch by Philip.

Answ. When the time or the place was not for particular Churches, the first right alone sufficient, as before the Temple or Tabernacle, sacrifices not confined to place.

4. Conclusion. For setling discipline in this Kingdome, Person unfit for Church-Communion are to be left out.

This question, (whether for the true method of setling of Christ the Churches aright in this Kingdome, Persons unfit are to be left out, or cast out,) well cleared, will make much for true Reformation among us. To this we say two things.

1. Supposing all such are to be cast out, they must first be left out, that they may be cast out, leaving them out orderly making way for their casting out.

1. That they may be cast out, discipline must be setled, for [Page 43]it is by discipline, that they must be cast out; that discipline may be setled, officers must be chosen by the people of the Church; but Persons unfit for Church-Communion, 1. are not the People of the Church. 2. They are morally unfit to chuse officers. 3. They are a Party engaged, as if Malefactors should chuse their Judge; therefore they may not chuse officers.

2. The discipline for casting out is to be exercised, as by the officers by an office-power, so by the people by a Power of Or­der; but Persons fit to be cast out, may not have this power and the exercise of it; this would prevent discipline for ever, except we shall think that they will cast out themselves.

3. As in a Church where Discipline is setled, such as are for­mally suspended, or to be suspended, are left out as to vote or consent before they be cast out; so in a Church to be setled, such as are materially suspended, or to be suspended, (as are all to whom we refuse, or should refuse the Sacraments) are to be left out, before they be cast out.

4. If Christians in name, but scandalous in life, have not lost their disciplinary interest till they be cast out, then neither have the scandalous Ministers lost their ministeriall interest for Disci­pline till they be cast out: if so, then these Ministers with those Christians may, joyning together, set up the Prelatical Discipline Ecclesiastically valid. Whether now shall these be withdrawne from or not, that the true Discipline may be set up? If not, they will carry the false by number of Votes; if they may, the que­stion is granted, there must be leaving out before casting out.

2. They are to be left out, not cast out.

1. They onely are to be cast out by Discipline in case of scan­dalous sinning, who have beene by voluntary confederacy under it, and accepted as fit matter of the Church; but such were not our scandalous sinners; they were never yet under the Discipline which we contend for, neither can they in true account, be owned as fit matter of the Church. 1. That only they who are true matter of the Church are objects of discipline, it is cleare, because discipine is for them within, not for them without. 2. only them who have by voluntary confederacy come under it. 1. No man, or society of men, hath Church-power over another, without his consent first had: as the reverend Assembly speaks [Page 44]in answer to the Dissenting Brethren; the mutual assent and agree­ment of the people among whom, and over whom discipline is to be exercised, is the next foundation of the exercise thereof. 2. Discipline being among the weapons of spirituall warfare, and having to do onely with the conscience, it hath place only upon those who conscientiously (in appearance at least) have owned this Discipline as an ordinance, & therupon, of free accord, volun­tarily engaged in it. Object. The preaching the word is to deal only with the conscience; shall it therefore be preached onely to such as voluntarily submit to hearing? Ans. The preaching of the word is an ordinance, first proving it selfe, and then all other ordinances, as Sacraments, Censures; therefore so far as it hath first convinced, others take place; 3. The people of the Church are a willing people. 4. The Discipline had no place with the Ca­techumens of old, notwithstanding their personall profession, till upon their voluntary giving up themselves to the Church, and by the Church approved they were received into full Church fellowship. 5. The like method is used by the reformed Churches; None are under discipline, who have not first been approved and by voluntary tender of themselves received to the Supper.

2. The Church is so to be made up of her members, in her se­verall congregations, as that the smaller number is ever to be supposed to be cast out of the greater; 1. Forasmuch as the people have their Vote in casting out; 2. Forasmuch as the pre­sence and censure of those who are to cast out, make for the humbling and shameing of those who are to be cast out; but if all the scandalous are to be cast out, it cannot be supposed that they will be the smaller number, in severall congrega­tions.

3. Casting out supposeth publique, but personall admonition (if he hear not the Church) and particularly proofe of the fault' for which the sinner is to be cast out: but how this is possible in our Nation, I shall only appeal to experience, and common sense.

4. If all scandalous sinners amongst us be to be cast out, then are they all the scandalous of the Church, (what have I to do to judge them that are without?) But they are not all the scan­dalous of the Church; with none of the scandalous of the Church must we familiarly keep company, and yet may we abide [Page 45]in the world, but with-many of the scandalous in the Nation, we must upon diverse occasions keep familiar company, except we will go out of the world, (and it is the same case in all Nations of the world). 1 Cor. 5.9. with experience.

CHAP. VII. The sifth Instruction. There is a Church-Power formally distinct from the Civill.

One conclusion will here be of use before we insist upon the proofe of this Instruction; And it is this; The authority and relation of Magistracy is one and the same; whether the per­son of the Magistrate be Christian or not; as the authority and relation of a father is one and the same, in both cases; It be­longs to the office of Magistracy to preserve authoritatively both Tables of the law of God, to take order that the Subjects may live in godlinesse and honesty, though onely the Christian Magistrate hath principles for exercising this power in a Christi­an way. This premised we come to the proofe.

1. From the ensignes of these Powers; the Sword of the Ci­vill; the Keyes of the Ecclesiasticall; these, as of different [Page 46]name and nature, so they represent that power, whereof they are the ensignes, different.

2. From the nature of these Powers compared 1. In their Ob­ject; of the one, the Common-wealth; of the other, the Church. 2. In their laws; of the one, such as humane wisedome findes necessary or expedient, for the society of mankind; of the other, only the word of God. 3. Their authority; of the one, Imperiall, commanding in their own names, as Lawgi­vers to the Subjects; of the other, ministerial commanding only in the name of Christ, the only Lawgiver of his Church. 4. In their punishments & rewards; of the one, such as concern the out­ward man; as for punishments, fines, imprisonment, banishment, death, &c. For rewards, revenues, honours, &c. Of the other, such as concerne the inward man; binding or loosing (the wea­pons of this warfare are spirituall,) retaining or remitting sins.

3. From the institution of these powers; the institution of Magistracy is divine in generall. (The powers that be, are or­dained of God.) The constitution in particular is humane, in di­verse nations, diverse; in some, the Governement by the king, in others by the State, in others by the People; (Be subject to every humane creation,) 1 Pet. 2.13. The institution of Church-office, is divine both generally, that there be officers in the Church, and particularly that these be they and no other, 1 Cor. 12.28. the civill magistrate is nowhere in the list, or roll of Church-officers.

4. From the conveyance of these powers. 1. The civill ma­gistrate, (to instance in the supreme Person,) may be by succes­sion; Church-officers must be by Election; the civill magistrate, (to instance in the supreme Court,) may be by election of the people of the Common-wealth as such, whether duly qualified for Church-Government or not; Church-officers must be by election of the People of the Church as such; and they must be qualified according to Scripture-Characters, that they may rightly be chosen.

5. From the exercise of these powers; both these powers were exercised in their full height, for the first three hundred years after Christ, when yet, neither was any Church-officer a civill magistrate, neither did any civill magistrate pretend to be a Church-officer.

[Page 47] 6. From the dissolution of these powers; excommunicati­on dissolves all Church-power in the hand of a Church-officer, when rightly administred against him; it neither dissolves nor weakens civill power in the hand of the Magistrate, when right­ly administred against him.

7. From the farre distance of these Powers; a woman may be a civill magistrate, (as Deborah in Israel, Queen Elizabeth in England,) but a woman may not be a Church-officer; a Person may by good right be a Magistrate, yet by no right a Church-member, much lesse a Church-officer.

8. Adde to these the concurrent judgement of all Churches, who have ever avouched both in Doctrine and Practice these powers distinct.

CHAP. VIII. The sixth Instruction. That Bishops in office above Presbyters, are no Church-officers of di­vine institution, it is pleaded by Jerome from Scripture, and the highest Gospel-antiquity.

THere is a Divine Bishop, one and the same with a Presbyter or a Pastor or Teacher of a Congregation, and Elder labour­ing in the Word and Doctrine; there is an humane Bishop, one that pleads his office to be above the Presbyters or Pastors office; and two things he challengeth above the Presbyter. 1. Power of Ordination. 2. Power of Jurisdiction. Jerome a learned Father, famous about 390 yeeres after Christ, in his Epistle to E­vagrius, and in his Commentary upon the Epistle to Titus, speaks clearly to this question, both from Scripture, and from the first Gospel antiquity; I have therefore thought fit to translate that Epistle, and thence to observe his Arguments, from Scripture, as likewise what he produceth from antiquity, that we might at once give double light to this question, knowing well, that where antiquity is used against the Scripture it is nothing worth, but whereit stands fair with the Scripture, it may be a secondary con­firmation of the true meaning of Scripture, to the impartial enqui­ter after truth; and an argument fully in force against the ad­versary, pretending antiquity for his Error. This Epistle is di­rected against a certaine person who would have a Deacon to be above a Presbyter, against whom thus Jerome;

We read in Isaiah, the fool will speak folly, I hear of one who hath broken forth into so great folly, that he would prefer Dea­cons before Presbyters, that is before Bishops. For when the Apostle teacheth clearly, that Presbyters are the same with Bishops, who may endure that the servant of tables and wi­dowes, should lift up himselfe swollen above them, by whose prayers the body and blood of Christ is consecrate? Seekest thou authority? Heare the Testimony, Paul and Timothy, Phil. 1. the Ser­vants of Jesus Christ, to all the Saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the Bishops and Deacons. Acts 20. Wilt thou another ex­ample? In the Acts of the Apostles thus, Paul writes to the [Page 52]Ministers (Sacerdotes) of one Church; Take heed to your selves and to the whole flock, over which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops: (for it is the same word here, that every otherwhere is translated Bishops) that yee might rule the Church of the Lord, (so he reads it) which he hath purchased with his owne blood. And that no man may contentiously wrangle, that there were many Bishops in one Church, hear yet another testimony, by which it is most manifestly proved, Tit. 1. that a Bishop and Presbyter are one and the same. For this end I left thee in Creet, that thou mightest redresse the things that were wanting, that thou mighest appoint Presbyters in every City, as I have also commanded thee; If any man be without blame, the husband of one wife, have faithful chil­dren,1 Tim. 4.not accused of riot, or disobedient; for it behooves a Bishop to be without blame, as the Steward of God. And to Timothy, Neglect not the grace which is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of hands of the Presbytery. But Pe­ter likewise in his first Epistle saith, 1 Pet. 5. The Elders or Presbyters which are among you, I intreat, who am your fellow-Elder, and a wit­nesse of the suffrings of Christ, and also a partaker of glory to come, which is to be revealed, that yee rule the flock of Christ, and o­versee it, not of necessity, but willingly, according to God, which in the Greek is more significantly exprest, [...] Bishoping that is, overseeing them, from whence the name of Bishop is drawne.

Do the testimonies of these so great men seem small to thee? let the Gospel-trumpet sound, the Son of thunder, whom Je­sus loved so much, who drunk the flowing streams of doctrine out of his Saviours breast; The Presbyter to the elect Lady and to her children, whom I love in the truth. And in another Epistle, The Presbyter to the wel-beloved Caius, whom I love in the truth. Hitherto Ierome.

Here we have both clearly affirmed, and strongly confirmed, that a Bishop in office above a Presbyter, is no where to be found in Scripture, but Bishop and Presbyter are two names of one and the same office, so that whatsoever belongs to any Bi­shop by vertue of his office, the same belongs to every Presbyter, as he is a Presbyter. For clearing both his affirmation and con­firmation, we must observe that in his time the custome of the Church, had obtained that some were single Presbyters, others [Page 53]so Presbyters, as withall Bishops challenging above single Pres­byters, the Power of Ordination at the least, themselves like­wise ordained, not by single Presbyters, (as they called them,) but by Bishops; and it is pleaded by the Advocates of Episcopa­cy at this day, that the Apostles before their death ordained severall Bishops, in office above Presbyters, (as formerly we laid down,) over the Churches in severall cities, and these Bi­shops in continuall succession ordained others; neither can a Bishop be ordained by Presbyters, nor a presbyter without a Bishop; at least ordinarily.

Against this Jerome pleads, taxing the great errour of them that would preferre a Deacon to a Presbyter, That it is all one to preferre him to a Bishop; for according to Scripture, the one is nei­ther greater nor lesse then the other, neither is there any such distin­ction of single Presbyter from the Bishop, but they are one and the same, and this he saith the Apostle teacheth clearly; and having affirmed this, he proves it by many Arguments.

1. From the granted operation belonging to the Presbyters of­fice as such, and therefore to every Presbyter, which is to conse­crate the body and bloud of Christ. Where is the highest officiall o­peration, there is the highest office; but in the hands of every Pres­byter is the highest officiall operation: (for we may not thinke that either imposition of hands in Ordination, or passing sentence in ex­communication, are acts of higher nature, then consecrating the ele­ments in the Supper, and this belongs to every Presbyter by vertue of his office,) therefore in the hands of every Presbyter is the highest office. The like Argument we have. 1 Tim. 5.17. Those acts which are most worthy of honour are the highest; but such is labour­ing in the word and doctrine, belonging to every minister of the word, compared with ruling challenged by the Bishop.

2. Argument from the two first testimonies, Phil. 1.1. and Acts 20. Of Bishops above Presbyters, there is but one belongs to a city. But here are many to one city, to Philippi, to Ephesus, and these were one and the same with Presbyters.

The denyall of the Proposition he accounts contentious wrangling, whence this discourse proceeds clear.

3. Argument from the same testimonies; The name of Bishop is equally given to all the Elders, Phil. 1. All the ministers salu­ted by that name, (for what reason can be imagined, supposing Bi­shops [Page 54]and Elders distinct, why he should salute only the Bishops and Deacons, and leave out all the other ministers?) Acts 20. the same who are called Elders, v. 17. are Bishops, v. 28. The same Argu­ment, Tit. 1.5. with the seventh.

4. Argument, from the last testimonie; Where the names are used indifferently one for another, and the selfe same qualifications for office subjoyned to each name, there the selfe same office is set out under each name. But so it is here. The Apostle enjoyning Ti­tus to appoint Elders, —if any be blamelesse, &c. v. 5, He gives the reason, v. 7. for a Bishop must be blamelesse, &c. If Bishop and Presbyter be not one and the same, the Apostle had not reasoned at all; might it not be replyed? it is true, a Bishop must be blamelesse, &c. but every Presbyter is not a Bishop;

Here we may take notice of the miserable shifts of the Je­suits, and with them our Prelates. The names, say they, were then common, but the office distinct.

Answ. 1. Because the names were common, and that perpe­tually, therefore the father here, according to all reason in the world, argues the office one and the same. 2. Not only the names are common, but the qualifications for office, are here one and the same under those names. The selfe same office is set forth; their glosse here doth yet further betray the nakednes of their evasion. A Presbyter say they is comprehened in a Bishop, for every Bishop is a Presbyter, (though withal he bemore,) as every Captaine is a Souldier, and therefore the names are common.

Answ. 1. Where Persons different in peculiar Calling or Commission, do yet agree in one common denomination, it cannot be said they are one and the same; No man faith, (though every Captaine be a Souldier,) that a Captaine and a Souldier are one and the same; but here Jerome expresseth ac­cording to the Scripture, that Bishop and Presbyter are one and the same. 2. In such a difference of Persons, the lesse may be affirmed indefinitely, or universally of the greater; but not the greater of the lesse; it is true, every Captain is a Souldier; but it is not true that every Souldier is a Captaine; but here the Bi­shop is affirmed of the Elder, Acts 20.17. with 28. and Tit. 1.5. with v. 7. Their second shift is as miserable, (for this hold is so weak they are forced to quit it,) That in the Apostles times the office of Bishop and Presbyter was distinct, but both at [Page 55]one time conferred upon the same Persons.

Answ. 1. This is to be wise above what is written, no such thing any where hinted. 2. The highest operations are ascribed to the Elders as such to feed, to labour in the word and do­ctrine, therefore the Bishops office could not be above theirs. 3. How miserably then had Jerome argued? What folly is this (saith he) that any man should preferre Deacons before Presbyters, (speaking of the Presbyters of his time, when the custome of the Church had obtained that Bishops were above Presbyters,) that is before Bishops; and thence carries on his dispute, that ac­cording to divine institution there is no difference. Now if this Je­suitical Allegation was true, the Answer was ready; they had in the Apostles time the office of Presbyter and Bishop both, though distinct, yet in one Person, as now they are distinct in several Persons; therefore Presbyters now are not by divine institution equall to them; the truth is, it is one office, which was then in one Person undivided, is now divided, and so sha­red into severall Persons.

5. Argument. From 1 Tim. 4.14. If that which is challenged peculiarly to Bishops, belong to the Presbyters as such, then their office is not distinct; but so it is; that which is challenged, &c. No­thing more peculiarly challenged then Ordination, yet is that here by Jerome pleaded for the Presbyters, in this very question, wher­in he is pleading the equality of (or identity rather) of Bish­ops and Presbyters. The same we may argue from Act. 13.1. &c. The separating of Barnabas and Saul to their Mini­stery among the Gentiles by imposition of hands, cannot well be conceived belonging to any other then to those to whom it belongs to set a part by like imposition of hands, the ordi­nary Ministers of the word; at least not to any inferiour to those; But Paul and Barnabas were separate to their Ministery, not by Bishops above Presbyters, but by Prophets and Teachers who were Presbyters. Object. The greater cannot be Ordain­ed by the lesse; Paul Ordained Timothy. Answ. This impo­sition of hands is of like nature, with Ordination at the least; the Presbyters concurred with Paul.

6. Argument, From 1 Pet. 5.1.2. The Greek word (saith he) [...], over-seeing or taking the over-sight, is more significant, whence the name of a Bishop is drawn; The Argu­ment [Page 56]is thus. Whatsoever operations belong to the Bishop by his Office, the same belong to the Presbyter by his; therefore they are not distinct Officers, but one and the same. The former part is proved thus; All that belongs to the Bishops office, is comprehen­ded in the word [...] which signifies to performe the part of a Bishop; from whence the very name of Bishop is derived; but whatsoever is comprehended in the word [...] belongs to the Presbyters by expresse testimony here; they must act the part of Bishops, which were they not the same with Bishops, would be to usurpe. Therefore if not onely Ordination but Jurisdiction be­longs to Bishops, the same by as authentique Commission be­longs to Presbyters or Pastors and Teachers of severall Congre­gations. Hence as formerly for Ordination, so for Jurisdiction, we may observe that it is to be performed without Bishops di­stinct from and above Presbyters, 1 Cor. 5. per totum, there were then no Bishops in Corinth.

Object. The Apostle there excommunicated, vers. 3. I have judged already, &c.

Answ. 1. Some (as Beza for one) hold excommunication prevented by publique rebuke, and repentance thereupon, 2 Cor. 2.6. the word [...] rendred punishment, signifies rebuke. 2. The Apostles judgement was a judgement of doctrinall deter­mination, appointing them what to do, in case publike rebuke or admonition should not reclaime him; not of juridicall executi­on. The Church was to be gathered in the name and with the power of Christ, to deliver, &c. 3. Had not this Church the same power with those Churches Rev. 2? But they were to proceed by the Apostles direction, blamed that they had suffered such and such as the Nicolatians, Jezabel, &c. The Apostle him­selfe not formally executing, 1 Tim. 5.17. All Church rule is distributed among the Elders or Presbyters; therefore to the Elders, as the Elders it belongs; and Elders and Bishops are one and the same.

Adde here (what is observed) the word [...] or Bishop is never mentioned in the New Testament as belonging to a per­petuall Church officer, but the actions therein required belong to any teaching Presbyter, are not those peculiar actions challenged to the Bishops.

7. Argument from this last testimony, and 2 John 1 & [Page 57]3 John 1. There is no perpetual office in the Church above that which the Apostles hold in common with the perpetual officers, la­bouring in the word and doctrine, and according to which they stile themselves; but that is the office of Presbyters, as is cleare in these testimonies.

All these Arguments we have here in Ierome's discourse, and thus by him made use of; let us adde the

8. Argument. The office of Pastor or Teacher, is an office of the highest denomination after the Apostles and Evangelists have ceased. Ephes. 4.11. 1. To feed and to teach are higher acts then to rule in way of Discipline; 1 Tim. 5.17. 2. These are the on­ly Ministers of the word, given of Christ to the Church in all a­ges for perfecting the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for edi­fying the body of Christ, verse 12. But every Minister of the word is by his office a Pastor or Teacher.

Object. But Bishops above Presbyters may be Pastors above Pastors, and Teachers above Teachers.

Answ. 1. Those acts and the power for them whereby they challenge superiority, cannot make them above, because they are of inferiour nature to the acts of feeding and teaching belonging to every Minister of the word.

2. All officers of one denomination, whether above them or below them, are equall in power and office; the Apostles and Evangelists above them, equall among themselves; the Deacons below them, equall among themselves; and what hint is there that these middle officers should among themselves be divided into extremes?

Thus from Scripture. Jerome now goes on to shew the equali­ty of Bishops and Presbyters, as to their office by divine institu­tion, partly by preventing an objection, partly by a famous in­stance in the Church of Alexandria; the objection he prevents in these words; But that afterwards one was chosen, who should be preferred before the rest, it was done for the remedy of schisme, least every one drawing the Church of Christ to him­selfe should break it in pieces. The Summe is this; in the A­postles times there was no difference, the Scripture holds them forth equall; this difference was made afterwards, occasioned by schisme, for the healing whereof the Church thought it expe­dient to take this course; but no ground in Scripture for this ine­quality; [Page 58]and this he expresseth yet more clearly in his Commen­tary upon Tit. 1.5. comparing the fifth and seventh v. together, thus he speaks. Let us diligently attend the Apostles words, saying that thou mayest appoint Presbyters in every city, as I had appointed thee, who shewing what kind of Presbyter ought to be ordained in his following discourse, thus he inferrs, for it behoves a Bishop to be blamelesse, as the steward of God; a Presbyter then is the very same with a Bishop, (saith he) and before that by the instinct of the devill divisions were made in religion, and they said among the People, I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, but I am of Cephas, the Churches were governed by the Common Councell of the Presbyters; (these Presbyters not joyned to the Bishop, as one above them, as it is here plaine, but all the Presbyters equall among themselves joyning in this Common-Counsell,) the Father goes on; but after that every one thought those whom he baptized, his owne, not Christs; it was decreed in the whole world, that one chosen from among the Presbyters, should be set above the rest, to whom all the care of the Church should belong, and the seeds of schisme should be taken away.

1. Here we see that this custome came in long after the A­postles times generally.

Object. Nay, the Apostle ordered it thus in his time; for it is said here, when one said, I am of Paul, another, I am of Apollo, &c. Then was this course taken; but it was in the Church of Co­rinth in the Apostles time, that so they said.

Answ. That forme of words Jerome here useth aptly to ex­presse the manner of Schisme, but doth not point at that time, as if the Apostle had then taken this course, as is manifest, 1. When he had proved the equality of Bishops and Presbyters, from Epistles written after the Epistle to the Corinthians, he yet saith afterwards this course was taken. 2. He doth not say when the Corinthians said thus, but when they said thus among the people, it was decreed not in Corinth, but in the whole world. 2. And as it was after the Apostles times, so that it had no ground in their writings, he goes on to shew by some of the same Scriptures, formerly used in this Epistle to Evagrius, which Scriptures he further in this place insists upon. Some man may think (saith he,) that this is not the sentence of the Scri­pture, [Page 59]but my owne, that a Bishop and a Presbyter are one, and that one is the name of age, the other of office or duty; let him read the words of the Apostle, Phil. 1.1. Philippi is of Mace­donia, and certainly in one city there could not be many Bi­shops, as they are called, but because they called the same Bi­shops at that time, whom they called also Presbyters, therefore the Apostle spake indifferently of Bishops, as of Presbyters. Yet this may seeme doubtfull to some men, except it be confir­med by another testimony, Acts 20.17, 28. Mark this dili­gently, (saith he,) how he calling the Presbyters of one city of Ephesus, afterwards cals the same Bishops. If any man will re­ceive that Epistle which is written to the Hebrews in Pauls name, there also the care of the Church is equally divided among ma­ny, forasmuch as he writes to the people. Obey them that rule over you, &c. Heb. 13.17. and Peter who from the firme­nesse of his faith received his name,—in his Epistle speaks, saying, the Elders that are among you, I who am likewise your fellow El­der, &c. 1 Pe. 5.1.2. These things I have therefore spoken, that we might shew, that amongst the Ancient, Bishops and Presbyters were the same, but by little and little, that the miseries of dissention may be plucked up, all the care was laid upon one. Therefore as the Presbyters know that they are by the custome of the Church subject to him that is set over them: so let the Bishops know, that they rather by custome then the truth of the Lords order are greater then Presbyters, and that they ought to governe the Church in Commune; imitating Moses, who when he had it in his Power alone to rule the People of Israel, chose seventy, with whom he would judge the People. Hitherto Jerome upon Tit. 1.1. whose discourse is so plain and cleare, that the very reading it over, answers all cavils started to obscure his doctrine, touching the equality of Bishops and Presbyters by divine institution; and whereas in the close of all he seems to parallel the Bishop and his Presbyters with Moses and his seventy Judges, that this in parallel is according to the custome of the Church, not according to scripture rule, is evi­dent by the words immediatly foregoing.

CHAP. IX.

WE returne now to his Epistle to Evagrius, and come to the instance of the Church at Alexandria, further con­firming the equality of Presbyters and Bishops, when he had said (as formerly we quoted) in prevention of an objection; but that afterwards one was chosen, who should be set before the rest, it was done for the remedy of schisme, least every one drawing the Church of Christ to himselfe should break it in pie­ces; he addes, for at Alexandria also, from Mark the Evan­gelist, untill the time of Heraclas and Dionysius Bishops, the Pres­byters alwayes named one, the Bishop, who was chosen out of themselves, and placed in an higher degree, as if an Army should make a Generall, or the Deacons should from among themselves chuse one whom they knew industrious, and call him Arch-Deacon; For what doth a Bishop, Ordination except­ed, that a Presbyter may not do?

The summe of these words is, as at Ephesus and Philippi, in the Apostles time the Bishops and Presbyters were one and the same, so after their time, till about two hundred and sixty years, more or lesse after Christ, they remained equall in office at Alexandria, (what change soever was made sooner in some other Churches, occasioned by schismes amongst them,) only for more orderly Proceeding, one of the Presbyters was chosen by the rest, to be in degree above the rest, but not in office or distinct Power, as having no peculiar Ordination, and this man they called the Bishop; that this is the true meaning of the words, it appears upon distinct consideration of them, (here we must remember that his Prevention of the Objection follows immediately his Scripture testimonie; and the instance of Alex­andria immediately follows that Prevention.)

1. The Conjunction also, or and, joyns this example of A­lexandria, to the former of Ephesus and Philippi, (For at Alex­andria also.)

2. He makes a difference betwixt Heraclas and Dionysius, Bi­shops, and those before them, from Mark the Evangelist, whom they called Bishops.

[Page 61] 3. He shews what the difference was, that whereas Hera­clas and Dionysius were by peculiar Ordination made Bishops, as in office and Power above Presbyters, (as the like custome had obtained earlier in other Churches, as appears in Cyprians E­pistles,) they that were before, were only chosen by the Pres­byters, placed in an higher degree, and called Bishops, but had no peculiar Ordination, (and therefore no peculiar office.) That they had no peculiar Ordination, is manifest. 1. By the Per­sons by whom they were set in an higher degree, they were only the other Presbyters. But 1. Presbyters alone say the ad­vocates of Episcopacy, may not ordaine a Presbyter, much lesse a Bishop. 2. If they might ordaine a Bishop, much more might they ordaine a Presbyter, and then what place for the office of a Bishop in the Church above the Presbyter? Ordination be­ing one maine peculiar challenged to the Bishop. Had it then been peculiar Ordination that had advanced these above the rest, and so invested them with a peculiar office, it must have been Bishops, not Presbyters, by whose hands they were lifted up. 2. By the explication subjoyned in two comparisons. 1. As if an Army should make a Generall. Here the Army chusing the Generall, answers to the Presbyters chusing the Bishop so called; As Jerome speaks, He that is Generall only upon those termes, hath no peculiar Commission, it belongs to the Prince or State to give that; neither had he that was Bishop any peculiar Ordination, according to the mind of this comparison, which the next comparison holds forth more clearly; suppose the Deacons should agree among themselves to chuse out one whom they would call Arch-Deacon, here neither is, nor could be any peculiar Office or Ordination conferred upon this Arch-Deacon. Hence Jerome concludes, having no distinct Ordination, they had no distinct Power or Office; and that is the true mean­ing of those words; for what doth a Bishop, Ordination ex­cepted, that a Presbyter may not do? This is usually otherwise interpreted. viz. that a Presbyter may do all that a Bishop may do, only the act of Ordination excepted, he may not ordain. And 1. they that are for the divine right of Episcopacy will have the exception to be by divine institution; but this is cleare­ly to interpret this clause contrary to Ieroms whole discourse, both the Scope and Arguments of it. 2, Pleading the equality [Page 62]of Bishops and Presbyters, or their identity rather, instanced in Imposition of hands by the Presbytery. 3. This interpretation overthrows his discourse in this very instance of the Church of Alexandria, whence it is inferred, as we have seen by the naturall explication of this discourse. But 2. they that are against E­piscopacy, understand Ierome to speak of the Practice of the Church in his time; as if he should say there was no difference formerly; now there is only this, and that not by divine insti­tution, but by the custome of the Church. A Bishop ordains, which a Presbyter may not do. This interpretation may stand with his former discourse and with the truth; and this passing, there is nothing for Episcopacy by divine right; therefore to grant this, looseth nothing of the cause in hand, but the truly naturall interpretation following upon the former discourse, which hath concluded what is here inferred, seems to be that formerly given, Ordinarion excepted, signifying without Ordi­nation conferred, Ordination here passively not actively taken. Summe up the discourse in this instance of Alexandria, Every distinct Church officer hath a distinct Ordination; but these Bishops, so called in the Church of Alexandria, till Heraclas and Dionysius, had no distinct Ordination from that of Pres­byters: therefore they were no distinct Church-officers from them.

Hence we have light discovering the truth against the three Pretences from antiquity, pleading the divine right of Epis­copacy.

1. It is alledged, that such and such Apostles and Evangelists were ordained Bishops of such and such Churches; among the rest, Mark the Evangelist Bishop of Alexandria; that they ordained their Successors, and so Episcopacy hath run downe in a constant course from the Apostles times.

Answ. 1. This story overthrows it selfe, as is observed by the learned. 1. What place is there for ordaining Apostles and Evangelists, Bishops over such and such Churches, who as A­postles and Evangelists, had already in every Church, what pow­er soever a Bishop can claime in any Church to which he is or­dained? 2. Ordination is from the lesse to the greater; if an Apostle or Evangelist first, be afterwards ordained a Bishop, then is the office of an Apostle or Evangelist inferiour to that of a Bishop.

[Page 63] Answ. 2. That there was no such Succession of Bishops, or­daining Bishops distinct from and above Presbyters, is manifest in this instance of the Church of Alexandria, where till Hera­clas and Dionysius, a Bishop was no other but one of the Presby­ters, by the choice and consent of the rest, set in an higher degree.

2. Another pretence from antiquity, is the Catalogues of Bishops, succeeding each other in such and such Churches.

Answ. How doth it appeare that these Bishops had peculiar Ordination and above Presbyters? there is as formall a Cata­logue given in of the Bishops of Alexandria, as of any other Church succeeding Mark the Evangelist in this order; 1. Ani­anus. 2. Abilius. 3. Cerdo. 4. Primus. 5. Justus. 6. Eumenes. 7. Marcus. 8. Celadion. 9. Agrippas or Agrippinus. 10. Julia­nus. 11. Demetrius. 12. Heraclas. 13. Dionysius. Whereas yet we have it cleare from Ierome, that Heraclas was the first who had distinct Ordination and Office above a Pres­byter.

3. Pretence from antiquity, such testimonies as are given to the honour and power of Bishops by the Ancients; and here above all Ignatius helps at every turne.

Answ. 1. Forasmuch as five of his Epistles are granted by diverse advocates of Episcopacy to be such as do evidently be­tray no little forgery, who shall assure us, that those seven by them avouched in all things genuine, are so indeed? what more unlikely, then that they should escape tampering by the same hands?

2. Those seven most stood upon, are by very learned men (amongst others Salmasius,) judged in the very testimonies ve­ry spurious, and that not from blasse, but upon good grounds. 1. The arrogance of some of them; take that for one, in his Epistle to the Trallians, What is the Bishop, but he that is strong­ly possest of all Principality and Authority, beyond all, as much as is possible for men to be possest? being made an imitatour, accord­ing to Power of Christ who is God. He that can find here an Apo­stolicall spirit breathing, surely hath little acquaintance with the Apostles writings, saith Salmasius; and indeed how unlike to that of the Apostle is it? 1 Cor. 3.5. Who then is Paul, and [Page 64]who is Apollo, but ministers by whom you beleeved? &c. This was Pauls way to take up schisme; how contrary to this Igna­tius here for the Prevention of it? 2 Of the falsenesse of some, that in the same Epistle; Reverence the Bishop as Christ, as the blessed Apostles commanded you. Where is this command? That, in his Epistle to the Smyrnians, Let that be accounted a firme Eucharist, which is by the Bishop administred, or by him to whom he shall have committed it; it is not lawfull without the Bishop either to baptize or to offer, &c. Hath not the Holy Ghost com­mitted preaching, and baptisme, and administration of the Supper, joyntly to every Presbyter? this sounds ill in every care, except of Papist or Prelate; the Church of Alexandria had no true baptisme for about two hundred and sixty years, if this be true doctrine; as for the Reformed Churches, they are in the same case. 3. The idolatrous strayne of some; take that in the same Epistle, In the Church is nothing greater then the Bishop, consecrate to God for the salvation of the whole world. 4. The impertinencie of some, take that in his Epistle to the Phila­delphians; Let the Princes obey the Emperour, the Souldiers the Princes, the Deacons the Presbyters, those High-Priests, the Presbyters and the Deacons, and the rest of the Clergy; and who are they I wonder, and what part of the Clergy is the Deacon? with all the People, and the Souldiers, and the Princes, and the Emperour, let them obey the Bishop. Setting a­side other flawes, what impertinencie is here to enjoyne the Princes and the Emperour to obey the Bishop, when there were not at this time, nor many years after any Emperour or Princes Christian? These are some few gleanings more of the like stamp there to be found; that not without reason it is by the learned conjectured, that about the beginning or middle of the second Century, was this forged Author surreptitiously brought into the Church, about which time this kinde of Epis­copacy soaring above Presbytery began.

3. How little our prelates and their party regard his writ­ings, (only they plead them to serve their own turne) is ma­nifest, that we hear so little from them of subjection to the Presbyters and Deacons, which Ignatius urgeth so much in his Epistle to the Trallians, It is necessary that ye do nothing without the Bishop, but that ye be in subjection likewise to the [Page 65]Presbytery, as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ. And ye ought by all means to please the Deacons, being — of the mysteries of Jesus Christ.— The Presbyters are the great Councell of God, and the Chain of the Apostles of Jesus Christ. In his Epistle to those in Tarsus, Let the Presbyter be subject to the Bishop; the Deacons to the Presbyters; the People to the Presbyters and the Deacons; they that keep this good order, my soul for theirs. Much more to the same purpose up and down in him; where Salmasius conjectures this spurious Author was about the midst, or towards the beginning of the second century, whilst the Presbytery yet retaind much of its authority.

Now what do our Prelates and their party here? For Presbyters, they allow them no rule by way of jurisdiction; for Deacons, they have first changed their office, and then order­ed it so as it is never long standing, being only a degree to Presbytery.

And indeed here this Ignatius seemes to ascribe that office and power to Deacons which the scripture takes no notice of, which hath appointed them to the service of tables, not to preach and rule in the Church (as Jerome argues;) and this furthers discovers that this is no true Ignatius.

4. Conclude from Jerome, that before schisme fell out in the Churches, and that long after the Apostles times, the Church was governed only by Presbyters; that the Bishop above the Presbyters was brought into some Churches sooner, in­to others later; according as schisme gave the occasion; that it was about 260 years, ere this change was made in the Church of Alexandria; that wheresoever it was made, it stands not up­on divine authority, but upon Church Custome, and this by Scripture strongly proved; therefore these testimonies of Ig­natius, or whatsoever the like, so farre as they plead for Epis­copacy above Presbytery, cannot stand either with the truth of the Scripture, or the practice of the first and purest Churches.

We returne to Jerome his Epistle to Evagrius; That which next follows concernes not the matter in hand, but is a­gainst the superiority of the Bishop of Rome, and against a perverse custome in Rome, that a Presbyter was ordained upon the testimony of a Deacon; that which concernes the present [Page 66]question followes in these words, Presbyter and Bishop, one is the name of age, the other of dignity; whence to Titus and Timothy the Apostle speaks of the Ordination of the Bishop and Dea­con concerning the Presbyters he is altogether silent, because in the Bishop the Presbyter also is contained; He that is ordained from the lesse to the greater he is advanced; Therefore either let the Deacon be ordained from the Presbyter, (that is, let him that is first a Presbyter be afterwards ordained a Deacon) that the Presbyter may be proved lesse then the Deacon into whom he encreaseth from a little one; or if the Presbyter be or­dained from the Deacon, let him know that he is lesse in gaines, greater in ministery. And that we may know that the Apostoli­call traditions were taken out of the Old Testament, what Aaron and his sonnes, and the Levites were in the Temple, that let the Bishops, and Presbyters, and Deacons challenge in the Church.

Here we have two things confirming the equality of Bishops and Presbyters; in the third place an objection is to be an­swered, seeming to favour their inequality.

The first thing confirming their equality, That Presbyter and Bishop are different names of one and the same person, in one and the same office, as having one and the same ordination; and where it is said the Presbyter is contained in the Bishop, the meaning is not as the lesse in the greater, but as one with him; thus he exprest himselfe in the beginning of this Epistle; this he hath strongly pleaded all the way; thus againe in his Commen­tary upon 1 Titus, as was formerly quoted in these words. Some man may think that this is not the sentence of the Scripture, but mine owne, that a Bishop and Presbyter are one, and that one is the name of age, the other of office; let him read the words of the Apostle, Phil. 1.1. &c.

The second confirmation of their equality, that Ordination is from the lesse to the greater; and therefore if the Deacon be greater then the Presbyter, he must from a Presbyter as a little one, grow by Ordination into a Deacon as a great one; this rule destroyes the foundation of Hierarchy; that the Apostles were towards the end of their dayes, (and so the Evangelists) or­dained Bishops of certaine Cities, every one having his proper See; then from an Apostle or Evangelist as the lesse, did he by [Page 67]Ordination, increase into a Bishop as the greater; but this is too absurd that a Bishop should be greater then an Evangelist, nay then an Apostle.

The Objection to be removed follows in the last words; And that we may know that the Apostolicall traditions, &c. where he cals the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters, then obtaining in the Church, an Apostolicall tradition.

Answ. 1. There was great difference betwixt the Episco­pacy that then was, and the Prelacy as we have had it; as no­thing was done without the Bishop, so nor without the rest of the Ministers and People.

2. His scope was to prove, and clearly he hath proved, that according to the Scriptures in the writings of the A­postles, there is no inequality at all betwixt Bishop and Pres­byter, but they are one and the same.

3. The rise of their inequality he makes the custome of the Church, contra-distinguished to the truth of the Lords order.

4. Therefore that he cals it an Apostolicall tradition, it can amount only to this; that what the Church did here, when by schismes occasioned thereto, he conceives not contrary to A­postolicall Precept, in generall, (though particularly the e­quality or identity rather of the Bishop and Presbyter be abun­dantly held forth in their writings,) but rather that the Churches Practice here fell under some generall rule, as let all things be done to edifying, or the like.

And here was the difference, as is observed by the learned, betwixt Jerome and Aerius; they both agreed, that accord­ing to divine institution, there was no inequality. Aerius would have this inviolably observed in the Church. Jerome thought the Church had liberty to make a difference, and that it was a great expedient against schisme. Of the same mind with Ierome for equality by divine institution, it is pleaded by some choicely learned amongst our Writers of sacred Controversies, (Ames and Salmasius) confest by a learned Authour among the Pa­pists, (Medina,) that Ambrose, Austin, Sedulius, Primasius, Chrysostome, Theodoret, Oecumenius and Theophylact were.

This instruction then stands good, Bishops in office above Presbyters, are no Church-Officers of divine institution; ac­cording [Page 68]as it is pleaded by Jerome. I shall conclude this instru­ction, with one question?

Quest. May the Church in any case, set up as an expedient an office in the Church, which is not of divine institution.

Answ. No, in no wise. It was appointed that the man of fin should ascend into his chayre; thence the Church discerned not the iniquity of those beautifull steps, by which he was to ascend; what the Church took for an expedient to prevent schisme, proved an expedient to promote tyranny. His time of falling hath been comming on, in this last age, is more and more hastening; hence this truth making not a little for it, pas­seth clear and current in the Reformed Churches, that in the Church no office-Power is to be owned, but what is of di­vine institution. An Argument or two to confirme it.

1. As among Jewes, no order of Priests or Levites, but what was expressely appointed of God, was to be received; so in the Gospel-Churches, no other order of Ministeries. All by Moses there, as a faithfull servant; All by Christ here, as a faithfull Sonne.

2. Christ is the onely Law-giver of his Church, the appoint­ing of office is a maine exercise of the Law-givers power, as in the kingdomes of men, so in the Kingdome of the Mediator.

3. All proper and essentiall meanes of worship must be of di­vine institution. 1. Because worship by other meanes is will-worship, and will-worship is hatefull unto God; 2. Because it is God alone who can sanctifie and blesse the meanes of worship; man can put no instrumentall efficacy unto meanes, therefore cannot he ordaine them; But office, or ministery in the Church, is a proper and essentiall meanes of worship; therefore it must be of no other then divine institution. As for that worne Octje­ction of Timothy and Titus. Answ. They were Evangelists, who as the Apostles, are succeeded by Pastors and Teachers; above whom there is no Bishop.

Object. The Angel of the Church 2 and 3. of the Revelati­on is the Bishop of each Church, a Pastor of peerlesse power in the Church.

Answ. 1. Suppose by the Angel is meant a singular person, and he an eminent Pastor, how doth it appear that he had di­stinct power of Ordination and jurisdiction above the rest? Why [Page 69]might it not be in those Churches as in the Church of Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist, till Heraclas and Dionysius, one in degree and order, not in office and distinct power above the rest, to whom the Epistle is inscribed?

2. Angel in the singular number, doth not of necessity infer a singular person; it is used in Scripture collectively diverse times, as Psal 34.7. The Angel of the Lord pitcheth his tents, &c. that is the Angels of the Lord pitch their tents round about, &c. so the Revelation frequently; the seven Angels that soun­ded the seven trumpets, and the seven Angels that powred out the seven vials, were not seven singular Persons, but seven Compa­nies or sorts of men performing that service.

3. The Angel of the Churches, Rev. 2. and 3. must be taken collectively, or the whole company of the ministers of the Church, as is evident, Rev. 2.24. To you in the plurall number, [...] writing to the Angel, as distinguished from the rest of the Church.

Having seen the unwarrantablenesse of the Diocesan Bishop, we shall not need to speak of the true officers for rule in the Church; for Pastors and Teachers, they are doubted by none, but the Episcopall Party; for ruling Elders to them adjoyned, as it hath been the doctrine and practice of the Reformed Churches generally; so of late there are diverse discourses, easie to be met with, fairly and clearly pleading their divine right; a­mong the rest, the way of the Church of Christ in New Eng­land, the Jus Divinum, &c. the summe of the survey of discipline, by Master Hooker. I shall therefore passe to another instruction, about particular Congregations.

CHAP. X. The seventh Instruction.

1. The Churches instanced in Scripture, of Corinth, Ephe­sus, &c. thus far they seem to have been each a particu­lar Congregation.

1. All the ordinary officers were chosen by the People, as of­ficers in command to the flock in common; this appears from the doctrine of the Peoples choyce formerly; of the Church of Co­rinth, their ministers were chosen, [...] it seeming good to the whole Church, in the time of Cle­mens Romanus.

2. In the exercise of discipline, the People generally concur­red with the officers jointly; this from the doctrine of discipline formerly; those officers formerly by them in common chosen; and thus the Churches true liberty was preserved.

As for that Objection, the number of Christians and officers were so great, they could not ordinarily meet in one place for worship; the answer is, suppose that to be truth; yet might the officers interchangeably administer to them, as officers in common to the flock in common, as wel for all publick admi­nistrations of worship, as for discipline joyntly.

As for the other maine objection, variety of languages; therefore their Congregations, must be many and fixt.

Answ. There were interpreters of languages, that those who in the Congregation understood not their language spoken in, might by interpretation understand it; this argues their Congregations were not fixt, according to the difference of languages.

3. Where there are all sorts of power for discipline, there is an entire right for the exercise of it; for power is for exer­cise, [Page 71]but in every Congregation there are all sorts of Power; there is power of order, and power of office; and for of­fice-power, there are both sorts of officers, Elders labouring in the word and doctrine, and others for rule with them; and in this they of the Presbyterian and Congregationall way agree.

4. Where our Saviours rule may be observed, Matth. 18.15, 16, 17. there is entire power of discipline; But in every Congrega­tion so framed, that rule may be observed. Admonition, first single, then before a witnesse or two, and lastly by the Church.

5. Where authoritative suspension may be, there may be excommunication; but in every such Congregation authorita­tive suspension may be; this later is granted, the former is thus confirmed. Where there is power of Church-admonition, there is power of excommunication; Mat. 18.17. but where there is power of authoritative suspension, there is power of Church-admonition. 1. Suspension supposeth such admonition. 2. Admonition is a lesse act of power and jurisdiction then Suspension is.

6. Where there is right to entire Church-fellowship, in the Ordinances of Publicke Worship, and private Communion, there is right for the exercise of discipline; this appears thus; A scandalous sinner in such a society retained, is leaven, leavening the whole lump, involving the whole soci­ety in guilt, 1 Cor. 5. therefore it is their duty, and in their power to cast him out. But in every Congregation so framed, there is right for entire Church-fellowship, &c. This is not que­stioned.

Hence to the Church of Corinth power is ascribed, and she blamed for not casting out the incestuous Person, not because she had thus and thus many officers, but because she was a Church entirely framed for discipline, having in her all kinde of power for that purpose.

CHAP. XI. The eighth Instruction. To a Congregation of visible Saints, not yet possest of officers, it belongs to possesse themselves of them.

HEre are two things fall into considera­tion.

• Election.
• Ordination.

1. For election, forasmuch as it is the Peoples right, as such, as hath been proved in the third instruction, hence it belongs to any number of them joyned together into a congregation, by choyce to call Officers to themselves.

2. If they have not this right among themselves, whence shall it be derived to them? 1. From other Churches; but how came they by their officers? 2. From a Synod; but a Synod is made up of the delegates of setled Congregations, therefore Congregations must first be setled. There is the same answer for a Classis. 3. From the civill magistrate. This hath been prevented in the fifth Instruction. 4. From the combination of diverse ministers. Be it granted that the People now about to forme into a disciplinary Congregation, and to chuse their offi­cers, ought to consult and follow the just guidance of able and faithfull Ministers proceeding aright, in directing them; yet ought not those ministers to appoint officers over them, whom they shall not upon their directions freely consent to; Preach­ers to them, not Pastors and Rulers over them, may they with the help of civill authority fix among them. In a setled Congregation, where by death, or removall, or censure, only one officer is wanting, the rest of the officers have not Power to impose another upon the Congregation, without her choyce, as is cleare by the third Instruction, formerly shew­ing the right of the Peoples Election; but those her owne of­ficers have greater authority over her, then any combination of Ministers not yet disciplinarily setled in severall Congregations. Much lesse hath any one Minister this power.

2. For Ordination. Not to dispute whether it be the for­mall [Page 73]Constitution of an officer, or the solemne approbation of him, by the Peoples Election formally constitute;

1. According to Scripture-rule, and thence the Practice both of the Primitive and Reformed Churches, it ought to succeed the Peoples Election; this is cleare for a Pastor or Teacher to a Church gathered, whatsoever may be said for a Teacher by office for gathering a Church.

2. Be it granted that the People having chosen their offi­cers, ought to present them, (having the opportunity,) to some approved Ministers for Imposition of hands; it must likewise be granted, that those Ministers without just exception against that People or their choyce, ought not to refuse the officer so presented.

3. Supposing such Ordination cannot be had, whether are the People to remaine without the publike ministery, and so without the publike Ordinances of worship and discipline; or doth their election and approbation alone in this exigency, in­vest with office-power? Let us indeavour to frame a judgement by instance of a case or two.

1. Suppose a company of Saints cast upon a remote Island, not neare any Churches or Ministers, and there they are to fixe their habitations; may they not, (having Persons among them fitted,) settle among themselves a publike ministery?

2. Suppose a company of People in the midst of the Romane territories, savingly enlightned with the truth of the Gospel; 1. Ought they not, having fit Persons among them, to choose out some for the publick ministeries of the Church? 2. Ought they in case Imposition of hands might be so obtained, to pre­sent them to the Romane Prelates for it? Beza saith no. 3. In case that they either ought not, or it could not be obtained, might they not without it, settle their officers among themselves?

3. In case then that a Congregation stands convinced of the true bounds of the matter of the visible Church and the true confine­ment of discipline to them within those bounds, & hath fit Persons for the publike ministry among them, but can not obtain Imposi­tion of hands upon their choyce from Ministers sought unto, as differing in judgement about the matter and discipline of the Church, why hath not this Congregation the same liberty in this case, that the others had in the former?

[Page 74] Object. Here they make themselves Judges.

Answ. 1. So in the former instances. 2. What way soever they are in, or what Governement soever they are under, ex­cept they see it with their owne eyes to be according to rule, it is but blinde walking, and blind obedience, and therefore unac­ceptable.

Quest. In case they go wrong, and the ministery with other Christians against them be right, what is to be done?

Answ. 1. For them, they are to obey their own consciences; though we cannot say erring Persons have a right to obey their owne consciences, yet may we say that it is their duty. An erro­neous conscience bindes.

2. For the Ministry and Orthodox Christians against them; as the Church is to proceed against Schismaticks, so are they against those, in case they themselves be in a State of discipline, and judge the offence of that moment.

Quest. Suppose they be right, and the Ministry and Christi­ans against them wrong.

Answ. 1. For the ministery, &c. (as formerly on the other part,) here is their duty, though not their right, to proceed as the Church ought to do against Schismaticks.

2. For the Congregation, it is their duty and their right to proceed, as in other cases the true Church is to hold on her way, though persecuted as schismaticall and hereticall.