PRIMS Full-text transcription (HTML)

The Temple meaſured: OR, A brief Survey of the Temple myſtical, Which is the Inſtituted CHURCH of CHRIST.

Wherein are ſolidly and modeſtly diſcuſſed, Moſt of the material Queſtions touching the Conſtitution and Government of the Viſible Church Militant here on Earth.

Together with The ſolution of all ſorts of OBJECTIONS which are uſually framed againſt the Model and Platform of Eccleſiaſtical Polity, which is here aſſerted and maintained.

In particular here are debated, The points of ſo much Controverſie, touching the Unity of the Church, The Members of the Church, The Form of the Church, and Church Covenant, The Power of the Church, The Officers of the Church, and their Power in Church-Government, The Power of Magiſtrates about the Church, and ſome Church Acts, as Admiſſion of Members, and other things ſet down in the Table before the Book.

By JAMES NOYES Teacher of the Church at Newbery in New England.

LONDON: Printed for EDMUND PAXTON, and are to be ſold at his Shop in Pauls chain, over againſt the Caſtle Tavern neer to the Doctors Commons. 1647.

READER,

IT is a thing well known to them of New-England (and too well known amongſt our ſelves) in what excentrick motions the judgements of ſome of the Elders and Churches there have of late been carried about matters pertaining to Church-Adminiſtrations; yet hitherto, for the moſt part, they do concur in their practiſe, though not all acted upon the ſame principles, nor regulated in all things by the ſame Catholique and individual Rule. For the practiſe of ſome is directly upon particular Rules of Scripture, by them apprehended and acknowledged: The practiſe of others (to whom the former Rules ſeem miſapplied) is upon more general Rules of Scripture (viz. Rules of Charity and Chriſtian Peace) which do by conſequence only, and not directly lead them to an Identity and Uniformity in their practiſe with the reſt of their Brethren. A general Rule may very well ſuperſede a particular; it is a maxime planted in the nature of things, which do often act contrary to the Rule of their particular nature, for the conſervation of the univerſe: and were we as well grounded upon it as our Brethren of New-England be, we ſhould both the more prefer the Peace and Tranquility of this Church (which is a general good) above our own private Intereſt, and the leſs cenſure them, who upon the ſame principle have ſomtimes taken (and will doubtleſs have the wiſdom always to take) juſt Animadverſion upon them that cauſe Diviſions and are diſturbers of the Churches Peace, though they may haply plead their Conſcience, and transform themſelves into Angels of Light.

As for this Reverend Author, who (amongſt others) is not ſatisfied touching the Charter of the Churches where he lives, and cannot yet finde in Scripture that the Lord Jeſus did ever give them Commiſsion to the full exerciſe of that Government which is there Eſtabliſhed; he did after long ſilence, at length acquaint his People, and the Reverend Presbyters of that countrey with his doubtings concerning the way they went in: And upon conference had with them about the particulars controverted betwixt them, finding himſelf ſtill unſatisfied both in their Arguments againſt him, and Anſwers to him (in neither of which he could perceive ſo much truth, as might convince him of Error, or move him from his own principles) but perceiving rather that jealouſies and miſunderſtandings of him did ariſe in the hearts of his Reverend fellow-Presbyters (whoſe love he did always eſtimate at a high rate) therefore that he might the more freely and fully, and at once declare what are the points he holds, and wherein he can or cannot concur with them, and the Reaſons why, he hath drawn up and publiſhed theſe ſhort notes; in the mean time reſolving that love ſhall ſet bounds to his enquiry after truth, and not under pretence of ſeeking truth to tranſgreſs the Rule and Law of love, according to the Apoſtles direction, Eph. 4.15. Following the truth in Love. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

In all this Treatiſe it will be evident at firſt ſight that he is altogether free from a Spirit of Faction, ſeeking only truth and ſatisfaction; and therefore he hath ingeniouſly and impartially laid down his Judgement, which is in ſome things coincident with the judgment of the Reverend Presbyters in New-England: in ſome things conſenting with our Reverend Aſſembly here in England, and in ſome things diſtant from them both; being neither for Ariſtotle nor for Plato, but for Truth; neither for Paul nor for Apollo, but for Chriſt.

In his Stile he does affect to make his words and his matter commenſurable: for the Kingdom of God is not in word but in power. The truth is,1 Cor. 4.20. it is an Argument of want of Argument and of moſt odious Sophiſtry in moſt of the Disputers of this world, that they cannot ſpeak of an Argument, but it muſt be uſhered in with an out-braving Preface to raiſe the eſteem of the Author or Cauſe; that ſo the affections being bribed with fair speeches, the underſtanding may be won to aſſent to Error; which is the ſubtilty of the Serpent, not the ſimplicity of Chriſt; the jugling of a Seducer, not the craft of one that can do nothing againſt the truth, but for the truth.

Farewel.

THE TABLE.

COncerning the Vnity of the Church Pag. 1.
Of the matter and quantity of the Church p. 5.
Of the Form of the Church p. 8.
Of the Power of the Church p. 10.
Of the Officers of the Church p. 16.
Of the Power of the Presbytery p. 29.
Of the Power of Synods and Councels p. 49.
Of the Power of Magiſtrates about the Church p. 58.
Of their Power of Iuriſdiction in the Church p. 60.
Of Admiſsion of Members p. 62.
Of Impoſition of hands p. 69.
Concerning Excommunication p. 74.
Concerning the Retention of unnatural mediums of Worſhip p. 80.
Concerning the Morality of the Sabbath p. 83.
Of the beginning and ending of the Sabbath p. 89.
Of the maner of obſerving the Sabbath. p. 93.

The Temple meaſured: OR, A brief Survey of the Temple myſtical.

Concerning the Ʋnity of the Church.

THe Militant Church of Chriſt upon earth,Pro. 1. is one integral Body viſible, and hath power to act in Synods and Councels to the end of the world. 1. The Apoſtles, and Prophets, and Evangeliſts were viſible members of the Univerſal or Catholike and Integral Church. They could not be members of any particular Church, becauſe they were not conſtituted members of any particular Church by ſpecial reference to any particular Church. That which conſtitutes one a member of a particular Church, doth ſo conſtitute him a member of that Church, as that he is not (in that reſpect) a member of all Churches, or of any other. Therefore the Apoſtles, &c. were members of no viſible Church, if they were not members of a viſible Church Univerſal. 2. Acts 15. 1 Cor. 16.The Apoſtles were viſible Heads of the whole Church, and did Decree and Ordain with reference to the whole Church. This they could not do as members of one particular Church, but as tranſcendent Officers, and as viſible Heads of the Catholike Church. The Apoſtles have been called heretofore (and that juſtly) 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Now many and all2 Churches under the ſame viſible Officers, are but one Church: many Corporations under one King, are but one Body Politick. The twelve Tribes in Iſrael under one King, made but one Kingdom. 3. The Apoſtles, &c. admitted members into the Catholike Church, neither in the preſence nor under the notion of any particular Church. Acts 8. & 10. & 16.The Eunuch, Cornelius, the Jaylor, and ſuch like, were baptized members of no viſible Church, if there was not a viſible Church Univerſal. Eccleſia non eſt Reſp. non ariſtocratio, ſed regnum. Beza Ep. 83. p. 367. 4. Chriſt is one viſible Head, one Maſter of the family, one Biſhop, one King viſibly, by vertue of his Laws and Ordinances, and works of ſpecial providence in the Churches. Chriſt walketh in the midſt of the golden candleſticks, Rev. 1. and ſitteth in the midſt of two or three gathered together in his Name, Matth. 18. Thus a King, though abſent from his Kingdom, is a viſible King in his Kingdom. The King of England is viſibly King of Scotland, though he makes his abode and keeps his Court in London. 5. The Church of the Jews was a type and patern of the Chriſtian Church, Ezek. 40.41, 42. Revel. 11.1, 2. compared with Rev. 21. The Church of the Jews conſiſted of many Tribes and many Cities, yet was but one Body politick. The great Synedrian of Jeruſalem, might reſemble the great Presbytery of the Apoſtles and extraordinary Elders, in reſpect of more ordinary execution in Primitive days, and Synods and Councels, in reſpect of leſſe ordinary execution in ſucceeding ages. Acts 12.1. Eph. 3.21. 1 Tim. 3.15.6. It is correſpondent to Scripture-phraſe; the viſible Church is termed in Scripture one Univerſal Church, Matth. 16.18. the Univerſal Church is one viſible Church, becauſe it is deſcribed as acting viſibly in the adminiſtrations of the Keys: This may be more fully proved in another place. See Calvin Inſtit. lib. 4. cap. 1.In Eph. 4. the Univerſal Church is one viſible Church, becauſe it is deſcribed by its viſible Officers, Apoſtles, Prophets, Evangeliſts, Paſtors and Teachers. 1 Cor. 12, the Univerſal Church is one viſible Church, becauſe it is deſcribed by its viſible Officers in like manner. Rev. 11.1, 2, 3, the Univerſal Church is deſcribed as viſible, by one city, by one court; and is called the outward court, and ſo diſtinguiſhed, as it is viſible, from the myſtical Church, which is reſembled by the Temple. 7. The myſtical Union of Brotherhood doth naturally conſtitute one Body myſtical: Why ſhould not the viſible Union of Brotherhood in profeſſion, conſtitute one Body viſible? The Lord ſevered the children of Iſrael into Tribes; yet ſo as that all might be one Body, under one Prince and Prieſt. 8. All natural grounds of fellowſhip in particular Churches, in3 reſpect of more ordinary execution,A ſin againſt authority, is a greater ſin; an evil inflicted by authority, is a greater evil. do beſpeak fellowſhip in one Catholike Church in point of leſſe ordinary execution. Brotherly Union, Chriſtian profeſſion, the edification of the Church, the celebration of the Name of Chriſt, all theſe are prevalent. Chriſt is glorified moſt eminently in the great Aſſembly. Pride and Independence are inſeparable. If the children of Jacob had been divided into Tribes as independent States, they might ſoon have rejected one another as Eſaeu and Jacob did. The notion of a relation doth cheriſh affection and maintain union. 9. The manner of admiſſion in Primitive days, obligeth to all Churches, to the whole Church as well as to a particular Church. 2 Chron. 15.12. & 34.31.As all Iſrael together was wont to profeſſe their purpoſe to walk according to the Law before the Lord; ſo all converts in Primitive days did profeſſe their purpoſe to walk with all Saints in all the Ordinances of Chriſt. That covenant which converts then made, ſeemeth to be general with reference to all Churches. Thus then the Church Militant is one viſible Body, one Houſe, one Family, one Tabernacle, one Temple, one Candleſtick, one Citie, one New Jeruſalem, Rev. 21. this Jeruſalem hath twelve gates, and theſe gates are particular Churches, which do admit into the whole City, as well as into the particular gates: every gate is an entry into the city, and all in the city have a virtual admiſſion thorow every gate. Every Common-wealth hath power offenſive ſecondarily for the defending of it ſelf, or any other in caſe of oppreſſion. Abraham had power to reſcue Lot; but this power is not equal to the power of Churches. God hath diſtinguiſhed Eſau from Jacob in point of Politie; but God hath united the children of Jacob, by one ſtaff of beauty and another of bonds, both by temporal and ſpiritual authority before Chriſt came. God hath altered the conſtitution of the world; ſin hath rent the world in pieces: but God hath repaired and united the Church by an Uniformity of Ordinances, and by an identity of profeſſion under one viſible Head the Lord Chriſt. All Saints are next brethren as the children of Jacob were, and united, by a perpetual bond. The Churches do approve of each others acts by mutual conſent, when one Church admitteth members, electeth Officers, diſpenſeth Cenſures, it acts for all Churches. What is done by one gate in Jeruſalem, is done by the whole city (intuitu,Beza Ep. 68. p. 290. though not interventu totius Eccleſiae) as Maſter Parker diſtinguiſheth to another purpoſe. Laſtly, it is generally ſuppoſed that all Churches have power to act together, and to exert power of Juriſdiction4 in a General Councel. Calvin is expreſſe, Inſtit. l. 4. c. 8 & 9. And if this be granted, it follows that the Church is one viſibly. It could not act as one in a General Councel, if it were not one viſibly. — Operari ſequitur eſſe.

Object. The whole Church hath no viſible Head.

Anſw. Particular Churches are viſible Churches when they are deſtitute of viſible Officers: The whole Church accordingly may be one viſible Body without any viſible Officers, at leaſt in reſpect of power to act conjunctim ordinarily. 2. Chriſt is ſuppoſed to be a viſible Head in ſome reſpect; and Eccleſiaſtical Policie is acknowledged to be Monarchical in reſpect of Chriſt. Judg 8.23Joſephus obſerves that there was a Monarchical Theocracie in Iſrael: we may as well conclude that there is ſuch a Monarchie in the Chriſtian Church to the end of the world. 3. The Church is one ſo as to act ordinarily, as one, diviſim. And therefore when a particular Presbytery excommunicateth any perſon, he doth excommunicate that perſon out of all particular Churches or the Univerſal Church; and that by the authority of the univerſal Church, becauſe there is ſuch a mutual conſent in all Churches.

Paſtores (ſaith Chamier) ſi minùs ſingulos, tamen omnes, Eccleſiae toti praefectos aſſerimus, Apoſtolos non modò omnes ſed etiam ſingulos. Some of our modern Divines do ſeem to allow onely of an eſſential and inviſible unity, and yet they do aſcribe a judicial power to Synods and Councels. The Fathers ſo praedicated the unity of an univerſal Church, that they laid foundations for an univerfal Biſhop. Res Divinae (according to Polanus) adminiſtrantur Synodali〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, confirmantur regia〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In Synodo est authoritatis apex, totius Eccleſiae unitas, ordinis firmamentum. Leid. Prof. de Conciliis. The Papiſts would build their Babel for their Pope on this foundation: but they ſhall not proceed, becauſe God hath divided the tongues of the Chriſtian world: Proteſtants ſpeak the language of Canaan, and it cannot be underſtood by the Antichriſtians.

The Church of the Lord Chriſt,Pro. 2. Acts 2 & 14. 1 Cor. 1. & 11. Gal. 1. Rev. 2, &c. in reſpect of more ordinary or conſtant execution, is many Churches. 1. The Scripture frequently calleth particular congregations the Churches of Chriſt, and declareth that they were intruſted and furniſhed with compleat power to adminiſter both Tables of the Law, the Covenants, the Seals, the Cenſures, in all Ordinances. 2. Conveniency and neceſſity do require it, becauſe it is impoſſible for the whole to maintain fellowſhip5 in one place for edification. The Church of the Jews (though but one Nation) could congregate but ſeldome: Circumciſion was permitted at home, the Paſſeover was celebrated by families apart, onely in Jeruſalem. 3. The Apoſtles direction and approbation is evident. They ordained Presbyters in particular congregations, and confined them to their particular congregations. Asts 20 and 14, they ordained no ordinary Officers ſine titulo, but with reference to particular congregations. Theſe particular Churches are called The tents of the ſhepherds, Cant. 2. the chambers of the temple, Ezek. 40. the gates of new Jeruſalem, where the Presbyters are to ſit in judgement for the ordinary, Rev. 21. Theſe are ſo many chambers of preſence; Chriſt ſitteth in the midſt of them, Matth. 18. thoſe that are admitted into any one chamber, are admitted into the whole houſe, as thoſe that are admitted into any one gate of New Jeruſalem, are admitted into the whole city. It is determined in Politicks, that ſubordinate cities have need of Government within themſelves. Triumvirale Synedrium.If we look upon the type or patern of the Chriſtian Church in the State of Iſrael, we ſhall finde that the leſſer cities in Iſrael had their particular Preſbyters, though conſiſting but of three Elders, ſuch was their frame of Policie. Pistro Soane Polano, the author of the Hiſtory of the Trent Councel (that excellent and impartial Hiſtorian) obſerveth that Epiſcopal power hath mounted from an office of charity (practiſed in all congregations in the Primitive days) to ſuch an height, as maketh it ſuſpected to Princes, and terrible to the people, to whole Kingdoms. Let this be the concluſion: All congregations have a divided power, but not an Independent power. The Synagogues in Iſrael had a divided power, yet dependent upon the Temple: they could excommunicate, Joh. 9. and in all probability, the Prieſts and Levites in the Temple did not admit ſuch as ſtood excommunicate in the Synagogues, until the caſe were decided.

Concerning the matter of the Church, and alſo of the quantity of the Church.

MEmbers of the Church ought to be viſibly holy,Pro. 1. or viſibly Saints, in ſome appearance. A viſible ſegregation from the world, and a viſible aggregation to Chriſt, is neceſſary to Churchunion6 and communion. Levit. 6. Num. 19.9. 1 Cor. 11.28. Ezek. 44. 2 Chro. 30.Whitgifts aſſertion (that all that are the Kings ſubjects are members of Chriſts Church) is not warrantable. The Temple is holy, the Keys, the Tables of the Law, the Seals, the Cenſures, the Officers, all holy; Chriſt is holy. The Apoſties, &c. required profeſſion of faith, Acts 2. Matth. 3. The Seals preſuppoſe faith and repeneance: If thou believest (ſaith Philip to the Eunuch) thou mayeſt be haptized, Acts 8. Phoſe that received the Apoſtles words〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(that is, to whom the doctrine of faith and repentance was grateful) they were baptized, Acts 2. The ſtones of the Temple were to be hewn ſtones; the timber was to be ſquared and poliſhed; the Tabernacle was curiouſly wrought; the Candleſtick was of beaten gold; the twelve Tribes were repreſented upon the High prieſts breſt plate, by twelve precious ſtones; and the viſible members are correſpondent to the myſtical, in ſome appearance. The members of Churches were all Saints by calling, 1 Cor. 1.2. Eph. 1, &c. Yet the Church (as may be afterward demonſtrated) muſt admit by a general rule, ſuch as may comprehend and take in all Saints. All Iſraelites muſt have a lot and portion in the congregation of the Lord. A diſpriviledging of Chriſtians, is a diſinheriting of them. Churches muſt be open and forward to reſcue all that flee from the avenger of blood: the way muſt be made eaſie to the cities of refuge: Churches are repreſented by the cities of refuge,Num. 35. Joſh. 20. Heb. 6.8. where ſinners that flee before the avenger, may have free recourſe to take ſanctuary. Our facility in admitting viſible members, muſt give teſtimony to the Lords diſpenſation of grace in the embracing of inviſible members. The gates of Jeruſalem do ſtand open, Rev. 21.25. The rule of admiſſion is a rule of Prudence, for the keeping out of ſuch as are apparantly profane in toto, and ſuch as are ſcandalous in tanto: and alſo it is a rule of charity, for the entertaining of all that have the leaſt meaſure of ſaving grace. Leid. Prof. de diſcip. Eccleſ.The Leiden Prof. do acknowledge rigorens aliquem in nonnullis canonibus veterum Synodorum, qui manſuetudinis Chriſti & Apoſtolorum ejus, modum non nihil excedar. Calvin alſo, ſo great a witneſſe of truth, joyneth iſſue with the forenamed, and ſpeaketh more indefinitely againſt the ancient ſeverity of the Churches, Inſtit. lib. 4. cap. 29. See Beza, another great ſtar in the Church, Epiſt. 73. p. 302. De quolibet bene praſumendum, donec conſtet contrarium. This rule muſt moderate in cenſures abſolutely, though not ſo in admiſſions. The rule of admiſſion is a ſutable profeſſion of faith and repentance, with ſubjection to the Ordinances.

7A particular Church muſt conſiſt of no more then may ordinarily or conſtantly meet together for the edification of the whole aſſembly. Pro. 2. 1 Cor. 5. & 14.1. The Apoſtles directed the Churches to meet together in one place, Acts 2 & 5 & 6. An Apoſtolical Direction is ſufficient for an Inſtitution. 2. Edification and conſtant communion (the natural grounds of multiplying Churches) do neceſſitate ſuch a limitation of Churches. A Dioceſan-Church is too big and too monſtrous to be one Church for ordinary execution. 3. The Apoſtles inſtituted Churches〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in every Citie: and〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉doth not exclude villages, as it appeareth by Matth. 10.10. Cenchrea was but anſwerable to a village, and yet it is ſaid to have a Church, Rom. 16. One Province contained many Churches, 1 Cor. 16.1, 19. Gal. 1.2 & 21. Rev. 1.2. The Churches of Galatia were Churches of one Province, not one Provincial Church. 4. There was no ordinary Officers inſtituted by Chriſt for any other then congregational Churches. The Elders of every congregation have the ſame power both intenſive and extenſive: there are no Archbiſhops or Archdeacons inſtituted by the Lord. 5. All congregations have the ſame Titles, the ſame Power, the ſame Ordinances compleatly. Nature giveth the ſame name to ſimilar parts; every drop of water is water; it hath the ſame name and the ſame nature. Paris in parem non eſt poceſtus. The lamb of the Paſſeover was to be eaten onely by ſo many together, as might enjoy a feſtival communion together at one Table, Exod. 2. Ancient Canons did prohibite the ordaining of a Presbyter to more then one Title; but as the Church did degenerate, there came in Nonreſidence, Pluralities, Commendaes univerſal and perpetual,Commendaes for term of life. or for term of life; a diſtinction of Benefices compatible an incompatible, and Canons; all theſe were added to Dioceſan Epiſcopacie and Prelacie.

The Church in reſpect of its integrality,Pro. 3. may conſiſt but of two or three. Noah and his wife and children were a Church. Abrahem and Sarah were fundamentally the whole Church of the Jews. Adam and Eve were actually the whole Church upon earth. The Churches indeed in the Apoſtles time ſeem to be ſomewhat grown before they erected Presbyters: yet they were Churches when they were not ſo numerous; and there was the leſſe need of ordinary Presbyters, becauſe there were extraordintry. Two or three cannot be a compleat Church organically. Thoſe two or three in Matth. 18. do refer to the Presbytery, as may be proved hereafter. The family or domeſtick6〈1 page duplicate〉7〈1 page duplicate〉8Churches preceding the Levitical Prieſthood, do correſpond to the congregational Churches, conſtituted by the coming of Jeſus Chriſt: and the ſtate of the Church then in point of unity and univerſality, doth confirm the unity and univerſality of the Church at preſent. The Maſters of families with their fathers, were Prieſts in their childrens family, as well as in their own houſes. Melchizedek by vertue of a natural precedency in age (as may be ſuppoſed) was a Prieſt to Abrahams family as well as in his own. Adam (if ſin had not degraded him) had been naturally a Prieſt for ever unto the whole world. If Officers and Diſcipline ſtrictly taken are not neceſſary to the being of a Church, then a number of Seven, or ſuch a number as may afford Officers and exerciſe Diſcipline according to the rule Matth. 18, is not neceſſary. And ſuppoſe ſuch qualifications in members (as are neceſſary to Officers) unneceſſary in members to the being of a Church, it will follow that ſuch a number (as is neceſſary to the conſtituting of Officers) is unneceſſary to the being of a Church.

Concerning the Form of the Church.

EXplicite and particular covenants are not neceſſary to the conſtitution of Churches. Pro. 1. Heb. 10. Acts 19.9.1. Chriſtians fell into fellowſhip without any ſuch form in Primitive days. The Ordinances, brotherly relation, cohabitation, were natural motives: the directions and exhortations of the Apoſtles and Elders did concur, Acts 19.9. Paul is ſaid to ſeparate the brethren in Epheſus. 2. Elders were ordained without any explicite covenants, both before and ſince the time of the Goſpel: we read of a charge, but not one ſyllable of a covenant. Now if Officers were ordained without any covenant, May not members (by proportion) be admitted without any explicite covenant? 3. One ground may be the unity of the Church in general: we muſt not ſo cloſe with a particular Church which is but a part of the Church, as to break relations with the whole Church univerſal, in confining members ſtrictly to one particular Church. 4. Another ground may be this: Fellowſhip in a particular Church is conditional and tranſient, and a duty of no greater moment then many other which are not to be inſtanced in, unto admiſſion. 5. In the9 Acts there is no appearance of explicite covenanting with the Church, in particular or general. There was an explicite profeſſion of faith and repentance, and a cleaving unto the Lord, Acts 2.8. No ſhew of covenanting to cleave to each other in Church-fellowſhip; no ſhew (I ſay) of any ſuch explicite covenanting. Chriſtians counted themſelves next brethren, one and the ſame houſhold, and were exhorted to maintain the unity of the Spirit, as one body at one table, as much as might be for edification. The myſtical Church in the Temple was repreſented by twelve cakes on the table, called The bread of faces, becauſe all Saints ſit there together face to face feeding on the Lord Jeſus in way of communion. The viſible Church, or Church of the outward court, is alſo called to one and the ſame table myſtical, as far as all may ſit together. 6. We finde no explicite covenanting in Iſrael but with God; and Iſraels covenanting with God was ſolemnized and attended as occaſion did urge in collapſed times. There is not any evidence of their covenanting conjoyntly with God at their firſt conſtitution: there may be granted an explicite covenant of reformation, but not of conſtitution; of confirmation or reformation, not of admiſſion.

Object. It is recorded in Neh. 10.29, that they clave to their brethren.

Anſw. It is explicated in the ſame verſe how they clave to their brethren, namely, to covenant with God. They did not covenant to cleave to their brethren; but they clave to their brethren to covenant with God. Beſides ſome duties that concerned the Houſe of God and the Officers of the Houſe of God, are there particularized; but Churchfellowſhip is made no part of the covenant. For an explicite covenant of reformation, we have Nehemiah, Hezekiah, Jehoiada, &c. authentick examples; but for an explicite covenant of conſtitution, we have authentick examples to the contrary, the Apoſtles themſelves, ſuch as it muſt needs be preſumption in us to oppoſe. In the Old Teſtament it is uſual to ſpeak of a covenant of converſion and reformation; but neither in the Old or New, can we finde an explicite covenant of conſtitution of Churches and admiſſion of members. A people profeſſing faith & a reſolution to embrace the Ordinances of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt together, is a Church before there be any explicite covenanting together, & there is an implicite covenant in ſuch a profeſſion. Pro. 2.

When a company of Chriſtians are called to dwell together where there is no foundation of a Church, there is need of ſome explicite conjunction or conſent. Such are to make known their deſire10 and faith to one another, either by teſtimony or by their profeſſion. And where Elders of ſome neighbouring Church may be procured, it is meet to requeſt aſſiſtance for exhortation together with prayer and bleſſing, as alſo for the ſatisfaction of other Churches concerning the faith and order of ſuch a Church. But for a Faſt of conſtitution, for a concourſe of Churches and their meſſengers, and ſolemnities in way of covenant unto the rearing of particular Churches, I finde no Apoſtolical direction, or footſtep of primitive practice. A feaſt of dedication may ſeem as ſutable as a faſt for conſtitution. Apoſtles and ſuch like were preſent, and did ſomething in ſeparating the brethren: but for explicite covenanting (pro modo & forma) I finde nothing. Explicite covenanting and ſearching of the conſcience, may be a diſpenſation too violent and compulſory in reſpect of the facility of Gods grace in point of acceptance. The Ordinances of the covenant of grace are ſutable to the grace of the covenant. The Elders of the cities of refuge did not expoſtulate with ſuch as fled before the avenger of blood, in way of any explicite covenant or exquiſite examination, Joſh. 20. The Eunuch did not promiſe by any covenant explicite what he would be; he onely ſhewed what he did believe, or what he was. Exceſſe of complements in ſolemnities, formalities, punctualities, is unſutable to the ſimplicity and ſpirituality of the Goſpel, and alſo fully forbidden in the ſecond commandment. Calvin in his commentary on Rom. 14.3, 4. maketh Knowledge a ſufficient teſtimony that a man is received of God. When thou ſeeſt a man (ſaith he) illuminated with the knowledge of God, Satis teſtimonii habes quod a Deo aſſumptus ſit. And he addeth that we ought to hope well of any one in quo cernimus aliquid Dei. Confeſſions of Faith have been deemed ſufficient for mutual communion of Churches, either by writing or word of mouth.

Concerning the Power of the Church.

THe body of members (women and ſuch as are unmeet to govern,Pro. 1. excepted) hath all power originally and eſſentially. The body of members is the immediate ſubject of the Keys. 1. Every being (be it never ſo ſubordinate) hath a defenſive power, and the Church or body of members is a ſeat and ſociety of Authority, and therefore11 hath power both offenſive and defenſive within it ſelf. Thoſe churches Acts 14.23. had no proper Officers when they were called churches; and there is no intimation that their Officers made them churches. Officers are not the like and ſoul of churches. 2. Elſe the church ſhall be left deſtitute of neceſſary ſupports for its ſubſiſtence: times may come in which no Elders are to be obtained for many particular churches. Such as are wholly ſubject, have a defenſive power according to the law of Nature: David and Eliſha thought it lawful to defend themſelves; Iſrael defended Jonuthan. 3.2 Kings 6.32. 3. It is natural that the Whole ſhould have Soveraignty over its parts, eſpecially when parts are equal or pares. If all members in the body had an eye, all ſhould give direction according to the order of nature. 4. The church hath relation of a Spouſe unto Chriſt; and it is meet that the Spouſe ſhould have power ſome way or other, in abſence of the Husband. 5. The church hath power to give the Keys, therefore it hath power to act the Keys. 6. Thoſe which have power in other Societies to elect their Governours, have power alſo to act themſelves; yea, to reſerve to themſelves what power they pleaſe in reſpect of thoſe that are elected. And if the church be a church in propriety, when it hath no Officers, then it hath an offenſive power over ſuch as are within, and a defenſive power towards thoſe without, as all Beings have which are ſui juris.

Object. The church may have the Keys to give, yet not to act. A meſſenger may carry a commiſſion, and yet have no power to open or execute the commiſſion.

Anſw. The Arguments from the conſtitution of the church, do prove that the church hath power to act as well as it can, until it be furniſhed with Officers. 2. The churches power of election is forcible of it ſelf, unleſſe there be ſomething againſt the proportion of the churches power, as compared with other Societies. 3. The church is not onely the conduit, but the onely ordinary fountain of power upon earth. 4. The members have all of them gifts for edification, 1 Cor. 12.5. In Iſrael the whole body did act as well as elect; though when they had Magiſtrates, they could onely exerciſe a defenſive power in interpoſing with or againſt their Magiſtrates, and that onely for demonſtrable cauſes, not ſcandalouſly circumſtantiated. The member•may act in the way of charity and of natural Office; the Elders onely in way of Stewardſhip or inſtituted Office: the people by a natural law, the officers by a poſitive law. The members12 have gifts, and therefore may act, as a potentia ad actum valet argumentum. The people may give that which it hath onely virtually, and act that which it hath formally, or in potentia proxima.

Object. There is not the ſame reaſon for ſupernatural Societies, as for natural; for the power of ſupernatural Societies, as for the power of natural Societies.

Anſw. Supernatural Societies are as perfect as natural Societies; and therefore if natural Societies have power within themſelves for their ſubſiſtence, the church muſt have the like.

Object. The church cannot adminiſter the Seals without Officers.

Anſw. The church hath power to act all Ordinances that are eſſential to its primary and natural integrality, that are neceſſary to its being or firſt being; though (without Officers) it cannot diſpenſe ſome Ordinances as are neceſſary to its well-being, or ſecondary being, and eſſential to its ſecondary integrality. The church hath not an organick integrity, but it hath an eſſential integrity, before it hath Officers.

The people have power to elect and authorize their own Officers. Pro. 2. 1. The people did ſomething in the election of Matthias, Act. 1. the members elected Deacons, Acts 6. 2. The Officers have no conſtant and ordinary mean of calling, but from the church and body of members; they do not receive their Office immediately from Chriſt, and they cannot receive it immediately always from other Elders. The power of Officers is dependent on the church, not the power of the church on the Officers. The church is greater then its Officers in reſpect of priority, fontality, finality, ſtability and dignity. Maſter Parker hath abundantly demonſtrated this aſſertion in his Eccleſiaſtical Policie, and that from principles maintained by Gerſon a Papiſt. 3. It was a continued cuſtome from the Apoſtles days, that the people did elect their Officers, & conſuetudo est bona juris interpres. Calvin hath demonſtrated this point from Cyprian. Calvin is for ſome conſent,Cal. Inſtit. l. 4. c. 3. Sect. 5. Beza Epiſt. 83. p. 365. Beza for an implicite conſent. The election of the people gives the Keys (at leaſt incompleatly) when they have Elders, becauſe their conſent is neceſſary together with the conſent of the Elders. The Elders have naturally a negative voice in point of election; but they cannot compleatly elect any Officer without the conſent of the people. That act which doth give authority, is an act of authority: the peoples conſent in election doth give authority. The aſſumption is thus proved: That which doth compleat the authoritative13 act of the Elders, or which doth adde authority to the Elders act, that act doth give authority: but the conſent of the people doth (at leaſt) compleat the act, or adde authority to the act of the Elders in election. 5. Either Election or Ordination alone, or both together, do give the Keys, not Ordination alone; therefore Election doth give the Keys, either in toto or ex parte. In Rome it was wont to be ſaid that authoritas was in Magiſtratu, Poteſtas in plebe, Majeſtas in populo. 6. Ordination doth not give the Keys eſſentially, therefore Election doth give the Keys. 1. It appears from the nature of Ordination. Ordination is but a ſolemn declaration and confirmation of a perſon in Office. Ordinatio est teſtificatio & complementum electionis. 2. The body of members gave the Keys eſſentially to their proper Officers in the reſurrection and reſtitution of the church out of Antichriſtianiſm. There is no ſufficient teſtimony of their immediate call; and the church of Rome had loſt its power. 3. Election is not onely a ſigne of Office; then an officer ſhould be an officer before he be elected, and before he be ordained alſo, becauſe Ordination was wont to follow Election. 4. The Prieſts and Levites were eſſentially Officers before they were ordained: Ordination was but a circumſtance to the hereditary right of the Levitical tribe. 5. The fathers and maſters of families were Prieſts before the Law eſſentially and abſolutely, without any Ordination. The ceremonial Ordination under the Law is abrogated, and Ordination under the Goſpel is onely moral, and a complement of Election. Doctor Ames compareth Ordination to the coronation of Princes and inauguration of Magiſtrates, in his Bellar. Ener. 6. Election in other Societies doth give the authority. The gift of edification, faculty or aptitude is preſuppoſed to Election, the authority or Office is conferred by Election; by Election ſufficienter, by Ordination abundanter. Reformed churches have attributed liberty to the people in point of Election, for the general. Polanus ſaith that an Elder is ordained in the name of the church.

Object. Election is but an act of ſubjection.

Anſw. Such an act of ſubjection tranſmitteth that power which the church had formerly within it ſelf, unto the Officers, and therefore giveth authority unto the Officers. Every one that is ſui juris, or ſo far as any one is ſui juri, he is ſo far indued with authority within himſelf, and therefore a ſervant giveth authority to his maſter; a ſervant (I ſay) giveth a maſter authority over himſelf, by putting14 himſelf under his maſters authority, and by giving over to his maſter that authority which he had over himſelf while he was free.

Object. The members have not ſole power of Election where there are Officers.

Anſw. The power of Election is primitively in the body of members, though ſecondarily there be a negative and an authoritative voice in the Elders as Elders.

The common members are not meet Organs to ordain their Officers. Pro. 3. 1. Common members have not co-ordinate power to act with their Officers; but Officers elected are eſſentially Officers, in reſpect of them at leaſt. An Elder elect is ſuppoſed fitteſt to preach and pray for preparation unto his own ordination. 2. Ordination includes prayer as a part thereof, and the Elder elect is fitter to pray then the common members. 3. Ordination includes a bleſſing, and this bleſſing ſuppoſeth a meliority in order: Heb. 7. The Officers are to bleſſe the people, and not the people the Officers in way of churchorder. 4. Ordination is an act of conſecration, Numb. 8. but the Officers are to conſecrate the people, not the people the Officers. Such as have been ſent in way of ſpecial office, have been onely found to ſend others in point of Ordination, both in the old and new Teſtament. The Fathers have obſerved it ſo Religiouſly, as to appropriate Ordination to the Biſhop. The church is greater then its officers in point of priority, and finality, and dignity; but the Officer: are greater in authority and power of execution. Chriſtiani ſumus propter nos,Auguſtine. Paſtores ſumus propter vos. 5. The Apoſtles and extraordinary Elders would never have taken ordination out of the peoples hands, if it had belonged to them, becauſe they did not deprive them of the power of election.

Object. In caſe of general Apoſtacies there can be no ordinary way of ordination.

Anſw. In caſe no Elders can be acquired, election doth ſuffice. The members do give power immediately of acting ſome Ordinances, The members have formally ſome power to teach, and the commiſſion of Chriſt giveth them power to baptize, which have the power of office to teach, Matth. 28.19. The church of common members have not formally and actually power to adminiſter the Seals, but it hath power efficiently and virtually. The Sun giveth life, though it hath no potentia proxima of life; the foul hath power to ſee virtually, becauſe it hath power to frame its organs, and convey power to them;15 ſo the members have power to ſet up Officers, and to convey power to them for the adminiſtration of the Seals; and thus qui poſſidet, diſpenſat. 2. God in extraordinary paſſages of providence, did ordain the Apoſtles; Moſes ordained Aaron, but who ordained Moſes? Ordination is not eſſential; we may not make ordination with Scotus and Franciſcus, a Sacrament. Ordination is not ſo neceſſary to a Miniſter, as the Sacrament to a chriſtian; and yet a chriſtian is a chriſtian, though he never partake of a Sacrament. The Papiſts themſelves hold it ſufficient to be baptized in voto.

Object. The people of Iſrael are ſaid to anoint Solomon, 1 Chron. 20.22.

Anſw. Its evident that they anointed him by ſome ſacred perſon, even as they did Zadoc the Prieſt: not immediatly, but by ſome Nathan, &c.

Object. Members may elect, which is the greater; therefore, they may ordain, which is the leſſer.

Anſw. Ordination is an act of order as well as of juriſdiction. Some Papiſts place the eſſence of Ordination in that form of words, (Be thou a Prieſt.) Where ſhall we finde the very form of Ordination in the Scriptures? We conceive that it conſiſteth in Solemnities connatural to the confirmation of Election: and prayer, and bleſſing (which are acts of order) are acts of Ordination. Thoſe that can do the greater, may not do the leſſer, unleſſe it be of the ſame kinde.

Object. The Levites were ordained by the hands of the congregation.

Anſw. 1. Upon the ſame ground the members ſhould now ordain, and their proper Elders ſtand by. 2. The Levites were ordained by Aaron and the Prieſts, Numb. 8.3. Impoſition of hands by the congregation was proper to the ceremonial offering of the Levites as a Sacrifice to God, Exod. 29.13. not to our moral ſeparating of Officers under the Goſpel. That act of Impoſition doth rather import ſomthing of Election then of Ordination, as we may ſhew in another queſtion. Calvins opinion is, that Ordination ought to be adminiſtred by Elders, praeſſe etium electioni debere alios paſtores. Doctor Ames granteth to Bellar.Inſtit. lib. 4. cap. 3. that it is the doctrine of the reformed church that Ordination is an act of the Elders, except in caſe of a general Apoſtacie, Bellar. Ener. de vocations Clericorum. Election is an eſſential application of authority in the way of Juriſdiction; Ordination is a circumſtantial application of authority, ſutable to the power of16 Order and Office. Election is an act of eſſential Juriſdiction; Ordination is proper to official power and juriſdiction. The leaſt Ordinances in point of exemption, are proper to the Officers as the greateſt perſons, in reſpect of executive power. The Keys of natural power of of general Office, are in the members; the Keys of inſtituted power, or of Office in ſpecial, in the Elders. I might diſtinguiſh thus: The Keys of natural power are in the body of members; the Keys of Office in the Elders.

Concerning the Officers of the Church.

A Biſhop and Presbyter are the ſame in point of power,Pro. 1. both of Order and Juriſdiction, both intenſively and extenſively. 1. The Lording or Magiſtratical power, is prohibited all Presbyters: for what is allowed in Magiſtrates, is diſallowed in Miniſters, Luke 22.25, 26. The Apoſtle Peter interpreteth the words of our Savour, 1 Pet. 5.3. 2. All Elders or Presbyters of Churches are equally ſtyled Biſhops in Scripture, Acts 20. Phil. 3. Tit. 1. 1 Tim. 3. And thoſe which have wholly the ſame Titles, have the ſame Office. 3. All Presbyters have equally the flock of Chriſt with them, Act. 20. Cyprian might have ſaid of Presbyters and Biſhops together, what he ſaid of Biſhops in his own ſenſe: — Epiſcopatus eſt unus, cujus pars in ſclidum tenetur a ſingulis. The Apoſtle made many Biſhops in one Congregation; but not one Biſhop for many Congregations. The Word of God is far from allowing teaching Elders to be onely ruling Biſhops, to rule by themſelves, and teach by others. Perſonal qualifications muſt be perſonally executed; and teaching Elders are the excelling Biſhops,The office of Biſhops is a Miniſtery, not onely a dignity: therefore he that hath the title, muſt do the work. 1 Tim. 5.17. 4. The Office of Dioceſans is both formally and efficiently Antichriſtian. Grant a Primate of England, and why not of the whole world? Gregory juſtly called John of Conſtantinople The forerunner of Antichriſt. 5. In other Orders there was no precedency inſtituted by the Lord Chriſt. No Arch-Apoſtle, no Arch-Evangeliſt, no Arch-Presbyter or Arch-Biſhop. In the Temple the High-prieſt was a type of Chriſt, the ſons of the High prieſt were types of Presbyters, and they were equal in the matter of their Office. This Propoſition according to Jeromes aſſertion, had place of great authority amongſt the Papiſts themſelves17 until the Councel of Trent. It hath been witneſſed unto by the Fathers anciently. The invented Orders of the Papiſts have been ſome of the plagues of the Antichriſtian Egypt. The praedicant Orders of Antichriſt, are like to the clamorous Froggs; the mendicant Friars or manducant Friars (as Buchanan hath it) are like to the creeping Lice, the plague of Egypt, of the Church, and of the world. This Propoſition is abundantly elaborated by many. Some Theologes oppoſed the ſuperiority of Biſhops (as maintained to be Jure divino) in the Councel of Trent: the Cardinals oppoſed it alſo, though for their own ſakes. It is an extraordinary judgement of God, that ſo many Chriſtian Princes and Kingdoms do ſuffer the Papal bondage all this while. Nome populus (as one ſaid) diutius ex conditione eſſe poteſt, cujus eum poeniteat.

Object. Timothy and Titus are made Dioceſan Biſhops by the Poſtſcripts of thoſe Epiſtles which are written to them.

Anſw. The Poſtſcripts are proved to be Apocrypha by Beza and others. When Paul ſaloteth the Elders of Epheſus, Act. 20, he owneth Archbiſhop there, but equally ſaluteth them all. Beſides, Timoshy his courſe was ambulatory, and he is called an Evangeliſt, 2 Tim. 1.4. •. Titus was in the ſame rank with Timothy. As for the Angels of the ſeven Churches in the Revelation, they were Angels but of ſo many Congregations, and do repreſent all the Elders of thoſe Churches. No Dioceſan can be made to appear in the three next centuries after the Lord Chriſt. The Angels are not called Archangels: The ſeven ſtars, the four beaſts, are all the Elders of all the Churches, not onely ſeven or four. The two Witneſſes Revel. 11, do repreſent all the witneſſes of Truth. The ſingular is frequently read for the plural.

All Biſhops or Presbyters, are both Paſtors and Teachers:Pro. 2. Paſtors and Teachers are not diſtinct Officers. 1. All the Prieſts under the High-prieſt, all the fons of Aaron had the ſame Function or Office in the Temple. There was not one a teaching Prieſt, another an exhorting Prieſt, a third a ruling Prieſt; as if one Presbyter ſhould be a teaching Biſhop, another an exhorting Biſhop, a third a ruling Biſhop. 2. The Apoſtle aſſigneth the title of Paſtor and Teacher to the ſame. Office, Epheſ. 4. Some are Apoſtles, ſome Prophets,Jer. 5.15. ſome Evangeliſts, ſome (according to the Apoſtle) Paſtors and Teachers, which is as much as both Paſtors and Teachers. It is ſuppoſed by ſome that the Apoſtle uſed [and] for ſome, as if the copulative [and]18 were disjunctive in this place, and the meaning of the Apoſtle this: Some Paſtors, ſome Teachers. But the Apoſtle doth not ſpeak after ſuch a manner, as to inſinuate any ſuch interpretation; he doth not ſo much as ſay And Paſtors and Teachers; onely Some Paſtors and Teachers. There is no parallel in all the Scripture, which will prove that [and] loth ſtand for ſome. 3. Paſtors do not any where denote ſuch as had the gift of exhortation moſt eminently, but rather ſuch as had the gift or office of Government, both in the Old and New Teſtament. 4. Teachers are properly before Paſtors in order, as they are taken for exhorters: exhortations are dependent applications of Doctrines. The Apoſtle placeth teaching before exhorting, 2 Tim. 13.16. Tit. 1.9. 5. All Biſhops are called both to teach and exhort, Tit. 1.9. Every Biſhop (ſaith the Apoſtle) muſt exhort with wholeſome doctrine. 6. Paſtors are ſometimes deſcribed onely by the adminiſtration of teaching. Go make diſciples, teaching them, Matth. 28.19, 20. A Biſhop muſt be apt to teach, 1 Tim. 3. The diſtinct gifts of teaching and exhorting, do denominate ſome teachers, and ſome exhorters, rather then ſome Paſtors and ſome Teachers. 7. The Office of Biſhops or Presbyters, is made ſometimes to conſiſt onely in feeding, as if all were Paſtors. Paul biddeth all the Elders feed the flock of Chriſt, Acts 20. Peter ſpeaketh in like manner, 1 Pet. 5.2. Now if teaching and exhorting are moſt frequently applied to one and the ſame Office; Why ſhould we make the one a differential character of a diſtinct Office? There is no appearance of any diſtinction between Paſtors and Teachers in antiquity: Quod eſt rerum non eſt verum. All the ſons of Aaron had full power to uncover the altar, the table, the ark; to open the Miniſtery of the Goſpel in like manner, and that in way of Office.

Object. The Apoſtle ſeemeth to diſtinguiſh him that exhorteth from him that teacheth, Rom. 12.

Anſw. The Apoſtle diſtinguiſheth one from the other in reſpect of gifts, but not in reſpect of Offices. 1. The Apoſtles project according to the face of the Text, is to ſpeak of the diſtinct gifts of Officers in way of compariſon, not of the diſtinct Offices of Officers, or of Officers as comparatively diſtinguiſhed in gifts, not as diſtinguiſhed in Office, or of the Offices of Officers in a large ſenſe, as they ſignified gifts, not diſtinct Offices in propriety of ſpeech. Thus Elders were to attend on their Office in exerciſing chiefly, or eſpecially in exerciſing their ſpecial gifts. I ſuppoſe the Apoſtle uſeth〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉19here for Office, yet properly it ſignifieth action: and I mean Office in a general or large ſenſe, as before.

Object. The Apoſtle compareth the members of the Church to the members of the natural body; and their gifts to the offices of the members of the natural body. Now diſtinct gifts in members of the natural body, do denote diſtinct members; and conſequently the diſtinct gifts of the Officers in a Church (according to the Apoſtle) muſt conſtitute or denote diſtinct Officers.

Anſw. 1. Similies do not neceſſarily run on all four: ſome things ſerve for ornament as well as for argument, as Maldonate obſerveth upon the Parables of our Saviour. 2. The Apoſtle compareth the gradual difference of gifts in officers, to the ſpecifick difference of offices in the natural body. 1. This is evident from the like compariſon, 1 Cor. 12. Common members have the ſame offices, and yet (according to the Apoſtle) they are compared to the members of the natural body in reſpect of their gifts. The comparative diſtinction of gifts in common members, doth not make members diſtinct officers. All members of the Church (in the Apoſtles compariſon) have gifts, and comparatively or gradually diſtinct; but all members are not officers. 2. Is it likely that the Apoſtle ſhould ſpeak here onely of a body of officers? 3. It is certain that the Apoſtle ſpeaketh of a body of members in common: We are all members (ſaith the Apoſtle) one of another, verſ. 5. as all, even ſubordinate members are members in the natural body. In the Apoſtles ſenſe therefore members and officers in the Church are different in reſpect of ſpiritual gifts, onely as the right hand is different from the left; which by reaſon of uſe or conſtitution, is more active and uſeful then the other. Thus one eye may differ from the other in reſpect of its viſive power. gradually, and yet not be a different member eſſentially, or in reſpect of its kinde and ſpecies. One Chriſtian is more like to one member in the natural body, then to another, in point of uſe; and yet accommodate to the ſervice of all the members in a meaſure. In like manner the ſame officers, or diſtinct perſons in one and the ſeme office, may be different in reſpect of gifts gradually, and yet induce with a competent meaſure of all gifts ſutable to their office. 4. It is apparent that in the Primitive nays God did eminently induc ſome with a ſpirit of Government, and competently with a ſpirit of Prophetic, others with an eminent ſpirit of Prophetic, and a compat••t ſpirit of Government: and every one20 was to exerciſe that chiefly which was chiefly beſtowed on him. 5. It is ſomething that the Apoſtle putteth down theſe gifts promiſcuouſly, the diſtributer before the ruler. The Apoſtle is wont to obſerve order, when he ſpeaks of offices or officers. So Epheſ. 4. Some Apoſtles, ſome Prophets, ſome Evangelists, &c. 1 Cor. 12.28. Some Apoſtles, then Prophets, then Doctors or Evangelists, then miracles, then gifts of healing. Theſe are extraordinary and tranſient members of the Church, and therefore the Apoſtle nameth them in the firſt place, and then proceedeth to the ordinary or permanent; helps in the way of Prophecie or Doctrine. I interpret helps by gifts of Prophecie, becauſe there is ſome correſpondence between this ſecond inſtance in v. 28, and the firſt, in v. 8. Prophecie and Tongues are put laſt, becauſe they were ordinary in reſpect of uſe and continuance in the ordinary officers of the Church. 6. It is apparent by the ſcope of the Apoſtle in the whole Chapter, that he doth ſpeak of the gifts of members and officers conjoyntly, and not onely of the diſtinct and compleat Miniſtrations, or gifts of officers, or of the diſtinct or compleat offices of members. The Apoſtle firſt inſtructeth the Church how to exerciſe gifts in general; then he cometh to gifts in particular; and firſt inſtructeth the Church how to uſe ſpecial or eminent gifts of edification (as the gift of teaching and exhorting, &c.) Laſtly, he deſcendeth to common gifts, love, &c. When the Apoſtle therefore ſaith, He that teacheth, in teaching; it is no more then to ſay, He that teacheth, or he that hath a ſpecial gift to teach, and is in office, let him eſpecially attend upon the exerciſe of that gift of teaching. 7. The Apoſtle doth not ſay here or elſewhere, He that is a teacher, or he that is an exhorter, or he that hath the office of teaching or exhorting. Paſtors are diſtinguiſhed from Teachers by the Apoſtle, Epheſ. 4. not becauſe Paſtors do ſignifie exhorters there; but ſuch as do govern, according to the ſpecial uſe of the phraſe in Scripture: and ſo they are not there compleat titles of diſtinct officers, but conjoyned to the conſtituting of one and the ſame kinde of office. 8. It is certain by what hath been already diſcourſed in the arguments, that exhorting and teaching are not compleat miniſtrations of diſtinct officers. Diſtinct offices require diſtinct and proper miniſtrations; not onely ſpecial attendance upon the exerciſe of ſpecial gifts. Teachers are not ſuch as do onely teach, nor exhorters ſuch as do onely exhort, becauſe that every Elder muſt attend both upon teaching and exhorting. An Apoſtle hath ſome proper miniſtration21 to make him an Apoſtle, a Prophet hath ſome proper miniſtration to make him a Prophet, an Elder hath ſome proper miniſtration to make him an Elder, a Deacon hath ſome proper miniſtration to make him a Deacon. If an Apoſtle may do all that a Prophet may do, yet a Prophet may not do all that an Apoſtle may do; if an Elder may do all that a Deacon may do, yet a Deacon may not do all that an Elder may do: But a Teacher ought to do all that an Exhorter doth, and an Exhorter all that a Teacher, put aſide the ſpecial improvement of their ſpecial gifts; and in caſe they are all alike gifted, they may every way be equally employed. 9. It is evident that the Deacons are here diſtinguiſhed by gifts onely; he that diſtributeth is not a diſtinct officer from him that ſheweth mercy.

Object. The Apoſtle diſtinguiſheth him that diſtributeth, from him that ſheweth mercy, becauſe it is the diſtinct office of the widows to ſhew mercy.

Anſw. It belongeth to the Deacons office to ſhew mercy, elſe the Apoſtle would not ſay (he) that ſheweth mercy, but ſhe that ſheweth mercy. 2. Widows are not to be found in all Congregations; there the Deacons muſt ſhew mercy by themſelves or others,1 Tim. 5.16. by men or women as cauſe ſhall require. 3. Widows are not diſtinct officers, but ſubſervient inſtruments to the Deacons office; not ſet officers, but occaſional objects, as well as inſtruments of the Deacons; as the poverty of the widows ſubjecteth them to the Deacons ſpecial providence. For concluſion, it may appear by what hath been ſaid, that teaching is but an incompleat miniſtration or office of an Elder; and ſo exhortation, a gift to teach, and a gift to exbort, are both neceſſary for every Elder.

Governing Elders are not diſtinct officers in the Churches:Pro. 1. There is no appearance of any ſuch diſtinction; in ſucceeding ages next after the Apoſtles, all Elders were called Sacerdotes, and had power both to teach and adminiſter the ſeals. The Centuriatores Magdeburgeuſes were for ruling Elders, and yet could not eſpie any thing in thoſe firſt Centuries; which made for them. Cartw: reply. P. 14. The allegations ſeem to me very inſufficient, that of Ambroſe it moſt ſpecious. That which Ambroſe teſtifieth, is interpreted by Mr. Caertwright, as if he ſhould ſay that the ancient Elders were aboliſhed in his time: but his words hold forth to ſuch thing; Ambroſe onely ſaith that the ancient cuſtom of conſulting with Elders was neglected in his time. Ambroſe doth indeed ſay that this was come to paſſe by the pride of the Doctors;22 but whom ſhould he mean (according to Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory) but ſuch as by reaſon of ſpecial learning and favour were exalted to be Biſhops, and ſet over other Elders? The Elders which Ambroſe ſpeaks of, were extant in his time, therefore he ſpeaks not of ruling Elders. Beſides, he cannot mean any other then Biſhops by Doctors, becauſe they were the teaching Presbyters, which were neglected (according to Ambroſe) in point of conſultation, for as much as there were no other Elders then extant. Field, l. 5. C. 26. Read Dr. Field, lib. 5. Cap. 25, 26. and Catal. Test. Church-Wardens do ſeem rather to be the defaced Image of ancient Deacons, then reliques of ruling Elders. 2. As Elders are called to teach, and conſequently to baptize, Matth. 28.18. All Elders ought to be〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.A Biſhop muſt be apt to teach〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Tim. 3.2. All Biſhops muſt exhort with wholſome Doctrine, Tit. 1.9. All officers repreſented in Rev. 4. were full of eyes, as Seers, apt to teach. All Elders are equally deſcribed in theſe places, by a gift to teach. 3. All Elders are ſometimes deſcribed by their miniſtration of governing, 1 Theſ. 5.12. Heb. 13.17. This is an argument, that it is not onely the office of ſome to govern, and the ſpecial office of others to teach, but that it is the office of thoſe which teach, equally to attend upon government in point of office, with thoſe which are ſuppoſed to be onely for government. This being ſuppoſed, ruling Elders ſeem to have little or nothing to do — veritas non parit abſurda. The teaching Elders are moſt meet to act in publique adminiſtrations; in private adminiſtrations the Deacons were wont in ancient times to do what ruling Elders are ſuppoſed to ſerve for. 4 Elders are equally honoured in all ſalutations, Act. 20. Phil. 1.1. The Apoſtle putteth a diſtinction between Biſhops and Deacons, none between Biſhops and ruling Elders. Teachers are eminently more honourable, in reſpect both of adminiſtrations and qualifications, for they onely are intruſted with the Tables and Seals of the Covenant, and they onely are endued with knowledge and wiſdom in reference to teaching; perſons thus unequal, do not deſerve equal honour. Mr. Hooker in his preface to his Eccleſiaſtical policy, conceiveth that Calvin admitted ruling Elders at the firſt, onely out of policy: to give ſome content to the Magiſtrates and members: truth is, there is ſome ſhew of it, becauſe they were annually elected. 5. The office of all Elders is to feed like ſhepheards, and a ſhepheard is to feed by teaching, as well as by governing. The Apoſtles charge all Elders to•e•d alike, not ſome by doctrine; and others by23 government 1 Pet. 5.1. Act. 20. What feeding was intended by our Saviour, when he bids Peter feed his lambe and ſheep? Joh. 21. Elders are called Paſtors from feeding, and the Paſters of the Church muſt feed with knowledge and underſtanding. Jer. 3, 15. This is the current of Scripture phraſe. 6. Why doth the Apoſtle give no intimation of theſe Elders in his diſcourſe concerning church officers? 1 Tim. 3. All the officers of the Church (in all likely hood) are there diſcourſed of, and yet the Apoſtle requires the ſame qualifications, without any diſtinction in all the Elders of the Church. 7. Ruling Elders ſeem to have nothing to do, but that which Deacons did in Primitive times. The Deacons were wont (as is ſuppoſed by good Antiquaries) to be part of the Presbyterie. According to Cyprian,Cypr. lib. 3. ep. 10. & l. 3. ep. 15. they did praeceptis gubernare, & manus imponere. Under the Ceremonial law, all the Church officers were Prieſts and Levits, and doubtleſſe the Jewiſh church was an accorate type and pattern of the Chriſtian. This may ſerve for an eighth Argument. The Levirs were to excel in power and dignity, for they were choſen in place of the firſt born: And the Deacons were to be full of the holy Ghoſt and wiſdom. Act. 6. In Moſes time ſome Levites did bear the Arke, the Table, the Altar, ſome the Tabernacle, the Tent or Covering, ſome the boards and pillars, &c. Numb. 4.8. 1 Tim. 3.12, 13. Num. 6.3.In Davids time ſome attended immediatly on the Prieſts, and were Singers, others were Porters, others were Treaſurers, 1 Chron. 24, 25, 16. Now if the Deacons are anſwerable to the Levites, then the Levites muſt help carry the Lord Jeſus in his Ordinances, and ſing forth the glad tydings of Salvation. The Tabernacle was a type of the Church, the Deacons therefore muſt promove the communion and conſolation of the Church, and ſupport the Presbyters thereof, theſe are the pillars of the Churches, which the Levites (in way of type) did bear on their ſhoulders. The Deacons were at the firſt inſtituted for to eaſe the Elders in all matters or miniſtrations, which are not proper to the teaching Elders. Act. 6. We are to attend on the Word and Prayer (ſaith the Apoſtle.) The Deacons therefore are to teach as occaſion ſerves, to viſit the ſick, to watch over the converſation of members, and to acquaint the Elders with what they obſerve, as Porters under the Elders. Epiſcopis oeconomiae ſuae rationes quotannis reddebant. Calv. Instis. l. 4. c. 4. Sect. 5.

It is as much as I•im at,Lib. 3. Ep. 10. & 3.15. if we grant as much to Deacons as the Scripture doth; and indeed, thoſe forementioned acts (according to the24 Scripture and Eccleſiaſtical hiſtory) ſeem to belong to the office of Deacons, as well as to furniſh the Table of the Lord, the Table of the Elders, and the Table of the poor by collections, or a treaſurie. And if this be the office of Deacons, muſt not the Deacons put ruling Elders out of office? I dare not call our ruling Elders (in the way of reproach) Aldermen, as one doth, I like not invectives: onely I crave leave to ſpeak my opinion, and that under correction. I reverence the opinion of all godly men, yet Dr. Whitakers affirmation is true, — the practice of the Church is the cuſtom of men, the ſentence of the Fathers is the opinion of men, the definition of Councels is the Judgement of men.

Object. The Apoſtle diſtinguiſheth governments from Doctors. 1 Cor. 12.28.

Anſw. Firſt, It is not neceſſary to interpret governments in this Text, by diſtinct officers in point of government, becauſe it is the intent of the Apoſtle to ſpeak here of the members of the Church as endued with diſtinct gifts, as well as of diſtinct officers. This is oppoſite to his preceding diſcourſe concerning the members of a natural body, and alſo to his ſcope in Rom. 12. as hath been already declared. All diſtinct gifts of members do not conſtitute ſo many officers, for then all members in the Church may be officers. Every member endued with a gift is an helper, but not an Officer; an officer is not endued with one gift alone, but with many together. 2. Miracles, healings, tongues, interpretation of tongues, do not import ſo many officers, and therefore it is not neceſſary (governments) ſhould conſtitute a diſtinct office. The Apoſtle indeed inſtanceth in ſome officers, officers being eminent members of the Church in reſpect of their gifts: but his drift is directly to ſpeak of members as endued with gifts, not onely of members that are officers, and therefore mentioneth members eminent in gifts together with members that were eminent in office. 3. The Apoſtle doth not ſay governours, but governments; which intimateth that he rather ſpake of gifts then of officers. 4. Helps and governments ſeem here to ſignifie the ordinary teaching Elders, if any ordinary officers do anſwer to the gift of Prophecie and the gift of diſcerning ſpirits, v. 10. both which are neceſſary to an Elder; the one for teaching, the other for governing. If wiſdom be the eminent gift of Apoſtles, knowledge of Prophets, faith or the word of faith, the eminent gift of Evangeliſts, then the particular inſtances in verſ. 28. &c. do25 exactly refer to thoſe in verſ. 8. and then accordingly (helps) in v. 28. do anſwer unto Propheſie in verſ. 8.

Object. Teaching Elders ſeem to be underſtood in the third ſort of Officers, for they are called Doctors or Teachers.

Anſw. Theſe Doctors in all probability, are Evangeliſts or extraordinary Teachers. 1. They are placed with ex raordinary members, and in the midſt of extraordinary members, next after Apoſtles and Prophets, and immediately before miracles and healings. 2. Elſe Governments ſhould have been placed next to Doctors. 3. They anſwer to the third kind of officers mentioned Epheſ. 4.11. Some Apoſtles, ſome Prophets, ſome Evangeliſts. Evangeliſts muſt be underſtood by Prophets here, or elſe not at all recited. 4. We read of ſuch Doctors as were extraordinary Act. 13.1. Paul ſeems to be the leaſt of them at that time, he is named laſt. 5. Ordinary Elders are no where elſe deſcribed onely by the title of Doctors or teachers. 6. The order is perſwaſive, the Apoſtle diſcourſeth firſt of extraordinary members (Apoſtles, Prophets, Doctors, miracles, healings) then of ordinary members, as helps, governors, &c. tongues, and Propheſie &c. were extraordinary at that time in reſpect of the cauſe, but yet may be reckoned for ordinary gifts, becauſe they are permanent and ordinary in reſpect of uſe. Th. Aquinas doth ſome what conſent to this interpretation.

Object. Ruling Elders are clearly diſtinguiſhed from Teaching Elders. 1 Tim. 5.1.

Anſw. Firſt, This place ſeemeth to afford moſt evidence, yet it is not reaſonable to interpret our Text this way, when many other places do plainly bear witnes to the contrary. 2. Some make the firſt Elders to be Deacon.The Elders that rule well may be the ſame perſons with thoſe that teach, under a double conſideration, if the relative (or) would permit, and then this were the meaning, The Elders that rule well (that is) as they rule well, but eſpecially thoſe that teach (that is) as they teach, are worthy of double honour: It will not follow hence that one Elder ſhall have more honour for teaching onely, then another hath for teaching and ruling alſo, but that one Elder may have more honour for one gift then for another, or more honour for his gift to teach, then for his gift of governing^a^aThe word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉notes a difference in circumſtances, as well as in kind. Gal 6.10. Phil. 4.22. 3. This ſeemeth to be the ſenſe of the text: The Elders that rule well, that is, which are eſpecially gifted for government, and which eſpecially attend on that gift, eſpecially26 ſuch as labour in the word &c. (that is) ſuch as are eſpecially gifted for doctrine, and ſo eſpecially attend on that gift, are worthy of double honour. I take this to be the moſt genuine interpretation. Barnabas was faithful in his miniſtery, yet Paul was the chief ſpeaker. 4. It is not imaginable how ruling Elders ſhould deſerve ſuch equal honour with teaching Elders. Teaching Elders muſt diligently attend government as well as doctrine. 5. Such as rule well are not ſuch as rule onely, becauſe ſuch as labour in the Word are not ſuch as labour onely in the Word, but ſuch as labour chiefly in the Word. It is queſtionleſſe that the Teachers muſt labour in government as well as in doctrine. 6. If the Apoſtle had meant ſuch as rule onely, it had been moſt plain to have ſpoken after this manner, The Elders that rule well are worthy of double honour, but eſpecially thoſe that rule well, and labour in the Word and Doctrine alſo. 7. The Apoſtle in the ſame Epiſtle 1 Tim. 3.2. and elſewhere, requireth a gift or ſpecial aptitude to teach in all Elders. 8. This Text is ſomewhat paralel to Rom. 12. and 1 Cor. 12. from which we may more eaſily learn the mind of the Apoſtle in this place; It is the idiome of the Apoſtle to ſpeak of members as gifted in thoſe Epiſtles. The members of the natural body do moſt exquiſitely hold forth the gifts, faculties, or natural offices of Church-members, whether in office, or out of office, 1 Cor. 12.8. The Apoſtle reckoneth up nine ſeveral gifts, but not to point out nine kinds of officers in the Churches. He that propheſieth onely, is not a diſtinct officer; he that diſcerneth ſpirits onely, is not a diſtinct officer; he that ſpeaketh tongues onely, is not a diſtinct officer: ſo he that teacheth, he that exhorteth, he that ruleth, theſe adminiſtrations do not adaequately or completely deſcribe ſo many diſtinct Elders in point of office, all theſe gifts are neceſſary to every Elder. In Cant. 4. & 6. & 7. The Church is deſcribed, circumſcribed by her feet, thighes, belly, breaſts, neck, lips, teeth, noſe, eyes, and by the temples of her head, but all theſe members of the Church, endued with ſundry and ſeveral gifts, do not beſpeak ſo many diſtinct Officers in the Church. The head of the Church, or of the Spouſe, ſeemeth to repreſent Chriſt in the Presbyterie; her hair, the doctrines and profeſſion of the Presbyters, hanging, adhereing as hair to and upon the head; her eyes, noſe, teeth, lips, and neck, their gifts of wiſedom, knowledge, and diſcerning, or of teaching, and exhorting, and governing. The Presbyterie is like mount Carmel, becauſe it is fruitful; the hair is like purple, and like27 a flock of Goats on mount Gilead, becauſe the doctrine and profeſſion of the miniſters of Chriſt clothe both themſelves and others with the garments of ſalvation; The temples within the locks are the gracious and inward qualifications, like to pomegranates for pleaſantneſſe both to the eye and taſt.

This Presbyterie hath eyes, and teeth, and lips; to teach, exhort; it hath a neck like an Armory, a noſe like the Tower of Libanon, that looketh towards Damaſcus, theſe ſignifie the gifts of government, whereby the Church is defended againſt its enemies both within and without; the enemy of Iſrael was Damaſcus eſpecially, and therefore the Spirit of God chuſeth it to point out the enemies of the Chriſtian Church. This may ſuffice for to illuſtrate the diſcourſe of the Apoſtle concerning the gifts and members of the Church. 1 Cor. 12.

The Prophets 1 Cor. 14.Pro. 4. do not maintain any ſtanding Ordinance of prophecying in the Churches. Elders are the onely ſtanding teachers in the Church, in point of ordinary execution. 1. Thoſe in the 1 Cor. 14 are called Prophets, and their adminiſtration is called prophecying, this arguoth an eminency of gift both in reſpect of the matter of it, and alſo in reſpect of the manner of coming by it. Propheſie when it is taken properly, notes an eminent adminiſtration, and that from ſpecial inſpiration throughout all the Scripture. Aſaph and Heman, and Jeduthun &c. are ſaid to propheſie 1 Chron. 25. theſe may be ſaid to propheſie figuratively; and yet it is certain that Aſaph, Heman, and Jeduthun were extraordinarily taught by the Spirit of God, and it is probable that their children alſo were eminent under them in this reſpect. The Spirit of God helped them to indite Prophetical Pſalmes, and alſo to perform their other muſical adminiſtrations; why elſe was this office ſo tranſcending the other functions of the other Levites? Bezaliel, Samuel, David, Aſaph, Heman, Jeduthun and their ſons, Eliſha and the children of the Prophets, all theſe were ſingularly inſtructed by the Spirit for the ſervice of God, for the work of the Tabernacle and Temple, in doctrinal and muſical adminiſtrations, in vocal and organical muſick: And all theſe were types of the miniſters of the Goſpel,1 Sam. 15.20. and of all other which are taught by the Spirit, to make melody in their hearts and in their adminiſtrations unto God. Our David hath invented us to be inſtruments of muſick, we are onely the people that are ordained to ſhew forth the praiſe of our God. The Hebrew word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉is ſuppoſed to ſignifie ſuch an one cui Deus arcana revelat. Aſaph, Heman, Jeduthun28 and their ſons alſo, at leaſt ſome of them obtained ſpecial cunning through the ſpecial inſpiration of the Spirit of God, and therefore they are ſaid to prophecie; this may be ſufficient for the clearing of that place. Aaron is ſaid to be Moſes his Prophet, Exod. 7.1. the reaſon is, becauſe the dictates and oracles of God from the mouth of Moſes, as Prophets, were wont to ſpeak immediaely from Gods mouth. 2. Propheſie is expreſſed to be one of the gifts which were extraordinarily conferred in thoſe times, 1 Cor. 12. 3. It was an uſual effect of impoſition of hands. 4. How ſhould ſo many in ſo ſhort a time acquire ſuch ability to ſpeak by ordinary means? Interpreters do generally apprehend thoſe Prophets to be in an eſpecial manner inſpired. The Etymologie in the Greek is known to ſpeak much, the uſe of it in Scripture ſpeaks more. The common-members may be thought to propheſie as well as Elders 1 Cor. 11. becauſe the gift of the Spirit was vouchſafed to Elders and others. 5. Propheſie is made to anſwer to revelation, doctrine to anſwer to knowledge; the latter phraſes do explicate the former, 1 Cor. 14.6. and the Apoſtle 1 Cor. 13. maketh mention of the gift of Propheſie, as a ſingular gift of the Spirit in thoſe dayes. 6. All that were ſtanding preachers (according to the Scripture) were ſent of God by ſome ſpecial calling, mediate or immediate, directly or indirectly, expreſly or by good and manifeſt conſequence.

Object. Their gift was not infallible, they were not of the higheſt order of Prophets, ſuch as are ſpoken of Epheſ. 4.

Anſw. Their gift did excel the common gift, or the gift that was common to all members, as hath been diſcourſed. 2. The gift was miraculous in reſpect of the manner of comming by it; and a like gift in theſe daies being not ſo circumſtantiated, doth not ſo edifie; tongues were then of publike uſe in common members, partly becauſe they were miraculouſly conferred; tongues now are not of publike uſe in the Church in common members, when Elders have the ſame. 3. Now there is no reaſon why an inferiour gift ſhould be ordinarily exerciſed by ſuch as are not in ſtate of office; if any ſhould be permitted ordinarily to teach together with the Elder, they are the Deacons, and yet it is not the Deacons office ordinarily to teach in publike. The Elders or Church may intreat ſuch as have dedicated themſelves to the miniſterie, and others alſo (in ſome caſes) to exerciſe a gift of edification, but not in way of ſtanding office or ordinance; The Elders are called Teachers, becauſe it is their office29 to teach ordinarily. The Prieſts did onely blow the Trumpets under the Law, to denote the Office of the Elders under the Goſpel. The Levites might carry the Ark, the Table, &c. but the Prieſt onely did uncover the Table, the Altar, &c. Numb. 10.8. this was to ſhew that the Elders onely have authority to open the Tables of Gods Law, and to reveal the myſteries of the Kingdom of God, in the way of ſtanding Office. It was onely the Prieſts office to take down the tent and tabernacle; and accordingly it is onely the Elders office to preach ordinarily the doctrine of the Goſpel, the doctrine of humiliation and mortification, to make way for the Churches progreſſe in the wilderneſſe.

Object. The Princes are ſent to teach. 2 Chron. 17.7.

Anſw. Piſcator ſuppoſeth that the Princes did onely promove the Levites in teaching. The Hebrew word doth ſignifie to make to learn, whether by ones ſelf or others. 2. Magiſtrates have power to teach in the Common-wealth ordinarily, though not as Prophets in the Church. We may ſhut up all: The Church is the golden Candleſtick; but the ſpirit of the Elders is the ſhining and burning light therein, and the two Olive-branches thereof. Zech. 4.2. Ezek. 7.20The Church is the hangings of the Temple. The Elders are the pillars on which the hangings did depend.

Concerning the Power of the Presbyterie.

THe Presbyterie is to govern with great condeſcendencie,Prop. 1. and to labour for the conſent of the Church in caſes of moment. Magiſtrates themſelves are called Paſtors and Fathers (partly) becauſe they ought to be mild, (as Cauſabon and others have obſerved) in the execution of their power. Paſtors ſhould carry lambs in their boſomes, Iſa. 40. Magiſtratical Soveraignty of ſpirit,Luke 22. 1 Pet 5. is intolerable in Miniſters of the Church. It is better to be the Bride, then the Bridegrooms friend. Abrahams ſervant muſt intreat Rebeckah with kindneſſe, with bracelets and jewels, and carry her to his maſter with honour. The Prieſts were charged to take down the Tabernacle, and the Levites to bear it with great reſpect; and the Tabernacle was a type of the Church. Our Solomon will have his mother to be ſet at his right hand in a chair of State. Rev. 3. & 4. & 20.The four and twenty Elders30 have all thrones and crowns as Chriſtians,Cyprian ad Cl•rum, nihil ſine veſtro conſilio & plebi; conſenſu. Lib. 3. Ep. 10. & l 4. Ep 5. & l. 3. Ep. 22. & l. •. Ep. 10. & l. 5. Ep. 7. though not as Eccleſiaſtick Governours. Cyprian ſeemeth ſometimes to tender thus much reſpect to the common members or body of the Church (as when he ſaith, Vobis praeſentibus & judicautibus) but not a word of ſuffrage in antiquity, except in point of Election. And Cyprian is bold to write after this manner (hortor & mando) as to ſubjects. The Apoſtle is bold to threaten the rod to the Corinthians: Shall I come unto you with a rod? 1 Cor. 4 21. The more authority is conferred upon Elders, the more humble have they need to be: Caeſari, cui omnia licent, propter hoc, minus licet. I ſuppoſe, the power of Juriſdiction doth originally and eſſentially reſide in the body of members. Elders have their power either by Election or Ordination, becauſe there is no other ordinary mean of vocation. Election is neceſſary even from the people, becauſe they are to ſubject themſelves or withdraw, according as Elders preach for Chriſt or againſt Chriſt; and therefore the peoples election doth incompleatly (at leaſt) give the keys. We affirm that the power of Presbyters doth not eſſentially depend on Ordination, but on Election. The people have power to act, yea, even to adminiſter the Seals virtually and mediately, and give power by Election to the Elders. Election is now anſwerable to the hereditary vocation under the Law; and the Ceremonial Ordination was but circumſtantial to the hereditary right of the Levi•es. Election in all Societies doth ſubſtantially or eſſentially derive power, and correſpondeth to an hereditary derivation of power. ^*^*Ep. 65. p. 285. & 67. p. 289. & 13. p 365.Beza is onely for an implicite conſent of the people, and that onely in Election. The French Synods have condemned Morellius his Democracie, and eſtabliſhed the next Propoſition.

The commom members are not to govern by ſuffrage and coordinate authority together with their Elders. Pro. 2. Prudence and brotherly love require an endeavour in the Elders for the procuring of conſent from all;Confeſſus ſeniorum eſt judicium Recleſiae. Calv. Inſtis. l. 4 c. 12. Sect 3. but conſent is not abſolutely neceſſary. The conſent of the people is not authoritative, but conſultative in reſpect of the Elders. Praeter electionem miniſtrorum, plebis nullas eſſe partes in Eccleſiaſtico regimine cenſemus: ſo Chamier.

1. Arg. 1. If the Presbytery be not inveſted with the power of Juriſdiction, then the Presbytery ſerves but for order;Cyprian by himſelf, or his〈◊〉by it ſelf, either (in conſult a pl••e) did binde and looſe, cenſure and abſolve the lapſet, though he ſpeaks of the conſenſus plebis at ſuch times. Presbyters are but Prolocutors; every members is eſſentially and ſubſtantially a Governour, as well as an Elder.

312. Arg. 2. If the Elders are not to baptize and adminiſter the Seals but at the appointment of the Church in particular; then they have not compleat power of order, becauſe they have not compleat power to execute their proper acts which belong to the power of order.

3. The miniſterial Keys, or the Keys of execution, were given to Peter as an Apoſtle, Matth. 16.18, 19. They may be given to Peter before he was an Apoſtle, quoad promiſſionem; after he was an Apoſtle, quoad confirmationem; when he was made an Apoſtle,Arg. 3. quoad conſtitutionem. 1. Peter is here made oeconomus Eccleſiae; the keys of the Kingdom are given to Peter; and kingdom includes the Church. Peter is evidently diſtinguiſhed from the Church; therefore he doth not repreſent the Church. On this rock (ſaith the Lord Chriſt) will I build my Church; and unto thee will I give the keys: he doth not ſay Ʋnto it (as meaning the Church) out Ʋnto thee, meaning Peter, and diſtinguiſhing Peter from the Church.

Object. If it be objected, that the Keys are not given to the Church here mentioned, becauſe it is the univerſal Church:

Anſw. I reply, 1. The univerſal Church may as well be made the ſubject as the object of the Keys: as it is the object in particular viſible Churches, ſo it may be the ſubject alſo. 2. It may as well be made the ſubject of the Keys, as of the viſible Officers, 1 Cor. 12.28. 3. Is it probable that Pote•ſhould repreſent any other Church, then that which is expreſſed in the Text? 4. I ſuppoſe it hath been already proved, that there is an univerſal viſible Church. Secondly, Peters confeſſion argueth that this promiſe was made unto Peters perſon in way of reward. 3. Peter is made a principal ſtone of the Church, a ſecondary foundation, a maſter-builder. The doctrine of the Apoſtles is called a foundation of the Church:Eph. 2.20. Rev. 11. the twelve Apoſtles are twelve ſundamental ſtones of New Jeruſalem. Peter was named ſo, with reference to his Miniſtery. One and the ſame rule is not ſutable to Peter as an Apoſtolical ſtone, and as a Chriſtian ſtone alſo. Chriſt is the Rock, Peter a ſtone: Chriſt the matter or object of Peters confeſſion, is the Roc•••not the Confeſſion it ſelf. The doctrine of the Apoſtles is a ſecondary foundation, Epheſ. 2. and Chriſt in the doctrine of the Goſpel is the fundamental Rock. The Confeſſion is not the Rock, becauſe the Rock is an antecedent to the Church; but faith or confeſſion is a concomitant. That which is revealed to Peter, is Chriſt in the doctrine or matter of confeſſion; and upon this is the Church to be built. The foundation is homogeneous to the firſt32 eſſentials of the building, viſible confeſſion is an accident to the Church as myſtical. 5. The Apoſtles had the power of the keys immediately from Chriſt; and where, if not in ſuch explicite paſſages as theſe are? 6. Let one place be found, where one of the Apoſtles alone is brought in as repreſenting the common members. I cannot finde Peter or any one of the Apoſtles ſo much as to repreſent the other Apoſtles, when our Saviour ſpeaks to them. When Peter ſpeaks in the name of all the Apoſtles, Joh. 6. and Matth. 19.28. Chriſt ſpeaks to all in the plural number; not to Peter onely. It is queſtionable whether Peter did intend to ſpeak in the name of all in this place; and it is as queſtionable whether our Saviour intended all directly, in ſpeaking to Peter. 7. What is there in that Text to argue that Peter is here repreſentative, both as a member in common, and alſo as an Apoſtle? Apoſtolical power and Church-power cannot be conveyed in the ſame expreſſions, tum quoad praedicatum. & ſubjectum. ^*^*If Chriſt had ſaid, Thou art Peter, both a common member & an Apoſtle and unto thee will I give the keys; then there had been reaſon to have conceived that the keys had contained both Church-power and Apoſtolical power: but the Text doth not ſo ſpeak.Auguſtine ſeemeth ſometimes to apprehend that Peter did repreſent all Chriſtians; but Doctor Reynolds hath obſerved, that he affirmeth that Peter received the Apoſtolical Office here, Perſonam omnium Apostolorum gerentem, in Johan. Tractat. 118. It is evident that Auguſtine did not make the body of members the ſubject of executive power.

Object. Peter doth at leaſt repreſent the Apoſtles and their ſucceſſors.

Anſw. 1. The Keys may be given onely to Peter directly here; becauſe they were in Peter wholly, and the other Apoſtles were not ſpoken unto. All power of execution is virtually in every Apoſtle. One Apoſtle hath as much power (in caſe there be but one) as all together. One Elder hath not a divided power, where there are more then one to conſtitute a Presbyterie. Arg. 4.2. The Keys were given to all the Apoſtles by conſequence, though not in the way of repreſentation. 3. If Peter did now receive the Keys Apoſtolical, then he could not repreſent the common Preſbyters. The ſame rule, in the ſame expreſſions, cannot confer ſuch a different power as the power of common elders and the power Apoſtolical; the Text and the parallels do not admit of any ſuch repreſentation

The Apoſtles could not poſſibly repreſent the Church, Matth. 18. They are diſtinguiſhed from the Church, which they are ſent to gather. The Church gathered is the object of the Miniſtery of thoſe that are ſent. They are to teach them after that they have baptized

33The Apoſtles could not poſſibly repreſent the Church, Matth. 18. They are diſtinguiſhed from the Church which they are ſent to gather. The Church gathered is the object of the Miniſtery of thoſe that are ſene. They are to teach them after that they have baptized them. 2. They have power of office, or actual power to baptize. 3. They are bid Ga up and down to teach all Nations. This place is thus far parallel to Matth. 16, and confirmeth the interpretavion precedent. But our Saviour here intendeth this commiſſion even to the ſucceſſors of the Apoſtles. I am with you (ſaith he) to the end of the World. In all congruity our Saviour underſtands by you, ſuch as you are; ſuch as are indued with authority to teach and baptize, as well as you: onely the commiſſion is to be interpreted quoad materiam ſubjectam; and therefore the Apoſtolical commiſſion is not exactly quadrato to the common Elders. The promiſe of Chriſts preſence tended to the encouragement of the Apoſtles and their ſucceſſors, in the work of the Miniſtery, about which they were now ſent: and that power which is given to the Apoſtles here, is given to all Elders, as far as Scripture may permit.

5. Elders have as full power to baptize as to teach,Arg. 5. according to this Text; and by conſequence they have full power to admit members. Full power to baptize upon making a diſciple, without any intervening act of the Church, doth argue full power to admit, becauſe admiſſion is not a conſequent of Baptiſm.

6. If all members young and old, children and men;Arg. 6. if thouſands together muſt judge and govern upon conſcience, together with the Presbyterie. 1. It muſt needs interrupt the work. 2. It is work enough, a double labour for the Elders to inſtruct the Church how to judge. There is more time ſpent in informing the Church, then in determining the caſe. The members will make the keys flite about their Blders ears, if they have them.Muſt Elders hold the hands of the common members, (as the maſter teacheth Scholars to write) and act onely by them? 3. Pride is an epidemical diſcaſe in Democratical Government. Who is ſufficient to hold the reins of authority! Where there are no ſtanding Magiſtrates in the Common-wealth, and in the Church no Governours at all, or none but Governours, the off-ſpring is like to be an Iehabed. 4. Confuſion and diſorder is inevitable. Turba ruunt. The Church ought to be a patern of punctual order. A Democracie is called by Plato, Nundi•ae populares. 5. As Churchwork muſt needs be too long a doing by ſo many, when it is caſie; ſo it muſt needs be done too ſoon by ſuch as are precipitant, when it34 is difficult. Some are conſcientious and ſcrupulous, others unſeaſoned, ignoran, youthful. This is a Pedocracy as well as a Democracy. The ſeat of Government is the ſeat of Wiſedom.

7. Arg. 7. It is naturally in the power of the Presbyterie to admoniſh the whole church, to ſuſpend the whole church in reſpect of the ſeals,1 Theſ. 5.12. It is intoletable that many whole churches ſhould convene and act•on••nctim, eſpecially for all offences.Arg. 8. otherwiſe they might be active in adminiſtring to thoſe which are known to be unworthy. This power containeth more then a negative reference to their elders. The church and its elders are not co-ordinate ſocieties in reſpect of ordinary execution. In Iſrael there was Soveraignty in the Magiſtrates or Princes. Amongſt the Romans, Imperium was in magiſtratu, Majeſtas in populo.

8. It is granted that Elders have full power in reſpect of ſome acts of juriſdiction; elders may ſend to, or ſpeak to one another for a word of exhortation, and not ask the conſent of the church. &c. And where are the ancient bounds? By what rule are they ſubordinate to the church in other acts? Are they not ſeparated to execute all the ſtanding laws of Chriſt? Why ſhould they depend upon the determinations of the people, who are choſen to interpret Chriſts laws unto the people, and that in way of authority, as being ſet over the people? Praeceptive power without corrective power (as one ſaith) is like a ſword without an edge.

9. Arg. 9. Deu. 21.5.The Elders are rulers, governors, ſet over the church, and have power to command, to admoniſh as ſuperior in authority judicial, 1 Theſ. 5.12. The church is charged to obey their elders, as over-ſhadowing perſons in that way of government, Heb. 13.17. The angels are rebuked for the corruptions of the churches of Aſia, as if it had been in their power to prevent and redreſſe. How could Diotrephes have the face to arrogate ſuch Prelatical power, if the Presbyters had not power of juriſdiction in their hands? The Levites were to carrie the Tabernacle under the prieſts, the government was praeordinately upon the prieſts ſhoulders. The church is to be carryed, not to carry; to obey, not to command; to be ſubject, not to govern. Thoſe that allowed elders nothing but〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉in the French churches, do wholy ſute our practiſe.

Object. The peoples conſent is neceſſary in the way of liberty, not in the way of authority.

Anſw. 1. If the peoples denial of conſent muſt bind the Elders, ſo that they cannot proceed, and the elders denial of conſent doth not bind the people when a caſe is voted, then the bodie of35 members hath more authority then the Elders. 2. If the elders and body of members have a negative voice for the binding of each other, then we make the church to conſiſt of two co-ordinate ſocieties, but altogether gratis, as far as I underſtand the Scripture. 3. A binding power is a power of authority, Matth. 16. and 18. Joh. 20. And authority may be natural as well as inſtituted. The people have authority by a natural law originally, the elders by a poſitive law. And if the people have power by a natural or hereditary right in point of ordinary execution, their authority of ordinary execution doth ſo far excel the power of elders, as heriditary Monarchy doth excel that which is elective, and ſo it is in an Ariſtocracy. 4. A neceſſity of the members conſent doth conſtitute church-government exceſſively Democratical. In Rome, in Athens &c. they were far from ſuch a Democracy, as wherein all the people did govern conſtantly with their Magiſtrates, and yet they are reputed Democratical. An abſolute Monarch (ſaith one) is not bound to a Parliament; and grant but an abſolute Ariſtocracy, a Parliament or general court ſhall have but a conſultative power, not a binding or authoritative power. Chamier profeſſeth that he hath not ſeen one that affirmeth church-policie to be Democratical. But if the conſent of the members be abſolutely neceſſary in ordinary execution, certainly church policie is Democratical, or elſe there neither hath been, nor is any Democracy in the world where there are Magiſtrates. Truth is, where Magiſtrates are bound to the judgement of the people in ordinary execution, they are but titular magiſtrates, and where elders are bound to the judgement of the members, they are but moderators or titular governors. 5. Liberty is relative,D•m••lcus Sil•in the Councel of Tr•••, made liberty oppoſite either to neceſſity or ſervitude. Poteſtas in ſ•l•bert••dicitur, & diſtinguitur a p•••ſtat•in ali••. Gr••. de Jure〈◊〉l. 1. p 4. and imports directly (in a civil or moral ſence) but an immunity from ſervitude or authority; but the conſent of the members in admiſſions and cenſures, doth bind and looſe, and is an act of power over others; Liberty in propriety directly argues that a man is not under authority, but not that a man is in authority over others. A Jury in a Court is a tranſient Magiſtracy, though not a ſtanding Magiſtracy. The Commons in Parliament, which have a binding vote, are tranſient governors. 6. The conſent of the members doth give authority, therefore it is an act of authority. Nihil dat, quod non habet. The act of the elders in binding and looſing is an act of authority, and it is incomplete, ſeparated from the conſent of the members. 7. The conſent of the members in election, is an act of authority, therefore36 their conſent in point of execution (if it be abſolutely neceſſary, or if it be a reſignation of liberty in both) is an act of authority. Liberty imports directly an immunity from authority out of a mans ſelf; indirectly, that a man hath authority over himſelf. A free man is ſui juris, as he is properly ſaid to be free; now when a people reſigneth this liberty either to Magiſtrates or Miniſters, it reſigneth that authority which was formerly reſident in themſelves. 〈◊〉65. p 28.5. Ruther p. 50.8. Corrective and coactive power is authority, and this conſent of the members doth complete the corrective and coactive power of the people, over which they were governours. The conſent of the people is deſireable, and many godly men ſpeak much this way, which do not eſteem it abſolutely neceſſary. It is deſireable humani•atis gratia (as one ſpeaketh of a Parliament in an abſolute monarchy) not neceſſitas gratia. If Politicks do truly affirm thoſe Kingdoms to be beſt eſtabliſhed where their Kings are hereditary, and do nunquam interire (as they ſpeak;) how (miſerably) is that church conſtituted, that hath never any governors, or none but the ghoſt-like apparitions of governors? Our elders may well be called ghoſtly fathers, and ghoſtly governors, which have but the ſhadow of authority perfectly in them. I might argue farther from the definition of authority; authority in the general is but jus regendi, and if the conſent of the members do neceſſarily bind, and that jure divine, it is fully correſpondent to the definition. Azorius his definition of authority, or any other that ever I met with, doth make a binding conſent an act of authority: we uſe to divide power but into a power of might, and a power of authority; a power of liberty is reduced to a power of authority. Governors and to govern with coactive power, art conjugates. Are they not proper governors which ſhall govern the people over which they are governors, onely when the people themſelves liſt? ^a^aAn Indian is bound as well as a member, to obey a miniſter, if a miniſter may preach to an Indian (vi officii.) It is not enough to ſay that the members are bound to obey the doctrinal ſentence of the elders (clave〈…〉) vi officii or in reſpect of a preceptive power; they are bound to obey the exhortation of any private brother, (vi materiae, which it but little different) when he ſpeaketh according to the rule, where there is no preceptive ſuperior or judicial power. It is but equal that governors or rulers ſhould have judicial power to conſtrain obedience, which is inconſiſtent with a neceſſity of the members conſent. If an abſolute Ariſtocracy be for the general leſſe dangerous then a Democracy, there is leſſe danger in the church then in the Common-wealth from37 ſuch an Ariſtocracy; becauſe the medium of government in the church, is rather ſwaſive then coactive; Elders are to govern verbo non gladia. Such governors do beſt become the Church, as may eminently repreſent the kingly office of Chriſt, at leaſt as evidently as the prieſtly and prophetical office of Chriſt. It is ſuppoſed that a King or Monarch may be complete in reſpect of ordinary execution, and yet the Soveraignty or Majeſty reſide in the Kingdom; and an Ariſtocracy may be complete in reſpect of ordinary execution, and yet that Soveraignty or Majeſty reſide in the Common-wealth. Where the people have power to ſet up and pul down Magiſtrates with an offenſive power, there is a Democracy in being or conſtitution, if not in ordinary action or execution. Epiſt 67. and 68.Arg. 10. Num. 21.16.17. 1 Chr. 26.And a power defenſive, or a power to except and interpoſe (in caſe of juſt defence) is connatural to all bodies or beings, civil or natural, where the Soveraignty or Majeſtie is loſt. or given away to ſuch as bear the enſignes of authority. Bexa is for an implicite conſent of the people in election, but reſolute againſt it in other caſes, non tantum periculoſum, ſed etiam iniquuns eſſe, totum caetum is ſuffragia witti. Epist. 83. pag. 36.

10. The relations of elders to churches do challenge power complete. They are antitypical; the eyes, heads, fathers, princes of the Congregation. Moſes and the Princes did repreſent Chriſt and his Apoſtles, and Elders. They are the Captains of the Lords Hoſt. Moſes and the Princes digged the well and ſang to it; to denote how Chriſt and the Elders do digge the well of ſalvation, and ſing the new ſong of ſalvation to the Iſrael of God. Though pro•ati•uni••be probati•nullius ſometimes: yet ſuch as theſe, both together and apart, may be vehemently perſwaſive. Some do ſcruple at the calling of the Miniſtere heads of the Churches, and indeed there is no univerſal head beſide Chriſt; but yet miniſters may be called heads of particular churches, in that ſence as they are fathers and rulers.

11. It was Gods Ordinance in Iſrael. In all Courts,Arg. 11. Lev. 13. Num. 35. Deut. 19.12. in the Temple, in the Cities of Refuge, in the Synagogues, the elders had full power of execution. The Prieſts did onely determine concerning the Leproſie. The Levits themſelves did open and ſhut, were porters under the Prieſts. This Ordinance of God ſeemeth to be grounded on moral equity; we generally find an equity in Gods Ordinances, as well as a ceremony. And it is moſt ſutable to nature, it being unnatural for the multitude to execute. I is true that the people of God are••••isted to a ne•••communion with God in worſhip, then under the Law, but it is true in reſpect of the Elders as well as of the common members. And we are freed from the38 ceremony of the Moſaical Ordinances, not from the equity.

12. Arg. 12. That power which is aſcribed to the Prieſts and Levites, Ezek. 44.23, 24. muſt needs type out the power of elders in the Chriſtian church. The whole chapter and propheſie concerneth the Chriſtian church. The civil acts in Iſrael were a typical pattern of the Chriſtian church, as well as the Temple. The Prieſts and the Levits muſt ſtand in judgement, and judge and determine controverfies in the church, Deut. 19.17. By their word ſhall all strife be tryed. Deut. 21.5. They ſhall give the ſentence of judgement, and thou ſhalt not decline from their judgement: they are ſeparated for this purpoſe by the Lord, Deut. 17.9.11. Allegories are Argumentative, when they are evident. And though all things are not exactly typed out in the ceremonies, at leaſt in all ceremonies, yet it is our duty to obſerve that which is repreſentative. The Prieſts were types of all ſpiritual men in oppoſition to natural men, but they were types alſo of Elders in reſpect of their ſpecial office, as they are oppoſed to the Saints in general.

13. Arg. 13. Elders are titles of authority, the notation thereof alludes to the Elders under the Law. Paſtors are titles of authority, the notation thereof alludes to the uſe of the phraſe in the Scriptures, and it is applyed even to Civil Magiſtrates. Shepherds do govern as well as feed; and Elders are to feed by authority as well as by doctrine. The Prieſts under the Law had complete power in the Temple. 1. To admit into the outward Court. 2. To adminiſter at the Altar and Laver, the Covenants, and Doctrines, and the ſence of Regeneration, and Juſtification, of Mortification and Vivification. 3, To adminiſter about the Table and Candleſtick, for the increaſe of faith, and love, and joy. Thus the Elders are to inſtitute and make diſciples; and after inſtitution by the doctrine of the Covenants, to confirm by Baptiſm, and then build them up unto perfection, by teaching them all things, Matth. 28.18. Go, make Diſciples in all Nations, baptizing them, and teaching them to obſerve all things whatſoever I have commanded you. Admiſſion into the outward Court, ſeemeth to ſignifie initiation into the viſible Church; the Altar, and Laver, and Table, the gradual proceeding from grace to grace, of thoſe that are worſhippers of God in ſpirit and in truth, of inward worſhippers of God, of ſuch as belong to the myſtical Church, Rev. 11.2, 3. &c. True converts are firſt brought to the altar of faith, repentance, and mortification, and then to the laver,39 for the confirmation of ſanctification and juſtification, by the doctrines and ſeals of the blood and ſpirit of Chriſt.

14. What the Apoſtles could do in all Churches,Arg. 14. that the ordinary Elders can do in reſpect of ordinary adminiſtrations and ordinary exemption, within the ſphaeres of their particular Churches. And the Apoſtles could admit, excommunicate, threaten the rod, make decrees &c. They did not ask the vote of the Church in admiſſions or excommunications, Acts 2. 1 Tim. 1. Philip himſelf could admit without the Church; Acts 8. Paul bids Timothy and Titus to command and rebuke. Tit. 1. Mr. Cartwright hath done enough for this point in his Reply. If the Apoſtles had deprived the people of any power due to them in