{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_13941/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_13941","id":"gutenberg_13941","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/13941","summary":null,"tags":["Canon Law","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Presbyterian Church -- Government"],"text":"THE\n\nDIVINE RIGHT\n\nOF\n\nCHURCH GOVERNMENT:\n\nWHEREIN IT IS PROVED\n\nTHAT THE PRESBYTERIAN GOVERNMENT, BY PREACHING AND RULING ELDERS, IN\nSESSIONAL, PRESBYTERIAL, AND SYNODICAL ASSEMBLIES, MAY LAY THE ONLY\nLAWFUL CLAIM TO A DIVINE RIGHT, ACCORDING TO THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.\n\nA NEW EDITION, CORRECTED AND AMENDED.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\nBY SUNDRY MINISTERS OF CHRIST WITHIN THE\nCITY OF LONDON.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTO WHICH IS ADDED\n\nAN APPENDIX,\n\nCONTAINING\n\nEXTRACTS FROM SOME OF THE BEST AUTHORS WHO HAVE WRITTEN ON CHURCH\nGOVERNMENT,\n\nCONCERNING THE SCRIPTURAL QUALIFICATIONS AND DUTIES OF CHURCH MEMBERS;\nTHE SOLE RIGHT OF GOSPEL MINISTERS TO PREACH THE GOSPEL; THE PEOPLE'S\nDIVINE RIGHT TO CHOOSE THEIR OWN PASTORS;\n\nTOGETHER WITH\n\nAN ABSTRACT OF THE ARGUMENTS OF THE GREAT DR. OWEN (THOUGH A PROFESSED\nINDEPENDENT) IN FAVOUR OF THE DIVINE RIGHT OF THE OFFICE OF THE RULING\nELDER.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nNEW YORK: R. MARTIN & CO., 26 JOHN-STREET.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nM.DCCC.XLIV.\n\n\n\n\nTHE EDITOR TO THE READER.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nAfter what the authors of the following Treatise have said in their\npreface, the Editor judges it unnecessary for him to detain the reader\nlong with any observations of his upon the subject. He, however, could\nsincerely wish that the friends of Christ would pay that attention to\nthe government and discipline of his Church which it justly deserves.\nAlthough this subject should not be placed among the things essential to\nthe being of a Christian; yet if it be found among the things that\nChrist has commanded, it is at our peril if we continue wilfully\nignorant of, or despise it. He has expressly declared, that he who\nbreaks one of the _least_ of his commandments, and teacheth men to do\nso, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. It is an opinion too\ncommon, that if we believe the _essentials_ of religion, there is no\noccasion for so much preciseness about the forms of church government,\nwhich are only _circumstantials_, as there will be no inquiry made about\nthese at the tribunal of Christ. But whatever relative importance the\nthings of religion may have, when compared with one another, we ought to\nreckon nothing which God hath appointed, nothing which Jesus hath\nratified with his blood, nothing which the Holy Spirit hath indited, so\n_circumstantial_, as to be unworthy of our serious regard. It is at\nleast very rash, if not presumptuous, to say, that nothing about the\ncircumstantials of religion will be inquired into at the tribunal of\nChrist. God has expressly said, that every work, good or evil, every\nidle word, and every deed done in the body, shall be brought into\njudgment; and false worshippers will, perhaps, find that their form of\nworship consisted in something worse than idle words, or sinful words\neither, even in sinful deeds, for which they will be accountable at the\njudgment. As Christ laid down his life for his people, has instructed\nthem, and has set a hedge about all that they have, it would be most\nungrateful to requite him with pouring the highest contempt on his\nkingly honor and authority; and when his worship is polluted, his truth\nperverted, and the walls of his New Testament Zion broken down, to care\nfor none of those things. Government and discipline are the hedge of his\ngarden, the Church; and how will what men call the essentials of\nreligion remain in their glory, when this is broken down, the present\nstate of affairs can sufficiently attest, when the most damnable errors\nare propagated with impunity.\n\nIn our times the enemies of the scriptural order of the house of God are\nvery numerous and very active, exerting all their power to break down\nthe carved work of God's sanctuary. The present spirit for novelty and\ninnovation, together with the rage for infidelity so prevalent, strongly\nfavors the opposition made to every thing which has a tendency to bind\nmen closely to God, to his truths, to the purity of his worship and\nordinances, or to one another by a holy profession. The design,\ntherefore, of republishing this Treatise is to assist Presbyterians of\nall denominations in the understanding of those passages of Scripture\nupon which their wall is built, that they be not led aside by the\ncunning speeches of false teachers, whereby they deceive and draw aside\nthe hearts of the simple.\n\nThis work was first published at London, at the time when the\ncontroversy between the Presbyterians and ancient Independents ran very\nhigh, and every intelligent and unprejudiced reader will see, that the\nHoly Scriptures have been carefully perused, accurately compared, wisely\ncollected, and judiciously explained, in order to evince that the\nPresbyterian government has the only lawful claim to a divine right, and\nis the only form appointed by Christ in his Church. It is, therefore, to\nbe wished, that all his people would endeavor, in the strength of Divine\ngrace, to observe the laws of his house, and to walk in all his\nordinances and commandments blameless.\n\nConsiderable pains have been taken to make this edition more easily\nunderstood by common readers than the former, and yet several difficult\nand hard words have passed unnoticed. The Latin quotations from the\nFathers have been omitted, because they contain nothing materially\ndifferent from what is in the body of the work, and modern Independents\npay little regard to any human authorities but their own. It was\nproposed to have added a few extracts from Messrs. Rutherford and\nGillespie, but upon looking into their works nothing of consequence was\nobserved, that tended to cast any new light upon the subject. It is\nhoped, however, that the Appendix is filled up with extracts from other\nauthors upon subjects of considerable importance, and very necessary for\nthese times, concerning the scriptural qualifications and duties of\nchurch members; the divine right of the gospel ministry; the people's\ndivine right to choose their own pastors; with an abstract of Dr. Owen's\narguments in favor of the divine right of the ruling elder: and as there\nare many serious Christians who have not a capacity to take up and\nretain a long chain of reasoning, a summary of the whole Treatise is\ngiven by way of question and answer as a conclusion.\n\nThe Editor is not to be understood as approving of, or vindicating every\nsingle sentiment, or mode of expression, used in this Treatise: at the\nsame time, next to the Holy Scriptures, he recommends it as one of the\nbest defences of presbytery which he has seen.\n\nThat it may be blessed of God for informing the ignorant, settling the\nwavering, and establishing the believers of _the present Truth_, is the\nearnest desire of,\n\nChristian reader,\n\nYour humble servant in the Gospel,\n\nT.H.\n\n_Paisley, 28th February, 1799._\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\nTO THE PIOUS AND JUDICIOUS READER.\n\n\nCHRISTIAN READER:\n\nThou hast in the ensuing treatise, 1st, a brief delineation of the\nnature of a divine right, wherein it consists, and how many ways a thing\nmay be accounted of divine right, according to the Scriptures; as also,\n2d, a plain and familiar description of that church government which\nseems to have the clearest divine right for it, and (of all other\ncontended for) to be the most consonant and agreeable to the word of\nChrist; which description (comprehending in itself the whole frame and\nsystem of the government) is in the several branches thereof explained\nand confirmed by testimonies or arguments from Scripture; more briefly,\nin particulars which are easily granted; more largely, in particulars\nwhich are commonly controverted; yet as perspicuously and concisely in\nboth as the nature of this unusual and comprehensive subject insisted\nupon would permit. Things are handled rather by way of positive\nassertion, than of polemical dissertation, (which too commonly\ndegenerates into verbal strifes, 1 Tim. vi. 3, 4; 2 Tim. ii. 23; and\nvain-jangling, 1 Tim. i. 6,) and where any dissenting opinions or\nobjections are refuted, we hope it is with that sobriety, meekness, and\nmoderation of spirit, that any unprejudiced judgment may perceive, that\nwe had rather gain than grieve those who dissent from us; that we\nendeavor rather to heal up than to tear open the rent; and that we\ncontend more for truth than for victory.\n\nTo the publication hereof we have been inclinable (after much\nimportunity) principally upon deliberate and serious consideration of,\n1st, the necessity of a treatise of this kind; 2d, the advantage likely\nto accrue thereupon; and, 3d, the seasonable opportunity of sending it\nabroad at such a time as this is.\n\nI. The necessity of a treatise of this nature, is evident and urgent.\nFor,\n\n1. We hold ourselves obliged, not only by the common duty of our\nministerial calling, but also by the special bond of our solemn\ncovenant with God, especially in Art. 1, to bend all our best endeavors\nto help forward a reformation of religion according to the word of God,\nwhich can never be effected without a due establishment of the\nscripture-government and discipline in the Church of God. And to make\nknown what this government is from the law and testimony, by preaching\nor writing, comes properly and peculiarly within the sphere of our place\nand vocation.\n\n2. A cloud of darkness and prejudice, in reference to this matter of\nchurch government, too generally rests upon the judgments and\napprehensions of men (yea of God's own people) among us, either, 1st,\nthrough the difficulty or uncommonness of this matter of church\ngovernment, (though ancient and familiar in other reformed churches, yet\nnew and strange to us;) or, 2d, through the strange misrepresentations\nthat are made hereof, by those that are small friends to the true\npresbyterial government, or that are enemies to all church government\nwhatsoever; or, 3d, through the different opinions about church\ngovernment, which are to be found among pious people and ministers: by\nall which the weak and unstable minds of many are cast into a maze of\nmany confused thoughts and irresolutions.\n\n3. Though many learned treatises have been published, some whereof have\npositively asserted, others have polemically vindicated divers parts of\nchurch government, and the divine right thereof, yet hitherto no\ntreatise of this nature is extant, positively laying open the nature of\na divine right, what it is, and a system of that government, which is\nso, and proving both by the Scriptures; without which, how shall the\njudgments and consciences of men be satisfied, that this is that church\ngovernment, according to the word of God, which they have covenanted to\nendeavor to promote, and whereto they are obliged to submit? And since\nit is our lot to travel in an unbeaten path, we, therefore, promise to\nourselves, from all sober and judicious readers, the greater candor and\ningenuity in their measuring of our steps and progress herein.\n\nII. The advantage which may probably accrue hereupon, we hope shall be\nmanifold: For, 1. Who can tell but that some of them, that in some\nthings are misled and contrary-minded, may be convinced and regained?\nand it will be no small reward of our labors if but one erring brother\nmay be brought back. 2. Some satisfaction may redound to such as are of\ndoubtful, unresolved minds, by removing of their doubts and scruples,\nand ripening of their resolutions, to settle more safely in point of\nchurch government. 3. Those that as yet are unseen in the matter of\nchurch government, or that want money to buy, or leisure to read many\nbooks upon this subject, may here have much in a little, and\ncompetently inform themselves of the whole body of the government. 4.\nConsequently upon the attaining of the former ends, the work of\nreformation will be much facilitated and smoothed, the hearts of the\npeople being prepared for the Lord and his ordinances. 5. The present\nattempt (if it reach not to that completeness and satisfactoriness which\nis desired) may yet incite some of our brethren of more acute and\npolished judgments to embark themselves in some further discoveries for\nthe public benefit of the Church. 6. But though it should fall out that\nin all the former we should be utterly disappointed, we shall have this\npeace and comfort upon our own spirits, that we have not hid our talent\nin the earth, nor neglected to bear witness to this part of Christ's\ntruth, touching the government of his Church, by his kingly power,\nwherein Christ was opposed so much in all ages, Psalm ii. 1, 2, 3; Luke\nxix. 14, 27; Acts iv., and for which Christ did suffer so much in a\nspecial and immediate manner, as[1] some have observed. For this end\nChrist came into the world, (and for this end we came into the\nministerial calling,) to bear witness to the truth.\n\nIII. Finally, the present opportunity of publishing a treatise on this\nsubject doth much incite and encourage us therein. For at this time we\nare beginning, in this province of London, (and we hope the whole\nkingdom will, with all convenient speed, and due caution, second us,) to\nput that covenanted church government into actual execution, which we\nhave a long time intended in our deliberate resolutions. So that\ngenerally we shall be engaged in the government one way or other, either\nas acting in it as the church officers, or as submitting to it as church\nmembers: now, how shall any truly conscientious person, either act in\nit, or conform and submit unto it with faith, judgment, and alacrity,\ntill he be in some competent measure satisfied of the divine right\nthereof?\n\nWill mere prudence, without a divine right, be a sufficient basis to\nerect the whole frame of church government upon, as some conceive?\nPrudentials, according to general rules of Scripture, may be of use in\ncircumstantials, but will bare prudentials in substantials also satisfy\neither our God, our covenant, our consciences, or our end in this great\nwork of reformation? What conscientious person durst have a hand in\nacting as a ruling elder, did he not apprehend the word of God holds\nforth a divine right for the ruling elder? Who durst have a hand in the\ncensures of admonishing the unruly, excommunicating the scandalous and\nobstinate, and of restoring the penitent, were there not a divine right\nhereof revealed in the Scripture, &c. Now, therefore, that ruling\nelders, and the rest of the people, may begin this happy work\nconscientiously, judiciously, cheerfully, in some measure perceiving the\ndivine right of the whole government, wherein they engage themselves,\ncleared by Scripture, we hope, by God's blessing, that this small tract\nwill afford some seasonable assistance, which will be unto us a very\nacceptable recompense.\n\nThus far of the nature of this treatise, and the grounds of our\npublishing thereof. In the next place, a few doubts or scruples touching\nchurch government here asserted, being succinctly resolved, we shall\npreface no further.\n\n_Doubt_ 1. Many scruple, and much question the divine right of the whole\nframe of church government; as, 1. Whether there be any particular\nchurch government of divine right? 2. What that government is? 3. What\nchurch officers or members of elderships are of divine right? 4. Whether\nparochial or congregational elderships be of divine right? 5. Whether\nclassical presbyteries be of divine right? 6. Whether provincial,\nnational, and ecumenical assemblies be of divine right? 7. Whether\nappeals from congregational to classical, provincial, national, and\necumenical assemblies, and their power to determine upon such appeals,\nbe of divine right? 8. Whether the power of censures in the\ncongregational eldership, or any other assembly, be of divine right? 9.\nWhether there be any particular rules in the Scripture directing persons\nor assemblies in the exercise of their power? 10. Whether the civil\nmagistrates, or their committees' and commissioners' execution of church\ncensures be contrary to that way of government which Christ hath\nappointed in his Church?\n\n_Resol_. To all or most of these doubts some competent satisfaction may\nbe had from this treatise ensuing, if seriously considered. For, 1. That\nthere is a church government of divine right, now under the New\nTestament, declared in Scripture, is proved, Part I. 2. What that\ngovernment is in particular, is evidenced both by the description of\nchurch government, and the confirmation of the parts thereof by\nScripture, Part. II. chap. 1, and so to the end of the book: whereby it\nis cleared that the presbyterial government is that particular\ngovernment which is of divine right, according to the word of God. 3.\nWhat ordinary church officers, (members of the several elderships,) are\nof divine right, is proved, Part II, chap. 11, sect. 1, viz. pastors and\nteachers, with ruling elders. 4. That parochial or congregational\nelderships, consisting of preaching and ruling elders, are of divine\nright, is manifested, Part II. chap. 12. 5. That classical presbyteries,\nor assemblies, and their power in church government, are of divine\nright, is demonstrated, Part II. chap. 13. 6. That synodical assemblies,\nor councils in general, (consequently provincial, national, or\necumenical councils in particular,) and their power in church\ngovernment, are of divine right, is cleared, Part II. chap. 14. 7. That\nappeals from congregational elderships, to classical and synodical\nassemblies, from lesser to greater assemblies associated, and power in\nthose assemblies to determine authoritatively in such, appeals, are of\ndivine right, is proved, Part II. chap. 15. 8. That the power of church\ncensures is in Christ's own church officers only as the first subject\nand proper receptacle there of divine right, is cleared, Part II. chap.\n11, sect. 2, which officers of Christ have and execute the said power\nrespectively, in all the ruling assemblies, congregational, classical,\nor synodical. See section 3, and chap. 12, 13, 14, 15. 9. That the\nScriptures hold forth, touching church government, not only general, but\nalso many particular rules, sufficiently directing both persons and\nassemblies how they should duly put in execution their power of church,\ngovernment. This is made good, Part II. chap. 4; and those that desire\nto know which are these rules in particular, may consult those\nlearned[2] centuriators of Magdeburg, who have collected and\nmethodically digested, in the very words of the Scripture, a system of\ncanons or rules, touching church government, as in the preface to those\nrules they do profess, saying, touching things pertaining to the\ngovernment of the Church, the apostles delivered certain canons, which\nwe will add in order, &c., the very heads of which would be too prolix\nto recite. 10. Finally, that neither the supreme civil magistrate, as\nsuch, nor consequently any commissioner or committees whatsoever,\ndevised and erected by his authority, are the proper subject of the\nformal power of church government, nor may lawfully, by any virtue of\nthe magistratical office, dispense any ecclesiastical censures or\nordinances: but that such undertakings are inconsistent with that way of\ngovernment which Christ hath appointed in his Church, is evidenced, Part\nII. chap. 9, well compared with chap. 11.\n\n_Doubt_ 2. But this presbyterial government is likely to be an arbitrary\nand tyrannical government, forasmuch as the presbyters of the assembly\nof divines and others (who, Diotrephes-like, generally affect\ndomineering) have desired an unlimited power, according to their own\njudgments and prudence, in excommunicating men from the ordinances in\ncases of scandal.\n\n_Resol_. A heinous charge, could it be proved against the presbyterial\ngovernment. Now for wiping off this black aspersion, consider two\nthings, viz: I. The imputation itself, which is unjust and groundless;\nII. The pretended ground hereof, which is false or frivolous.\n\nI. The imputation itself is, that the presbyterial government is likely\nto be an arbitrary and tyrannical government. _Ans_. How unjust this\naspersion! I. What likelihood of arbitrary conduct in this government,\nthat is, that it should be managed and carried on according to men's\nmere will and pleasure? For, 1. The presbyterial government (truly so\ncalled) is not in the nature of it any invention of man, but an\nordinance of Christ; nor in the execution of it to be stated by the will\nof man, but only by the sure word of prophecy, the sacred Scriptures.\nThis government allows not of one church officer at all; nor of one\nruling assembly made up of those officers; nor of one censure or act of\npower to be done by any officer or assembly; nor of one ordinance to be\nmanaged in the Church of God, but what are grounded upon, and warranted\nby the word of God. This government allows no execution of any part\nthereof, neither in substantials, nor circumstantials, but according to\nthe particular, or at least, the general rules of Scripture\nrespectively. And can that be arbitrary, which is not at all according\nto man's will, but only according to Christ's rule, limiting and\nordering man's will? Or is not the Scripture a better and safer\nprovision against all arbitrary government in the Church, than all the\nordinances, decrees, statutes, or whatsoever municipal laws in the world\nof man's devising, can be against all arbitrary government in the\ncommonwealth? Let not men put out their own eyes, though others would\ncast a mist before them. 2. Who can justly challenge the reformed\npresbyterial churches for arbitrary proceedings in matters of church\ngovernment, practised in some of them for above these fourscore years?\nOr where are their accusers? 3. Why should the presbyterial\ngovernment, to be erected in England, be prejudged as arbitrary, before\nthe government be put in execution? When arbitrary conduct appears, let\nthe adversaries complain. 4. If any arbitrary conduct hath been\ndiscovered in any reformed church, or shall fall out in ours, it is or\nshall be more justly reputed the infirmity and fault of the governors,\nthan of the government itself.\n\nII. What probability or possibility of tyranny in the presbyterial\ngovernment? For, 1. Who should tyrannize, what persons, what ruling\nassemblies? Not the ministers; for, hitherto they have given no just\ncause of any suspicion, since this government was in hand: and they are\ncounterpoised in all assemblies with a plurality of ruling elders, it\nbeing already studiously[3] provided that there be always two ruling\nelders to one minister: if there be still two to one, how should they\ntyrannize if they would? Neither ministers nor ruling elders are likely\nto tyrannize, if due care be taken by them, whom it doth concern, to\nelect, place, and appoint, conscientious, prudent, and gracious\nministers and ruling elders over all congregations. Nor yet the ruling\nassemblies, lesser or greater; for in the presbyterial government all\nlesser ruling assemblies (though now at first, perhaps, some of them\nconsisting of more weak and less experienced members) are subordinate to\nthe greater authoritatively; and persons aggrieved by any\nmal-administrations have liberty to appeal from inferior to superior:\nand the very national assembly itself, though not properly subordinate,\nyet is it to be responsible to the supreme political magistracy in all\ntheir proceedings so far as subjects and members of the commonwealth.\n\nIII. How can they tyrannize over any? Or in what respects? Not over\ntheir estates: for they claim no secular power at all over men's\nestates, by fines, penalties, forfeitures, or confiscations. Not over\ntheir bodies, for they inflict no corporal punishment, by banishment,\nimprisonment, branding, slitting, cropping, striking, whipping,\ndismembering, or killing. Not over their souls; for, them they desire by\nthis government to gain, Matth. xviii. 15; to edify, 2 Cor. x. 8, and\nxiii. 10; and to save, 1 Cor. v. 5. Only this government ought to be\nimpartial and severe against sin, that the flesh may be destroyed, 1\nCor. v. 5. It is only destructive to corruption, which is deadly and\ndestructive to the soul. Thus the imputation itself of arbitrary conduct\nand tyranny to the presbyterial government is unjust and groundless.\n\nII. The pretended ground of this aspersion is false and frivolous. The\npresbyters of the Assembly of Divines, and others (_Diotrephes_-like,\naffecting pre-eminence) have desired an unlimited power, according to\ntheir own prudence and judgment, in keeping men from the ordinances in\ncases of scandal not enumerated. _Ans_. 1. The presbyters of the\nAssembly and others, are so far from the domineering humor of\nDiotrephes, that they could gladly and heartily have quitted all\nintermeddling in church government, if Jesus Christ had not by office\nengaged them thereto; only to have dispensed the word and sacraments\nwould have procured them less hatred, and more case. 2. They desired\nliberty to keep from the ordinances, not only persons guilty of the\nscandals enumerated, but of all such like scandals, (and to judge which\nare those scandals, not according to their minds unlimitedly, but\naccording to the mind of Christ in his word, more sure than all\nordinances or acts of Parliament in the world.) And was this so hideous\na desire? This liberty was desired, not for themselves, but for\nwell-constituted elderships. As great power was granted by the very\nservice-book to every single curate; (see the Rubric before the\ncommunion.) A perfect enumeration and description of scandals can be\nmade in no book but in the Scriptures; and when all is done, must we not\nrefer thither? All scandals are punishable, as well as any, and to\ninflict penalties on some, and not on others as bad or worse, is\ninexcusable partiality. Why should not presbyteries duly constituted,\nespecially the greater, be accounted, at least, as faithful,\nintelligent, prudent, and every way as competent judges of what is\nscandal, and what not, according to the Scriptures, and that without\narbitrary conduct and tyranny, as any civil court, committees, or\ncommissioners whatsoever? Ruling church assemblies are intrusted with\nthe whole government in the church, consequently with this, and every\npart. The best reformed churches allow to their presbyteries power to\nkeep from the ordinances scandalous persons, not only for scandals\nenumerated, but for scandals of like nature not enumerated, with some\ngeneral clause or other, as may appear in eight several churches,\naccording to the allegations here in the foot-note;[4] and, therefore,\nno new thing is desired, but what is commonly practised in the reformed\nchurches, whom we should imitate so far as they lead us on towards\npurity and perfection.\n\n_Doubt_ 3. But the independent government seems to be a far more\nexcellent way, and it is embraced by many godly and precious people and\nministers.\n\n_Ans_. 1. What true excellency is there at all in the whole independent\ngovernment, save only in those particulars wherein it agrees with the\npresbyterial government; and only so far as it is presbyterial?\nTherefore, the presbyterial government is equally, yea, primarily and\nprincipally excellent. Wherein is the excellency of the independent way\nof government? 1st. Have they only those officers which Christ himself\nhath appointed, pastors and teachers, ruling elders and deacons? So the\nPresbyterians. 2d. Have they those spiritual censures, of admonishing,\nexcommunicating, and receiving again into communion, which Christ\nordained in his Church, for guarding his ordinances, and well guiding of\nthe flock? So the Presbyterians. 3d. Have they congregational\npresbyteries duly elected, and constituted for the exercise of all acts\nof government, proper and necessary for their respective congregations?\nSo the Presbyterians. 4th. Have they liberty of electing their own[5]\nofficers, pastors, elders, and deacons? So the Presbyterians. 5th. Have\nthey power to keep the whole lump of the Church from being leavened, and\npurely to preserve the ordinances of Christ, from pollution and\nprofanation, &c.? So the Presbyterians, &c. So that whereinsoever the\nindependent government is truly excellent, the presbyterial government\nstands in a full equipage and equality of excellence.\n\nII. What one true excellence is there in the whole independent\ngovernment in any one point, wherein it really differs from the\npresbyterial government? Take for instance a few points of difference.\n\n_In the independent government._\n\n    No other visible Church of Christ is acknowledged, but only a single\n    congregational meeting in one place to partake of all ordinances.\n\n    The matter of their visible Church must be to their utmost judgment\n    of discerning such as have true grace, real saints.\n\n    Their churches are gathered out of other true visible churches of\n    Christ, without any leave or consent of pastor or flock; yea,\n    against their wills, receiving such as tender themselves, yea, too\n    often by themselves or others, directly or indirectly seducing\n    disciples after them.\n\n    Preaching elders are only elected, not ordained.\n\n    Ruling elders also preach.\n\n    The subject of church government is the community of the faithful.\n\n    The church officers act immediately as the servants of the church,\n    and deputed thereby.\n\n    All censures and acts of government are dispensed in single\n    congregations ultimately, independently, without all liberty of\n    appeal from them to any superior church assembly; so the parties\n    grieved are left without remedy.\n\n    There are acknowledged no authoritative classes or synods, in\n    common, great, difficult cases, and in matters of appeals, but only\n    suasive and consultative; and in case advice be not followed, they\n    proceed only to a non-communion.\n\n\n_In the presbyterial government._\n\n    One general visible Church of Christ on earth is acknowledged, and\n    all particular churches; and single congregations are but as similar\n    parts of that whole.\n\n    The matter of the Church invisible are only true believers, but of\n    the Church visible persons professing true faith in Christ, and\n    obedience to him according to the rules of the Gospel.\n\n    Parochial churches are received as true visible churches of Christ,\n    and most convenient for mutual edification. Gathering churches out\n    of churches, hath no footsteps in Scripture; is contrary to\n    apostolical practice; is the scattering of churches, the daughter of\n    schism, the mother of confusion, but the stepmother to edification.\n\n    Preaching elders are both elected and ordained.\n\n    Ruling elders only rule, preach not, 1 Tim. v. 17.\n\n    The subject of church government is only Christ's own church\n    officers.\n\n    The church governors act immediately as the servants of Christ, and\n    as appointed by him.\n\n    All censures and acts of government are dispensed in congregational\n    presbyteries subordinately, dependently, with liberty of appeal in\n    all cases to presbyterial or synodal assemblies; where parties\n    grieved have sufficient remedy.\n\n    There are acknowledged, and with happy success used, not only\n    suasive and consultative; but also authoritative classes and synods,\n    in cases of great importance, difficulty, common concernment, or\n    appeals; which have power to dispense all church censures, as need\n    shall require.\n\nLet these and such like particulars in the independent way, differing\nfrom the presbyterial, be duly pondered, and then let the impartial and\nindifferent reader judge, whether they be not the deformities, at least\nthe infirmities of that way.\n\nIII. How many true excellences are there in the way of the presbyterial\ngovernment, wherein it utterly surpasses the independent government!\nRead but the particulars of the former parallel in the presbyterial\ngovernment, and then consider how far this transcends, yea, how the\nindependent government is indeed no government at all, to the\npresbyterial government; wherein is to be found such ample provision,\nand that according to the word of God, for comely order against\nconfusion; for peace and unity of the Church against schism and\ndivision; for truth of the faith against all error and heresy; for piety\nand unblamableness against all impiety and scandal of conversation; for\nequity and right against all mal-administrations, whether ignorant,\narbitrary, or tyrannical; for the honor and purity of all Christ's\nordinances against all contempt, pollution, and profanation; for\ncomfort, quickening, and encouragement of the saints in all the ways of\nChrist; and consequently for the honor of God and our Lord Jesus Christ\nin all the mysterious services of his spiritual sanctuary: all which\nrich advantages, how impossible is it they should ever be found in the\nindependent government so long as it continues independent? And what\nthough some pious minister and people embrace the independent way! This\ndazzles not the eyes of the intelligent, but of the infirm; we are to be\nregulated by Scripture warrant, not by human examples. The best of\nsaints have failed in the ecclesiastical affairs; what a sharp\ncontention was there between Paul and Barnabas, Acts xv. 39, &c.; what a\ndangerous dissimulation was there in Peter, the Jews, and Barnabas! Gal.\nii. 11, 12, 13, &c.; and, therefore, it is not safe, prudent, or\nconscientious, to imitate all the examples of the best, and yet how few\nare those that have engaged themselves in the independent way, in\ncomparison to the multitude of precious ministers and people, inferior\nto them neither in parts, learning, piety, nor any other spiritual gift,\nwho are for the presbyterial way of church government! Notwithstanding,\nlet all the true Israel of God constantly follow, not the doubtful\npractices of unglorified saints, but the written pleasure of the most\nglorious King of saints; and as many as walk according to this rule,\npeace shall be on them, and upon the Israel of God.\n\n\n\n\nTHE DIVINE RIGHT OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT.\n\nPART I.\n\nOF THE NATURE OF A DIVINE RIGHT: AND HOW MANY WAYS A THING MAY BE OF\nDIVINE RIGHT.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n_That there is a Government in the Church of_ DIVINE RIGHT _now under\nthe New Testament._\n\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath _the government_ (both of the Church, and\nof all things for the Church) laid _upon his shoulder_, Isa. ix. 6, and\nto that end hath _all power in heaven and earth given to him_, Matth.\nxxviii. 18, John v. 22, Ephes. i. 22. But lapsed man (being full of\npride, Psal. x. 2, 4, and enmity against the law of God, Rom. viii. 7)\nis most impatient of all government of God and of Christ, Ps. ii. 1, 2,\n3, with Luke xix. 14, 27; whence it comes to pass, that the _governing_\nand _kingly power_ of Christ hath been opposed in all ages, and\nespecially in this of ours, by quarrelsome queries, wrangling disputes,\nplausible pretences, subtle policies, strong self-interests, and mere\nviolent wilfulness of many in England, even after they are brought under\nthe _oath of God to reform church government according to the word of\nGod_. Yet it will be easily granted _that there should be a government\nin the Church of God_, otherwise the Church would become a mere _Babel_\nand _chaos_ of confusion, and be in a far worse condition than all human\nsocieties in the whole world: and _that some one church government is\nmuch to be preferred before another, yea, before all other_; as being\nmost desirable in itself, and most suitable to this state; otherwise,\nwhy is the _Prelatical_ government rejected, that another and a better\nmay be erected instead thereof? But the pinch lies in this, _Whether\nthere be any government in the Church visible of divine right?_ And, if\nso, _which of those church governments_ (which lay claim to a divine\nright for their foundation) _may be most clearly evinced by the\nScriptures to be of_ divine right _indeed?_ If the former be\nconvincingly affirmed, the fancy of the _Erastians_ and _semi-Erastians_\nof these things will vanish, that deny all government to the Church\ndistinct from that of the civil magistrate. If the latter be solidly\nproved by Scripture, it will appear, whether the _monarchical\ngovernment_ of the pope and prelates; or the _mere democratical\ngovernment_ of all the people in an equal level of authority, as among\nthe Brownists; or the _mixed democratical government_ of both elders and\npeople within their own single congregation only, without all\nsubordination of Assemblies, and benefit of appeals, as among the\nIndependents; or rather the _pure representative government_ of the\npresbytery or church rulers only, chosen by the people, in subordination\nto superior synodical assemblies, and with appeals thereto, as it is\namong the Presbyterians, be that peculiar government which Jesus Christ\nhath left unto his church, by divine right, and in comparison of which\nall others are to be rejected.\n\nTo draw things therefore to a clear and speedy issue about the divine\nright of church government, let this general proposition be laid down--\n\n_The Scriptures declare, That there is a government of_ DIVINE RIGHT _in\nthe visible Church of Christ now under the New Testament._\n\nThis is evident, 1 Cor. xii. 28, _God hath set some in the Church,\nfirst, Apostles, secondly, Prophets, thirdly, Teachers--Helps,\nGovernments;_ in which place these things are plain: 1. That here the\nApostle speaks of the visible Church: for he had formerly spoken of\nvisible gifts and _manifestations of the Spirit given to profit this_\nChurch _withal_, ver. 7 to 12. He also compares this Church of God to a\nvisible organical body, consisting of many visible members, ver. 12, 13,\n&c. And in this 28th verse he enumerates the visible officers of this\nChurch. 2. That here the Apostle speaks of one general visible Church;\nfor he saith not _churches_, but _church_, in the singular number, that\nis, of one; besides, he speaks here of the Church in such a latitude as\nto comprehend in itself all gifts of the Spirit, all members, and all\nofficers, both extraordinary and ordinary, which cannot be meant of the\nchurch of Corinth, or any one particular church, but only of that one\ngeneral Church on earth. 3. That this general visible Church here meant,\nis the Church of Christ now under the New Testament, and not under the\nOld Testament; for he mentions here the New Testament officers only,\nver. 28. 4. That in the visible Church now under the New Testament,\nthere is a government settled; for besides _Apostles, Prophets_, and\n_Teachers_, here is mention of another sort of officer distinct from\nthem all, called, in the abstract, _Governments_, a metaphor from\npilots, mariners, or shipmasters, who by their helm, card, or compass,\ncables, and other tacklings, guide, and order, turn and twine the ship\nas necessity shall require; so these officers called _Governments_, have\na power of governing and steering the spiritual vessel of the Church;\nthus, Beza on this place, says he declares the order of Presbyters, _who\nare keepers of discipline and church polity_. For how improperly should\nthese, or any officers be styled _Governments in the Church_, if they\nhad not a power of government in the Church settled upon them? Nor can\nthis be interpreted of the civil magistrate; for, when the Apostle wrote\nthis, the Church had her government, when yet she had no civil\nmagistrate to protect her; and when did God ever take this power from\nthe Church and settle it upon the civil magistrate? Besides, all the\nother officers here enumerated are purely ecclesiastical officers; how\ngroundless then and inconsistent is it under this name of _Governments_\nto introduce a foreign power, viz. the political magistrate, into the\nlist and roll of mere church officers? Finally, the civil magistrate, as\na magistrate, is not so much as a member of the visible Church, (for\nthen all Pagan magistrates should be members of the Church,) much less a\ngovernor in the Church of Christ. 5. That this government settled in the\nChurch is of divine right; for, of those _Governments_, as well as of\n_Apostles, Prophets_, and _Teachers_, it is said, _God hath set_ them\n_in the Church. God hath set_ them, _hath put, set_--Tremellius out of\nthe Syriac. Hath _constituted, ordained_--Beza out of the Greek. Now, if\nthey be set in the Church and God hath set them there, here is a plain\ndivine right for government in the Church.\n\nAdd hereto, 2 Cor. x. 8, \"Of our authority, which the Lord hath given to\nus for the edification, and not for the destruction of you.\" Here are\nmentioned--1. Church power or authority for government in the Church. 2.\nThe end of this power--positively, for the edification; negatively, not\nfor the destruction of the Church. 3. The Author or Fountain of this\nauthority--the Lord Christ hath given it, dispensed it; there is the\ndivine right. 4. The proper subjects intrusted with this authority, viz:\nthe church guides, our authority, which he hath given to us. They are\nthe receptacle of power for the Church, and the government thereof.\nCompare also 1 Thes. v. 12, Matth. xvi. 19, 20, with xviii. 11, and John\nxx. 21, 22, 23. In which and divers like places the divine right of\nchurch government is apparently vouched by the Scripture, as will\nhereafter more fully appear; but this may suffice in general for the\nconfirmation of this general proposition.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n_Of the Nature of a_ DIVINE RIGHT _in general._\n\n\nNow touching this divine right of church government, two things are yet\nmore particularly to be opened and proved, for the more satisfactory\nclearing thereof unto sober minds, to unprejudiced and unpre-engaged\njudgments, viz:--1. What the nature of a divine right is, and how many\nways a thing may be said to be of divine right, and that by warrant of\nScripture. 2. What the nature of the government of the Church under the\nNew Testament is, which is vouched by the Scripture to be of divine\nright.\n\nFor the first--viz. What the nature of a divine right is--consider both\nwhat a divine right is in general, and how many ways a thing may be said\nby Scripture warrant to be of divine right in particular.\n\n_Right_ is that which is most proper, just, or equal; or that which is\nprescribed or commanded by some statute law, and is just to be received\nin virtue of said law.\n\n_Divine_ sometimes points out a divine warrant or authority from God,\nengraven or enstamped upon any thing, whereby it is exalted above all\nhuman or created authority and power. And thus, all Scripture is styled\ndivinely breathed or inspired of God. Hence is the divine authority of\nScripture asserted, 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17; and in this sense divine right\nis here spoken of, in reference to church government, as it signifies a\ndivine warrant and authority from God himself, engraven upon that church\ngovernment and discipline, (hereafter to be handled,) and revealed to us\nin his holy Scriptures, the infallible and perfect oracles. So that\ndivine right, according to this interpretation of the terms, is that\nwhich is either just, meet, and equal; or commanded and enjoined by any\ndivine warrant or authority. And generally, a thing may be said to be of\ndivine right, which is any way divinely just, equal, &c.; or divinely\ncommanded by any law of God, or by that which is equivalent to a divine\nlaw. And whatsoever matters in church government can be proved by\nScripture to have this stamp of divine warrant and authority set upon\nthem, they may properly be said to be of divine right, and that by the\nwill and appointment of Jesus Christ, to whom God hath delegated all\npower and authority for the government of his Church, Matth. xxviii. 18,\n19, 20, Isa. ix. 6, John v. 22, Eph. i. 22. In this sense, if church\ngovernment, or any part of it, be found to be of divine right, then\nconsequently--1. It is above all mere human power and created authority\nin the world whatsoever, and that supereminently. A divine\nright is the highest and best tenure whereby the Church can hold of\nChrist any doctrine, worship, or government; only God can stamp such a\ndivine right upon any of these things, whereby conscience shall be\nobliged. All human inventions herein, whether devised of our own hearts,\nor derived as traditions from others, are incompatible and inconsistent\nherewith; vain in themselves, and to all that use them, and condemned of\nGod. See 1 Kings xii. 32, 33, Isa. xxix. 4, Matth. xv. 6, 7, 8, 9. 2. It\nis beyond all just, human, or created power, to abolish or oppose the\nsame, or the due execution thereof in the Church of Christ; for what is\nof divine right, is held of God, and not of man; and to oppose that,\nwere to fight against God. The supreme magistrates in such cases should\nbe nurse-fathers, Isa. xlix. 23, not step-fathers to the Church; their\npower being cumulative and perfective, not privative and destructive\nunto her; for she both had and exercised a power in church government,\nlong before there was any Christian magistrate in the world; and it\ncannot be proved that ever Christ took away that power from his Church,\nor translated it to the political magistrate, when he became Christian.\n3. It is so obligatory upon all churches in the whole Christian world,\nthat they ought uniformly to submit themselves unto it; for a divine\nright is equally obligatory on one church as well as on another. And it\nis so obligatory on all persons, states, and degrees, that none ought to\nbe exempted from that church government which is of divine right, nor to\nbe _tolerated_ in another church government, which is but of human\ninvention; nor ought any Christian to seek after, or content himself\nwith any such exemption or _toleration_; for in so doing, the inventions\nof men should be preferred before the ordinances of God; our own wisdom,\nwill, and authority, before the wisdom, will, and authority of Christ:\nand we should in effect say, _We will not have this man to reign over\nus_, Luke xix. 27. _Let us break their bands asunder, and cast their\ncords away from us_, Psalm ii. 3.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n_Of the Nature of a_ DIVINE RIGHT _in particular. How many ways a thing\nmay be of_ DIVINE RIGHT. _And first, of a_ DIVINE RIGHT _by the true\nlight of nature._\n\n\nThus we see in general what a divine right is: now in particular let us\ncome to consider how many ways a thing may be said to be of divine right\nby scripture-warrant, keeping still our eye upon this subject of church\ngovernment, at which all particulars are to be levelled for the clearing\nof it.\n\nA thing may be said to be of divine right, or (which is the same for\nsubstance) of divine institution, divers ways. 1. _By the true light of\nnature._ 2. _By obligatory scripture examples._ 3. _By divine\napprobation._ 4. _By divine acts._ 5. _By divine precepts or mandates._\nAll may be reduced to these five heads, ascending by degrees from the\nlowest to the highest divine right.\n\nI. _By light of nature._ That which is evident by, and consonant to the\ntrue light of nature, or natural reason, is to be accounted of divine\nright in matters of religion. Hence two things are to be made out by\nScripture. 1. What is meant by the true light of nature. 2. How it may\nbe proved, that what things in religion are evident by, or consonant to\nthis true light of nature, are of divine right.\n\n1. For the first, What is meant by the true light of nature, or natural\nreason? Thus conceive. The light of nature may be considered two ways.\n1. As it was in man before the fall, and so it was that image and\nsimilitude of God, in which man was at first created, Gen. i. 26, 27, or\nat least part of that image; which image of God, and light of nature,\nwas con-created with man, and was perfect: viz. so perfect as the sphere\nof humanity and state of innocency did require; there was no sinful\ndarkness, crookedness, or imperfection in it; and whatsoever was evident\nby, or consonant to this pure and perfect light of nature, in respect\neither of theory or practice, was doubtless of divine right, because\ncorrespondent to that divine law of God's image naturally engraved in\nAdam's heart. But man being lapsed, this will not be now our question,\nas it is not our case. 2. As it is now in man after the fall. The light\nof nature and image of God in man is not totally abolished and utterly\nrazed by the fall; there remain still some relics and fragments thereof,\nsome glimmerings, dawnings, and common principles of light, both\ntouching piety to God, equity to man, and sobriety to a man's self, &c.,\nas is evident by comparing these places, Psal. xix. 1, 2, &c., Acts\nxiv. 17, and xvii. 27, 28; Rom. i. 18-21, and ii. 12, 14, 15; 2 Cor. v.\n1: in which places it is plain, 1. That the book of the creature is able\n(without the scriptures, or divine revelations) to make known to man\nmuch of God, his invisible Godhead and attributes, Psalm xix. 1, 2, &c.;\nActs xiv. 17, and xvii. 27, 28; yea, so far as to leave them without\nexcuse, Rom. i. 18-21. 2. That there remained so much natural light in\nthe minds even of the heathens, as to render them capable of instruction\nby the creature in the invisible things of God; yea, and that they\nactually in some measure did know God, and because they walked not up to\nthis knowledge, were plagued, Rom. i. 18-21, 24, &c. 3. That the work of\nthe law (though not the right ground, manner, and end of that work,\nwhich is the blessing of the new covenant, Jer. xxxi. 33; Heb. viii. 10)\nwas materially written in some measure in their hearts. Partly because\nthey did by nature without the law the things contained in the law, so\nbeing a law to themselves, Rom. ii. 14, 15; partly, because they by\nnature forbore some of those sins which were forbidden in the law, and\nwere practised by some that had the law, as 2 Cor. v. 1; and partly,\nbecause according to the good and bad they did, &c., their conscience\ndid accuse or excuse, Rom. ii. 15. Now conscience doth not accuse or\nexcuse but according to some rule, principle, or law of God, (which is\nabove the conscience,) or at least so supposed to be. And they had no\nlaw but the imperfect characters thereof in their own hearts, which were\nnot quite obliterated by the fall. Now so far as this light of nature\nafter the fall, is a true relic of the light of nature before the fall,\nthat which is according to this light may be counted of divine right in\nmatters of religion, which is the next thing to be proved.\n\nFor the second, how it may be proved that what things in religion are\nevident by, or consonant to this true light of nature, are of divine\nright. Thus briefly,\n\n1. Because that knowledge which by the light of nature Gentiles have of\nthe invisible things of God, is a beam of divine light, as the apostle,\nspeaking of the Gentiles' light of nature, saith, That which may be\nknown of God is manifest in them--for God hath showed it to them. For\nthe invisible things, &c., Rom. i. 19, 20. God himself is the Fountain\nand Author of the true light of nature; hence some not unfitly call it\nthe divine light of nature, not only because it hath God for its object,\nbut also God for its principle; now that which is according to God's\nmanifestation, must needs be of divine right.\n\n2. Because the Spirit of God and of Christ in the New Testament is\npleased often to argue from the light of nature in condemning of sin, in\ncommending and urging of duty, as in the case of the incestuous\nCorinthian; \"It is reported commonly, that there is fornication among\nyou, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the\nGentiles,\" (who had only the light of nature to guide them,) 1 Cor. v.\n1. In case of the habits of men and women in their public church\nassemblies, that women's heads should be covered, men's uncovered in\npraying or prophesying. \"Judge in yourselves, is it comely that a woman\npray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that if\na man hath long hair, it is a shame to him? but if a woman have long\nhair it is a glory to her,\" &c., 1 Cor. xi. 13-15. Here the apostle\nappeals plainly to the very light of nature for the regulating and\ndirecting of their habits in church assemblies; and thus, in case of\npraying or prophesying in the congregation in an unknown tongue, (unless\nsome do interpret,) he strongly argues against it from the light of\nnature, 1 Cor. xiv. 7-11, and afterwards urges that women be silent in\ntheir churches, from the natural uncomeliness of their speaking there,\nfor it is a shame for women to speak in the church, 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35.\n\nNow, if the Spirit of God condemn things as vicious, and commend things\nas virtuous from the light of nature, is there not divine right in the\nlight of nature? May we not say, that which is repugnant to the light of\nnature in matters of religion, is condemned by divine right; and what is\ncorrespondent to the light of nature, is prescribed by divine right? And\nif not, where is the strength or force of this kind of arguing from the\nlight of nature?\n\nConsequently, in the present case of church government, that which is\nagreeable to the true light of nature, must needs be confessed to be of\ndivine right. Though the light of nature be but dim, yet it will lend\nsome help in this particular: e.g. the light of nature teaches, 1. That\nas every society in the world hath a distinct government of its own\nwithin itself, without which it could not subsist, so must the Church,\nwhich is a society, have its own distinct government within itself,\nwithout which it cannot subsist more than any other society. 2. That in\nall matters of difference the lesser number in every society should give\nway to, and the matters controverted be determined and concluded by the\nmajor part; else there would never be an end: and why not so in the\nChurch? 3. That in every ill administration in inferior societies the\nparties aggrieved should have liberty to appeal from them to superior\nsocieties, that equity may take place; and why not from inferior to\nsuperior church assemblies?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nII. _Of a Divine Right by obligatory Scripture Examples._\n\n\nII. By obligatory scripture examples (which God's people are bound to\nfollow and imitate) matters of religion become of divine right, and by\nthe will and appointment of Jesus Christ, by whose Spirit those examples\nwere recorded in Scripture, and propounded for imitation to the saints.\nThe light of nature in this case helps something; but the light of\nobligatory scripture examples helps much more, as being more clear,\ndistinct, and particular. We say scripture examples; for only these\nexamples are held forth to us by an infallible, impartial, divine hand,\nand those scripture examples obligatory, or binding; for there are many\nsorts of scripture examples that oblige not us to imitation of them,\nbeing written for other uses and purposes.\n\nGreat use is to be made of such examples in matters of religion, and\nparticularly in matters of church government, for the clearing of the\ndivine right thereof; and great opposition is made by some against the\nbinding force of examples, especially by men of perverse spirits, (as\ntoo many of the Erastian party are;) therefore it will be of great\nconsequence to unfold and clear this matter of scripture examples, and\nthe obliging power thereof, that we may see how far examples are to be a\nlaw and rule for us by divine right. In general, this proposition seems\nto be unquestionable, that whatsoever matter or act of religion Jesus\nChrist makes known to his Church and people, by or under any binding\nscripture example, that matter or act of religion so made known, is of\ndivine right, and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ: But to\nevince this more satisfactorily, these several particulars are to be\ndistinctly made good and manifested: 1. That some scripture examples are\nobligatory and binding on Christians in matters of religion. 2. Which\nare those obligatory scripture examples? These things being made out, we\nshall see with what strength scripture examples hold forth a divine\nright to us in the mysteries of religion, and particularly in church\ngovernment.\n\nI. That some scripture examples in matters of religion are obligatory on\nChristians, as patterns and rules, which they are bound in conscience to\nfollow and imitate, is evident,\n\n1. By the divine intention of the Spirit of God, in recording and\npropounding of examples in Scripture: for he records and propounds them\nfor this very end, that they may be imitated. Thus Christ's humility,\nin washing the feet of his disciples, was intentionally propounded as an\nobligatory example, binding both the disciples, and us after them, to\nperform the meanest offices of love in humility to one another. \"If I\nthen, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet, ye ought also to wash\none another's feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do\nas I have done to you,\" John xiii. 4, &c., 13-15. Thus Christ's\nsuffering with innocence and unprovoked patience, not reviling again,\n&c., is purposely propounded for all Christians to imitate, and they are\nbound in conscience as well as they can to follow it--\"Christ suffered\nfor us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps,\" &c., 1\nPet. ii. 21-23. Hence, the apostle so urges the example of Christ for\nthe Corinthians to follow in their bounty to the poor saints, yea,\nthough to their own impoverishing, \"For you know the grace of our Lord\nJesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became\npoor, that ye through his poverty might be rich,\" 2 Cor. viii. 9. Nor\nwas the example of Christ only written for our imitation; but the\nexamples of the apostles also in the primitive churches were\nintentionally left upon record for this end, that they might be binding\npatterns for us to follow in like cases in after ages. And in\nparticular, this seems to be one singular ground, scope, and intention\nof Christ's Spirit in writing the history of the Acts of the Apostles,\nthat the apostles' acts in the primitive churches might be our rules in\nsuccessive churches. For, 1. Though this book contain in it many things\ndogmatical, that is, divers doctrines of the apostles, yet it is not\nstyled the book of the doctrine, but of the Acts of the Apostles, that\nwe may learn to act as they acted. This being one main difference\nbetween profane and sacred histories; those are for speculation, these\nalso for admonition and imitation, 1 Cor. x. 11. The history, therefore,\nof the Acts propounds examples admonitory and obligatory upon us, that\nwe should express like acts in like cases. 2. Luke (the penman of the\nActs) makes such a transition from his history of Christ, to this\nhistory of Christ's apostles, as to unite and knit them into one volume,\nActs i. 1; whence we are given to understand, that if the Church wanted\nthis history of the apostles, she should want that perfect direction\nwhich the Spirit intended for her: as also that this book is useful and\nneedful to her as well as the other. 3. In the very front of the Acts it\nis said, that _Christ after his resurrection_ (and before his ascension)\n_gave commandments to the apostles--and spake of the things pertaining\nto the kingdom of God_, Acts i. 2, 3; viz. of the polity of the Church,\nsay some.[6] Of the kingdom of grace, say others.[7] Judicious\nCalvin[8] interprets it partly of church government, saying, Luke\nadmonisheth us, that Christ did not so depart out of the world, as to\ncast off all care of us: for by this doctrine he shows that he hath\nconstituted a perpetual government in his Church. Therefore Luke\nsignifies, that Christ departed not, before he had provided for his\nChurch's government. Now those expressions are set in the frontispiece,\nto stamp the greater authority and obligatory power upon the acts after\nrecorded, being done according to Christ's commandments; Christ\nintending their acts in the first founding of his kingdom and polity\necclesiastic to be the rule for after churches. For what Christ spoke of\nhis kingdom to the apostles is like that, \"What I say to you, I say to\nall,\" Matt. xiii. 37, as what was said to the apostles touching\npreaching and baptizing, remitting and retaining of sins, was said to\nall the apostles' successors, \"to the end of the world,\" John xx. 21,\n23, with Matt, xxviii. 18-20.\n\n2. By God's approving and commending such as were followers not only of\nthe doctrine, but also of the examples of the Lord, his apostles, and\nprimitive churches; \"And ye became followers\" (or imitators) \"of us and\nof the Lord,\" 1 Thess. i. 6, 7; and again, \"Ye, brethren, became\nfollowers\" (or imitators) \"of the churches of God, which in Judea are in\nChrist Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own\ncountrymen, even as they have of the Jews,\" 1 Thess. ii. 14. In which\nplaces the Holy Ghost recites the Thessalonians imitating of the Lord,\nof the apostles, and of the churches, to the praise of the\nThessalonians, by which they are given to understand that they did well,\nand discharged their duty in such imitations: for God's condemning or\ncommending any thing, is virtually a prohibiting or prescribing thereof.\n\n3. By the Lord's commanding some examples to be imitated. Commands of\nthis nature are frequent. In general, \"Beloved, imitate not that which\nis evil, but that which is good,\" 3 John 11. In particular, 1. Imitating\nof God and Christ; \"Be ye, therefore, followers of God as dear children:\nand walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us,\" Eph. v. 1, 2, with Eph.\niv. 32. \"He that saith he abideth in him, ought himself also to walk,\neven as he walked,\" 1 John ii. 6. 2. Imitating the apostles and other\nsaints of God. \"I beseech you, be ye imitators of me: for this cause\nhave I sent unto you Timothy--who shall bring you into remembrance of my\nways which be in Christ,\" 1 Cor. iv. 16, 17. \"Be ye imitators of me,\neven as I also am of Christ,\" 1 Cor. xi. 1.\n\n\"Those things which you have both learned, and received, and heard, and\nseen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you,\" Phil. iv. 9.\n\"Be not slothful, but imitators of them who through faith and patience\ninherit the promises,\" Heb. vi. 12. \"Whose faith imitate, considering\nthe end of their conversation,\" Heb. xiii. 7. \"Take, my brethren, the\nprophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example\" (or\npattern) \"of suffering affliction, and of patience,\" James v. 10. These\nand like divine commands infallibly evidence that many scripture\nexamples are obligatory, and do bind our consciences to the imitation of\nthem.\n\n4. By consent of orthodox and learned writers, both ancient and modern,\nacknowledging an obligatory force in some scripture examples, as being\nleft upon record for our imitation. As among others Chrysostom,[9] and\nGreg. Nyssen[10] well observe.\n\nAmong modern writers, Mr. Perkins excellently observes, This is a rule\nin divinity, that the ordinary examples of the godly approved in\nScripture, being against no general precept, have the force of a general\nrule, and are to be followed. See also Pet. Martyr, Calvin, and\nothers.[11]\n\nII. Thus, it is clear that some scripture examples are obligatory. Now\n(to come closer to the matter) consider which scripture examples are\nobligatory. 1. How many sorts of binding examples are propounded to us\nin Scripture. 2. What rules we may walk by for finding out the\nobligatory force of such examples.\n\nHow many sorts of binding examples are propounded unto us in Scripture,\nand which are those examples? Ans. There are principally three sorts,\nviz: Examples of God, of Christ, of Christians.\n\nI. Of God. The example of God is propounded in Scripture as obligatory\non us in all moral excellencies and actions: e.g. Matt. v. 44, 45, 48;\nEph. v. 1; 1 Pet. i. 14-16; 1 John iv. 10, 11.\n\nII. Of Christ. That the example of Christ is obligatory, and a binding\nrule to us for imitation, is evident by these and like testimonies of\nScripture, Matt. xi. 29; 1 Cor. xi. 11; Eph. v. 2, 3, 25, &c.; 1 John\nii. 6; 1 Pet. ii. 21-23. \"If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed\nyour feet, ye ought also to wash one another's feet. For I have given\nyou an example, that ye should do as I have done to you,\" John xiii. 14,\n15. In this place we must follow the reason of the example, rather than\nthe individual act, viz: after Christ's example, we must be ready to\nperform the lowest and meanest offices of love and service to one\nanother.\n\nBut which of Christ's examples are obligatory on Christians, will better\nappear, by distinguishing the several sorts of Christ's actions.\nChrist's actions were of several kinds; and to imitate them all is\nneither needful, nor possible, nor warrantable. Orthodox writers thus\nrank Christ's actions:\n\n1. Some of Christ's actions were of divine power and virtue; as his\nmiracles, turning water into wine, John ii. 7, &c.; walking on the sea,\nMark vi. 48, 49; dispossessing of devils by his word, Mark i. 27; Luke\niv. 36; curing one born blind with clay and spittle, John ix.; healing\nthe sick by his word or touch, John iv. 50; Mark vi. 56; raising the\ndead to life again, as John xii. 1; Matt. xi. 5; Luke vii. 22.\n\n2. Some were acts of divine prerogative, as sending for the ass and\ncolt, without first asking the owner's leave, Matt. xxi. 2, &c.\n\n3. Some mediatory, done by him as Mediator, Prophet, Priest, and King of\nhis Church: e.g. inditing the Scripture, called therefore the word of\nChrist, Col. iii. 16; laying down his life _for the sheep_, John x. 15,\n&c.; giving of the Spirit, John xx. 22; Acts ii.; appointing of his own\nofficers, and giving them commissions, Eph. iv. 7, 10, 11; Matt. x. and\nxxviii. 18-20; instituting of new, and thereby abrogating of old\nordinances, Matt. xxviii. 18, 19; 1 Cor. xi. 23, &c.\n\n4. Some accidental, occasional, incidental, or circumstantial, as in\nthe case of his celebrating his supper, that it was at night, not in the\nmorning; after supper, not before; with none but men, none but\nministers; with unleavened, not with leavened bread, &c.; these\ncircumstantials were accidentally occasioned by the passover, nature of\nhis family, &c.\n\n5. Some acts of Christ were moral, as Matt. xi. 29; Eph. v. 2, 3, 25,\n&c.; or at least founded upon a moral reason and foundation, as John\nxiii. 14,15.\n\nTo imitate Christ in his three first sort of acts, is utterly unlawful,\nand in part impossible. To imitate him in his circumstantial acts from\nnecessity, were to make accidentals necessary, and happily to border\nupon superstition; for, to urge any thing above what is appointed, as\nabsolutely necessary, is to urge superstition; and to yield to any thing\nabove what is appointed, as simply necessary, were to yield to\nsuperstition. But to imitate Christ in his moral acts, or acts grounded\nupon a moral reason, is our duty: such acts of Christ ought to be the\nChristian's rules.\n\nIII. Of prophets, apostles, saints, or primitive churches. That their\nexamples are obligatory, is evident by these places, 1 Cor. xi. 1; Phil.\niv. 8, 9; 1 Pet. iii. 4, 5, 6; 1 Thess. i. 6, and ii. 14; Heb. xiii. 7;\nJames v. 10, 11; 3 John 11.\n\nWhich of their examples are obligatory, may be thus resolved, by\ndistinguishing of their actions.\n\n1. Some were sinful; written for our caution and admonition, not for our\nimitation: as 1 Cor. x. 5, 6, 10, 12. That neither the just be lifted up\ninto pride by security, nor the unjust be hardened against the medicine\nthrough despair. See the fourth rule following.\n\n2. Some were heroical; done by singular instinct and instigation of the\nSpirit of God; as divers acts may be presumed to be, (though we read not\nthe instinct clearly recorded:) as, Elias's calling for fire from\nheaven, 2 Kings i. 10; which the very apostles might not imitate, not\nhaving his spirit, Luke ix. 54, 55; Phinehas's killing the adulterer and\nadulteress, Numb. xxv. 7, 8; Samson's avenging himself upon his enemies\nby his own death, Judges xvi. 30, of which, saith Bernard, if it be\ndefended not to have been his sin, it is undoubtedly to be believed he\nhad private counsel, viz. from God, for his fact; David's fighting with\nGoliath of Gath the giant, hand to hand, 1 Sam. xvii. 32, &c., which is\nno warrant for private duels and quarrels. Such heroic acts are not\nimitable but by men furnished with like heroic spirit, and instinct\ndivine.\n\n3. Some were by special calling, and singular extraordinary\ndispensation: as Abraham's call to leave his own country for pilgrimage\nin Canaan, Gen. xii. 1, 4, which is no warrant for popish pilgrimages\nto the holy land, &c.; Abraham's attempts, upon God's special trying\ncommands, to kill and sacrifice his son, Gen. xxii. 10, no warrant for\nparents to kill or sacrifice their children; the Israelites borrowing\nof, and robbing the Egyptians, Exod. xii. 35, no warrant for cozenage,\nstealing, or for borrowing with intent not to pay again: compare Rom.\nxiii. 8; 1 Thess. iv. 6; Psal. xxxvii. 21; the Israelites taking usury\nof the Canaanitish strangers, (who were destined to ruin both in their\nstates and persons, Deut. xx. 15-17,) Deut. xxiii. 20, which justifies\nneither their nor our taking usury of our brethren, Lev. xxv. 36, 37;\nDeut. xxiii. 19, 20; Neh. v. 7, 10; Psal. xv. 5; Prov. xxviii. 8; Ezek.\nxviii. 8, 13, 17, and xxii. 12; John Baptist's living in the desert,\nMat. iii., no protection for popish hermitage, or proof that it is a\nstate of greater perfection, &c.\n\n4. Some were only accidental or occasional, occasioned by special\nnecessity of times and seasons, or some present appearance of scandal,\nor some such accidental emergency. Thus primitive Christians had all\nthings common, Acts iv. 32, but that is no ground for anabaptistical\ncommunity. Paul wrought at his trade of tent-making, made his hands\n_minister to his necessities_, Acts xx. 34; would not take wages for\npreaching to the church of Corinth, 2 Cor. xi. 7-9; but this lays no\nnecessity on ministers to preach the gospel _gratis_, and maintain\nthemselves by their own manual labors, except when cases and seasons are\nalike, Gal. vi. 6-8; 1 Cor. ix. 6-13; 1 Tim. v. 17, 18.\n\n5. Some were of a moral nature, and upon moral grounds, wherein they\nfollowed Christ, and we are to follow them, 1 Cor. xi. 1; Phil. iv. 8,\n9, and other places forementioned; for, whatsoever actions were done\nthen, upon such grounds as are of a moral, perpetual, and common\nconcernment to one person as well as another, to one church as well as\nanother, in one age as well as another, those actions are obligatory on\nall, and a rule to after generations. Thus the baptizing of women in the\nprimitive churches, Acts viii. 12, and xvi. 15, though only the males\nwere circumcised under the Old Testament, is a rule for our baptizing of\nwomen as well as men, they being _all one in Christ,_ Gal. iii. 28. So\nthe admitting of infants to the first initiating sacrament of the Old\nTestament, circumcision, because they with their parents' were accounted\nwithin the covenant of grace by God, Gen. xvii., is a rule for us now to\nadmit infants to the first initiating sacrament of the New Testament,\nbaptism, because infants are federally holy, and within the covenant\nwith their believing parents now, as well as then, Rom. xi. 16; 1 Cor.\nvii. 14; Col. ii. 11, 12. Thus the baptizing of divers persons formerly,\nthough into no particular congregation, nor as members of any\nparticular congregation, as the eunuch, Acts viii.; Lydia, Acts xvi.;\nthe jailer, Acts xvi.; because it was sufficient they were baptized into\nthat one general visible body of Christ, 1 Cor. xii. 12, 13, is a rule\nfor us what to do in like cases upon the same common ground. Thus the\nChurch's practice of preaching the word, and breaking bread on the first\nday of the week, Acts xx. 7, &c., is our rule for sanctifying the Lord's\nday, by celebrating the word, sacraments, and other holy ordinances, at\nthese times. And in like manner, the primitive practices of ordaining\npreaching presbyters, by laying on of hands, 1 Tim. iv. 14; 2 Tim. i. 6;\nActs xiii. 3; of governing all the congregations of a city by one common\npresbytery, in which respect they are all called by the name of one\nchurch, as the church of Jerusalem, Acts viii. 1, and xv. 4; the church\nof Antioch, Acts xiii. 1, and xi. 25, 26; the church of Corinth, 1 Cor.\ni. 2, 2 Cor. i. 1; which had churches in it, 1 Cor. xiv. 34. Of healing\ncommon scandals and errors, troubling divers presbyterial churches by\nthe authoritative decrees of a synod, made up of members from divers\npresbyterial churches, as Acts xv., and such like, are our rules in like\nparticulars, which the Lord hath left for our direction, the same\ngrounds of such actions reaching us as well as them.\n\nNow this last kind of examples are those which we are, by divers divine\ncommands, especially enjoined to follow; and therefore such examples\namount to a divine right or institution; and what we ought to do by\nvirtue of such binding examples is of divine right, and by the will and\nappointment of Jesus Christ.\n\nWhat discriminatory notes or rules may we walk by, for finding out the\nobligatory force of scripture examples; and what manner of examples\nthose be? For discovery hereof, take these ensuing general rules:\n\n1. Those examples in Scripture, which the Spirit of Christ commands us\nto imitate, are undoubtedly obligatory. Such are the moral examples of\nGod, Christ, apostles, prophets, saints, and churches, recorded in\nScripture, with command to follow them, Eph. iv. 32, and v. 1, 2; 1 John\nii. 6; 1 Cor. xi. 1; Phil. iv. 6; Heb. vi. 12, and xiii. 7; James v. 10;\n3 John 11.\n\n2. Those examples in Scripture, which the Spirit of Christ commends and\npraises, are obligatory; his commendings are virtual commandings; and we\nought to follow whatsoever is praiseworthy, especially in God's account,\nPhil. iv. 8, 9; 2 Cor. x. 18. Now the Spirit of Christ commends many\nexamples to us: as, _Enoch's walking with God_, Gen. v. 24; _Noah's\nuprightness,_ Gen. vi.; _Abraham's faith_, Rom. iv., _and obedience_,\nGen. xxii.; _Lot's zeal against Sodom's sins_, 2 Pet. ii. 9; _Job's\npatience_, James v. 10, 11. And in a word, all the examples of the\nsaints, which the Lord approves and speaks well of; as Heb. xi.; 1 Pet.\niii. 5, 6: together with all such examples, whose imitation by others is\ncommended in Scripture; as, 1 Thess. i. 6, 7, and ii. 14.\n\n3. Those examples in Scripture are obligatory, whose ground, reason,\nscope, or end, are obligatory, and of a moral nature, and as much\nconcern one Christian as another, one church as another, one time as\nanother, &c., whether they be the examples under the Old or New\nTestament. Thus the example of the church of Corinth, in excommunicating\nthe incestuous person, because he was a wicked person--and lest he\nshould _leaven the whole lump;_ and that they might keep the\nevangelical passover sincerely, and for that they had power _to judge\nthem within_; and that his \"flesh might be destroyed, and his spirit\nsaved in the day of the Lord Jesus,\" 1 Cor. v. 5-8, 11-13: which grounds\nand ends being moral, oblige us to use the like remedy against all\nwicked and scandalous persons.\n\n4. Those acts which are propounded in Scripture as patterns or examples,\nthat we should act the like good, or avoid the like ill, are an\nobligatory law to us. There is an example of caution, and an example of\nimitation.\n\nThus in reference to well-doing, or suffering for well-doing, the\nexamples of Christ, his apostles, and other saints, are propounded as\npatterns to write after, as John xiii. 14, 15; Heb. xi. tot. with Heb.\nxii. 1, _with such a cloud of witnesses_. This verse is as the epilogue\nof the former chapter, (saith the learned Calvin,) showing to what end\nthe catalogue of saints was reckoned up, who under the law excelled in\nfaith, viz: that every one may fit himself to imitate them. Another\nadds,[12] He calls them a cloud, whereby we may be directed; in allusion\nto that cloud that went before Israel in the wilderness, to conduct them\nto the land of Canaan. See also 1 Pet. ii. 21-23; James v. 10.\n\nThus also, in reference to ill-doing, that it may be avoided by us, the\nbad examples of saints and others are laid before us as warnings and\ncautions to us, binding us to eschew like evils, 1 Cor. x. 5, 6, 11.\n\"Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust\nafter evil things, as they also lusted. Now all these things happened\nunto them for examples,\" &c., Jude 7.\n\n5. Those acts of saints or Christians, which were done by them as saints\nand Christians, are obligatory upon, and to be followed by all\nChristians; but those acts which are done by magistrates, prophets,\napostles, ministers, &c., only as such, are only obligatory on such as\nhave like offices, not on all; according to the maxim, that which agrees\nto any thing as such, agrees to every thing that is such. Thus James\nurges the example of Elias in praying, James v. 17. Paul presses the\nexample of Abraham in being justified by believing, Rom. iv. 23,24.\nPeter prescribes, as a pattern to wives, the example of Sarah, and other\nholy women of old, for \"adorning themselves with a meek and quiet\nspirit,--being in subjection to their own husbands,\" 1 Pet. iii. 4-6.\n\n6. Those acts that were commonly and ordinarily done, are ordinarily to\nbe imitated; as, baptizing _in water only_, and not in any other\nelement, was the ordinary practice of the New Testament, Matt. iii. 11,\n16; Mark i. 6, 10; Luke iii. 16; John i. 26, 31, 33; Acts i. 5, and\nviii. 36, 38, and x. 47, and xi. 16; and by that practice we are obliged\nto baptize in water only. Joining of many Christians together in\nreceiving the Lord's supper was an ordinary practice, Matt. xxvi. 20,\n26, 27; Acts ii. 42, and xx. 7, &c.; 1 Cor. xi. 20, and by us ordinarily\nto be imitated; how else is it a communion? 1 Cor. x. 16, 17.\n\nBut such acts as were done only upon special causes or singular reasons,\nare only to be imitated in like cases. Thus Christ argues from a like\nspecial cause, that he was not to do miracles at Nazareth without a\ncall, as he did in other places where he had a call of God; from the\nparticular example of Elijah and Elisha, who only went to them to whom\nGod called them, Luke ix. 25-27; so he proves that in like case of\nnecessity it was lawful for his disciples on the sabbath-day to rub ears\nof corn and eat them, &c., from David's example of eating show-bread when\nhe had need, Matt. xii. 1-5.\n\n7. Those acts that were done from extraordinary calling and gifts, are\nto be imitated (in regard of their special way of acting) only by those\nthat have such extraordinary calling and gifts. Christ therefore blames\nhis apostles for desiring to imitate Elijah's extraordinary act in\ncalling for fire from heaven, &c., when they had not his spirit, Luke ix.\n54, 55. Papists are blameworthy for imitating the extraordinary forty\ndays' and nights' fast of Moses, Elijah, and Christ, in their Lent fast.\nPrelates argue corruptly for bishops' prelacy over their brethren the\nministers, from the superiority of the apostles over presbyters.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n_Of a Divine Right by Divine Approbation._\n\n\nIII. By divine approbation of the Spirit of Jesus Christ in his word.\nWhatsoever in matters of religion hath the divine approbation of the\nSpirit of Christ in the Scriptures, that is of divine right, and by the\nwill and appointment of Jesus Christ. God's approving or allowing of any\nthing, plainly implies that it is according to his will and pleasure,\nand so is equivalent to a divine institution or appointment; for what is\na divine institution or law but the publishing of the divine will of the\nlegislator, touching things to be acted or omitted? and God cannot\napprove any thing that is against his will. Contrariwise, God's\ndisallowing of any thing, plainly implies that it is against his will,\nand so of divine right prohibited, and unlawful. God allows or disallows\nthings not because they are good or evil; but things are, therefore,\ngood or evil, because he approves or disallows them.\n\nNow God approves or disallows things divers ways:\n\n1. By commending or discommending. God commended king Josiah for his\nzeal and impartiality in completing of the reformation of religion, 1\nKings xiii. 25. This is a rule for all princes and magistrates how they\nshould reform. The angel of the church of Ephesus is commended, for not\nbearing of those that were evil, for trying and detecting the false\napostles, and for hating the works of the Nicolaitans, Rev. ii. 2, 3, 6.\nThe angel of the church of Pergamus is praised, for holding fast\nChrist's name, and not denying his faith in places of danger, and days\nof deepest persecution, Rev. ii. 13: a rule for all pastors and\nchurches, how in all such cases they should carry themselves. God's\ncommendings are divine commandings. On the contrary, God dispraises\nEphesus, for falling from her first love, Rev. ii. 4. Pergamus, for\nholding the doctrine of Balaam, and the doctrine of the Nicolaitans,\nRev. ii. 14, 15. Thyatira, for tolerating the false prophetess Jezebel,\nto teach and seduce his servants, &c., Rev. ii. 20. Laodicea, because\nshe was neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm, Rev. iii. 15. The church of\nCorinth, for coming together in public assemblies, not for better but\nfor worse, by reason of schisms, scandals, and other disorders about the\nLord's supper, 1 Cor. xi. 17, &c. In these and all such divine\ndiscommendings of the churches for their corruptions, all succeeding\nchurches are strongly forbidden the like corruptions: God's dispraises\nare divine prohibitions. Thus good church elders are commended in this\nnotion, that they are _elders ruling well_, 1 Tim. v. 17; therefore,\nthat elders in the church should rule, and rule well, is by this\ncommendation of divine right.\n\n2. By promising and threatening. What promise did God ever make to any\nact or performance, which was not a duty? or what threatening against\nany act which was not a sin? He promises to them that forsake all for\nChrist, a \"hundred-fold now in this time, and in the world to come\neternal life,\" Mark x. 29, 30; therefore it is our duty to forsake all\nfor Christ. He promised to ratify in heaven his disciples' sentences of\n_building or loosing on earth_; and to _be with them_ whensoever _two or\nthree of them were met together_ for that end, Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii.\n18-20, and John xx. 23. Therefore binding and loosing, remitting and\nretaining of sins, and meeting together for that end, belong to them by\ndivine right. He promised to be with them that baptize, preach, remit,\nand retain sins in his name, &c., _always, to the end of the world_,\nJohn xx. 23; with Matt, xxviii. 18-20, which promise shows, that these\nworks and employments belong to all succeeding ministers to the world's\nend, as well as to the apostles by divine right. On the contrary, the\nLord threatens Ephesus for decay of first love, Rev. ii. 4, 5; Pergamus,\nfor holding false doctrine, Rev. ii. 14, 15; Thyatira, for tolerating of\nJezebel and her false teaching, &c., Rev. ii. 21, 21, 23; and Laodicea,\nfor lukewarmness, Rev. iii. 15, 16. Therefore, all these were their\nsins, and we are bound, even by this divine threatening, to avoid the\nlike by a divine warrant.\n\n3. By remunerating or rewarding; whether he reward with blessings or\nwith judgments. With blessings God rewarded the Hebrew midwives, because\nthey preserved the male children of Israel, contrary to Pharaoh's bloody\ncommand; _God made them houses_, Exod. i. 17, 20, 21. He will have the\nelders that rule well _counted worthy of double honor_, &c.; i.e.\nrewarded with a bountiful, plentiful maintenance, 1 Tim. v. 17.\nTherefore, their ruling in the church is of divine right, for which God\nappoints such a good reward. Contrariwise, with judgments God rewarded\nking Saul, for offering a burnt-offering himself, 1 Sam. xiii. 12-14;\nUzzah, for touching the ark, though it was ready to fall, 2 Sam. vi. 6,\n7; and king Uzziah, for going into the temple to burn incense, 2 Chron.\nxxvi. 16. None of these being priests, yet presuming to meddle with the\npriest's office. A rule for all persons, being not church officers, yea,\nthough they be princes or supreme magistrates, that they are hereby\nwarned by the divine law, not to usurp church authority or offices to\nthemselves. God rewarded the Corinthians with the judgments of\nweakness, sickness, and death, for unworthy receiving of the Lord's\nsupper, 1 Cor. xi. 30. So that this is a divine warning for all after\nchurches against unworthy communicating.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\nIV. _Of a Divine Right by Divine Acts._\n\n\nIV. By divine acts. Whatsoever matters of religion were erected in, or\nconferred upon the Church of God, by God, or any person of the blessed\nTrinity, and are left recorded in the Scripture, they are of divine\nright, by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ. Shall divine\napprobation, yea, shall the saints' binding example hold forth to us a\ndivine right, and shall not the divine actions of God, Christ, and the\nSpirit, do it much more? Take some instances: the Lord's-day sabbath,\nunder the New Testament, was it not instituted (the seventh day being\nchanged to the first day of the week) by the acts of Christ, having now\nperfected the spiritual creation of the new world? viz: by his\nresurrection and apparitions to his disciples on that day, and\nmiraculous blessing and sanctifying of that day, by pouring forth the\ngifts of the Holy Ghost, Acts ii., all which were seconded with the\napostolical practice in the primitive churches, Acts xx. 7, &c.; 1 Cor.\nxvi. 1, 2. And do not the churches of Christ generally conclude upon\nthese grounds, that the Lord's-day sabbath is of divine warrant? Thus\ncircumcision is abrogated of divine right, by Christ's act, instituting\nbaptism instead thereof, Col. ii. 11, 12. The passover is abolished of\ndivine right, by Christ himself, our true passover, _being sacrificed\nfor us_, 1 Cor. v. 7; and the Lord's supper being instituted a memorial\nof Christ's death instead of it, Matt, xxvi., Mark xiv., Luke xxii. And\nthe whole ceremonial law is antiquated and made void by Christ's death,\naccomplishing all those dark types; therefore Christ, immediately before\nhis yielding up the ghost, cried, _It is finished_, John xix. 30. See\nCol. ii. 14; Eph. ii. 14, 15; _abolishing the law of commandments in\nordinances_, Heb. viii. 13, and x. 4, 5, &c. Thus by Christ's act of\ngiving the keys of the kingdom of heaven to Peter and the apostles,\nMatt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18, 19, the keys belong to the officers of the\nchurch by divine right. By God's act of _setting in the Church some,\nfirst apostles_, &c., 1 Cor. xii. 28, all those officers belong to the\ngeneral visible Church by divine right. By Christ's act of bounty upon\nhis triumphant ascension into heaven, _in giving gifts to men_, Eph.\niv. 7, 11, 12; all those church officers being Christ's gifts, are of\ndivine right. Finally, by the Holy Ghost's act, in setting elders,\noverseers over the flock, Acts xx. 28, elders are such overseers by\ndivine right.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\nV. _Of a Divine Right by Divine Precepts._\n\n\nV. Finally, and primarily, by divine precepts, whatsoever in matters of\nreligion is commanded or forbidden by God in his word, that is\naccordingly a duty or sin, by divine right: as, the duties of the whole\nmoral law, the ten words, commanded of God, Exod. xx.; Deut. v.\nBelieving in Christ, commanded of God, 1 John iii. 23. The plentiful and\nhonorable maintenance of ministers, commanded of God, 1 Tim. v. 17, 18;\n1 Cor. ix. 9-11, 13, 14; Gal. vi. 6. The people's esteeming, loving, and\nobeying their pastors and teachers, commanded of God, 1 Thess. v. 12;\nHeb. xiii. 7, 17. Ministers' diligence and faithfulness, in feeding and\nwatching over their flocks, commanded of God, Acts xx. 28; 2 Tim. iv.\n1-3; 1 Pet. iv. 1-3; with innumerable commands and precepts of all\nsorts: now all things so commanded are evidently of divine right, and\nwithout gainsaying, granted on all hands, even by Erastians themselves.\nBut the question will be, how far we shall extend this head of _divine\ncommands_. For clearness' sake, thus distinguish, thus resolve:\n\nGod's commands are either immediate or mediate.\n\n1. Immediate divine commands: as those which God propounds and urges; as\nthe ten commandments, Exod. xx., Deut. v., and all other injunctions of\nhis in his word positively laid down. Of such commands, the apostle\nsaith, \"I command, yet not I, but the Lord,\" 1 Cor. vii. 10.\n\nNow these immediate commands of God, in regard of their manner of\npublishing and propounding, are either explicit or implicit.\n\n1. Explicit: which are expressly and in plain terms laid down, as the\nletter of the commandments of the decalogue, Exod. xx. The commands of\nChrist, \"Feed my lambs, feed my sheep,\" John xxi.; \"Go, disciple ye all\nnations,\" &c., Matt, xxviii. 19; \"Do this in remembrance of me,\" Matt,\nxxvi; 1 Cor. xi. 23, 24, &c. Now whatsoever is expressly commanded of\nGod in plain, evident terms, that is of divine right, without all color\nof controversy. Only take this caution, the divine right of things\nenjoined by God's express command, is to be interpreted according to the\nnature of the thing commanded, and the end or scope of the Lord in\ncommanding: e.g. 1. Some things God commands morally, to be of perpetual\nuse; as to honor father and mother, &c.; these are of divine right\nforever. 2. Some things he commands but positively, to be of use for a\ncertain season; as the ceremonial administrations till Christ should\ncome, for the Jewish church, and the judicial observances for their\nJewish polity; and all these positive laws were of divine right till\nChrist abrogated them. 3. Some things he commands only by way of trial,\nnot with intention that the things commanded should be done, but that\nhis people's fear, love, and obedience may be proved, tried, &c. Thus\nGod commanded Abraham to offer up his son Isaac for a burnt-offering,\nGen. xxii.: such things are of divine right only in such cases of\nspecial infallible command. 4. Some things he commands extraordinarily\nin certain select and special cases: as, _Israel to borrow jewels of the\nEgyptians to rob them_, without intention ever to restore them, Exod.\nxi. 2, &c. The disciples to _go preach_--yet to _provide neither gold\nnor silver_, &c. Matt. x. 7-10. The elders of the church (while miracles\nwere of use in the church) _to anoint the sick with oil in the name of\nthe Lord_, for their recovery, James v. 14. These and like extraordinary\ncommands were only of force by divine right, in these extraordinary\nselect cases, when they were propounded.\n\n1. Implicit, or implied: which are either comprehensively contained in\nor under the express terms and letter of the command; or,\nconsequentially, are deducible from the express command.\n\nComprehensively, many things are contained in a command, that are not\nexpressed in the very letter of the command. Thus sound interpreters of\nthe decalogue generally confess, that all precepts thereof include the\nwhole parts under the general term, and God wills many things by them\nmore than the bare words signify: e.g. in negative commands, forbidding\nsin, we are to understand the positive precepts prescribing the contrary\nduties; and so, on the contrary, under affirmative commands, we are to\nunderstand the negative thereof: thus Christ expounds the sixth\ncommandment, Matt. v. 21-27, and ver. 43, to the end of the chapter. So\nwhen any evil is forbidden, not only the outward gross acts, but all\ninward acts and degrees thereof, with all causes and occasions, all\nfruits and effects thereof, are forbidden likewise: as, under killing,\nprovoking terms, rash anger, Matt. v. 21, 22; under adultery, wanton\nlooks, lustful thoughts, &c., Matt. v. 27-30. Now all things\ncomprehended in a command (though not expressed) are of divine right.\n\nConsequentially, many things are clearly deducible from express commands\nin Scripture, by clear, unforced, infallible, and undeniable\nconsequence. Now what things are commanded by necessary consequence,\nthey are of divine right, as well as things in express terms prescribed:\ne.g. in the case of baptism, have the ordinary ministers of the New\nTestament any punctual express command to baptize? yet, by consequence,\nit is evident infallibly, the apostles are commanded to baptize, and the\npromise is made to them by Christ, that he _will be with them always to\nthe end of the world_, Matt, xxviii. 18-20, which cannot be interpreted\nof the apostles' persons only; for they were not to live till the\nworld's end, but are dead and gone long ago; but of the apostles and\ntheir successors, the ministers of the gospel to the world's end; now to\nwhom the promise of Christ's presence is here to be applied, to them the\nprecept of baptizing and teaching is intended by clear consequence and\ndeduction. So, infants of Christian parents under the New Testament are\ncommanded to be baptized by consequence; for that the infants of God's\npeople under the Old Testament were commanded to be circumcised, Gen.\nxvii.; for, the privileges of believers under the New Testament are as\nlarge as the privileges of believers under the Old Testament: and the\nchildren of believers under the New Testament are federally holy, and\nwithin the covenant of God, as well as the children of believers under\nthe Old Testament, Gen. xvii., compared with Rom. xi. 16; 1 Cor. vii.\n14: and what objections can be made from infants' incapacity now,\nagainst their baptism, might as well then have been made against their\nbeing circumcised: and why children should once be admitted to the\ninitiating sacrament, and not still be admitted to the like initiating\nsacrament, (the Lord of the covenant and sacrament nowhere forbidding\nthem,) there can be no just ground. And baptism succeeds in the room of\ncircumcision, Col. ii. 11, 12. _Thus in case of the Lord's supper_,\napostles were commanded to dispense it, and men commanded to receive it.\n\"Do ye this in remembrance of me,\" Matt, xxvi., 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25; yet\nby consequence, the ministers of the gospel succeeding the apostles,\nbeing stewards of the mysteries of God, have the same charge laid upon\nthem; and women as well as men are enjoined to keep that sacrament,\nwhole families communicating in the passover, the forerunner of the\nLord's supper, Exod. xiv., and male and female being _all one in\nChrist_, Gal. iii. 28. _Thus in case of the maintenance of ministers\nunder the New Testament_: the apostle proves it by consequence to be\ncommanded, God hath ordained, &c., from God's command of not _muzzling\nthe ox that treads out the corn_, and of maintaining the priests under\nthe Old Testament, 1 Cor. ix. 14, &c.; l Tim. v. 17, 18. And thus, in\ncase of church polity, the Hebrews are commanded to obey and be\nsubordinate to their rulers in the Lord, Heb. xiii. 17; consequently,\nother churches are commanded not only to have rulers, but to obey and\nsubmit to their rule and government. Timothy is commanded to lay hands\n_suddenly on none_, &c., in ordaining of preaching elders, 1 Tim. v. 21,\n22; consequently, such as succeed Timothy in ordaining of preaching\nelders are enjoined therein to do nothing suddenly, hastily, &c., but\nupon mature deliberation. The apostle commands, that men must _first be\nproved, and found blameless, before they execute the deacon's office_, 1\nTim. iii. 10; by consequence, it is much more necessarily commanded,\nthat ruling elders should first be proved, and be found blameless,\nbefore they exercise rule; and that ministers be examined, and found\nblameless, before they be ordained to or execute the ministerial\nfunction, for these offices are of greater and higher concernment than\nthe deacon's office.\n\n2. Mediate divine commands, which are mediately from God, but\nimmediately from men; and these come under a double consideration, being\neither,\n\n1. Such commands whose general principles are immediately the Lord's,\nyet accommodations and determinations of particulars are from men, by\napparent deductions from those grounds. Of such the apostle saith, \"But\nto the rest speak I, not the Lord,\" 1 Cor. vii. 12; not that Paul\ndelivered any commands merely of his own head, (for he had \"obtained\nmercy of the Lord to be faithful,\" ver. 25, and did _think that he had\nthe Spirit of the Lord_, ver. 40,) but grounded his commands upon the\nword of God, whereof the apostle was the interpreter. The case is\nconcerning divorce when it fell out that believer and unbeliever were\nmarried together: the Lord had given general rules about divorce, but no\nparticular rule about this case, (it being not incident to the Jews;)\nthe apostle, therefore, accommodates the general rule to the particular\ncase; he, not the Lord, determined the particular. This sound\ninterpreters conceive to be the apostle's meaning: Thus the apostle,\ntreating of order in public assemblies, saith, \"The prophet and the\nspiritual man must acknowledge the things which I write, to be the\ncommandments of the Lord,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 37. Understand it mediately, as\nbeing agreeable to the Lord's principles revealed: for otherwise how\nshould the prophet know what the Lord immediately revealed to the\napostle? or why should we think it probable that what Paul here speaks\nof order and decency in church assemblies, was immediately and expressly\ndelivered him by speech or revelation from the Lord, seeing these\nparticulars have such easy and apparent deduction from general\nprinciples, and revelations are not unnecessarily multiplied? Yet these\nparticular deductions and determinations are here styled the\ncommandments of the Lord.\n\n2. Such commands, which are accidental and occasional, whose grounds and\ngeneral principles are also the Lord's; yet determination or deduction\nof particulars can hardly be made, but in such emergent cases and\noccasions accidentally falling out, as necessitate thereunto. As in that\ncase, Acts xv., when the synod commands abstinence _from blood, and\nthings strangled_, and that necessarily, (though the Levitical law was\nnow abrogated,) because the common use thereof by accident grew very\nscandalous: therefore, by the law of charity, the use of Christian\nliberty is to be suspended, when otherwise the scandal of my brother is\nendangered; yet from any ground of equity to have provided such a\nparticular rule as this, without such a case occurring, would scarce\nhave been possible. Now the synod saith of this determination, \"It\nseemed good unto the Holy Ghost, and unto us,\" Acts xv. And another\nsynod, walking by the like light and rule of the Scripture as they did,\nmay say of themselves as the apostles said.\n\n\n\n\nPART II.\n\nOF THE NATURE OF THAT CHURCH GOVERNMENT WHICH IS OF DIVINE RIGHT,\nACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n_The Description of Church Government._\n\n\nThe nature of that church government which is of divine right according\nto Scripture, comes next to be considered; (having so fully seen what\nthe nature of a divine right is, and how many several ways matters in\nreligion may be said to be of divine right.) For the fuller and clearer\nunfolding whereof, let us first see how church government may be\ndescribed; and then how that description may be explained and justified\nby the word of God, in the branches of it.\n\nChurch government may be thus described:\n\nChurch government is a power[13] or authority spiritual,[14] revealed in\nthe holy Scriptures,[15] derived from Jesus Christ[16] our Mediator,[17]\nonly to his own officers, and by them exercised in dispensing of the\nword,[18] seals,[19] censures,[20] and all other ordinances of\nChrist,[21] for the edifying of the Church of Christ.[22]\n\nThis description of church government may be thus explained and proved.\nThree things are principally considerable herein, viz: 1. The thing\ndefined, or described, viz. church government. 2. The general nature of\nthis government which it hath in common with all other governments, viz.\npower or authority.\n\n3. The special difference whereby it is distinguished from all other\ngovernments whatsoever. Herein six things are observable. 1. The special\nrule, wherein it is revealed, and whereby it is to be measured, viz. the\nholy Scriptures. 2. The proper author, or fountain, whence this power is\nderived, viz. from Jesus Christ our Mediator, peculiarly. 3. The special\nkind of this power or authority, viz. it is a spiritual power, it is a\nderived power. 4. The several parts or acts wherein this power sets\nforth itself, viz. in dispensing the word, seals, censures, and all\nother ordinances of Christ. 5. The special end or scope of this power,\nviz. the edifying of the Church of Christ. 6. The proper and distinct\nsubject or receptacle wherein Christ hath placed and intrusted all this\npower, viz. only his own officers. All these things are comprehended in\nthis description, and unto these several heads the whole nature of\nchurch government may be reduced. So that, these being explained and\nconfirmed by the Scriptures, it will easily and fully be discovered,\nwhat that church government is which is of divine right, and by the will\nand appointment of Jesus Christ, our Mediator.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n_Of the Subject Described, viz. Church Government, the terms being\nbriefly opened._\n\n\nTouching the thing defined or described, it is church government. Here\ntwo terms are to be a little explained: 1. What is meant by church? 2.\nWhat is meant by government?\n\n1. Church is originally derived from a Greek word,[23] which signifies\nto call forth. Hence church properly signifies a company or multitude,\ncalled forth; and so in this notation of the word, three things are\nimplied: 1. The term from which they are called. 2. The term to which\nthey are called. 3. The medium or mean by which they are brought from\none term to another, viz. by calling. And these things thus generally\nlaid down, do agree to every company that may properly be called a\nchurch. Now, this word translated church, never signifies one particular\nperson, but many congregated, gathered, or called together; and it hath\nseveral acceptations or uses in the New Testament: 1. It is used in a\ncommon and civil sense, for any civil meeting, or concourse of people\ntogether: thus that tumultuous and riotous assembly is called a church,\nActs xix. 32, 39, 40. 2. It is used in a special religious sense, for a\nsacred meeting or assembly of God's people together: and thus it\nsignifies the Church of God, either, 1. Invisible, comprehending only\nthe elect of God, as Heb. xii. 23, \"and Church of the first-born,\" Eph.\nv. 23, &c., \"Even as Christ is the head of the Church.\" 2. Or, visible,\ncomprehending the company of those that are called to the visible\nprofession of the faith in Christ, and obedience unto Christ, according\nto the gospel, as Acts ii. 47, and v. 11, and viii. 3, and xii. 1, 5; 1\nCor. xii. 23, and often elsewhere. Now in this description, church is\nnot understood of a civil assembly; for such assemblies are governed by\ncivil power. Nor of the invisible Church of Christ; for, as the Church\nis invisible, (to speak properly,) it is invisibly governed by Christ\nand his Spirit, Rom. viii. 14; Gal. ii. 20. But of the visible Church of\nChrist, for which Christ hath provided a visible polity, a visible\ngovernment, by visible officers and ordinances, for the good both of the\nvisible and invisible members thereof, which is that church government\nhere spoken of.\n\n2. Government is the translation of a Greek word, which properly\nsignifies the government of a ship with chart, &c., by the pilot or\nmariner, and thence metaphorically is used to signify any government,\npolitical or ecclesiastical. But the word is only once used in all the\nNew Testament, viz. 1 Cor. xii. 28: _Governments_, h.e. ruling elders in\nthe church; the abstract being put for the concrete, governments for\ngovernors. But whatever be the terms or names whereby government is\nexpressed, government generally considered seems still to signify a\nsuperiority of office, power, and authority, which one hath and\nexerciseth over another. This is the notion of government in general. So\nthat church government, in general, notes that pre-eminence or\nsuperiority of office, power, and authority, which some have and\nexercise over others in spiritual matters, in church affairs. And here\nwe are further to consider, that church government is either, 1.\nMagisterial, lordly, and supreme; and so it is primitively and\nabsolutely in God, Matt. xxviii. 18. Dispensatorily and mediatorily in\nJesus Christ our Mediator only, whom God hath made both Lord and Christ,\nActs ii. 36; Matt, xxiii. 8, 10; 1 Cor. viii. 6, and to whom God alone\nhath dispensed all authority and power, Matt, xxviii. 18, 19; John v.\n22. Now church government, as settled on Christ only, is monarchical. 2.\nMinisterial, stewardly, and subordinate; and this power Jesus Christ our\nMediator hath committed to his church guides and officers in his Church,\n2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10; and church government, as intrusted in the\nhands of church guides, is representative. This ministerial church\ngovernment, committed by Christ to his officers, may be considered\neither, 1. As it was dispensed under the Old Testament, in a Mosaical,\nLevitical polity; in which sense we here speak not of church government;\n(that polity being dissolved and antiquated.) 2. Or, as it is to be\ndispensed now under the New Testament, in an evangelical Christian\npolity, by Christ's New Testament officers; and this is that church\ngovernment which is here described, viz. not the supreme magisterial\ngovernment of Christ, but the subordinate ministerial government of\nChrist's officers; and this not as it was under the Old Testament, but\nas it ought to be now under the New Testament.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n_Of the general Nature of Church Government, viz. Power or Authority._\n\n\nTouching the general nature of this government, which it participates in\ncommon with all other governments, it is power or authority. Here divers\nparticulars are to be cleared and proved, viz:\n\n1. What is meant by power or authority? The word chiefly used in the New\nTestament for power or authority is used not only to denote Christ's\nsupreme power, as Luke iv. 36; Mark i. 17, with Luke vi. 19; but also\nhis officers' derived power, as with 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10. It is\nused to signify divers things: as, 1. Dignity, privilege, prerogative.\n\"To them he gave prerogative to be the sons of God,\" John i. 12. 2.\nLiberty, leave, license; as, 1 Cor. viii. 9, \"But so that your liberty\nbecome not an offence to the weak;\" and 1 Cor. ix. 4, 5, \"Have not we\nliberty to eat and drink? Have not we liberty to lead about a sister, a\nwife?\" 3. But most usually right and authority; as, Matt. xxi. 23, 24,\n27, and xxviii. 18; so 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10: in this last sense\nespecially it is here to be taken in this description of church\ngovernment.\n\nPower or authority in general is by some[24] thus described: that\nwhereby one may claim or challenge any thing to one's self, without the\ninjury of any other. Power is exercised either about things, or actions,\nor persons. 1. About things, as when a man disposes of his own goods,\nwhich he may do without wrong to any. 2. About actions, as when a man\nacts that which offends no law. 3. About persons, as when a man commands\nhis children or servants that are under his own power.--Proportionably,\nthe power of the Church in government is exercised, 1. About things, as\nwhen it is to be determined by the word, what the Church may call her\nown of right; as, that all the officers are hers, Eph; iv. 7, 8, 10, 11;\n1 Cor. xii. 28: that all the promises are hers, 2 Pet. i. 4; 1 Tim. iv.\n8: that Jesus Christ, and with Christ all things, are hers, 1 Cor. iii.\n21, 22. The keys of the kingdom of heaven are hers, Matt. xvi. 19, and\nxviii. 18, &c.; John xx. 21, 23, &c.: these things the Church may\nchallenge without wrong to any. 2. About actions. As when it is to be\ndetermined by the word, what the Church of divine right may do, or not\ndo: as, the Church may not _bear with them that are evil_, Rev. ii. 2;\n_nor tolerate women to teach_, or false doctrine to be broached, Rev.\nii. 20, &c. The Church may _warn the unruly_, 1 Thess. v. 14:\nexcommunicate the obstinate and incorrigible, Matt, xviii. 17, 18; 1\nCor. v. 4, 5, 13: receive again penitent persons to the communion of the\nfaithful, 2 Cor. ii. 7, 8: make binding decrees in synods, even to the\nrestraining of the outward exercise of due Christian liberty for a time,\nfor prevention of scandal, Acts xv. 3. About persons. The Church also\nhath a power to be exercised, for calling them to their duty, and\nkeeping them in their duty according to the word of God: as, to _rebuke\nthem before all_, that sin before all, 1 Tim. v. 20: to prove deacons,\nActs vi. 2, 3, &c.; 1 Tim. iii. 10: _to ordain elders_, Tit. i. 5; Acts\nxiv. 23: to use the _keys of the kingdom of heaven_, in the dispensing\nof all ordinances, Matt, xviii. 18-20, and John xx. 21, 23, with Matt,\nxxviii. 18-20: and, in a word, (as the cause shall require,) to judge of\nall them that are within the Church, 1 Cor. v. 12.\n\nThis is the power and authority wherein the nature of church government\ngenerally doth consist.\n\n2. That all governments in Scripture are styled by the common names of\npower or authority: e.g. the absolute government of God over all things,\nis power, Acts i. 7: the supreme government of Jesus Christ, is power,\nMatt, xxviii. 18; Rev. xii. 10: the political government of the\nmagistrate in commonwealths, is power, as John xix. 10; Rom. xiii. 1-3;\nLuke xxiii. 7: the military government of soldiers under superior\ncommanders, is power, &c., Matt. viii. 9: the family government that the\nmaster of a family hath over his household, is power, 1 Tim. iii. 5, \"If\nany man know not how to rule his own house.\" Yea, the very tyrannical\nrule that sin and Satan exercise over carnal men, is styled power, Acts\nxxvi. 18; Col. i. 13. Thus, generally, all sorts of government are\ncommonly called power or authority.\n\n3. That thus the Scripture also styles church government, viz. power or\nauthority, as 2 Cor. x. 8, \"Of our authority\" (or power) \"which the Lord\nhath given us for your edification.\" Paul speaks it of this power of\nchurch government. And again, speaking of the same subject, he saith,\n\"Lest being present, I should use sharpness, according to the power\nwhich the Lord hath given me to edification, and not to destruction.\" 2\nCor. xiii. 10.\n\nFor further clearing hereof, consider the several sorts or kinds of\necclesiastical power, according to this type or scheme of ecclesiastical\npower and authority here subjoined.\n\nEcclesiastical power is either supreme and magisterial; or subordinate\nand ministerial.\n\nI. Supreme magisterial power, consisting in a lordly dominion and\nsovereignty over the Church; and may come under a double consideration,\nviz:\n\n1. As it is justly attributed to God alone. Thus the absolute\nsovereignty and supreme power (to speak properly) is only his over the\nChurch, and all creatures in the whole universe: now this supreme divine\npower is either essential or mediatorial.\n\n1. Essential, viz. that power which belongs to the essence of God, and\nto every person of the Trinity in common, as God. \"His kingdom ruleth\nover all,\" Psal. ciii. 19. \"God ruleth in Jacob to the ends of the\nearth,\" Psal. lix. 13. \"The kingdom is the Lord's, and he is the\nGovernor among the nations,\" Psal. xxii. 28.\n\n2. Mediatorial, viz. that magisterial, lordly, and sovereign power or\ndominion, which God hath dispensed, delegated, or committed to Christ as\nMediator, being both head of the Church, and over all things to the\nChurch. This power is peculiar only to Jesus Christ our Mediator. \"All\npower is given to me both in heaven and in earth,\" Matt. xxviii. 18.\n\"The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand,\"\nJohn iii. 35. \"The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all\njudgment to the Son,\" John v. 22. \"One is your Master, even Christ,\"\nMatt. xxiii. 8, 10. \"God hath put all things under his feet, and gave\nhim to be head over all things to the Church,\" Eph. i. 20-23.--This\npower of Christ is the only proper fountain whence all ecclesiastical\npower flows to the Church.\n\nII. As it is unjustly arrogated and usurped by man; whether, 1. By the\npope to himself; who arrogates to himself to be Christ's vicar, the\nsupreme visible head on earth of the visible catholic Church of Christ;\nwho exalts himself above all that is called God on earth, over\nmagistrates, princes, kings, yea, over the souls and consciences of\nmen, and the holy Scriptures of God themselves, &c., 2 Thess. ii. 4;\nRev. xviii. 10-13.\n\n2. By earthly princes to themselves: as, King Henry VIII., who, casting\noff the papal power and primacy, was vested with it himself within his\nown dominions, over the Church, accounting himself the fountain of all\necclesiastical power, (it being by statute law annexed to the crown,)\nand assuming to himself that papal title of supreme head of the Church,\n&c., which is sharply taxed by orthodox divines of foreign churches.\nThus, that most learned Rivet, taxing Bishop Gardiner for extolling the\nking's primacy, saith, \"For, he that did as yet nourish the doctrine of\nthe papacy, as after it appeared, did erect a new papacy in the person\nof the king.\"--Andrew Rivet, _Expli. Decalog. Edit._ ii. page 203.\nJudicious Calvin saith thus: \"And to this day how many are there in the\npapacy that heap upon kings whatsoever right and power they can\npossibly, so that there may not be any dispute of religion; but should\nthis power be in one king, to decree according to his own pleasure\nwhatsoever he pleaseth, and that should remain fixed without\ncontroversy? They that at first so much extolled Henry, king of England,\n(certainly they were inconsiderate men,) gave unto him supreme power of\nall things, and this grievously wounded me always; for they were\nblasphemers, when they called him the supreme head of the Church under\nChrist: certainly this was too much. But let this remain buried, because\nthey sinned by an inconsiderate zeal. But when that impostor, (he means\nBishop Gardiner, as Rivet notes,) which after was chancellor of this\nProserpina, which there at this day overcometh all the devils, he when\nhe was at Ratisbon did not contend with reasons, (I speak of this last\nchancellor, who was Bishop of Winchester,) but as I now began to say, he\nmuch regarded not scripture testimonies; but said, it was at the\npleasure of the king to abrogate the statutes, and institute new rites.\nTouching fasting, there the king can enjoin and command the people, that\nthis or that day the people may eat flesh: yea, that it is lawful for\nthe king to forbid priests to marry; yea, that it is lawful for the king\nto forbid to the people the use of the cup in the Lord's supper; that it\nis lawful for the king to decree this or that in his kingdom. Why?\nBecause the king hath the supreme power. It is certain, if kings do\ntheir duty, they are both patrons of religion, and nurse-fathers of the\nChurch, as Isaiah calls them, Isa. xlix. 23. This, therefore, is\nprincipally required of kings, that they use the sword wherewith they\nare furnished, for the maintaining of God's worship. But in the mean\ntime there are inconsiderate men, that make them too spiritual; and this\nfault reigns up and down Germany; yea, spreads too much in\nthese countries. And now we perceive what fruits spring from this root,\nviz: that princes, and all that are in place of government, think\nthemselves to be so spiritual, that there is no other ecclesiastical\ngovernment. And this sacrilege creeps among us, because they cannot\nmeasure their office with certain and lawful bounds, but are of opinion\nthey cannot reign, unless they abolish all the authority of the Church,\nand become the chief judges both in doctrine, and in the whole spiritual\ngovernment. At the beginning they pretend some zeal; but mere ambition\ndrives them, that so solicitously they snatch all things to themselves.\nTherefore there ought to be a temper kept; for this disease hath always\nreigned in princes, to desire to bend religion according to their own\npleasure and lust, and for their own profits in the mean time. For they\nhave respect to their profit, because for the most part they are not\nacted by the Spirit of God, but their ambition carries them.\" Thus\nCalvin in Amos vii. 13. Oh what exclamations would this holy man have\npoured out, had he lived to see the passages of our days! _Quis talia\nfando temperet a lachrymis!_[25]\n\nII. Subordinate ministerial power, which is either,\n\n1. Indirectly, improperly, and only objectively ecclesiastical or\nspiritual, (so called, because it is exercised about spiritual or\necclesiastical objects, though formally in its own nature it be properly\na mere civil or political power.) This is that power which is allowed to\nthe civil magistrate about religion; he is _an overseer of things\nwithout the Church_, having an external care of religion as a\n_nurse-father_, Isa. xlix. 23; as had Hezekiah, Josiah, Asa,\nJehoshaphat, &c.; so as, by the law, to restore religion decayed, reform\nthe Church corrupted, protect the Church reformed, &c.\n\n2. Directly, properly, and formally ecclesiastical or spiritual, having\nrespect properly to matters within the Church. This power only belongs\nto church officers, who are overseers of things within, 1 Cor. iv. 20,\n21; 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10; and this is either, 1. More special and\npeculiar to the office of some church governors only, as the power of\npreaching the gospel, dispensing the sacraments, &c., which is only\ncommitted to the ministers of the gospel, and which they, as ministers,\nmay execute, in virtue of their office. This is called by some the key\nof doctrine, or key of knowledge; by others, the power of order, or of\nspecial office. See Matt, xxviii. 18-20; Rom. x. 15; 1 Tim. v. 17. 2.\nMore general and common to the office of all church governors, as the\npower of censures, &c., wherein ruling elders act with ministers,\nadmonishing the unruly, excommunicating the incorrigible, remitting and\nreceiving again of the penitent into church communion. Compare Matt,\nxviii. 17, 18; 1 Cor. v. 2, 4, 5, 7, 11-13; 2 Cor. ii. 6-12, with Rom.\nxii. 8; 1 Cor. xii. 28; and 1 Tim. v. 17. This is called the key of\ndiscipline, or power of jurisdiction.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n_Of the special difference of Church Government from other Governments.\nAnd first of the Special Rule of Church Government, viz. the Holy\nScriptures._\n\n\nTouching the special difference, whereby church government is in this\ndescription distinguished from all other governments whatsoever, it\nconsists of many branches, which will require more large explication and\nconfirmation; and shall be handled, not according to that order, as they\nare first named in the description, but according to the order of\nnature, as they most conduce to the clearing of one another, every\nbranch being distinctly laid down, as followeth:\n\nThe rule or standard of church government is only the holy Scriptures.\nThus in the description, church government is styled a power or\nauthority revealed in the holy Scriptures. For clearing hereof, take\nthis proposition, viz:\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath laid down in his word a perfect and\nsufficient rule for the government of his visible Church under the New\nTestament, which all the members of his Church ought to observe and\nsubmit unto until the end of the world. For clearing this, weigh these\nconsiderations:\n\n1. The government of the visible Church under the New Testament is as\nneedful as ever it was under the Old Testament. What necessity of\ngovernment could be pleaded then, which may not as strongly be pleaded\nnow? Is not the visible Church of Christ a mixed body of sound and\nunsound members, of fruitful and barren branches, of tares and wheat, of\ngood and bad, of sincere believers and hypocrites, of sheep and goats,\n&c., now as well as it was then? Is there not as great cause to separate\nand distinguish by church power, between the precious and the vile, the\nclean and the unclean, (who are apt to defile, infect, and leaven one\nanother,) now as well as then? Ought there not to be as great care over\nthe holy ordinances of God, to preserve and guard them from contempt and\npollution, by a hedge and fence of government, now as well as then? Is\nit not as necessary that by government sin be suppressed, piety\npromoted, and the Church edified, now as well as then? But under the Old\nTestament the Church visible had a perfect rule of church government,\n(as is granted on all sides:) and hath Jesus Christ left his Church now\nunder the New Testament in a worse condition?\n\n2. The Lord Jesus Christ (upon whose shoulder God hath laid the\ngovernment, Isa. ix. 6, and unto whom _all power both in heaven and in\nearth is given_ by the Father to that end, Matt. xxviii. 18) _is most\nfaithful in all his house_, the Church, fully to discharge all the trust\ncommitted to him, and completely to supply his Church with all\nnecessaries both to her being, and well-being ecclesiastical. Moses was\nfaithful in the Old Testament; for, as God gave him a pattern of church\ngovernment in the ceremonial law, so he did all things according to the\npattern; and shall the Lord Jesus be less faithful as _a son over his\nown house,_ than was Moses as a servant over another's house? \"Consider\nthe Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus, who was\nfaithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all\nhis house--and Moses verily was faithful in all his house as a\nservant--but Christ as a son over his own house, whose house are we,\"\nHeb. iii. 1, 2, 5, 6. Yea, \"Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and\nto-day, and forever,\" Heb. xiii. 8, giving a pattern of church\ngovernment to Moses, and the church officers of the Old Testament, (the\nChurch being then as a child in nonage and minority, Gal, iv. 1, &c.,)\ncan we imagine he hath not as carefully left a pattern of church\ngovernment to his apostles, and the church officers of the New\nTestament, the Church being now as a man come to full age and maturity?\n\n3. The holy Scriptures are now completely and unalterably perfect,\ncontaining such exact rules for the churches of God in all states and\nages, both under the Old and New Testament, that not only the people of\nGod, of all sorts and degrees, but also the men of God, and officers of\nthe Church, of all sorts and ages, may thereby be made perfect,\nthoroughly furnished unto all good works. \"The law of the Lord is\nperfect,\" Psal. xix. 7. \"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God,\nand is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for\ninstruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect,\nthoroughly furnished to every good work,\" 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17. And in his\nfirst epistle to Timothy, (which is the Church's directory for divine\nworship, discipline, and government,) he saith, \"These things write I\nunto thee--that thou mightest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself\nin the house of God, which is the Church of the living God,\" (this is\nspoken in reference to matters of church government peculiarly,) 1 Tim.\niii. 14, 15. And the apostle, having respect to the former matters in\nhis epistle, saith to Timothy, and to all Timothies after him, \"I give\nthee charge in the sight of God--that thou keep this commandment without\nspot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ,\"\n(therefore, this charge is intended for all ministers after Timothy to\nthe world's end,) 1 Tim. vi. 13, 14, compared with 1 Tim. v. 21, observe\n_these things_. And the perfection of the whole scripture canon is\nsealed up with that testimony in the close of the last book, \"If any man\nshall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are\nwritten in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of\nthe book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book\nof life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written\nin this book,\" Rev. xxii. 18, 19. Now, if the Scriptures be thus\naccurately perfect and complete, they must needs contain a sufficient\npattern, and rules of church government now under the New Testament;\nwhich rules are scattered here and there in several books of the word,\n(as flowers grow scattered in the field, as silver is mingled in the\nmine, or as gold is mixed with the sand,) that so God may exercise his\nChurch, in sifting and searching them out.\n\n4. All the substantials of church government under the New Testament are\nlaid down in the word in particular rules, whether they be touching\nofficers, ordinances, censures, assemblies, and the compass of their\npower, as after will appear; and all the circumstantials are laid down\nin the word, under general rules of order, decency, and edification, 1\nCor, xiv. 40, and ver. 5,12, 26.\n\nConsequently, there is a perfect and sufficient rule for church\ngovernment laid down in the Scriptures, which is obligatory upon all.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n_Of the Proper Author or Fountain, whence Church Government and the\nauthority thereof is derived by Divine Right, viz. Jesus Christ our\nMediator._\n\n\nAs the Scripture is the rule of church government, so Christ is the sole\nroot and fountain whence it originally flows; therefore, it is said in\nthe description, church government is a power or authority, derived from\nJesus Christ our Mediator. Take it in this proposition, viz:\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath all authority and power in heaven and in\nearth, for the government of his Church, committed unto him from God the\nFather. This is clearly evident,\n\n1. By plain testimonies of Scripture, declaring that the government of\nthe Church is laid upon his shoulder, to which end the Father hath\ninvested him with all authority and power. \"The government shall be upon\nhis shoulder,\" &c., Isa. ix. 6,7. \"All power is given me in heaven and in\nearth: go, disciple ye all nations,\" &c., Matt, xxviii. 18, 19. \"He shall\nbe great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest, and the Lord God\nshall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign\nover the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no\nend,\" Luke i. 32, 33. \"The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all\njudgment to the Son; and hath given him authority to execute judgment\nalso, because he is the Son of man,\" John v. 22, 27. \"The Father loveth\nthe Son, and hath given all things into his hand,\" John iii. 35. \"It is\nhe that hath the key of David, that openeth and no man shutteth, and\nshutteth and no man openeth,\" Rev. iii. 7. \"God raised him from the\ndead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far\nabove all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every\nname that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to\ncome: and hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the\nhead over all things to the Church, which is his body,\" Eph. i. 20-23,\n\n2. By eminent princely titles, attributed unto Jesus Christ our\nMediator, having such authority, power, rule, and government legibly\nengraven upon their foreheads, in reference to his Church.\n\n\"A Governor which shall feed\" (or rule) \"my people Israel,\" Matt. ii. 6.\n\"That great Shepherd of the sheep,\" Heb. xiii. 20. \"That Shepherd and\nBishop of our souls,\" 1 Pet. ii. ult. \"One is your master, Christ,\"\nMatt, xxiii. 8, 10. \"Christ as a son over his own house,\" Heb. iii. 6.\n\"The Head of the body the Church,\" Col. i. 18; Eph. v. 23. \"Head over\nall things to the Church,\" Eph. i. 22. \"To us but one Lord Jesus\nChrist,\" 1 Cor. viii. 6. \"Made of God both Lord and Christ,\" Acts ii.\n36. \"Lord of lords,\" Rev. xix. 16. \"He is Lord of all,\" Acts x. 36.\n\"God's King set on his holy hill of Zion,\" Psal. ii. 6. \"David their\nking,\" Jer. xxx. 9; Ezek. xxxiv. 23, and xxxvii. 24; Hos. iii. 5. \"King\nof kings,\" Rev. xix. 16.\n\n3. By those primitive, fundamental, imperial acts of power, and supreme\nauthority in the government of the Church, which are peculiarly ascribed\nto Jesus Christ our Mediator, as appropriate to him alone, above all\ncreatures, e.g.\n\n1. The giving of laws to his Church. \"The law of Christ,\" Gal. vi. 2.\n\"Gave commandments to the apostles,\" Acts i. 2. \"There is one Lawgiver,\nwho is able to save and to destroy,\" James iv. 12. \"The Lord is our\njudge, the Lord is our lawgiver,\" (or statute-maker,) \"the Lord is our\nking,\" Isa. xxxiii. 22.\n\n2. The constituting of ordinances, whereby his Church shall be edified:\nas _preaching the word_, Matt. x. 7; 1 Cor. i. 17; Matt, xxviii. 18-20;\nMark xvi. 15. _Administering of the sacraments. Baptism_, John i. 33,\nwith Matt. iii. 13, &c., and xxviii. 18, 19. _The Lord's supper_, 1 Cor.\nxi. 20, 23, &c.; Matt. xxvi. 26, &c.; Mark xiv. 22, &c.; Luke xxii. 19,\n20. _Dispensing of censures_, Matt. xvi. 10, with xviii. 15-18, &c.\n\n3. The ordaining and appointing of his own church officers, by whom his\nordinances shall be dispensed and managed in his Church. \"He gave gifts\nto men; and he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some,\nevangelists; and some, pastors and teachers,\" Eph. iv. 7, 8, 11; compare\n1 Cor. xii. 28; 1 Thess. v. 12; Acts xx. 28.\n\n4. The dispensing of Christ's ordinances, not in the name of\nmagistrates, ministers, churches, councils, &c., but in Christ's own\nname. The apostles did \"speak and teach in the name of Jesus,\" Acts iv.\n17, 18. \"Whatsoever ye ask in my name,\" John xiv. 13, 14, and xvi. 23.\n\"Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son,\" Matt,\nxxviii. 18, 19. \"They were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus,\" Acts\nxix. 5. \"In the name--with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to\ndeliver such a one to Satan,\" 1 Cor. v. 4. Yea, assemblies of the Church\nare to be in Christ's name: \"Where two or three are gathered together in\nmy name,\" Matt, xviii. 20.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n_Of the Special Kind, or Peculiar Nature of this Power and Authority._\n\n\nHaving viewed what is the rule of this authority, viz. the holy\nScriptures, and what is the fountain of this authority, viz. Jesus\nChrist our Mediator; now consider the special kind or peculiar nature of\nthis authority, which the description lays down in two several\nexpressions, viz: 1. It is a spiritual power or authority. 2. It is a\nderived power, &c.\n\n1. The power or authority of church government is a spiritual power.\nSpiritual, not so perfectly and completely as Christ's supreme\ngovernment is spiritual, who alone hath absolute and immediate power and\nauthority over the very spirits and consciences of men; ruling them by\nthe invisible influence of his Spirit and grace as he pleaseth, John\niii. 8; Rom. viii. 14; Gal. ii. 20: but so purely, properly, and merely\nspiritual is this power, that it really, essentially, and specifically\ndiffers, and is contradistinct from that power which is properly civil,\nworldly, and political, in the hand of the political magistrate. Now,\nthat this power of church government is in this sense properly, purely,\nmerely spiritual: and that by divine right may be evidenced many ways\naccording to Scripture; forasmuch as the rule, fountain, matter, form,\nsubject, object, end, and the all of this power, is only spiritual.\n\n1. Spiritual in the rule, revealing and regulating it, viz. not any\nprinciples of state policy, parliament rolls, any human statutes, laws,\nordinances, edicts, decrees, traditions, or precepts of men whatsoever,\naccording to which cities, provinces, kingdoms, empires, may be happily\ngoverned: but the holy Scriptures, that perfect divine canon, wherein\nthe Lord Christ hath revealed sufficiently how his own house, his\nChurch, shall be ruled, 1 Tim. iii. 14, 15; and all his ordinances,\nword, sacraments, censures, &c., shall therein be dispensed, 2 Tim. iii.\n16, 17. (See chap. IV.) Now this Scripture is divinely breathed, or\ninspired of God--holy men writing not according to the fallible will of\nman, but the infallible acting of the Holy Ghost, 2 Tim. iii. 16, with 2\nPet. i. 20, 21.\n\n2. Spiritual in the fountain or author of this power, whence it\noriginally flows; it being derived, not from any magistrate, prince, or\npotentate in the world, not from any man on earth, or the will of man;\nbut only from Jesus Christ our Mediator, himself being the sole or first\nreceptacle of all power from the Father, Matt. xxviii. 18; John v. 22:\nand consequently, the very fountain of all power and authority to his\nChurch, Matt. xxviii. 18-20, with John xx. 21, 23; Matt. xvi. 19, and\nxviii. 18-20; 2 Cor. x. 8. See this formerly cleared, chap. III. and V.\n\n3. Spiritual in the matter of it, and the several parts of this power:\ntherefore called the _keys of the kingdom of heaven_, not the keys of\nthe kingdoms of earth, Matt. xvi. 19, (as Christ professed his _kingdom\nwas not of this world_, John xviii. 36; and when one requested of\nChrist, that by his authority he would speak to his brother to divide\nthe inheritance with him, Christ disclaimed utterly all such worldly,\nearthly power, saying, \"Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?\"\nLuke xii. 13, 14.) Consider these heavenly spiritual keys in the kinds\nof them, whether of doctrine or discipline; or in the acts of them,\nwhether of binding or loosing, in all which they are spiritual: e.g. the\ndoctrine which is preached is not human but divine, revealed in the\nScriptures by the Spirit of God, and handling most sublime spiritual\nmysteries of religion, 2 Pet. i.; 2 Tim. iii. 16,17. The seals\nadministered are not worldly seals, confirming and ratifying any carnal\nprivileges, liberties, interests, authority, &c., but spiritual,\n_sealing the righteousness of faith_, Rom. iv. 11; the death and blood\nof Jesus Christ, with all the spiritual virtue and efficacy thereof unto\nhis members, Rom. v. 6; Gal. iii.; 1 Cor. x. 16, 17, and xi. 23, 24, &c.\nThe censures dispensed are not pecuniary, corporal, or capital, by\nfines, confiscations, imprisonments, whippings, stocking, stigmatizing,\nor taking away of limb or life, (all such things this government meddles\nnot withal, but leaves them to such as bear the civil sword,) but\nspiritual, that only concern the soul and conscience; as _admonishing_\nof the unruly and disorderly, Matt, xviii. 18, 19; _casting out the\nincorrigible_ and obstinate from the spiritual fellowship of the saints,\nMatt. xviii. 18, 19; 2 Cor. v. ult.: _receiving again into spiritual\ncommunion_ of the faithful, such as are penitent, 2 Cor. ii. 6. Thus the\nbinding and loosing, which are counted the chief acts of the keys, are\nspiritually by our Saviour interpreted to be the _remitting and\nretaining of sins_; compare Matt, xviii. 18, 19, with John xx. 21, 23.\n\n4. Spiritual in the form and manner, as well as in the matter. For this\npower is to be exercised, not in a natural manner, or in any carnal\nname, of earthly magistrate, court, parliament, prince, or potentate\nwhatsoever, as all secular civil power is; no, nor in the name of\nsaints, ministers, or the churches: but in a spiritual manner, in the\nname of the Lord Jesus, from whom alone all his officers receive their\ncommissions. The word is to be _preached in his name_, Acts xvii. 18:\nseals dispensed in his name, Matt. xxviii. 19; Acts xix. 5: censures\ninflicted in his name, 1 Cor. v. 4, &c. (See chap. V.)\n\n5. Spiritual in the subject intrusted with this power; which is not any\ncivil, political, or secular magistrate, (as after will more fully\nappear, in chap. IX.) but spiritual officers, which Christ himself hath\ninstituted and bestowed upon his Church, _apostles_, &c., _pastors,\nteachers, elders_, Eph. iv. 7, 8, 10, 11. To these only he hath given\nthe _keys of the kingdom of heaven_, Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18,19,\nand xxviii. 18, 19; John xx. 21-23; 2 Cor. x. 8, _authority which the\nLord hath given us_. These he hath made _governments in his Church_, 1\nCor. xii. 28. To these he will have _obedience and subjection_\nperformed, Heb. xiii. 17, and _double honor_ allowed, 1 Tim. v. 17.\n\n6. Spiritual in respect of the object about which this power is to be\nput forth and exercised, viz. not about things, actions, or persons\ncivil, as such; but spiritual and ecclesiastical, as such. Thus\ninjurious actions, not as trespasses against any statute or law\npolitical; but as scandalous to our brethren, or the Church of God,\nMatt, xviii. 18, 19; are considered and punished by this power. Thus the\nincestuous person was cast out, because a wicked person in himself, and\nlikely to leaven others by his bad example, 1 Cor. v. 6. Thus the\npersons whom the Church may judge are not the men of the world without\nthe Church, but those that are in some sense spiritual, and within the\nChurch, 1 Cor. v. 12.\n\n7. Spiritual also is this power in the scope and end of it. This the\nScripture frequently inculcates: e.g. a brother is to be admonished\nprivately, publicly, &c., not for the gaining of our private interests,\nadvantages, &c., but for _the gaining of our brother_, that his soul and\nconscience may be gained to God and to his duty, and he be reformed,\nMatt, xviii. 15. The incestuous person is to be \"delivered to Satan, for\nthe destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of\nour Lord Jesus,\" 1 Cor. v. 5; yea, the whole authority given to church\nguides from the Lord was given to this end, _for the edification, not\nthe destruction_ of the Church, 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10; all which,\nand such like, are spiritual ends. Thus the power of church government\nhere described is wholly and entirely a spiritual power, whether we\nrespect the rule, root, matter, form, subject, object, or end thereof.\nSo that in this respect it is really and specifically distinct from all\ncivil power, and in no respect encroacheth upon, or can be prejudicial\nunto the magistrate's authority, which is properly and only political.\n\n2. The power or authority of church government is a derived power. For\nclearing this, observe, there is a magisterial primitive supreme power,\nwhich is peculiar to Jesus Christ our Mediator, (as hath been proved,\nchap. III. and V:) and there is a ministerial, derivative, subordinate\npower, which the Scripture declares to be in church guides, Matt. xvi.\n19, and xviii. 18; John xx. 21, 23; Matt, xxviii. 19, 20; 2 Cor. x. 8,\nand xiii. 10, and often elsewhere this is abundantly testified. But\nwhence is this power originally derived to them? Here we are carefully\nto consider and distinguish three things, touching this power or\nauthority from one another, viz: 1st. The donation of the authority\nitself, and of the offices whereunto this power doth properly belong.\n2d. The designation of particular persons to such offices as are vested\nwith such power. 3d. The public protection, countenancing, authorizing,\ndefending, and maintaining of such officers in the public exercise of\nsuch power within such and such realms or dominions. This being\npremised, we may clearly thus resolve, according to scripture warrant,\nviz. the designation or setting apart of particular individual persons\nto those offices in the Church that have power and authority engraven\nupon them, is from the church nominating, electing, and ordaining of\nsuch persons thereunto, see Acts iii. 1-3; 1 Tim. iv. 14, and v. 22;\nTit. i. 5; Acts iv. 22. The public protection, defence, maintenance,\n&c., of such officers in the public exercise of the power and authority\nof their office in such or such dominions, is from the civil magistrate,\nas the _nursing-father_ of the Church, Isa. xlix. 23; for it is by his\nauthority and sanction that such public places shall be set apart for\nthe public ministry, that such maintenance and reward shall be legally\nperformed for such a ministry, that all such persons of such and such\ncongregations shall be (in case they neglect their duty to such a\nministry) punished with such political penalties, &c. But the donation\nof the office and spiritual authority annexed thereunto, is only derived\nfrom Jesus Christ our Mediator. He alone gives all church officers, and\ntherefore none may devise or superadd any new officers, Eph. iv. 7, 8,\n10, 11; 1 Cor. xii. 28. And he alone commits all authority and power\nspiritual to those officers, for dispensing of word, sacraments,\ncensures, and all ordinances, Matt. xvi. 19, and xxviii. 18-20; John xx.\n21-23; 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10: and therefore it is not safe for any\ncreature to intrude upon this prerogative royal of Christ to give any\npower to any officer of the Church. None can give what he has not.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n_Of the several Parts or Acts of this power of Church Government,\nwherein it puts forth itself in the Church._\n\n\nThus far of the special kind or peculiar nature of this authority; now\nto the several parts or acts of this power which the description\ncomprehends in these expressions, (in dispensing the word, seals,\ncensures, and all other ordinances of Christ.) The evangelical\nordinances which Christ has set up in his church are many; and all of\nthem by divine right that Christ sets up. Take both the enumeration of\nordinances and the divine right thereof severally, as followeth.\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath instituted and appointed these ensuing\nadministrations to be standing and perpetual ordinances in his church:\nwhich ordinances for method sake may be reduced into two heads,\naccording to the distribution of the keys formerly laid down, (chap.\nIII.,) viz., ordinances appertaining, 1st, To the key of order or of\ndoctrine; 2d, To the key of jurisdiction or of discipline.\n\n1. Ordinances appertaining to the key of order or doctrine, viz:\n\n1. Public prayer and thanksgiving are divine ordinances: for 1st, Paul\nwriting his first epistle to Timothy, \"that he might know how to behave\nhimself in the house of God,\" 1 Tim. iii. 14, 15, among other directions\nin that epistle, gives this for one, \"I exhort therefore that first of\nall supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made\nfor all men,\" 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2, \"for this is good and acceptable in the\nsight of God our Saviour,\" verse 3. 2. The apostle, regulating public\nprayers in the congregation, directing that they should be performed\nwith the understanding, takes it for granted that public prayer was an\nordinance of Christ. \"If I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth,\nbut my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with\nthe spirit, and will pray with the understanding also. Else when thou\nshalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the\nunlearned, say amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not\nwhat thou sayest? for thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is\nnot edified.\" 1 Cor. xiv. 14-17. 3. Further, the apostles did account\npublic prayer to be of more concern than serving of tables, and\nproviding for the necessities of the poor, yea, to be a principal part\nof their ministerial office, and therefore resolve to addict and \"give\nthemselves to the ministry of the word and to prayer,\" Acts vi. 4; and\nthis was the church's practice in the purest times, Acts i. 13, 14,\nwhose pious action is for our imitation. 4. And Jesus Christ hath made\ngracious promises to public prayer, viz., of his presence with those who\nassemble in his name; and of audience of their prayers, Matt, xviii. 19,\n20. Would Christ so crown public prayer were it not his own ordinance?\n\n2. Singing of psalms is a divine ordinance, being,\n\n1. Prescribed; \"be filled with the spirit: speaking to yourselves in\npsalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs,\" Eph. v. 18, 19. \"Let the word\nof Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing\none another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs,\" Col. iii. 16.\n\n2. Regulated; the right performance thereof being laid down, \"I will\nsing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also,\" 1\nCor. xiv. 15, 16. \"Singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord,\" Col.\niii. 16. \"Singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord,\" Eph. v.\n19.\n\n3. The public ministry of the word of God in the congregation is a\ndivine ordinance. \"We will give ourselves,\" said the apostles, \"to the\nministry of the word and prayer,\" Acts vi. 4. The ministry of the word\nis a sacred ordinance, whether read, preached, or catechetically\npropounded.\n\n1. The public reading of the word is a divine ordinance, (though\nexposition of what is read do not always immediately follow.) For, 1.\nGod commanded the reading of the word publicly, and never since repealed\nthat command, Deut. xxxi. 11-13; Jer. xxxvi. 6; Col. iii. 16. 2. Public\nreading of the scriptures hath been the practice of God's church, both\nbefore Christ, Exod. xxiv. 7; Neh. viii. 18, and ix. 3, and xiii. 1; and\nafter Christ, Acts xiii. 15, 27, and xv. 21; 2 Cor. iii. 14. 3. Public\nreading of the scriptures is as necessary and profitable now as ever it\nwas. See Deut. xxxi. 11-13.\n\n2. The public preaching of the word is an eminent ordinance of Christ.\nThis is evident many ways, viz:\n\n1. Christ hath commanded that the word shall be preached. \"Go ye into\nall the world, and preach the gospel to every creature,\" Mark xvi. 15.\n\"Go ye, therefore, and disciple ye all nations; teaching them to observe\nall things whatsoever I have commanded you,\" Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. \"As\nye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand,\" Matt. x. 7.\nSee also Mark iii. 14. \"I charge thee,\" &c. \"Preach the word,\" 2 Tim.\niv. 1, 2. \"Necessity is laid upon me, yea, wo is unto me if I preach not\nthe gospel,\" 1 Cor. ix. 16, 17. \"Christ sent me--to preach the gospel,\"\n1 Cor. i. 17; with which compare also Acts xx. 28, and 1 Pet. v. 1-4.\n\n2. Christ hath appointed who shall preach the word. \"How shall they\npreach except they be sent?\" Rom. x. 15. The qualifications of preaching\nelders see in 1 Tim. iii. 2-8, and Tit. i. 5-9.\n\n3. Christ hath appointed how the word shall be preached. \"Be instant, in\nseason, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering\nand doctrine,\" 2 Tim. iv. 2. \"That he may be able by sound doctrine\nboth to exhort and convince gainsayers,\" Tit. i. 9. \"He that hath my\nword, let him speak my word faithfully: what is the chaff to the wheat,\nsaith the Lord?\" Jer. xxiii. 28.\n\n4. Christ hath made many encouraging promises to the preaching of his\nword, which he would not have done, were it not his own ordinance.\n\"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,\nand lo I am with you every day to the end of the world,\" Matt, xxviii.\n20. \"Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and\nwhatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven,\" Matt.\nxvi. 19, and xviii. 18. \"Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted\nunto them: and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained,\" John xx.\n23. Both these are partly meant of doctrinal binding and loosing,\nremitting and retaining. \"Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy\npeace: for I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee,\nfor I have much people in this city,\" Acts xviii. 9, 10.\n\n3. The catechetical propounding or expounding of the word, viz. a plain,\nfamiliar laying down of the first principles of the oracles of God, is\nan ordinance of Christ also. For, 1. This was the apostolical way of\nteaching the churches at the first plantation thereof. \"When for the\ntime ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again\nwhich be the first principles of the oracles of God, and are become such\nas have need of milk and not of strong meat,\" Heb. v. 12. \"Therefore,\nleaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on unto\nperfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead\nworks, and of faith towards God,\" &c., Heb. vi. 1,2. \"And I, brethren,\ncould not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, as unto\nbabes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat, for\nhitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able,\" 1\nCor. iii. 1, 2. 2. And this is the sense of pastor and people which the\nHoly Ghost useth, setting forth the reciprocal relation and office\nbetween them, with his own approbation. \"Let him that is catechized in\nthe word, communicate to him that catechizeth him, in all good things,\"\nGal. vi. 6.\n\n4. The administration of the sacraments is of divine institution.\n\n1. Of baptism. \"He that sent me to baptize with water,\" John i. 33. \"Go\nye therefore, disciple ye all nations, baptizing them into the name of\nthe Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,\" Matt, xxviii. 18-20.\n\n2. Of the Lord's supper, which Christ ordained _the same night in which\nhe was betrayed_: which institution is at large described, 1 Cor. xi.\n20, 23, &c.; Matt. xxvi. 26-31; Mark xiv. 22-27; Luke xxii. 19, 20.\n\n2. Ordinances appertaining to the key of jurisdiction or of discipline,\nviz:\n\n1. The ordination of presbyters with imposition of the hands of the\npresbytery, after praying and fasting, is a divine ordinance. \"Neglect\nnot the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy with the\nlaying on of the hands of the presbytery,\" 1 Tim. iv. 14. Titus was left\nin Crete for this end, \"To set in order things that were wanting, and\nordain presbyters\" (or elders) \"in every city, as Paul had appointed\nhim,\" Tit. i. 5. Timothy is charged, \"Lay hands suddenly on no man,\nneither be partaker of other men's sins; keep thyself pure,\" 1 Tim. v.\n22. Paul and Barnabas came to Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, and \"when\nthey had ordained them presbyters in every church, and had prayed with\nfasting, they commended them to the Lord,\" &c., Acts xiv. 21, 23.\n\n2. Authoritative discerning, and judging of doctrine according to the\nword of God, is a divine ordinance. As that council at Jerusalem,\nauthoritatively (viz. by ministerial authority) judged of both the false\ndoctrine and manners of false teachers, branding them for \"troublers of\nthe Church, subverters of souls,\" &c. \"Forasmuch as we have heard that\ncertain, coming forth from u, have troubled you with words, subverting\nyour souls, saying, ye ought to be circumcised, and keep the law, to\nwhom we gave no such commandment,\" Acts xv. 24; \"it seemed good to the\nHoly Ghost, and to us, to impose upon you no greater burden than these\nnecessary things,\" v. 28; and this was done upon debates from scripture\ngrounds, \"and to this the words of the prophets agree,\" Acts xv. 15:\nand afterwards their results and determinations are called \"decrees\nordained by the apostles and elders,\" Acts xvi. 4.\n\n3. Admonition and public rebuke of sinners is a divine ordinance of\nChrist. \"If thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his\nfault between thee and him alone: if he will not hear thee, then take\nwith thee one or two more--and if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it\nunto the Church,\" Matt, xviii. 15-17. \"Whose soever sins ye bind on\nearth shall be bound in heaven,\" John xx. 23. One way and degree of\nbinding is by authoritative, convincing reproof. \"Admonish the unruly,\"\n1 Thess. v. 14. \"An heretic, after the first and second admonition,\nreject,\" Tit. iii. 1. \"Them that sin, convincingly reprove before all,\nthat the rest also may fear,\" 1 Tim. v. 20. \"Rebuke them sharply,\" (or\nconvince them cuttingly,) Tit. iii. 13. \"Sufficient to such an one is\nthat rebuke, which was from many,\" 2 Cor. ii. 6.\n\n4. Rejecting, and purging out, or putting away from the communion of the\nChurch, wicked and incorrigible persons, is an ordinance of Christ. \"And\nif he will not hear them, tell the Church; but if he will not hear the\nChurch, let him be unto thee even as a heathen and a publican.\" \"Verily,\nI say unto you, what things soever ye shall bind on earth, they shall be\nbound in heaven,\" Matt, xviii. 17, 18, compared with Matt. xvi. 19, and\nJohn xx. 21, 23. \"An heretic, after once or twice admonition, reject,\"\nTit. iii. 10; i.e. excommunicate, till he repent--_Pisc. in loc._ By\nthe lawful judgment of the Church, to deliver the impenitent to\nSatan.--_Beza in loc._ \"Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander, whom I have\ndelivered to Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme,\" 1 Tim. i. 20.\nThe apostle's scope in 1 Cor. v. is to press the church of Corinth to\nexcommunicate the incestuous person. \"Ye are puffed up, and have not\nrather mourned, that he that hath done this deed may be taken from the\nmidst of you. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit,\nhave already as present judged him that thus wrought this thing. In the\nname of our Lord Jesus Christ, you being gathered together, and my\nspirit with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one\nto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved\nin the day of our Lord Jesus,\" 1 Cor. v. 2-5. \"Know ye not that a little\nleaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven,\"\nver. 7. \"I wrote to you in an epistle, not to be mingled together with\nfornicators,\" ver. 9, 11; and explaining what he meant by not being\n_mingled together_, saith, \"If any named a brother be a fornicator, or\ncovetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or drunkard, or rapacious, with\nsuch an one not to eat together,\" ver. 11. \"Therefore take away from\namong yourselves that wicked person,\" ver. 13.\n\n5. Seasonable remitting, receiving, comforting, and authoritative\nconfirming again in the communion of the Church those that are penitent.\n\"What things soever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven,\"\nMatt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18. \"Whose soever sins ye remit, they are\nremitted unto them,\" John xx. 23. This loosing and remitting is not only\ndoctrinal and declarative in the preaching of the word, but also\njuridical and authoritative in the administration of censures. This is\ncalled, for distinction's sake, absolution. After the church of Corinth\nhad excommunicated the incestuous person, and he thereupon had given\nsufficient testimony of his repentance, the apostle directs them to\nreceive him into church communion again, saying, \"Sufficient to such an\none is that rebuke inflicted of many; so that contrariwise you should\nrather forgive and comfort him, lest such an one should be swallowed up\nof abundant sorrow. Wherefore I beseech authoritatively to confirm love\nunto him: for to this purpose also I have written unto you, that I may\nknow the proof of you, if ye be obedient in all things,\" 2 Cor. ii. 6-9.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n_Of the End and Scope of this Government of the Church._\n\n\nThe end or scope intended by Christ in instituting, and to be aimed at\nby Christ's officers in executing of church government in dispensing the\nword, sacrament, censures, and all ordinances of Christ, is (as the\ndescription expresseth) _the edifying of the Church of Christ_. This end\nis very comprehensive. For the fuller evidencing whereof these two\nthings are to be proved:1st, That Jesus Christ our Mediator hath under\nthe New Testament one general visible Church on earth. 2d. That the\nedification of this Church of Christ is that eminent scope and end why\nChrist gave the power of church government and other ordinances unto the\nChurch.\n\nI. For the first, that Jesus Christ our Mediator hath under the New\nTestament a general visible Church on earth, made up of all particular\nchurches, may be cleared by considering well these particulars.\n\n1st. That it is evident by the Scriptures that Jesus Christ hath on\nearth many particular visible churches: (whether churches\ncongregational, presbyterial, provincial, or national, needs not here be\ndetermined.) \"Unto the churches of Galatia,\" Gal. i. 2. \"The churches\nof Judea,\" Gal. i. 22. \"Through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the\nchurches,\" Acts xv. 41. \"To the seven churches in Asia,\" Rev. i. 4, 20.\n\"The church of Ephesus,\" Rev. ii. 1. \"The church in Smyrna,\" ver. 8.\n\"The church in Pergamus,\" ver. 12. \"The church in Thyatira,\" ver. 18.\n\"The church in Sardis,\" Rev. iii. 1. \"The church in Philadelphia,\" ver.\n7. And \"the church in Laodicea,\" ver. 14. \"The church that is in their\nhouse,\" Rom. xvi. 5; and Philem. 2. \"Let your women keep silence in the\nchurch,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 34. \"All the churches of the Gentiles,\" Rom. xvi.\n4. \"So ordain I in all churches,\" 1 Cor. vii. 17. \"As in all churches\nof the saints,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 33. \"The care of all the churches,\" 2 Cor.\nxi. 28. The New Testament hath many such like expressions.\n\n2d. That how many particular visible churches soever Christ hath on\nearth, yet Scripture counts them all to be but one general visible\nChurch of Christ. This is manifest,\n\n1. By divers Scriptures, using the word church in such a full latitude\nand extensive completeness, as properly to signify, not any one single\ncongregation, or particular church, but one general visible Church: as,\n\"Upon this rock I will build my Church,\" Matt. xvi. 18. \"Give none\noffence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Greeks, nor to the Church of\nGod,\" 1 Cor. x. 32. \"God hath set some in the Church, first, apostles;\nsecondarily, prophets; thirdly, teachers,\" &c., 1 Cor. xii. 28. \"I\npersecuted the Church of God,\" 1 Cor. xv. 9; Gal. i. 13. \"The Church of\nthe living God, the pillar and ground of the truth,\" 1 Tim. iii. 15.\n\"Might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God,\" Eph. iii. 10.\n\"In the midst of the Church will I sing praise unto thee,\" Heb. ii. 12.\nIn which, and such like places, we must needs understand, that one\ngeneral visible Church of Christ.\n\n2. By such passages of scripture as evidently compare all visible\nprofessors and members of Christ throughout the world to one organical\nbody, having eyes, ears, hands, feet, &c., viz., several organs,\ninstruments, officers, &c., in it, for the benefit of the whole body; as,\n\"He gave some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and\nsome pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the\nwork of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,\" Eph. iv.\n11, 12. \"There is one body,\" Eph. iv. 4. \"As we have many members in one\nbody, and all members have not the same office; so we being many are one\nbody in Christ, and every one members one of another,\" &c., Rom. xii.\n4-9. \"As the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of\nthat one body being many, are one body; so also is Christ,\" (i.e.,\nChrist considered mystically, not personally,) \"for by one Spirit are we\nall baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we\nbe bond or free,\" &c., 1 Cor. xii. 12, to the end of the chapter, which\ncontext plainly demonstrates all Christ's visible members in the world,\nJews or Gentiles, &c., to be members of one and the same organical body\nof Christ, which organical body of Christ is the general visible Church\nof Christ; for the invisible church is not organical.\n\nII. That the edification of the Church of Christ is that eminent scope\nand end, why Christ gave church government and all other ordinances of\nthe New Testament to his Church. This is frequently testified in\nscripture. 1. The apostle, speaking of this power generally, saith, \"Our\nauthority which the Lord hath given to us for edification, and not for\nthe destruction of you,\" 2 Cor. x. 8. The like passage he hath again,\nsaying, \"according to the authority,\" or power, \"which the Lord hath\ngiven to me for edification, and not for destruction,\" 2 Cor. xiii. 10;\nin both which places he speaks of the authority of church government in\na general comprehensive way, declaring the grand and general immediate\nend thereof to be, affirmatively, edification of the church; negatively,\nnot the subversion or destruction thereof. 2. In like manner, when\nparticular acts of government, and particular ordinances\nare mentioned, the edification of the Church, at least in her members,\nis propounded as the great end of all: e.g. 1. Admonition is for\nedification, that an erring _brother may be gained_, Matt. xviii. 15,\n16, that wavering minds may be sound in the faith. \"Rebuke them\ncuttingly, that they may be sound in the faith,\" Tit. i. 13, that\nbeholders and bystanders may fear to fall into like sins. \"Them that sin\nrebuke before all, that others also may fear,\" 1 Tim. v. 20. 2.\nExcommunication is for edification; particularly of the delinquent\nmember himself; thus the incestuous person was \"delivered to Satan for\nthe destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved in the day\nof the Lord Jesus,\" 1 Cor. v. 4, 5. \"Hymeneus and Alexander were\ndelivered to Satan, that they might learn not to blaspheme,\" 1 Tim. i.\n20: more generally of the Church; thus the incestuous person was to be\nput away from among them lest the whole lump of the church should be\nleavened by him, 1 Cor. v. 3. Absolution also is for edification, lest\nthe penitent party \"should be swallowed up of too much sorrow,\" 2 Cor.\nii. 7. 4. All the officers of his Church are for edification of the\nChurch, (Eph. iv. 7, 8, 11, 12, 16,) together with all the gifts and\nendowments in these officers, whether of prayer, prophecy, tongues, &c.,\nall must be managed to edification. This is the scope of the whole\nchapter. 1 Cor. xii. 7, &c., and 1 Cor. xiv. 3-5, 9, 12, &c., 26; read\nthe whole chapter. That passage of Paul is remarkable, \"I thank my God,\nI speak with tongues more than you all; yet in the church I had rather\nspeak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach\nothers also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue,\" verses 18,\n19. Thus church government, and all sorts of ordinances, with the\nparticular acts thereof, are to be levelled at this mark of edification.\nEdification is an elegant metaphor from material buildings (perhaps of\nthe material and typical temple) to the spiritual; for explanation's\nsake briefly thus take the accommodation: The _architects_, or builders,\nare the _ministers_, 1 Cor. iii. 10. The _foundation_ and _corner-stone_\nthat bears up, binds together, and gives strength to the building, is\nJesus Christ, 1 Cor. iii. 11; 1 Pet. ii. 4, 6. The _stones_ or\n_materials_ are the _faithful_ or _saints_, 2 Cor. i. 1. The _building_,\nor house itself, is the _Church_, that spiritual house, and _temple of\nthe living God_, Eph. ii. 21, and iv. 12; 1 Cor. iii. 9, 16, 17. The\nedification of this house is gradually to be perfected more and more\ntill the coming of Christ, by laying the foundation of Christianity, in\nbringing men still unto Christ, and carrying on the superstruction in\nperfecting them in Christ in all spiritual growth, till at last the\ntop-stone be laid on, the Church completed, and translated _to the house\nnot made with hands, eternal in the heavens_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n_Of the proper receptacle and distinct subject of all this power and\nauthority of Church Government, which Christ hath peculiarly intrusted\nwith the execution thereof according to the Scriptures. And_ 1.\n_Negatively, That the political magistrate is not the proper subject of\nthis power._\n\n\nThus we have taken a brief survey of church government, both in the\nrule, root, kind, branches, and end thereof, all which are comprised in\nthe former description, and being less controverted, have been more\nbriefly handled. Now, the last thing in the description which comes\nunder our consideration, is the proper receptacle of all this power from\nChrist, or the peculiar subject intrusted by Christ with this power and\nthe execution thereof, viz. only Christ's own officers. For church\ngovernment is a spiritual power or authority, derived from Jesus Christ\nour Mediator, only to his own officers, and by them exercised in\ndispensing of the word, &c. Now about this subject of the power will be\nthe great knot of the controversy, forasmuch as there are many different\nclaims thereof made, and urged with vehement importunity: (to omit the\nRomish claim for the pope, and the prelatical claim for the bishop,) the\npolitic Erastian pretends that the only proper subject of all church\ngovernment is the political or civil magistrate; the gross Brownists or\nrigid Separatists, that it is the body of the people, or community of\nthe faithful in an equal even level; they that are more refined, (who\nstyle themselves for distinction's sake[26] Independents,) that it is\nthe single congregation, or the company of the faithful with their\npresbytery, or church officers; the Presbyterians hold that the proper\nsubject wherein Christ hath seated and intrusted all church power, and\nthe exercise thereof, is only his own church officers, (as is in the\ndescription expressed.) Here, therefore, the way will be deeper, and the\ntravelling slower; the opposition is much, and therefore the\ndisquisition of this matter will unavoidably be the more.\n\nFor perspicuity herein, seeing it is said that this power is derived\nfrom Christ only to his own officers; and by this word (only) all other\nsubjects are excluded; the subject of church power may be considered,\n1. Negatively, what it is not. 2. Affirmatively, what it is.\n\nNegatively, the proper subject unto whom Christ hath committed the power\nof church government, and the exercise thereof, is not, 1. The political\nmagistrate, as the Erastians imagine. 2. Nor the body of the people,\neither with their presbytery or without it, as the Separatists and\nIndependents pretend. Let these negatives first be evinced, and then the\naffirmative will be more clearly evidenced.\n\nTouching the first of these--that the political magistrate is not the\nproper subject unto whom Jesus Christ our Mediator hath committed the\npower of church government, and the exercise of that power; it will be\ncleared by declaring these two things distinctly and severally, viz: 1.\nWhat power about ecclesiasticals is granted to the civil magistrate. 2.\nWhat power therein is denied unto him, and why.\n\n\nSECTION 1.\n\nSuch power is granted by the reformed churches and orthodox writers to\nthe political magistrate, in reference to church affairs. Take it in\nthese particulars.\n\nA defensive, protecting, patronizing power to the church, and all the\nmembers thereof. \"Kings shall be thy nursing-fathers,\" &c., Isa. xlix.\n23. \"The magistrate is the minister of God for good to well-doers, as\nwell as the avenger, executing wrath upon evil-doers; a terror not to\ngood works, but to the evil,\" Rom. xiii. 3, 4; he is called _an heir,\nor, possessor of restraint, to put men to shame_, Judges xviii. 7. And\nas the church ought to pray for kings and all in authority, so\nconsequently all in authority should endeavor to defend it, that the\nchurch and people of God should lead a quiet and peaceable life, (under\nthe wing of their protection,) \"in all godliness and honesty,\" 1 Tim.\nii. 2; and this is evident from the end and scope of these prayers here\nprescribed, as interpreters unanimously agree. And hereupon are those\npromises to the church, \"The sons of strangers shall build up thy walls,\nand their kings shall minister unto thee,\" Isa. lx. 10; \"and thou shalt\nsuck the breast of kings,\" Isa. lx. 16. Now, this nursing, protecting\ncare of magistrates towards the church, puts forth itself in these or\nlike acts, viz: He,\n\n1. Removes all external impediments of true religion, worship of God,\n&c., by his civil power, whether persons or things, whether\npersecutions, profaneness, heresy, idolatry, superstition, &c., that\ntruth and godliness may purely flourish: as did Jehoshaphat, Asa,\nHezekiah, Josiah. And hereupon it is that God so oft condemns the not\nremoving and demolishing of the high places and monuments of idolatry,\n1 Kings xv. 14, with 2 Chron. xv. 17; 1 Kings xxii. 44; 2 Kings xii. 3:\nand highly commends the contrary in Asa, 2 Chron. xv. 8, 16: in\nJehoshaphat, 2 Chron. xvii. 3, 4, 6-10: in Hezekiah, 2 Chron. xxxi. 1; 2\nKings xviii. 4: in Manasseh, 2 Chron. xxxiii. 15: in Josiah, 2 Kings\nxxiii. 8, 13, 19, 20, 24: whereupon the Holy Ghost gives him that\nsuperlative commendation above all kings before and after him, ver. 25.\n\n2. Countenanceth, advanceth, and encourageth by his authority and\nexample the public exercise of all God's ordinances, and duties of\nreligion within his dominions, whether in matter of divine worship,\ndiscipline, and government, maintaining for the Church the fulness of\nspiritual liberties and privileges communicated to her from Christ: as\ndid Asa, 2 Chron. xv. 9-16: Jehoshaphat, 2 Chron. xx. 7-9: Hezekiah, 2\nChron. xxix., xxx., and xxxi. chapters throughout: Josiah, 2 Chron.\nxxxiv. and xxxv. chapters. And to this end God prescribed in the law\nthat the king should still have a copy of the law of God by him, therein\nto read continually, Deut. xvii. 18-20; because he was to be not only a\npractiser, but also a protector thereof, a keeper of both tables.\n\n3. Supplies the Church with all external necessaries, provisions, means,\nand worldly helps in matters of religion: as convenient public places to\nworship in, sufficient maintenance for ministers, (as the Scripture\nrequireth, 1 Tim. v. 17, 18; 1 Cor. ix. 6-15; Gal. vi. 6:) schools and\ncolleges, for promoting of literature, as nurseries to the prophets,\n&c.; together with the peaceable and effectual enjoyment of all these\nworldly necessaries, for comfortably carrying on of all public\nordinances of Christ. Thus David prepared materials, but Solomon built\nthe temple, 1 Chron. xxii. Hezekiah commanded the people that dwelt in\nJerusalem, to give the portion of the priests and the Levites, that they\nmight be encouraged in the law of the Lord; and Hezekiah himself and his\nprinces came and saw it performed, 2 Chron. xxxi. 4, &c., 8: Josiah\nrepaired the house of God, 2 Chron. xxxiv.\n\nNor need the magistrate think scorn, but rather count it his honor to be\nan earthly protector of the Church, which is the _body of Christ, the\nLamb's wife_, for redeeming of which Christ died, and for gathering and\nperfecting of which the very world is continued.\n\nAn ordering, regulating power is also allowed to the magistrate about\necclesiastical matters in a political way, so that he warrantably,\n\n1. Reforms the Church, when corrupted in divine worship, discipline, or\ngovernment: as did Moses, Exod. xxxii.; Joshua, Josh. xxiv.; Asa, 2\nChron. xv.; Jehoshaphat, 2 Chron. xvii.; Hezekiah, 2 Kings xviii.;\nJosiah, 2 Kings xxiii.; 2 Chron. xxxiv.\n\n2. Convenes or convocates synods and councils, made up of ecclesiastical\npersons, to consult, advise, and conclude determinatively, according to\nthe word, how the church is to be reformed and refined from corruptions,\nand how to be guided and governed when reformed, &c. For, 1. Pious\nmagistrates under the Old Testament called the Church together, convened\ncouncils. David, about bringing back the ark, 1 Chron. xiii. 1, 2, and\nanother council when he was old, 1 Chron. xiii. 1; Solomon, 1 Kings\nviii. 1; Hezekiah, 2 Chron. xxix. 4; and Josiah, 2 Kings xxiii. 1, 2. 2.\nAll ought to be subject to superior powers, who ought to procure the\npublic peace and prosperity of the Church, Rom. xiii. 1, 2, &c.; 1 Pet.\nii. 13, &c., 17; 1 Tim. ii. 2. Therefore superior powers may convocate\ncouncils. 3. Christian magistrates called the four general councils:\nConstantine the first Nicene council; Theodosius, senior, the first\ncouncil of Constantinople; Theodosius, junior, the first Ephesian\ncouncil; Marcian Emperor, the Chalcedon council; and, 4. Hereunto\nantiquity subscribes, as Dr. Whitaker observes.\n\n3. Supports the laws of God with his secular authority, as a keeper of\nthe tables, enjoining and commanding, under civil penalties, all under\nhis dominion, strictly and inviolably to observe the same: as \"Josiah\nmade all that were present in Israel to serve the Lord their God,\" 2\nChron. xxxiv. 33. Nehemiah made the sabbath to be sanctified, and\nstrange wives to be put away, Neb. xii. 13, &c. Yea, Nebuchadnezzar, a\nheathen king, decreed, that \"Whosoever should speak amiss of the God of\nShadrach,\" &c., \"should be cut in pieces, and their houses made a\ndunghill,\" Dan. iii. 28, 29. And Darius decreed, \"That in every dominion\nof his kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel,\" &c., Dan.\nvi. 26, 27.\n\nAnd as he strengthens the laws and ordinances of God by his civil\nauthority, so he ratifies and establishes within his dominions the just\nand necessary decrees of the Church in synods and councils (which are\nagreeable to God's word) by his civil sanction.\n\n4. Judges and determines definitively with a consequent political\njudgment, or judgment of political discretion, concerning the things\njudged and determined antecedently by the Church, in reference to his\nown act. Whether he will approve such ecclesiasticals or not; and in\nwhat manner he will so approve, or do otherwise by his public authority;\nfor he is not a brutish agent, (as papists would have him,) to do\nwhatsoever the Church enjoins him unto blind obedience, but is to act\nprudently and knowingly in all his office; and therefore the judgment of\ndiscerning (which belongs to every Christian, for the well-ordering of\nhis own act) cannot be denied to the Christian magistrate, in respect of\nhis office.\n\n5. Takes care politically, that even matters and ordinances merely and\nformally ecclesiastical, be duly managed by ecclesiastical persons\norderly called thereto. Thus Hezekiah commanded the priests and Levites\nto do their duties, 2 Chron. xxix. 5, 24, and the people to do theirs, 2\nChron. xxx. 1; and for this he is commended, that therein he did cleave\nunto the Lord, and observed his precepts which he had commanded Moses, 2\nKings xviii. 6. Thus when the king is commanded to observe and do all\nthe precepts of the law, the Lord (as orthodox divines do judge)\nintended that he should keep them, not only as a private man, but as a\nking, by using all care and endeavor that all his subjects with him\nperform all duties to God and man, Deut. xvii. 18-20.\n\n6. A compulsive, coactive, punitive, or corrective power, formally\npolitical, is also granted to the political magistrate in matters of\nreligion, in reference to all sorts of persons and things under his\njurisdiction. He may politically compel the outward man of all persons,\nchurch officers, or others under his dominions, unto external\nperformance of their respective duties, and offices in matters of\nreligion, punishing them, if either they neglect to do their duty at\nall, or do it corruptly, not only against equity and sobriety, contrary\nto the second table, but against truth and piety, contrary to the first\ntable of the decalogue. We have sufficient intimation of the\nmagistrate's punitive power in cases against the second table; as the\nstubborn and rebellious, incorrigible son, that was a glutton and a\ndrunkard, sinning against the fifth commandment, was to be stoned to\ndeath, Deut. xxi. 18-21. The murderer, sinning against the sixth\ncommandment, was to be punished with death, Gen. ix. 6; Numb. xxxv.\n30-34; Deut. x. 11-13. The unclean person, sinning against the seventh\ncommandment, was to be punished with death, Lev. xx. 11, 12, 14, 17,\n19-25; and before that, see Gen. xxxviii. 24. Yea, Job, who is thought\nto live before Moses, and before this law was made, intimates that\nadultery is a heinous crime, yea, it is an iniquity to be punished by\nthe judges, Job xxxi. 9,11. The thief, sinning against the eighth\ncommandment, was to be punished by restitution, Exod. xxii. 1, 15, &c.\nThe false witness, sinning against the ninth commandment, was to be\ndealt withal as he would have had his brother dealt with, by the law of\nretaliation, Deut. xix. 16, to the end of the chapter, &c. Yea, the\nmagistrate's punitive power is extended also to offences against the\nfirst table; whether these offences be against the first commandment, by\nfalse prophets teaching lies, errors, and heresies in the name of the\nLord, endeavoring to seduce people from the true God. \"If there arise\namong you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, that prophet, or that\ndreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he hath spoken to turn\nyou away from the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of\nEgypt,\" &c., Deut. xiii. 1-6. From which place Calvin notably asserts\nthe punitive power of magistrates against false prophets and impostors\nthat would draw God's people to a defection from the true God, showing\nthat this power also belongs to the Christian magistrate in like cases\nnow under the gospel.\n\nYea, in case of such seducement from God, though by nearest allies,\nsevere punishment was to be inflicted upon the seducer, Deut. xiii.\n6-12. See also ver. 12, to the end of the chapter, how a city is to be\npunished in the like case. And Mr. Burroughs,[27] in his Irenicum, shows\nthat this place of Deut. xiii. 6, &c., belongs even to us under the\ngospel.\n\nOr whether these offences be against the second commandment, the\nmagistrate's punitive power reaches them, Deut. xvii. 1-8; Lev. xvii.\n2-8; 2 Chron. xvi. 13, 16. \"Maachah, the mother of Asa the king, he\nremoved from being queen, because she had made an idol in a grove.\" Job\nxxxi. 26-28, herewith compare Exod. viii. 25, 26. Or whether the\noffences be against the third commandment, \"And thou shalt speak unto\nthe children of Israel, saying, Whosoever curseth God shall bear his\nsin: and he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord he shall surely be put\nto death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him, as well\nthe stranger as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the\nname of the Lord shall be put to death,\" Lev. xxiv. 15, 16. Yea, the\nheathen king Nebuchadnezzar made a notable decree to this purpose,\nagainst blaspheming God, saying, \"I make a decree, that every people,\nnation, and language, who speak any thing amiss against the God of\nShadrach, Meshech, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their\nhouses shall be made a dunghill,\" Dan. iii. 29: and the pagan\nmagistrate, king Artaxerxes, made a more full decree against all\ncontempt of the law of God: \"And whosoever will not do the law of thy\nGod,\" saith he to Ezra, \"and the law of the king, let judgment be\nexecuted speedily upon him, whether it be unto death, or to banishment,\nor to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment:\" and Ezra blesses God\nfor this, Ezra vii. 26, 27.\n\nBesides all this light of nature, and evidence of the Old Testament, for\nthe ruler's political punitive power for offences against God, there are\ndivers places in the New Testament showing that a civil punitive power\nrests still in the civil magistrate: witness those general expressions\nin those texts--Rom. xiii. 3, 4: \"Rulers are not a terror to good works,\nbut to the evil. If thou do that which is evil, be afraid, for he\nbeareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger\n_to execute_ wrath upon him that doeth evil.\" 1 Pet. ii. 13, 14: \"Submit\nyourselves unto every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether it\nbe to the king as to the supreme, or unto governors which are sent for\nthe _punishment_ of evil-doers,[28] and the praise of them that do\nwell.\" Now, (as Mr. Burroughs[29] notes,) seeing the Scripture speaks\nthus generally, except the nature of the thing require, why should we\ndistinguish where the Scripture doth not? so that these expressions may\nbe extended to those sorts of evil-doing against the first as well as\nagainst the second table; against murdering of souls by heresy, as well\nas murdering of men's bodies with the sword; against the blaspheming of\nthe God of heaven, as well as against blaspheming of kings and rulers,\nthat are counted gods on earth. That place seems to have much force in\nit to this purpose, Heb. x. 28, 29: \"He that despised Moses' law, died\nwithout mercy under two or three witnesses. Of how much sorer\npunishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden\nunder foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant,\nwherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto\nthe Spirit of grace?\" Yea, what deserve such as deny the Spirit to be of\nGod? Papists exempt their clergy from the judgment of the civil power,\nthough they be delinquents against it; and their states, both civil\nand spiritual, from civil taxes, tributes, and penalties, both which we\ndeny to ours: for, 1st, This is repugnant to the law of nature, that\nchurch officers and members, as parts and members of the commonwealth,\nshould not be subject to the government of that commonwealth whereof\nthey are parts. 2d, Repugnant to the laws and practices of the Old\nTestament, under which we read of no such exemptions. Yea, we have\ninstance of Abiathar the high-priest, who, for his partnership with\nAdonijah in his rebellion, was exiled by king Solomon, and so\nconsequently deprived of the exercise of his office, 1 Kings ii. 26, 27.\n3d, Inconsistent with our Saviour's example, who, as subject to the law,\nheld himself obliged to pay tribute to avoid offence, (Matt. xvii. 26,)\nwhich was an active scandal; and he confesses Pilate's power to condemn\nor release him was _given him from above_, John xix. 11. 4th, And\nfinally, contrary to the apostolical precepts, _enjoining all to be\nsubject to superior powers_, Rom. xiii. 1-4; 1 Pet. ii. 13-15.\n\nNow, all the former power that is granted, or may be granted to the\nmagistrate about religion, is only cumulative and objective, as divines\nused to express it; thus understand them:--\n\nCumulative, not privative; adding to, not detracting from any liberties\nor privileges granted her from Christ. The heathen magistrate may be a\n_nurse-father_, Isa. xlix. 23; 1 Tim. ii. 2, may not be a _step-father_:\nmay protect the Church, religion, &c., and order many things in a\npolitical way about religion; may not extirpate or persecute the Church;\nmay help her in reformation; may not hinder her in reforming herself,\nconvening synods in herself, as in Acts xv., &c., if he will not help\nher therein; otherwise her condition were better without than with a\nmagistrate. The Christian magistrate much less ought to hinder her\ntherein, otherwise her state were worse under the Christian than under\nthe pagan magistrate.\n\nObjective or objectively ecclesiastical, as being exercised about\nobjects ecclesiastical, but politically, not ecclesiastically. His\nproper power is _about_, not _in_ religious matters. He may politically,\noutwardly exercise his power about objects or matters spiritual; but not\nspiritually, inwardly, formally act any power in the Church. He may act\nin church affairs as did Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah; not as did\nCorah, Saul, Uzzah, or Uzziah. He is an overseer of things without, not\nof things within. And in a word, his whole power about church offices\nand religion is merely, properly, and formally civil or political.[30]\n\nNor is this only our private judgment, or the opinion of some few\nparticular persons touching the granting or bounding of the magistrate's\npower about matters of religion; but with us we have the suffrage of\nmany reformed churches, who, in their Confessions of Faith published to\nthe world, do fully and clearly express themselves to the same effect.\n\nThe Helvetian church thus: Since every magistrate is of God, it is\n(unless he would exercise tyranny) his chief duty, all blasphemy being\nrepressed, to defend and provide for religion, and to execute this to\nhis utmost strength, as the prophet teacheth out of the word; in which\nrespect the pure and free preaching of God's word, a right, diligent,\nand well-instituted discipline of youth, citizens and scholars; a just\nand liberal maintenance of the ministers of the church, and a solicitous\ncare of the poor, (whereunto all ecclesiastical means belong,) have the\nfirst place. After this, &c.\n\nThe French churches thus: He also therefore committed the sword into the\nmagistrates' hands, that they might repress faults committed not only\nagainst the second table, but also against the first; therefore we\naffirm, that their laws and statutes ought to be obeyed, tribute to be\npaid, and other burdens to be borne, the yoke of subjection voluntarily\nto be undergone, yea, though the magistrates should be infidels, so long\nas the supreme government of God remains perfect and untouched, Matt.\nxxiv.; Acts iv. 17, and v. 19; Jude verse 8.\n\nThe church of Scotland thus: Moreover we affirm, that the purging and\nconserving of religion is the first and most especial duty of kings,\nprinces, governors, and magistrates. So that they are ordained of God\nnot only for civil polity, but also for the conservation of true\nreligion, and that all idolatry and superstition may be suppressed: as\nis evident in David, Jehoshaphat, Josiah, Hezekiah, and others, adorned\nwith high praises for their singular zeal.\n\nThe Belgic church thus: Therefore he hath armed the magistrates with a\nsword, that they may punish the bad and defend the good. Furthermore, it\nis their duty not only to be solicitous about preserving of civil\npolity, but also to give diligence that the sacred ministry may be\npreserved, all idolatry and adulterate worship of God may be taken out\nof the way, the kingdom of antichrist may be pulled down, but Christ's\nkingdom propagated. Finally, it is their part to take course, that the\nholy word of the gospel be preached on every side, that all may freely\nand purely serve and worship God according to the prescript of his word.\nAnd all men, of whatsoever dignity, condition, or state they be, ought\nto be subject to lawful magistrates, to pay them tribute and subsidies,\nto obey them in all things which are not repugnant to the word of God;\nto pour out prayers for them, that God would vouchsafe to direct them in\nall their actions, _and that we may under them lead a quiet and\npeaceable life in all godliness and honesty_. Wherefore we detest the\nAnabaptists and all turbulent men who cast off superior dominions and\nmagistrates, pervert laws and judgments, make all goods common, and\nfinally abolish or confound all orders and degrees which God hath\nconstituted for honesty's sake among men.\n\nThe church in Bohemia thus: They teach also that it is commanded in the\nword of God that _all should be subject to the higher powers_ in all\nthings, yet in those things only which are not repugnant to God and his\nword. But as touching those things which concern men's souls, faith, and\nsalvation, they teach that men should hearken only to God's word, &c.,\nhis ministers, as Christ himself saith, _Render to C\u00e6sar the things\nthat are C\u00e6sar's, and to God those things that are God's._ But if any\nwould compel them to those things which are against God, and fight and\nstrive against his word, which abideth forever; they teach them to make\nuse of the apostle's example, who thus answered the magistrate at\nJerusalem: _It is meet_ (say they) _to obey God rather than men_.\n\nFinally, the church in Saxony hath expressed herself notably in this\npoint, saying, among many other passages, God will have all men, yea,\neven unregenerate men, to be ruled and restrained by political\ngovernment. And in this government the wisdom, justice, and goodness of\nGod to mankind do shine forth. His wisdom, order declares, which is the\ndifference of virtues and vices, and the consociation of men by lawful\ngovernments and contracts ordained in wonderful wisdom. God's justice\nalso is seen in political government, who will have manifest\nwickednesses to be punished by magistrates; and when they that rule\npunish not the guilty, God himself wonderfully draws them to punishment,\nand regularly punishes heinous faults with heinous penalties in this\nlife, as it is said, _He that takes the sword shall perish by the\nsword_; and, _Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge_. God will have\nin these punishments the difference of vices and virtues to be seen; and\nwill have us learn that God is wise, just, true, chaste. God's goodness\nalso to mankind is beheld, because by this means he preserves the\nsociety of men, and therefore he preserves it that thence the Church may\nbe gathered, and will have polities to be the Church's inns. Of these\ndivine and immoveable laws, which are testimonies of God, and the chief\nrule of manners, the magistrate is to be keeper in punishing all that\nviolate them. For the voice of the law, without punishment and\nexecution, is of small avail to bridle and restrain men; therefore it is\nsaid by Paul, _The power should be a terror to evil works, and an honor\nto the good._ And antiquity rightly said, _The magistrate is the keeper\nof the law, both of the first and second table,_ so far as appertains to\n_good order_. And though many in their governments neglect the glory of\nGod, yet this ought to be their chief care, to hear and embrace the true\ndoctrine touching the Son of God, and to foster the churches, as the\npsalm saith, _And now understand, ye kings, and be instructed, ye judges\nof the earth._ Again, _Open your gates, ye princes_, i.e., Open your\nempires to the gospel, and afford harbor to the Son of God. And Isa.\nxlix.: _And kings shall be thy nursing-fathers, and queens_, i.e.,\ncommonwealths, _shall be thy nursing-mothers_, i.e., of the Church, they\nshall afford lodgings to churches and pious studies. And kings and\nprinces themselves shall be members of the Church, and shall rightly\nunderstand doctrine, shall not help those that establish false doctrine,\nand exercise unjust cruelty, but shall be mindful of this saying, \"I\nwill glorify them that glorify me.\" And Daniel exhorteth the king of\nBabylon unto the acknowledgment of God's wrath, and to clemency towards\nthe exiled Church, when he saith, \"Break off thy sins by righteousness,\nand thine iniquities by showing mercy to the poor.\" And since they are\namong the chief members of the Church, they should see that judgment be\nrightly exercised in the Church, as Constantine, Theodosius, Arcadius,\nMarcianus, Charles the Great, and many pious kings, took care that the\njudgments of the Church should be rightly exercised, &c.\n\nThus those of the presbyterian judgment are willing to give to C\u00e6sar\nthose things that are C\u00e6sar's, even about matters of religion, that the\nmagistrate may see, it is far from their intention in the least degree\nto intrench upon his just power, by asserting the spiritual power, which\nChrist hath seated in his church officers, distinct from the\nmagistratical power: but as for them of the independent judgment, and\ntheir adherents, they divest the magistrate of such power.[31]\n\n\nSECTION II.\n\nII. Some power on the other hand touching religion and church affairs,\nis utterly denied to the civil magistrate, as no way belonging to him at\nall by virtue of his office of magistracy. Take it thus:\n\nJesus Christ, our Mediator, now under the New Testament, hath committed\nno spiritual power at all, magisterial or ministerial, properly,\ninternally, formally, or virtually ecclesiastical, nor any exercise\nthereof, for the government of his Church, to the political magistrate,\nheathen or Christian, as the subject or receptacle thereof by virtue of\nhis magistratical office.\n\nFor explication hereof briefly thus: 1. What is meant by\nspiritual power, magisterial and ministerial, is laid down in the\ngeneral nature of the government, Chap. III. And, That all magisterial\nlordly power over the Church, belongs peculiarly and only to Jesus\nChrist our Mediator, Lord of all, is proved, Chap. V. Consequently, the\ncivil magistrate can challenge no such power, without usurpation upon\nChrist's prerogative. We hence condemn the Pope as Antichrist, while he\nclaims to be Christ's vicar-general over Christ's visible Church on\nearth. So that all the question here will be about the ministerial\npower, whether any such belong to the civil magistrate. 2. What is meant\nby power, properly, internally, formally, or virtually ecclesiastical?\nThus conceive: These several terms are purposely used, the more clearly\nand fully to distinguish power purely ecclesiastical, which is denied to\nthe magistrate, from power purely political about ecclesiastical\nobjects, which is granted to him; which is called ecclesiastical, not\nproperly, but improperly; not internally, but externally; not formally,\nbut only objectively, as conversant about ecclesiastical objects. Nor\nhath he any such ecclesiastical power in him virtually, i.e. so as to\nconvey and give it to any other under him. He may grant and protect the\npublic exercise of that power within his dominions; but designation of\nparticular persons to the office and power, is from the Church; the\ndonation of the office and power only from Christ himself. So that\nmagistracy doth not formally nor virtually comprehend in it\necclesiastical power for church government; for a magistrate, as a\nmagistrate, hath no inward ecclesiastical power at all belonging to him.\n\nFor confirmation of this proposition, consider these ensuing arguments.\n\n_Argum_. 1st. The keys of the kingdom of heaven were never given by\nChrist to the civil magistrate, as such: therefore he cannot be the\nproper subject of church government as a magistrate. We may thus reason:\n\n_Major_. No power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven was ever given by\nChrist to the civil magistrate, as a magistrate.\n\n_Minor_. But all formal power of church government is at least part of\nthe power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore no formal power of church government was ever\ngiven by Christ to the civil magistrate, as a magistrate.\n\nThe major proposition is evident.\n\n1. Because when Christ gave the keys of the kingdom of heaven, he makes\nno mention at all of the civil magistrate directly or indirectly,\nexpressly or implicitly, as the recipient subject thereof. Compare Matt.\nxvi. 19, and xviii. 18, John ii. 21-23, with Matt. xxvii. 18-20. 2.\nBecause, in Christ's giving the keys of the kingdom of heaven, he makes\nexpress mention of church officers,[32] which are really and essentially\ndifferent from the civil magistrate, viz. of Peter, in name of all the\nrest, Matt. xvi. 18, 19, and of the rest of the apostles as the\nreceptacle of the keys with him, Matt. xviii. 18, all the disciples save\nThomas being together, he gave them the same commission in other words,\nJohn xx. 20-24, and Matt. xxviii. 18-20. Now if Christ should have given\nthe keys, or any power thereof to the magistrate, as a magistrate, he\nmust consequently have given them only to the magistrate, and then how\ncould he have given them to his apostles, being officers in the Church\nreally distinct from the magistrate?\n\n3. Because Jesus Christ, in giving the keys of the kingdom, gave not any\none sort, act, part, or piece of the keys severally, but the whole power\nof the keys, all the sorts and acts thereof jointly. Therefore it is\nsaid, _I give the keys of the kingdom_--and _whatsoever thou shalt\nbind--whatsoever thou shalt loose--whose soever sins ye remit--whose\nsoever sins ye retain_--Matt. xvi. 19, John xx. 23. So that here is not\nonly key, but keys given at once, viz. key of doctrine, and the key of\ndiscipline; or the key of order, and the key of jurisdiction; not only\nbinding or retaining, but loosing or remitting of sins, viz. all acts\ntogether conferred in the keys. Now if Christ gave the keys to the\nmagistrate, then he gave all the sorts of keys and all the acts thereof\nto him: if so, the magistrate may as well preach the word, and dispense\nthe sacraments, &c., (as Erastus would have him,) as dispense the\ncensures, &c., (for Christ joined all together in the same commission,\nand by what warrant are they disjoined?) and if so, what need of\npastors, teachers, &c.,, in the Church? Let the civil magistrate do all.\nIt is true, the ruling elder (which was after added) is limited only to\none of the keys, viz. the _key of discipline_, 1 Tim. v. 17; but this\nlimitation is by the same authority that ordained his office.\n\n4. Because if Christ gave the keys to the civil magistrate as such, then\nto every magistrate, whether Jewish, heathenish, or Christian: but not\nto the Jewish magistrate; for the sceptre was to depart from him, and\nthe Jewish polity to be dissolved, and even then was almost extinct. Not\nto the heathenish magistrate, for then those might be properly and\nformally church governors which were not church members; and if the\nheathen magistrate refused to govern the Church, (when there was no\nother magistrate on earth,) she must be utterly destitute of all\ngovernment, which are grossly absurd. Nor, finally, to the Christian\nmagistrate, for Christ gave the keys to officers then in being; but at\nthat time no Christian magistrate was in being in the world. Therefore\nthe keys were given by Christ to no civil magistrate, as such, at all.\n\nThe minor, viz. But all formal power of church government is at least\npart of the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven is clear. If we\ntake church government largely, as containing both doctrine, worship,\nand discipline, it is the whole power of the keys; if strictly, as\nrestrained only to discipline, it is at least part of the power. For,\n1st, Not only the power of order, but also the power of jurisdiction, is\ncontained under the word keys; otherwise it should have been said key,\nnot keys; church government therefore is at least part of the power of\nthe keys. 2d, The word key, noting a stewardly power, as appears, Isa.\nxxii. 22, (as Erastians themselves will easily grant,) may as justly be\nextended in the nature of it to signify the ruling power by\njurisdiction, as the teaching power by doctrine; in that the office of a\nsteward in the household, who bears the keys, consists in governing,\nordering, and ruling the household, as well as in feeding it, as that\npassage in Luke xii. 41-49, being well considered, doth very notably\nevidence. For, Christ applying his speech to his disciples, saith, \"Who\nthen is that faithful and wise steward, whom his Lord shall make ruler\nof his household?--he will make him ruler over all that he hath,\" &c.\n3d, Nothing in the text or context appears why we should limit keys and\nthe acts thereof only to doctrine, and exclude discipline; and where the\ntext restrains not, we are not to restrain. 4th, The most of sound\ninterpreters extend the keys and the acts thereof as well to discipline\nas to doctrine; to matters of jurisdiction, as well as to matters of\norder. From all we may conclude,\n\nTherefore no formal power of church government was ever given by Christ\nto the civil magistrate, as a magistrate.\n\n_Argum_. 2d. There was full power of church government in the church\nwhen no magistrate was Christian, yea, when all magistrates were\npersecutors of the Church, so far from being her _nursing fathers_, that\nthey were her _cruel butchers_; therefore the magistrate is not the\nproper subject of this power. Thus we may argue:\n\n_Major_. No proper power of church government, which was fully exercised\nin the Church of Christ, before any magistrate became Christian, yea,\nwhen magistrates were persecutors of the Church, was derived from Christ\nto the magistrate as a magistrate.\n\n_Minor_. But all proper power of church government was fully exercised\nin the Church before any magistrate became Christian, yea, when\nmagistrates were cruel persecutors of the Church of Christ.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore no proper power of church government was derived\nfrom Christ to the civil magistrate as a magistrate.\n\nThe _major_ proposition must be granted. For, 1st, Either then the\nChurch, in exercising such full power of church government, should have\nusurped that power which belonged not at all to her, but only to the\nmagistrate; for what power belongs to a magistrate, as a magistrate,\nbelongs to him only; but dare we think that the apostles, or the\nprimitive purest apostolical churches did or durst exercise all their\npower of church government which they exercised, merely by usurpation\nwithout any right thereunto themselves? 2d, Or if the Church usurped\nnot, &c., but exercised the power which Christ gave her, let the\nmagistrate show wherein Christ made void the Church's charter, retracted\nthis power, and gave it unto him.\n\nThe minor proposition cannot be denied. For,\n\n1st. It was about 300 years after Christ before any of the Roman\nemperors (who had subdued the whole world, Luke ii. 1, under their sole\ndominion) became Christian. For Constantine the Great was the first\nemperor that received the faith, procured peace to the Church, and gave\nher respite from her cruel persecutions, which was in Anno 309 (or\nthereabouts) after Christ; before which time the Church was miserably\nwasted and butchered with those ten bloody persecutions, by the tyranny\nof Nero, and other cruel emperors before Constantine.\n\n2d. Yet within the space of this first 309 or 311 years, all proper\npower of church government was fully exercised in the Church of Christ;\nnot only the word preached, Acts iv. 2; 1 Tim. iii. 16; and sacraments\ndispensed, Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xi. 17, &c.; Acts ii. 4, and viii. 12: but\nalso _deacons_ set apart for that office of _deaconship_, Acts vi.:\n_elders_ ordained and sent forth, Acts xiii. 1-3, and xiv. 23; 1 Tim.\niv.; Tit. i. 5: public _admonition in use_, Tit. iii. 10; 1 Tim. v. 20:\n_excommunication_, 1 Cor. v.; and 1 Tim. i. 20: _absolution_ of the\npenitent, 2 Cor. ii. 6, 7, &c.: synodical conventions and decrees, Acts\nxv. with xvi. 4. So that we may conclude,\n\nTherefore no proper power of church government was derived from Christ\nto the civil magistrate, as a magistrate.\n\n_Argum_. 3d. The magistratical power really, specifically, and\nessentially differs from the ecclesiastical power; therefore the civil\nmagistrate, as a magistrate, cannot be the proper subject of this\necclesiastical power. Hence we may thus argue:\n\n_Major_. No power essentially, specifically, and really differing from\nmagistratical power, was ever given by Christ to the magistrate as a\nmagistrate.\n\n_Minor_. But all proper ecclesiastical power essentially, specifically,\nand really differs from the magistratical power.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore no proper ecclesiastical power was ever given by\nJesus Christ to the civil magistrate as a magistrate.\n\nThe major is evident: for how can the magistrate, as a magistrate,\nreceive such a power as is really and essentially distinct and different\nfrom magistracy? Were not that to make the magistratical power both\nreally the same with itself, and yet really and essentially different\nfrom itself? A flat contradiction.\n\nThe minor may be clearly evinced many ways: as, 1st, From the real and\nformal distinction between the two societies, viz. the Church and\ncommonwealth, wherein ecclesiastical and political power are peculiarly\nseated. 2d. From the co-ordination of the power ecclesiastical and\npolitical, in reference to one another. 3d. From the different causes of\nthese two powers, viz. efficient, material, formal, and final; in all\nwhich they are truly distinguished from one another.\n\n1st. From the real and formal distinction between the two societies,\nviz. church and commonwealth: for, 1. The society of the Church is only\nChrist's, and not the civil magistrate's: it is his _house_, his\n_spouse_, his _body_, &c., and Christ hath no vicar[33] under him. 2.\nThe officers ecclesiastical are Christ's officers, not the magistrate's,\n1 Cor. iv. 1: _Christ gave_ them, Eph. iv. 8, 10, 11: _God set them in\nthe Church_, 1 Cor. xii. 28. 3. These ecclesiastical officers are both\nelected and ordained by the Church, without commission from the civil\nmagistrate, by virtue of Christ's ordinance, and in his name. Thus the\napostles appointed officers: _Whom we may appoint_, Acts vi. 3, 4. The\npower of ordination and mission is in the hands of Christ's officers;\ncompare Acts xiv. 23; 1 Tim. iv. 14, with Acts xiii. 1-4: and this is\nconfessed by the parliament to be an ordinance of Jesus Christ, in their\nordinance for ordaining of preaching presbyters. 4. The Church, and the\nseveral presbyteries ecclesiastical, meet not as civil judicatories, for\ncivil acts of government, as making civil statutes, inflicting civil\npunishments, &c., but as spiritual assemblies, for spiritual acts of\ngovernment and discipline: as preaching, baptizing, receiving the Lord's\nsupper, prayer, admonition of the disorderly, &c. 5. What gross\nabsurdities would follow, should not these two societies, viz. church\nand commonwealth, be acknowledged to be really and essentially\ndistinct from one another! For then, 1. There can be no commonwealth\nwhere there is not a Church; but this is contrary to all experience.\nHeathens have commonwealths, yet no Church. 2. Then there may be church\nofficers elected where there is no church, seeing there are magistrates\nwhere there is no church. 3. Then those magistrates, where there is no\nchurch, are no magistrates; but that is repugnant to Scripture, which\naccounts heathen rulers the servants of God, Isa. xlv. 1; Jer. xxv. 9:\nand calls them kings, Exod. vi. 13; Isa. xxxi. 35. And further, if there\nbe no magistrates where there is no church, then the church is the\nformal constituting cause of magistrates. 4. Then the commonwealth, as\nthe commonwealth, is the church; and the church, as the church, is the\ncommonwealth: then the church and the commonwealth are the same. 5. Then\nall that are members of the commonwealth are, on that account, because\nmembers of the commonwealth, members of the church. 6. Then the\ncommonwealth, being formally the same with the church, is, as a\ncommonwealth, the mystical body of Christ. 7. Then the officers of the\nchurch are the officers of the commonwealth; the power of the keys gives\nthem right to the civil sword: and consequently, the ministers of the\ngospel, as ministers, are justices of the peace, judges, parliament-men,\n&c., all which how absurd, let the world judge.\n\n2d. From the co-ordination of the power ecclesiastical and political, in\nreference to one another: (this being a received maxim, that subordinate\npowers are of the same kind; co-ordinate powers are of distinct kinds.)\nNow, that the power of the Church is co-ordinate with the civil power,\nmay be evidenced as followeth: 1. The officers of Christ, as officers,\nare not directly and properly subordinate to the civil power, though in\ntheir persons they are subject thereto: the apostles and pastors may\npreach, and cast out of the church, against the will of the magistrate,\nand yet not truly offend magistracy; thus, in doing the duty they have\nimmediately received from God, they must \"obey God rather than men,\"\nActs iv. 19, 20. And the apostles and pastors must exercise their office\n(having received a command from Christ) without attending to the command\nor consent of the civil magistrate for the same; _as in casting out the\nincestuous person_, 1 Cor. v. 5: telling the Church, Matt. xviii. 17:\n_rejecting a heretic_, Tit. iii. 10. And, 2. Those acts of power are not\ndirectly and formally subordinate to the magistrate, which he himself\ncannot do, or which belong not to him. Thus the kings of Israel could\nnot burn incense: \"It appertaineth not unto thee,\" 2 Chron. xxvi. 18,\n19. Likewise, none have the power of the keys, but they to whom Christ\nsaith, \"Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel,\" Matt. xxviii.\n19: but Christ spake not this to magistrates: so only those that are\n_sent_, Rom. x. 15, and those that are governors, are by Christ placed\nin the Church. 3. The officers of the Church can ecclesiastically\ncensure the officers of the state, though not as such, as well as the\nofficers of the state can punish civilly the officers of the Church,\nthough not as such: the church guides may admonish, excommunicate, &c.,\nthe officers of the state as members of the Church, and the officers of\nthe state may punish the officers of the Church as the members of the\nstate. 4. Those that are not sent of the magistrate as his deputies,\nthey are not subordinate in their mission to his power, but the\nministers are not sent as the magistrate's deputies, but are _set over\nthe flock by the Holy Ghost_, Acts xx. 28: they are likewise the\n_ministry of Christ_, 1 Cor. iv. 1, 2: they are _over you in the Lord_,\n1 Thess. v. 12: and in his name they exercise their jurisdiction, 1 Cor.\nv. 4, 5. 5. If the last appeal in matters purely ecclesiastical be not\nto the civil power, then there is no subordination; but the last appeal\nproperly so taken is not to the magistrate. This appears from these\nconsiderations: 1. Nothing is appealable to the magistrate but what is\nunder the power of the sword; but admonition, excommunication, &c., are\nnot under the power of the sword: they are neither matters of dominion\nnor coercion. 2. If it were so, then it follows that the having of the\nsword gives a man a power to the keys. 3. Then it follows that the\nofficers of the kingdom of heaven are to be judged as such by the\nofficers of the kingdom of this world as such, and then there is no\ndifference between the things of C\u00e6sar and the things of God. 4. The\nchurch of Antioch sent to Jerusalem, Acts xv. 2, and the synod there,\nwithout the magistrate, came together, ver. 6; and determined the\ncontroversy, ver. 28, 29. And we read, \"The spirits of the prophets are\nsubject to the prophets,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 32; not to the civil power as\nprophets. So we must seek knowledge at the priest's lips, not at the\ncivil magistrate's, Mal. ii. 7. And we read, that the people came to the\npriests in hard controversies, but never that the priests went to the\ncivil power, Deut. xvii. 8-10. 5. It makes the magistrate Christ's\nvicar, and so Christ to have a visible head on earth, and so to be an\necclesiastico-civil pope, and consequently there should be as many\nvisible heads of Christ's Church as there are magistrates. 6. These\npowers are both immediate; one from God the Father, as _Creator_, Rom.\nxiii. 1, 2; the other from Jesus Christ, as _Mediator_, Matt. xxviii.\n18. Now lay all these together, and there cannot be a subordination of\npowers; and therefore there must be a real distinction.\n\n3d. From the different causes of these two powers, viz. efficient,\nmaterial, formal, and final; in all which they are truly distinguished\nfrom one another, as may plainly appear by this ensuing parallel:\n\n1. They differ in their efficient cause or author, whence they are\nderived. Magistratical power is from God, the Creator and Governor of\nthe world, Rom. xiii. 1, 2, 4; and so belongs to all mankind, heathen or\nChristian; ecclesiastical power is peculiarly from Jesus Christ our\nMediator, Lord of the Church, (who hath all power given him, and the\ngovernment of the Church laid upon his shoulder, as Eph. i. 22; Matt.\nxxviii. 18, compared with Isa. ix. 16.) See Matt. vi. 19, and xviii. 18,\nand xxviii. 19, 20; John xx. 21-23; 2 Cor. x. 8: and consequently\nbelongs properly to the Church, and to them that are within the Church,\n1 Cor. v. 12, 13. Magistratical power in general is the ordinance of\nGod, Rom. xiii. 1, 2, 4; but magistratical power in particular, whether\nit should be monarchical in a king, aristocratical in states,\ndemocratical in the people, &c., is of men, called, therefore, a human\ncreature, or creation, 1 Pet. ii. 13; but ecclesiastical power, and\nofficers in particular, as well as general, are from Christ, Matt. xvi.\n19, and xxviii. 18-20; Tit. iii. 10; 1 Cor. v. 13; 2 Cor. ii. For\nofficers, see Eph. iv. 11, 12; 1 Cor. xii. 28.\n\n2. They differ in their material cause; whether it be the matter of\nwhich they consist, in which they are seated, or about which they are\nexercised. 1. In respect of the matter of which they consist, they much\ndiffer. Ecclesiastical power consists of the keys of the kingdom of\nheaven, which are exercised in the preaching of the word, dispensing the\nsacraments, executing the censures, admonition, excommunication,\nabsolution, ordination of presbyters, &c.; but magistratical power\nconsists in the secular sword, which puts forth itself in making\nstatutes, inflicting fines, imprisonments, confiscations, banishments,\ntorments, death. 2. In respect of the matter or object about which they\nare exercised, they much differ: for, the magistratical power is\nexercised politically, about persons and things without the Church, as\nwell as within the church; but the ecclesiastical power is exercised\nonly upon them that are within the Church, 1 Cor. v. 13. The\nmagistratical power in some cases of treason, &c., banishes or otherwise\npunishes even penitent persons: ecclesiastical power punishes no\npenitent persons. The magistratical power punishes not all sorts of\nscandal, but some: the ecclesiastical power punishes (if rightly\nmanaged) all sorts of scandal.\n\n3. They differ in their formal cause, as doth clearly appear by their\nway or manner of acting: magistratical power takes cognizance of crimes,\nand passes sentence thereupon according to statutes and laws made by\nman: ecclesiastical power takes cognizance of, and passes judgment upon\ncrimes according to the word of God, the Holy Scriptures. Magistratical\npower punishes merely with political punishments, as fines,\nimprisonments, &c. Ecclesiastical merely with spiritual punishments, as\nchurch censures. Magistratical power makes all decrees and laws, and\nexecutes all authority, commanding or punishing only in its own name, in\nname of the supreme magistrate, as of the king, &c., but ecclesiastical\npower is wholly exercised, not in the name of churches, or officers, but\nonly in Christ's name, Matt, xxviii. 19; Acts iv. 17; 1 Cor. v. 4. The\nmagistrate can delegate his power to another: church-governors cannot\ndelegate their power to others, but must exercise it by themselves. The\nmagistrate about ecclesiasticals hath power to command and compel\npolitically the church officers to do their duty, as formerly was\nevidenced; but cannot discharge lawfully those duties themselves, but in\nattempting the same, procure divine wrath upon themselves: as Korah,\nNumb. xvi.; King Saul, 1 Sam. xiii. 9-15; King Uzziah, 2 Chron. xxvi.\n16-22: but church-guides can properly discharge the duties of doctrine,\nworship, and discipline themselves, and ecclesiastically command and\ncompel others to do their duty also.\n\n4. Lastly, They differ in their final cause or ends. The magistratical\npower levels at the temporal, corporal, external, political peace,\ntranquillity, order, and good of human society, and of all persons\nwithin his jurisdiction, &c. The ecclesiastical power intends properly\nthe spiritual good and edification of the Church and all the members\nthereof, Matt, xviii. 15; 1 Cor. v. 5, &c.; 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii.\n10.[34] May we not from all clearly conclude, Therefore no proper\necclesiastical power was ever given by Jesus Christ to the magistrate as\na magistrate?\n\n_Argum_. 4th. The civil magistrate is no proper church officer, and\ntherefore cannot be the proper subject of church power, Hence we may\nargue:\n\n_Major_. All formal power of church government was derived from Jesus\nChrist to his own proper church officers only. To them he gave the _keys\nof the kingdom of heaven_, Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18; John xx. 21,\n28: to them he gave the _authority for edification of the church_, 2\nCor. x. 8, and xiii. 10: but this will after more fully appear in Chap.\nXI. following.\n\n_Minor_. But no civil magistrate, as a magistrate, is any of Christ's\nproper church officers. For, 1. The civil magistrate is never reckoned\nup in the catalogue, list, or roll of Christ's church officers in\nScripture, Eph. iv. 10-12; 1 Cor. xii. 28, &c.; Rom. xii. 6-8; if here,\nor anywhere else, let the magistrate or the Erastians show it. 2. A\nmagistrate, as a magistrate, is not a church member, (much less a church\ngovernor;) for then all magistrates, heathen as well as Christian,\nshould be church members and church officers, but this is contrary to\nthe very nature of Christ's kingdom, which admits no heathen into it.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore no formal power of church government was derived\nfrom Jesus Christ to the magistrate as a magistrate.\n\n_Argum_. 5th. The civil magistrate, as such, is not properly subordinate\nto Christ's mediatory kingdom; therefore is not the receptacle of church\npower from Christ. Hence thus:\n\n_Major_. Whatsoever formal power of church government Christ committed\nto any, he committed it only to those that were properly subordinate to\nhis mediatory kingdom. For whatsoever ecclesiastical ordinance, office,\npower, or authority, Christ gave to men, he gave it as Mediator and Head\nof the Church, by virtue of his mediatory office; and for the\ngathering, edifying, and perfecting of his mediatory kingdom, which is\nhis Church, Eph. iv. 7, 10-12. Therefore such as are not properly\nsubordinate to Christ in this his office, and for this end, can have no\nformal church power from Christ.\n\n_Minor_. But no magistrate, as a magistrate, is subordinate properly to\nChrist's mediatory kingdom. For, 1. Not Christ the Mediator, but God the\nCreator authorizeth the magistrate's office, Rom. xiii. 1, 2, 6. 2.\nMagistracy is never styled a ministry of Christ in Scripture, nor\ndispensed in his name. 3. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, John\nxviii. 36; the magistrate's is.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore no formal power of Church government is\ncommitted by Christ to the magistrate as a magistrate.\n\n6th. Finally, divers absurdities unavoidably follow upon the granting of\na proper formal power of Church government to the civil magistrate:\ntherefore he cannot be the proper subject of such power. Hence it may be\nthus argued:\n\n_Major_. No grant of ecclesiastical power, which plainly introduceth\nmany absurdities, can be allowed to the political magistrate, as the\nproper subject thereof. For though in matters of religion there be many\nthings mysterious, sublime, and above the reach of reason; yet there is\nnothing to be found that is absurd, irrational, &c.\n\n_Minor_. But to grant to the political magistrate, as a magistrate, a\nproper formal power of church government, introduceth plainly many\nabsurdities, e.g.: 1. This brings confusion betwixt the office of the\nmagistracy and ministry. 2. Confounds the church and commonwealth\ntogether. 3. Church government may be monarchical in one man; and so,\nnot only prelatical but papal; and consequently, antichristian. Which\nabsurdities, with many others, were formerly intimated, and neither by\nreligion nor reason can be endured. We conclude:\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore the grant of a proper formal power of church\ngovernment cannot be allowed to the political magistrate as the proper\nsubject thereof, because he is a magistrate.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n_That the community of the faithful, or body of the people, are not the\nimmediate subject of the power of Church government._\n\n\nThus we see, that Jesus Christ our Mediator did not commit any proper\nformal ecclesiastical power for church government to the political\nmagistrate, as such, as the Erastians conceive. Now, in the next place\n(to come more close) let us consider that Jesus Christ our Mediator hath\nnot committed the spiritual power of church government to the body of\nthe people, presbyterated, or unpresbyterated (to use their own terms)\nas the first subject thereof, according to the opinion of the\nSeparatists or Independents. Take it in this proposition:\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath not committed the proper formal power or\nauthority spiritual, for government of his Church,[35] unto the\ncommunity of the faithful, whole church, or body of the people, as the\nproper immediate receptacle, or first subject thereof.\n\n\nSECTION I.\n\nSome things herein need a little explanation, before we come to the\nconfirmation.\n\n1. By _fraternity, community of the faithful, whole church or body of\nthe people_, understand a particular company of people, meeting together\nin one assembly or single congregation, to partake of Christ's\nordinances. This single congregation may be considered as presbyterated,\ni.e., furnished with an eldership; or as unpresbyterated, i.e.,\ndestitute of an eldership, having yet no elders or officers erected\namong them. Rigid Brownists or Separatists say, that the fraternity or\ncommunity of the faithful unpresbyterated is the first receptacle of\nproper ecclesiastical power from Christ: unto whom some of independent\njudgment subscribe. Independents thus resolve: First, That the apostles\nof Christ are the first subject of apostolical power. Secondly, That a\nparticular congregation of saints, professing the faith, taken\nindefinitely for any church, (one as well as another,) is the first\nsubject of all church offices with all their spiritual gifts and power.\nThirdly, That when the church of a particular congregation walketh\ntogether in the truth and peace, the brethren of the church are the\nfirst subjects of church liberty; the elders thereof of church\nauthority; and both of them together are the first subject of all church\npower.[36] Which assertions of Brownists and Independents (except the\nfirst) are denied by them of presbyterian judgment, as being obvious to\ndivers material and just exceptions.[37]:\n\n2. By _proper formal power or authority spiritual, for church\ngovernment_, thus conceive. To omit what hath been already laid down\nabout the natures and sorts of spiritual power and authority, (part 2,\nchap. III. and VI.,) which are to be remembered, here it may be further\nobserved, that there is a proper public, official, authoritative power,\nthough but stewardly and ministerial, which is derived from Jesus Christ\nto his church officers, Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18; John xx. 21-23;\nMatt, xxviii. 18-20; of which power the apostle speaking, saith, \"If I\nshould somewhat boast of our power which the Lord hath given us to\nedification,\" 2 Cor. x. 8; so 2 Cor. xiii. 10. The people are indeed\nallowed certain liberties or privileges; as, _To try the spirits_, &c.,\n1 John iv. 1. To prove all doctrines by the word, 1 Thess. v. 21. To\nnominate and elect their own church officers, as their deacons, which\nthey did, Acts vi. 3, 5, 6; but this is not a proper power of the keys.\nBut the proper, public, official, authoritative power, is quite denied\nto the body of the people, furnished with an eldership or destitute\nthereof.\n\n3. By _proper immediate receptacle, or first subject of power_,\nunderstand, that subject, seat, or receptacle of power, which first and\nimmediately received this power from Jesus Christ; and consequently was\nintrusted and authorized by him, to put forth and exercise that power in\nhis Church for the government thereof. And here two things must be\ncarefully remembered: 1. That we distinguish betwixt the object and\nsubject of this power. The object for which, for whose good and benefit\nall this power is given, is primarily the general visible Church, Ephes.\niv. 7, 10-12; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Rom. xii. 5,6, &c. Secondarily, particular\nchurches, as they are parts and members of the general. But the subject\nreceiving to which the power is derived, is not the Church general or\nparticular, but the officers or governors of the Church. 2. That we\ndistinguish also betwixt the donation of the power, and the designation\nof particular persons to offices ecclesiastical. This designation of\npersons to the offices of key bearing or ruling may be done first and\nimmediately by the Church, in nominating or electing her individual\nofficers which is allowed to her; yet is no proper authoritative act of\npower. But the donation of the power itself is not from the Church as\nthe fountain, but immediately from Christ himself, 2 Cor. xi. 8, and\nxiii. 10. Nor is it to the Church as the subject, but immediately to the\nindividual church officers themselves, who consequently, in all the\nexercise of their power, act as the _ministers and stewards of Christ_,\n1 Cor. iv. 1, putting forth their power immediately received from\nChrist, not as the substitutes or delegates of the Church putting forth\nher power, which from Christ she mediately conveys to them, as\nIndependents do imagine, but by us is utterly denied.\n\n\nSECTION II.\n\nFor confirmation of this proposition thus explained and stated; consider\nthese few arguments:\n\n_Argum_. I. The community of the faithful, or body of the people, have\nno authentic commission or grant of proper spiritual power for church\ngovernment; and therefore they cannot possibly be the first subject or\nthe proper immediate receptacle of such power from Christ. We may thus\nargue:\n\n_Major_. Whomsoever Jesus Christ hath made the immediate receptacle or\nfirst subject of proper formal power for governing of his Church, to\nthem this power is conveyed by some authentic grant or commission.\n\n_Minor_. But the community of the faithful, or body of the people, have\nnot this power conveyed unto them by any authentic grant or commission.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore Jesus Christ our Mediator hath not made the\ncommunity of the faithful, or body of the people, the immediate\nreceptacle or first subject of proper formal power for governing of his\nChurch.\n\nThe major proposition is evident in itself: For, 1. The power of church\ngovernment in this or that subject is not natural, but positive; and\ncast upon man, not by natural, but by positive law, positive grant: men\nare not bred, but made the first subject of such power; therefore all\nsuch power claimed or exercised, without such positive grant, is merely\nwithout any due title, imaginary, usurped, unwarrantable, in very fact\nnull and void. 2. All power of church government is radically and\nfundamentally in Christ, Isa. ix. 6; Matt, xxviii. 18; John v. 22. And\nhow shall any part of it be derived from Christ to man, but by some fit\nintervening mean betwixt Christ and man? And what mean of conveyance\nbetwixt Christ and man can suffice, if it do not amount to an authentic\ngrant or commission for such power? 3. This is evidently Christ's way to\nconfer power by authentic commission immediately upon his church\nofficers, the apostles and their successors, to the world's end. \"Thou\nart Peter; and I give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,\" &c.,\nMatt. xvi. 18, 19. \"Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth,\" &c., Matt,\nxviii. 19, 20. \"As my Father sent me, so send I you; go, disciple ye all\nnations; whose sins ye remit, they are remitted--and lo, I am with you\nalways to the end of the world,\" John xx. 21, 23; Matt, xxviii. 19, 20.\n\"Our power, which the Lord hath given us for edification,\" 2 Cor. x. 8,\nand xiii. 10: so that we may conclude them that have such commission to\nbe the first subject and immediate receptacle of power from Christ, as\nwill after more fully appear. 4. If no such commission be needful to\ndistinguish those that have such power from those that have none, why\nmay not all without exception, young and old, wise and foolish, men and\nwomen, Christian and heathen, &c., equally lay claim to this power of\nchurch government? If not, what hinders? If so, how absurd!\n\nThe minor proposition, viz: But the community of the faithful, or body\nof the people, have not this power conveyed to them by any authentic\ngrant or commission, is firm. For whence had they it? When was it given\nto them? What is the power committed to them? Or in what sense is such\npower committed to them?\n\n1. Whence had they it? _From heaven or of men?_ If from men, then it is\na human ordinance and invention; _a plant which the heavenly Father hath\nnot planted_; and therefore _shall he plucked up_. Matt. xv. 13. If from\nheaven, then from Christ; for _all power is given to him_, Matt, xxviii.\n18, &c.; Isa. ix. 6. If it be derived from Christ, then it is derived\nfrom him by some positive law of Christ as his grant or charter. A\npositive grant of such power to select persons, viz. church officers,\nthe Scripture mentions, as was evidenced in the proof of the major\nproposition. But touching any such grant or commission to the community\nof the faithful, the Scripture is silent. And let those that are for the\npopular power produce, if they can, any clear scripture that expressly,\nor by infallible consequence, contains any such commission.\n\n2. When was any such power committed by Christ to the multitude of the\nfaithful, either in the first planting and beginning of the Church, or\nin the after establishment and growth of the Church under the apostles'\nministry? Not the first; for then the apostles themselves should have\nderived their power from the community of the faithful: now this is\npalpably inconsistent with the Scriptures, Which tell us that the\napostles had both their apostleship itself, and their qualifications\nwith gifts and graces for it, yea, and the very designation of all their\nparticular persons unto that calling, all of them immediately from\nChrist himself. For the first, see Gal. i. 1: \"Paul, an apostle, not of\nmen, nor by man, but by Jesus Christ,\" Matt, xxviii. 18-20. For the\nsecond, see John xx. 22, 23: \"And when he had said this, he breathed on\nthem, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whose soever sins\nye remit, they are remitted unto them,\" &c. For the third, see Luke vi.\n13, &c.: \"And when it was day he called to him his disciples: and of\nthem he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles; Simon--\" Matt. x.\n5-7, &c.: \"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying.\"\nAnd after his resurrection he enlarges their commission, Mark xvi. 15,\n16: \"Go ye into all the world;\" and, \"As my Father hath sent me, so send\nI you,\" John xx. 21. See also how the Lord cast the lot upon Matthias,\nActs i. 24-26. Nor the second; for if such power be committed to the\ncommunity of the faithful after the apostles had established the\nchurches, then let those that so think show where Christ committed this\npower first to the apostles, and after to the community of the faithful,\nand by them or with them to their ordinary officers, for execution\nthereof. But no such thing hath any foundation in Scripture; for the\nordinary Church guides, though they may have a designation to their\noffice by the church, yet they have the donation, or derivation of their\noffice and its authority only from Christ: their office is from Christ,\nEphes. iv. 8, 11; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Acts xx. 28, 29. Their power from\nChrist, Matt. xvi. 19, and xxviii. 18, 19; John xx. 21, 23. \"Our power\nwhich the Lord hath given us,\" 2 Cor. viii. 10. They are _Christ's\nministers, stewards, ambassadors_, 1 Cor. iv. 1; 2 Cor. v. 19, 20. They\nare to act and officiate _in his name_, Matt, xviii. 19; 1 Cor. v. 4, 5;\nand to Christ they _must give an account_. Heb. xiii. 17, 18; Luke xii.\n41, 42. Now if the ordinary officers have (as well as the apostles their\napostleship) their offices of pastor, teacher, &c., from Christ, and are\ntherein the successors of the apostles to continue to the world's end,\n(Matt, xxviii. 18-20,) then they have their power and authority in their\noffices immediately from Christ, as the first receptacles thereof\nthemselves, and not from the Church as the first receptacle of it\nherself. A successor hath jurisdiction from him from whom the\npredecessor had his; otherwise he doth not truly succeed him.\nConsequently the Church or community of the faithful cannot possibly be\nthe first receptacle of the power of church government from Christ.\n\n3. What power is it that is committed to the body of the Church or\nmultitude of the faithful? Either it must be the power of order, or the\npower of jurisdiction. But neither of these is allowed to the multitude\nof the faithful by the Scriptures, (but appointed and appropriated to\nselect persons.) Not the power of order; for the whole multitude, and\neveryone therein, neither can nor ought to intermeddle with any branches\nof that power. 1. Not with preaching; all are not _apt to teach_, 1 Tim.\niii. 2, nor able to exhort and convince gainsayers, Tit. i. 9; all are\nnot gifted and duly qualified. Some are expressly prohibited _speaking\nin the church_, 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35, 1 Tim. ii. 12, Rev. ii. 20, and none\nare _to preach, unless they be sent_, Rom. x. 15, nor _to take such\nhonor unto themselves unless they be called_, &c., Heb. v. 4, 5. Are all\nand every one of the multitude of the faithful able to teach, exhort,\nand convince? are they all sent to preach? are they all called of God?\n&c. Nay, hath not Christ laid this task of authoritative preaching only\nupon his own officers? Matt, xxviii. 18, 19. 2. Not with administration\nof the sacraments; this and preaching are by one and the same commission\ngiven to officers only, Matt, xxviii. 18-20; 1 Cor. xi. 23. 3. Nor to\nordain presbyters, or other officers. They may choose; but extraordinary\nofficers, or the presbytery of ordinary officers, ordain. Acts vi. 3, 5,\n6: \"Look ye out men--whom we may appoint.\" Compare also Acts xiv. 23; 1\nTim. iv. 14, and v. 22; Tit. iii. 5. So that the people's bare election\nand approbation is no sufficient Scripture ordination of officers. Nor\nis there one often thousand among the people that is in all points able\nto try and judge of the sufficiency of preaching presbyters, for\ntongues, arts, and soundness of judgment in divinity. Nor is the power\nof jurisdiction in public admonition, excommunication, and absolution,\n&c., allowed to the multitude. For all and every one of the multitude of\nthe faithful, 1. Never had any such power given to them from Christ;\nthis key as well as the key of knowledge being given to the officers of\nthe Church only, Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18-20. _Tell the church_,\nthere, must needs be meant of the ruling church only.[38] 2 Cor. viii.\n10; John xx. 21-23. 2. Never acted or executed any such power, that we\ncan find in Scripture. As for that which is primarily urged of the\nchurch of Corinth, that the whole church did excommunicate the\n_incestuous person_, 1 Cor. v. 4, &c., many things may be answered to\nevince the contrary. 1st, The whole multitude could not do it; for\nchildren could not judge, and women must not speak in the Church. 2d, It\nis not said, _Sufficient to such an one is the rebuke inflicted of all_;\nbut _of many_, 2 Cor. ii. 6, viz. of the presbytery, which consisted of\nmany officers. 3d, The church of Corinth, wherein this censure was\ninflicted, was not a congregational, but a presbyterial church, having\ndivers particular congregations in it, (as is hereafter cleared in Chap.\nXXIII.,) and therefore the whole multitude of the church of Corinth\ncould not meet together in one place for this censure, but only the\npresbytery of that great church. Again, never did the whole multitude\nreceive from Christ due gifts and qualifications for the exercise of\nchurch government and jurisdiction; nor any promise from Christ to be\nwith them therein, as officers have, Matt, xxviii. 18-20. And the\nabsurdities of such popular government are intolerable, as after will\nappear.\n\n4. Finally, in what sense can it be imagined that any such power should\nbe committed from Christ to the community of the faithful, the whole\nbody of the Church? For this power is given them equally with the\nchurch-guides, or unequally. If equally, then,.1. The church-guides have\npower and authority, as primarily and immediately committed to them, as\nthe Church herself hath; and then they need not derive or borrow any\npower from the body of the faithful, having a power equal to theirs. 2.\nHow vainly is that power equally given as to the officers, so to the\nwhole multitude, when the whole multitude have no equal gifts and\nabilities to execute the same! If unequally, then this power is derived\nto the church-guides, either more or less than to the multitude of the\nfaithful. If less, then how improperly were all those names of rule and\ngovernment imposed upon officers, which nowhere are given by Scripture\nto the multitude! as _Pastors_, Eph. iv. 8, 11. _Elders_, 1 Tim. v. 17.\n_Overseers_, Acts xx. 28. _Guides_, Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 22. In this last\nverse they are contradistinguished from the saints; church-guides, and\nsaints guided, make up a visible organical church. _Rulers in the Lord_,\n1 Thes. v. 12; Rom. xii. 8: and _well-ruling Elders_, 1 Tim. v. 17.\n_Governments_, 1 Cor. xii. 28. _Stewards_, 1 Cor. iv. 1,2; Luke xii. 42,\n&c. And all these titles have power and rule engraven in their very\nforeheads; and they of right belonged rather to the multitude than to\nthe officers, if the officers derive their power from the multitude of\nthe people. If more, then church-guides, having more power than the\nChurch, need not derive any from the Church, being themselves better\nfurnished.\n\nThus, what way soever we look, it cannot be evinced, that the multitude\nand body of the people, with or without eldership, are the first subject\nof power, or have any authoritative public official power at all, from\nany grant, mandate, or commission of Christ. From all which we may\nstrongly conclude,\n\nTherefore Jesus Christ our Mediator hath not made the community of the\nfaithful, or body of the people, the immediate receptacle, or first\nsubject of proper formal power for governing of his church.\n\n_Argum_. II. As the multitude of the faithful have no authentic grant or\ncommission of such power of the keys in the Church; so they have no\ndivine warrant for the actual execution of the power of the said keys\ntherein: and therefore cannot be the first receptacle of the power of\nthe keys from Christ. For thus we may reason:\n\n_Major_. Whosoever are the first subject, or immediate receptacle of the\npower of the keys from Christ, they have divine warrant actually to\nexercise and put in execution the said power. _Minor_. But the\nmultitude or community of the faithful have no divine warrant actually\nto exercise and put in execution the power of the keys.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore the community of the faithful are not the first\nsubject, or immediate receptacle of the power of the keys from Jesus\nChrist.\n\nThe major proposition must necessarily be yielded. For, 1. The power of\nthe keys contains both authority and exercise; power being given to that\nend that it may be exercised for the benefit of the Church. It is called\nthe _power given us for edification_, 2 Cor. viii. 10. Where there is no\nexercise of power there can be no edification by power. 2. Both the\nauthority and complete exercise of all that authority, were at once and\ntogether communicated from Christ to the receptacle of power. \"I give\nunto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt\nbind on earth,\" &c., Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18. \"As my Father sent\nme, so send I you--whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted,\" John\nxx. 21, 23. Here is both power and the exercise thereof joined together\nin the same commission. Yea, so individual and inseparable are power and\nexercise, that under exercise, power and authority is derived: as, \"Go,\ndisciple ye all nations, baptizing them,\" &c., Matt. xxviii. 18, 19. 3.\nHow vain, idle, impertinent, and ridiculous is it to fancy and dream of\nsuch a power as shall never be drawn into act by them that have it!\n\nThe minor proposition, viz. But the multitude or communion of the\nfaithful have no divine warrant, actually to exercise and put in\nexecution the power of the keys, is clear also:\n\n1. By reason: for, the actual execution of this power belongs to them by\ndivine warrant, either when they have church officers, or when they want\nchurch officers. Not while they have officers; for, that were to slight\nChrist's officers: that were to take officers' work out of their hands\nby them that are no officers, and when there were no urgent necessity;\ncontrary whereunto, see the proofs, Chap. XI. Section 2, that were to\nprejudice the church, in depriving her of the greater gifts, and\nundoubtedly authorized labors of her officers, &c. Not when they want\nofficers in a constituted church: as in case where there are three or\nfour elders, the pastor dies, two of the ruling elders fall sick, or the\nlike; in such cases the community cannot by divine warrant supply the\ndefects of these officers themselves, by exercising their power, or\nexecuting their offices. For where doth Scripture allow such power to\nthe community in such cases? What one church without its eldership can\nbe instanced in the New Testament, that in such cases once presumed to\nexercise such power, which might be precedent or example for it to\nother churches? How needless are church officers, if the multitude of\nthe faithful may, as members of the church, take up their office, and\nactually discharge it in all the parts of it?\n\n2. By induction of particulars, it is evident, that the community cannot\nexecute the power of the keys by any divine warrant. 1. _They may not\npreach_: for, \"how shall they preach, except they be sent?\" Rom. x. 15;\nbut the community cannot he sent, many of them being incapable of the\noffice, either by reason of their _sex_, 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35; 1 Tim. ii.\n11, 12: or by reason of their _age_; as children, and all or most of\nthem by reason of their deficiency in gifts and in scripture\nqualifications, Tit. i. and 1 Tim. iii. For not one member of a thousand\nis so completely furnished, as to be \"apt to teach, able to convince\ngainsayers, and to divide the word of truth aright.\" Besides, they may\nnot send themselves, were they capable, for, _no man takes this honor to\nhimself_--Yea, _Jesus Christ himself did not glorify himself to be made\nan high-priest_--Heb. v. 4, 5. Now only officers are sent to preach,\nMatt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 19, 20; Mark xvi. 15. 2. They may not\nadminister the seals, the sacraments, baptize, &c. under the New\nTestament; for who gave the people any such authority? hath not Christ\nconjoined preaching and dispensing of the sacraments in the same\ncommission, that the same persons only that do the one, may do the\nother? Matt. xxviii. 18, 19. 3. They may not ordain officers in the\nchurch, and authoritatively send them abroad: for, ordinarily the\ncommunity have not sufficient qualifications and abilities for proving\nand examining of men's gifts for the ministry. The community are nowhere\ncommanded or allowed so to do in the whole New Testament, but other\npersons distinct from them, 1 Tim. v. 22; 2 Tim. ii. 2; Tit. i. 5, &c.\nNor did the community ever exercise or assume to themselves any such\npower of ordination or mission, but only officers both in the first\nsending of men to preach, as 1 Tim. iv. 14; 2 Tim. i. 6: and to be\ndeacons, Acts vi. 6, and also in after missions, as Acts xiii. 1-3. 4.\nThe community, without officers, may not exercise any act of\njurisdiction authoritatively and properly; may not admonish,\nexcommunicate, or absolve. For we have no precept that they should do\nit; we have no example in all the New Testament that they ever did do\nit; we have both precept and example, that select officers both did and\nought to do it. \"Whatsoever ye bind on earth\" (saith Christ to his\nofficers) \"shall be bound in heaven,\" &c. Matt. xviii. 18, and xvi. 19.\n\"Whose soever sins ye remit,\" &c., John xx. 21, 23. \"An heretic, after\nonce or twice admonition, reject,\" Tit. i. 10. \"I have decreed--to\ndeliver such an one to Satan,\" 1 Cor. v. 4. \"The rebuke inflicted by\nmany,\" not all, 2 Cor. ii. \"Whom I have delivered to Satan,\" 1 Tim. i.\n_ult_. And the Scriptures nowhere set the community over themselves to\nbe their own church-guides and governors; but appoint over them in the\nLord rulers and officers distinct from the community. Compare these\nplaces, 1 Thes. v. 12; Acts xx. 28, 29; Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 22. \"Salute\nall them that have the rule over you, and all the saints.\" From the\npremises we conclude,\n\nTherefore the community of the faithful are not the first subject, or\nimmediate receptacle of the power of the keys from Jesus Christ.\n\n_Argum_. III. Jesus Christ hath not given nor promised to the community\nof the faithful a spirit of ministry, nor those gifts which are\nnecessary for the government of the church: therefore the community was\nnever intended to be the first subject of church government.\n\n_Major_. Whomsoever Christ makes the first subject of the power of\nchurch government, to them he promises and gives a spirit of ministry,\nand gifts necessary for that government. For, 1. As there is diversity\nof ecclesiastical administrations (which is the foundation of diversity\nof officers) and diversity of miraculous operations, and both for the\nprofit of the Church; so there is conveyed from the Spirit of Christ\ndiversity of gifts, free endowments, enabling and qualifying for the\nactual discharge of those administrations and operations. See 1 Cor.\nxii. 4-7, &c. 2. What instance can be given throughout the whole New\nTestament of any persons, whom Christ made the receptacle of church\ngovernment, but withal he gifted them, and made his promises to them, to\nqualify them for such government? As the apostles and their successors:\n\"As my Father sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he\nbreathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose\nsoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins\nye retain, they are retained,\" John xx. 21-23. And, \"Go ye therefore,\nand disciple ye all nations, &c.--And lo, I am with you alway,\" (or\nevery day,) \"even to the end of the world,\" Matt. xxviii. 19, 20. 3.\nChrist being the _wisdom of the Father_, Col. ii. 3, John i. 18, and\n_faithful as was Moses in all his house_; yea, _more faithful_--_Moses\nas a servant_ over another's, he _as a son over his own house_, Heb.\niii. 2, 5, 6--it cannot stand with his most exact wisdom and fidelity,\nto commit the grand affairs of church government to such as are not duly\ngifted, and sufficiently qualified by himself for the due discharge\nthereof.\n\n_Minor_. But Christ neither promises, nor gives a spirit of ministry,\nnor necessary gifts for church government to the community of the\nfaithful. For, 1. The Scriptures teach, that gifts for ministry and\ngovernment are promised and bestowed not on all, but upon some\nparticular persons only in the visible body of Christ. \"To one is given\nby the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge,\"\n&c., not to all, 1 Cor. xii. 8, 9, &c. \"If a man know not how to rule\nhis own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?\" 1 Tim. iii.\n5. The hypothesis insinuates that all men have not gifts and skill\nrightly to rule their own houses, much less to govern the church. 2.\nExperience tells us, that the multitude of the people are generally\ndestitute of such knowledge, wisdom, prudence, learning, and other\nnecessary qualifications for the right carrying on of church government.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore Christ makes not the community of the faithful\nthe first subject of the power of church government.\n\n_Argum_. IV. The community of the faithful are nowhere in the word\ncalled or acknowledged to be church governors: therefore they are not\nthe first subject of church government.\n\n_Major_. Those persons, who are the first subject and receptacle of\nproper power for church government from Christ, are in the word called\nand acknowledged to be church governors. This is evident, 1. By\nScripture, which is wont to give to them whom Christ intrusts with his\ngovernment, such names and titles as have rule, authority, and\ngovernment engraven upon them: as _overseers_, Acts xx. 28;\n_governments_, 1 Cor. xii. 28; _rulers_, 1 Tim. v. 17, and Rom. xii. 8;\nwith divers others, as after will appear in Chap. XI. 2. By reason,\nwhich tells us that government and governors are relative terms; and\ntherefore to whom government belongs, to them also the denominations of\ngovernors, rulers, &c., do belong, and not contrariwise.\n\n_Minor_. But the community of the faithful are nowhere in the word\neither called or acknowledged to be church governors. This is clear.\nFor, 1. No titles or names are given them by Scripture which imply any\nrule or government in the visible Church of Christ. 2. They are plainly\nset in opposition against, and distinction from, church governors: they\nare called the _flock_; these, _overseers_ set over them by the Holy\nGhost, Acts xx. 28: they, _the saints_; these _their rulers_, Heb. xiii.\n22: these are _over them in the Lord_; and consequently they are _under\nthem in the Lord_, 1 Thes. v. 12. 3. The community of the faithful are\nso far from being the subject of church government themselves, that they\nare expressly charged by the word of Christ to _know, honor, obey_, and\n_submit_, to other governors set over them, and distinct from\nthemselves. \"Know them who are over you in the Lord,\" 1 Thes. v. 12.\n\"Let the well-ruling elders be counted worthy of double\nhonor; especially,\" &c., 1 Tim. v. 17. \"Obey ye your rulers, and submit,\nfor they watch for your souls,\" Heb. xiii. 17.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore the community of the faithful are not the first\nsubject and receptacle of proper power for church government.\n\n_Argum_. V. This opinion of making the body of the Church, or community\nof the faithful, the first subject and immediate receptacle of the keys\nfor the government of the Church, doth inevitably bring along with it\nmany intolerable absurdities. Therefore it is not to be granted. Thus we\nmay argue:\n\n_Major_. That doctrine or opinion which draws after it unavoidably\ndivers intolerable absurdities, is an unsound and unwarrantable opinion.\n\n_Minor_. But this doctrine or opinion that makes the whole community or\nbody of the Church to be the first subject and immediate receptacle of\nthe keys, draws after it unavoidable divers intolerable absurdities.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore this doctrine or opinion that makes the whole\ncommunity or body of the Church to be the first subject, and immediate\nreceptacle of the keys, is an unsound and unwarrantable opinion.\n\nThe _Major_ is plain. For, 1. Though matters of religion be above\nreason, yet are they not unreasonable, absurd, and directly contrary to\nright reason. 2. The Scriptures condemn it as a great brand upon men,\nthat they are absurd or unreasonable; \"Brethren, pray for us--that we\nmay be delivered from absurd and evil men,\" 2 Thes. iii. 2; and\ntherefore if absurd men be so culpable, absurdity, and unreasonableness\nitself, which make them such, are much more culpable.\n\nThe _Minor_, viz. But this doctrine or opinion that makes the whole\ncommunity or body of the Church to be the first subject and immediate\nreceptacle of the keys, draws after it unavoidably divers intolerable\nabsurdities, will notably appear by an induction of particulars.\n\n1. Hereby a clear foundation is laid for the rigid Brownist's confused\ndemocracy, and abhorred anarchy. For, if the whole body of the people be\nthe first receptacle of the keys, then all church government and every\nact thereof is in the whole body, and every member of that body a\ngovernor, consequently every member of that body an officer. But this is\nabsurd; for if all be officers, where is the organical body? and if all\nbe governors, where are the governed? if all be eyes, where are the\nfeet? and if there be none governed, where is the government? it is\nwholly resolved at last into mere democratical anarchy and confusion,\n\"but God is not the author of confusion,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 33. What an\nabsurdity were it, if in the body natural _all were an eye_, or _hand_!\nfor _where_ then _were the hearing, smelling_, &c.; _or if all were one\nmember, where were the body_? 1 Cor. xii. 17,19. So if in the family all\nwere masters, where were the household? where were the family\ngovernment? If in a city all were aldermen, where were the citizens?\nwhere were the city government? If in a kingdom all were kings, where\nwere the subjects, the people, the commonalty, the commonwealth, or the\npolitical government?\n\n2. Hereby the community or whole body of the faithful, even to the\nmeanest member, are vested from Christ with full power and authority\nactually to discharge and execute all acts of order and jurisdiction\nwithout exception: e.g. To preach the word authoritatively, dispense the\nsacraments, ordain their officers, admonish offenders, excommunicate the\nobstinate and incorrigible, and absolve the penitent. For _the keys of\nthe kingdom of heaven_ comprehend all these acts jointly, Matt. xvi. 19,\nand xviii. 18-20, with John xx. 21, 23: and to whom Christ in the New\nTestament gives power to execute one of these acts, to them he gives\npower to execute all; they are joined together, Matt, xviii. 19, (except\nin such cases where himself gives a limitation of the power, as in the\ncase of the ruling elder, who is limited to ruling as contradistinct to\n_laboring in the word and doctrine_, 1 Tim. v. 17.) Now what gross\nabsurdities ensue hereupon! For, 1. Then the weak as well as the strong,\nthe ignorant as well as the intelligent, the children as well as the\nparents, yea, and the very women as well as the men, may preach,\ndispense seals, ordain, admonish, excommunicate, absolve\nauthoritatively; (for they are all equally members of the body, one as\nwell as another, and therefore, as such, have all alike equal share in\nthe keys and exercise thereof:) viz. they that are not gifted for these\noffices, shall discharge these offices; they that are not called nor\nsent of God to officiate, (for God sends not all,) shall yet officiate\nin the name of Christ without calling or sending, contrary to Rom. x.,\nHeb. v. 4. They that want the common use of reason and discretion (as\nchildren) shall have power to join in the highest acts of order and\njurisdiction: yea, they that are expressly prohibited _speaking in the\nchurches_, as the _women_, 1 Cor. xiv., 1 Tim. ii., shall yet have the\n_keys of the kingdom of heaven_ hung at their girdles. 2. Then the\nChurch shall be the steward of Christ, and dispenser of the mysteries of\nGod authoritatively and properly. But if the whole Church be the\ndispenser of the mysteries of God, what shall be the object of this\ndispensation? Not the Church, for according to this opinion she is the\nfirst subject dispensing; therefore it must be something distinct from\nthe Church, unto which the Church dispenseth; what shall this be? shall\nit be another collateral church? then particular churches collateral may\ntake pastoral care one of another reciprocally, and the same churches be\nboth over and under one another; or shall it be those that are without\nall churches? then the ordinances of the gospel, and the dispensation of\nthem, were not principally bestowed upon the Church and body of Christ\nfor the good thereof, (which is directly repugnant to the Scriptures,\nEph. iv. 8, 11-13;) but rather for them that are without. How shall the\nmen, who maintain the principle's of the Independents, clearly help\nthemselves out of these perplexing absurdities?\n\n3. Hereby the body of the people (as Mr. Bayly well observes in his\nDissuasive, chap. ix. page 187) will be extremely unfitted for, and\nunwarrantably taken off from the several duties that lie upon them in\npoint of conscience to discharge in their general and particular\ncallings, in spiritual and secular matters, on the Lord's days and on\ntheir own days. For, if the ecclesiastical power be in all the people,\nthen all the people are judges, and at least have a negative voice in\nall church matters. They cannot judge in any cause prudently and\nconscientiously, till they have complete knowledge and information of\nboth the substantials and circumstantials of all those cases that are\nbrought before them; they must not judge blindly, or by an implicit\nfaith, &c., but by their own light. For all the people to have such full\ninformation and knowledge of every cause, cannot but take up abundance\nof time, (many of the people being slow of understanding and extremely\ndisposed to puzzle, distract, and confound one another in any business\nto be transacted in common by them all.) If these matters of discipline\nbe managed by them on the sabbath day after the dispatch of other public\nordinances, ministry of the word, prayer, sacraments, &c., what time can\nremain for family duties privately, as repeating sermons, and meditating\nupon the word, searching the Scriptures, whether things preached be so\nindeed, reading the Scriptures, catechizing their children and servants,\n&c.? and how will the life of religion in families, yea, and in churches\nalso, languish, if these family exercises be not conscientiously upheld?\nIf they be managed on the week days, how can all the people spare so\nmuch time, as still to be present, when perhaps many of them have much\nado all the week long to provide food and raiment, and other necessaries\nfor their families? and \"if any provide not for his own, and specially\nfor those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than\nan infidel,\" 1 Tim. v. 8. Let the case of the church of Arnheim[39]\nwitness the mischief and absurdity of this popular government once for\nall.\n\n4. Hereby, finally, the community of the faithful (being accounted the\nproper subject of the power of the keys) have authority and power not\nonly to elect, but also to ordain their own officers, their pastors and\nteachers. And this they of the independent judgment plainly confess in\nthese words:[40] Though the office of a pastor in general be immediately\nfrom Christ, and the authority from him also, yet the application of\nthis office, and of this authority to this elect person, is by the\nchurch; and therefore the church hath sufficient and just warrant, as to\nelect and call a presbyter unto an office, so to ordain him to it by\nimposition of hands. They that have power to elect a king, have power\nalso to depute some in their name to set the crown upon his head. But\nfor the whole church or community to ordain presbyters by imposition of\nhands, is very absurd. For, 1. Their women and children, being members\nof the church and of the community, may join in ordaining presbyters by\nimposing of hands, and have as great an influence in appointing them\nthat shall actually impose hands, as the rest of the church members\nhave, being as properly members as they. 2. Then the community, that\ngenerally are unable to judge of the fitness and sufficiency of\npresbyters for the pastoral office, in point of necessary gifts of\nlearning, &c., shall, without judicious satisfaction herein by previous\nexamination, ordain men notwithstanding to the highest ordinary office\nin the church. How ignorantly, how doubtfully, how irregularly, how\nunwarrantably, let the reader judge. 3. Then the community of the\nfaithful may assume to themselves power to execute this ordinary act of\nordination of officers, without all precept of Christ or his apostles,\nand without all warrant of the apostolical churches. But how absurd\nthese things be, each moderate capacity may conceive. Further\nabsurdities hereupon are declared by Mr. Bain,[41] and after him by Mr.\nBall.[42]\n\nWhence we may justly conclude,\n\nTherefore this doctrine or opinion, that makes the whole community or\nbody of the church to be the first subject and immediate receptacle of\nthe keys, is an unsound and unwarrantable opinion.\n\nThe middle-way men, (that profess to go between the authoritative\npresbyterial, and the rigid Brownistical way,) seeing these and such\nlike absurdities, upon which the Brownists inevitably dash themselves,\nthink to salve all by their new-coined distinction of the keys; viz. 1.\nThere is a key of faith or knowledge, Luke xi. 52. The first subject of\nthis key is every believer, whether joined to any particular church or\nnot. 2. There is a key of order, Col. ii. 5, which is either, 1. A key\nof interest, power, or liberty, Gal. v. 13, which key is of a more large\nnature; 2. A key of rule and authority, which is of more strict nature,\nMatt. xvi. 19, John xx. 23. Hence, upon this distinction premised, they\nthus infer, 1. A particular congregation of saints is the first subject\nof all the church offices with all their spiritual gifts and power, 1\nCor. iii. 22. 2. The apostles of Christ were the first subject of\napostolical power. 3. The brethren of a particular congregation are the\nfirst subjects of church liberty. 4. The elders of a particular church\nare the first subjects of church authority. 5. Both the elders and\nbrethren, walking and joining together in truth and peace, are the first\nsubjects of all church power needful to be exercised in their own body.\n\n_Answer_. A rotten foundation, and a tottering superstruction, which\ntumbles down upon the builders' own heads: for,\n\n1. This distribution of the keys is infirm in divers respects: e.g. 1.\nIn that the key of knowledge (as it stands here distinguished from the\nkey of order, comprehending the key of power and authority) is left\nutterly devoid of all power. Now no key of the kingdom of heaven is to\nbe left without all power, Independents themselves being judges. 2. In\nthat the key of power is left as utterly void of all authority, (being\ncontradistinguished from the key of authority,) as the key of knowledge\nis left void of power. Now, power and authority, in matters of\ngovernment, seem to be both one; and the word in the original signifies\nthe one as well as the other. 3. The key of liberty or interest is a new\nkey, lately forged by some new locksmiths in Separation-shop, to be a\npick-lock of the power of church officers, and to open the door for\npopular government; no ordinance of Christ, but a mere human invention,\n(as will after appear upon examination of that scripture upon which it\nis grounded,) and therefore this limb of the distribution is redundant,\na superfluous excrescence. 4. The texts of Scripture upon which this\ndistribution of the keys is grounded, are divers of them abused, or at\nleast grossly mistaken; for, Luke xi. 52, key of knowledge is\ninterpreted only the key of saving faith. But knowledge, in strict\nspeaking, is one thing, and faith another; there may be knowledge where\nthere is no faith; and knowledge, in a sort, is a key to faith, as the\ninlet thereof. And the key of knowledge, viz. true doctrine and pure\npreaching of the word, is a distinct thing from knowledge itself. This\nkey the lawyers had taken away by not interpreting, or misinterpreting\nof the law; but they could not take away the people's faith, or\nknowledge itself. Touching Col. ii. 5, 6, _your order_, it will be hard\nto prove this was only or chiefly intended of the keys delivered to\nPeter: doth it not rather denote the people's moral orderly walking,\naccording to the rule of faith and life, as in other duties, so in\nsubmitting themselves to Christ's order of government, as is elsewhere\nrequired, Heb. xiii. 17? And as for Gal. v. 13, produced to prove the\nkey of liberty, _Brethren, you have been called unto liberty_, there is\ntoo much liberty taken in wresting this text; for the apostle here\nspeaks not of liberty as a church power, of choosing officers, joining\nin censures, &c., but as a gospel privilege, consisting in freedom from\nthe ceremonial law, that yoke of bondage, which false teachers would\nhave imposed upon them, after Christ had broken it off; as will further\nappear, if you please with this text to compare Gal. v. 1, 11, 15, 10,\nand well consider the current of the whole context.\n\n2. The inferences upon this distribution of the keys premised, are very\nstrange and untheological. For it may be accepted in general, that it is\na groundless fancy to make several first subjects of the keys, according\nto the several distributions of the keys; for, had all the members of\nthe distribution been good, yet this inference thereupon is naught,\ninasmuch as the Scripture tells us plainly, that all the keys together\nand at once were promised to Peter, Matt. xvi. 19, and given to the\napostles, Matt, xviii. 18, 19, with xxviii. 18-20, and John xx. 21-23;\nso that originally the apostles and their successors were the only first\nsubject and immediate receptacle of all the keys from Christ. And though\nsince, for assistance and case of the pastor, they are divided into more\nhands--viz. of the ruling elder, Rom. xii. 8; 1 Cor. xii. 28; 1 Tim. v.\n17--yet originally the subject was but one. Further, here is just ground\nfor many particular exceptions: as, 1. That every believer, whether\njoined to any particular church or not, is made the first subject of the\nkey of knowledge, which seems to be extremely absurd: for then every\nparticular believer, gifted or ungifted, strong or weak, man, woman, or\nchild, hath power to preach, (taking the key of knowledge here for the\nkey of doctrine, as it ought to be taken, or else it is no\necclesiastical key at all,) which is one of the highest offices, and\nwhich the great apostle said, \"Who is sufficient for these things?\" 2\nCor. ii. 16. How unscriptural and irrational this is, all may judge.\nThen also some of the keys may be committed to such as are without the\nChurch. Then finally, it is possible to be a believer, and yet in no\nvisible church; (for Independents hold there is no church but a\nparticular congregation, which is their only church:) but a man is no\nsooner a true believer, but he is a member of the invisible Church: he\nis no sooner a professed believer, but he is a member of the general\nvisible Church, though he be joined to no particular congregation. 2.\nThat a particular congregation of saints is made the first subject of\nall the church offices, with all their spiritual gifts and power, 1 Cor.\niii. 22. But is the word subject used here properly, for the first\nsubject recipient of all church offices, with all their gifts and power?\nThen the congregation of saints are either officers themselves formally,\nand can execute the function of all sorts of officers, and have all\ngifts to that end; what need then is there of any select officers? for\nthey can make officers virtually, and furnish those officers with gifts\nand power to that end; but who gave them any such authority? Or what\napostolical church ever assumed to themselves any such thing? Officers,\nnot churches, are the first subject of such gifts and power. Is the word\nsubject here used improperly, for object, whose good all offices with\ntheir gifts and power are given? Then not any particular congregation,\nbut the whole general visible Church is the object for which all offices\nand officers with their gifts and power are primarily given, 1 Cor. xii.\n28; Eph. iv. 8, 11, 12. As for that place, 1 Cor. iii. 22, \"All is\nyours,\" &c., it points not out the particular privilege of any one\nsingle congregation, (nor was the church of Corinth such, but\npresbyterial, see chap. XIII.,) but the general privilege of all true\nsaints, and of the invisible mystical Church: for were Paul and Cephas\napostles given peculiarly to the church of Corinth only? Or was the\n_world, life, death, things present and to come_, given to the wicked in\nthe church of Corinth? 3. That the apostles are made the first subject\nof all apostolical power. But then, how doth this contradict the former\nassertion, that a particular congregation is the first subject of all\noffices with their gifts and power? Are there two first subjects of the\nsame adjuncts? Or is apostleship no office? Are apostolical gifts no\ngifts, or power no power? or have apostles all from the Church?\nDoubtless apostles were before all Christian churches, and had the keys\ngiven them before the churches had their being. 4. That the brethren of\na particular congregation are made the first subjects of church liberty.\nBut, if that liberty be power and authority, then this evidently\ncontradicts the former, that a particular congregation is the first\nsubject of all offices and power; for brethren here are distinct from\nelders, and both do but make up a particular congregation. If liberty\nhere be not power, then it is none of Christ's keys, but a new forged\npick-lock. 5. That the elders of a particular church are made the first\nsubject of church authority; but then here is a contradiction to the\nformer position, that made the particular congregation the first subject\nof all power. And though apostles and elders be the first subject of\nauthority, yet, when the keys  were first committed to them, they were\nnot in relation to any particular church, but to the general. 6.\nFinally, that both elders and brethren, walking and joining together in\ntruth and peace, are the first subjects of all church power, is liable\nalso to exception. For this joins the brethren (who indeed have no\nauthoritative power at all) with the elders, as the joint subject of all\npower. And this but allowed to them walking and joining together in\ntruth and peace: but what if the major part of the Church prove\nheretical, and so walk not in truth; or schismatical, and so walk not in\npeace, shall the elders and the non-offending party lose all their\npower? Where then shall that independent church find healing? for\nappeals to presbyteries and synods are counted apocryphal by them. But\nenough hath been said to detect the vanity of these new dreams and\nnotions; it is a bad sore that must be wrapped in so many clouts.[43]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\n_Of the proper Receptacle, or immediate subject of the Power of Church\nGovernment: affirmatively, what it is, viz. Christ's own Officers._\n\n\nThus the proper receptacle or subject of ecclesiastical power hath been\nconsidered negatively, what it is not, viz: not the political\nmagistrate, nor yet the community of the faithful, or body of the\npeople, with or without their eldership. Now this receptacle of power\ncomes to be evidenced affirmatively, what it is, viz. (according to the\nexpress words of the description of government,) Christ's own officers.\nThis is the last branch of the description, the divine right whereof\nremains to be cleared; which may most satisfactorily be done by\nevidencing these three things, viz: 1. That Jesus Christ our Mediator\nhath certain peculiar church guides and officers which he hath erected\nin his Church. 2. That Jesus Christ our Mediator hath especially\nintrusted his own officers with the government of his Church. 3. How, or\nin what sense the ruling officers are intrusted with this government,\nseverally or jointly?\n\n\nSECTION I.\n\n1. _Of the Divine Right of Christ's Church Officers, viz. Pastors and\nTeachers, with Ruling Elders._\n\nTouching the first, that Christ hath certain peculiar church guides and\nofficers, which he hath erected in his Church. Take it thus:\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath ordained and set in his Church (besides\nthe apostles and other extraordinary officers that are now ceased)\npastors and teachers, as also ruling elders, as the subject of the keys\nfor all ordinary ecclesiastical administrations. The divine right of\nthese ordinary church officers may appear as followeth:\n\nI. Pastors and teachers are the ordinance of Jesus Christ. This is\ngenerally granted on all sides; and therefore these few particulars may\nsuffice for the demonstration of it, viz:\n\n1. They are enumerated in the list or catalogue of those church officers\nwhich are of divine institution. \"God hath set\" (or put, constituted)\n\"some in the Church, first, apostles; secondarily, prophets; thirdly,\nteachers,\" 1 Cor. xii. 28. These are some of the triumphant gifts and\ntrophies of Christ's ascension: \"Ascending up on high, he led captivity\ncaptive, and gave gifts to men: and he gave some apostles, and some\nprophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,\" Eph. iv.\n8, 11. Thus in that exact roll of ordinary officers: \"Having, therefore,\ngifts different according to the grace given unto us; whether prophecy,\nlet us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let\nus wait on our ministry;\" (here is the general distribution of all\nordinary officers under two heads, _prophecy_ and _ministry_:) \"or he\nthat teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation,\" (here\nis the teacher and the pastor, that come under the first head of\nprophecy,) Rom. xii. 6-8. \"Take heed to yourselves, and to all the\nflock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made\" (or set) \"you overseers,\"\nActs xx. 28. Note--God hath set in the Church; Christ hath given for his\nbody; the Holy Ghost hath made overseers over the flock, these pastors\nand teachers: and are not pastors and teachers church officers by divine\nright, having the authority of God, Christ, and of the Holy Ghost?\n\n2. They are to be thus and thus qualified according to divine direction.\nThe qualifications of these pastors and teachers, (called presbyters and\noverseers,) see in 1 Tim. iii. 2-8, \"An overseer,\" or bishop, \"must be\nblameless,\" &c.; and Tit. i. 5-10, \"To ordain presbyters,\" or elders,\n\"in every city--If any be blameless,\" &c. Now, where God lays down\nqualifications for pastors and teachers, there he approves such officers\nto be his own ordinance.\n\n3. They have manifold church employments committed to them from Christ,\nas ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God, (1 Cor. iv.\n1, 2,) they being intrusted in whole or in part with the managing of\nmost if not all the ordinances forementioned in part 2, chap. VII., as\nthere by the texts alleged is evident. Matters of order and special\noffice are committed to them only _divisim_: matters of jurisdiction are\ncommitted to them with ruling elders _conjunctim_. If Christ hath\nintrusted them thus with church ordinances, and the dispensing of them,\nsure they are Christ's church officers.\n\n4. The very names and titles given them in Scripture proclaim them to be\nChrist's own ordinance; among many take these: \"Ministers of Christ,\" 1\nCor. iv. 1; \"Stewards of the mysteries of God,\" 1 Cor. iv. 1;\n\"Ambassadors for Christ,\" 2 Cor. v. 20; \"Laborers thrust forth into his\nharvest by the Lord of the harvest,\" Matt. ix. 38; \"Ruling over you in\nthe Lord,\"[44] 1 Thess. v. 12.\n\n5. The Lord Christ charges their flock and people with many duties to be\nperformed to their pastors and teachers, because of their office; as to\nknow them, love them, obey them, submit unto them, honor them, maintain\nthem, &c., which he would not do were they not his own ordinance. \"But\nwe beseech you, brethren, to know them that labor among you, and rule\nover you in the Lord, and esteem them very highly in love for their\nwork's sake,\" 1 Thess. v. 12, 13. \"Obey your rulers, and submit; for\nthey watch for your souls as those that must give an account,\" Heb.\nxiii. 17. \"The elders that rule well count worthy of double honor;\nespecially them that labor in the word and doctrine; _for the Scripture\nsaith_, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the\ncorn, and the laborer is worthy of his hire,\" 1 Tim. v. 17, 18; compared\nWith 1 Cor. ix. 6-15. \"Let him that is catechized, communicate to him\nthat catechizeth him in all good things,\" Gal. vi. 6-8.\n\nThus much for the present may suffice to have been spoken touching the\ndivine right of pastors and teachers, the ordinary standing ministers of\nChrist under the New Testament. But forasmuch as we observe that in\nthese days some rigid Erastians and Seekers oppose and deny the very\noffice of the ministry now under the gospel, and others profess that the\nministry of the church of England is false and antichristian; we\nintend, (by God's assistance,) as soon as we can rid our hands from\nother pressing employments, to endeavor the asserting and vindicating of\nthe divine right of the ministers of the New Testament in general, and\nof the truth of the ministry of the church of England in particular.\n\nII. Ruling elders, distinct from all preaching elders and deacons, are a\ndivine ordinance in the Church of God now under the New Testament.\n\nThe divine right of this church officer, the mere ruling elder, is much\nquestioned and doubted by some, because they find not the Scriptures\nspeaking so fully and clearly of the ruling elder as of the preaching\nelder and of the deacon. By others it is flatly denied and opposed, as\nby divers that adhere too tenaciously to the Erastian and prelatical\nprinciples: who yet are willing to account the assistance of the ruling\nelder in matter of church government to be a very prudential way. But if\nmere prudence be counted once a sufficient foundation for a distinct\nkind of church officer, we shall open a door for invention of church\nofficers at pleasure; then welcome commissioners and committee men, &c.;\nyea, then let us return to the vomit, and resume prelates, deans,\narchdeacons, chancellors, officials, &c., for church officers. And where\nshall we stop? who but Christ Jesus himself can establish new officers\nin his church? Is it not the fruit of his ascension, &c.? Eph. iv. 7,\n11, 12. Certainly if the Scriptures lay not before us grounds more than\nprudential for the ruling elder, it were better never to have mere\nruling elders in the church. Both the Presbyterians and Independents[45]\nacknowledge the divine right of the ruling elder. For satisfaction of\ndoubting unprejudiced minds, (to omit divers considerations that might\nbe produced,) the divine right of the ruling elder may be evinced by\nthese ensuing arguments.\n\n_Argum_. I. The first argument for the divine right of the ruling elder\nin the Church of Christ, shall be drawn from Rom. xii. 6-8: \"Having,\nthen, gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us,\nwhether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;\nor ministry, _let us wait_ on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on\nteaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation; he that giveth, _let him\ndo it_ with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence,\" &c. Let the\nscope and context of this chapter be a little viewed, and it will make\nway for the more clear arguing from this place. Briefly thus: The\napostle having finished the principal part of his epistle, which was\nproblematical, wherein he disputed--1. About justification, chap,\ni.-vi.; 2. Sanctification, chap. vi. 7, 8; and, 3. Predestination, chap.\nix. 10, 11, he comes to the next branch, which is more practical, about\ngood works, chap. xii.-xvi. This twelfth chapter is wholly in the way of\nexhortation, and he herein exhorts to divers duties. 1. More generally\nthat we should even consecrate ourselves wholly to the service of God,\nver. 1; that we should not conform to the world, ver. 2. More specially\nhe descends to particular duties, which are of two sorts, viz: 1. Such\nas concern ecclesiastical officers as officers, ver. 3-9; 2. Such as\nconcern all Christians in common as Christians, both towards one another\nand towards their very enemies, verse 9, to the end of the chapter.\nTouching ecclesiastical officers, the apostle's evident scope is to urge\nthem not to be proud of their spiritual gifts, (which in those days\nabounded,) but to think soberly, self-denyingly of themselves, and to\nuse all their gifts well. This he presseth upon them, 1. From the nature\nof the Church, which is as a natural organical body, wherein are many\nmembers, having their several offices for the good of the whole body; so\nthe members of Christ's body being many, have their several gifts and\noffices for the good of the whole, that the superior should not despise\nthe inferior, nor the inferior envy their superior, ver. 3-5. 2. From\nthe distribution or enumeration of the several kinds of ordinary\nstanding officers in this organical body, the Church, who are severally\nexhorted duly to discharge those duties that are specially required of\nthem in their several functions, ver. 6-8. These officers are reduced\nfirst to two general heads, viz: Prophecy (understand not the\nextraordinary gift of foretelling future things, &c., but the ordinary,\nin the right understanding and interpreting of Scripture) and ministry;\nand the general duties thereof are annexed, ver. 6, 7. Then these\ngenerals are subdivided into the special offices contained under them,\nthe special duty of every officer being severally pressed upon them.\nUnder prophecy are contained, 1. _He that teacheth_, i.e., the doctor or\nteacher; 2. _He that exhorteth_, i.e., the pastor, ver. 7, 8. Under\nministry are comprised, 1. _He that giveth_, i.e., the deacon; 2. _He\nthat ruleth_, i.e., the ruling elder. The current of our best\ninterpreters to this effect resolve this context. So that here we have a\nvery excellent and perfect enumeration of all the ordinary standing\nofficers in the Church of Christ distinctly laid down. This premised,\nthe argument for the divine right of the ruling elder may be thus\npropounded:\n\n_Major_. Whatsoever members of Christ's organical body have an ordinary\noffice of ruling therein given them of God, distinct from all other\nordinary standing officers in the church, together with directions from\nGod how they are to rule; they are the ruling elders we seek, and that\nby divine right.\n\n_Minor_. But _he that ruleth_, mentioned in Rom. xii. 8, is a member of\nChrist's organical body, having an ordinary office of ruling therein\ngiven him of God, distinct from all other standing officers in the\nchurch, together with direction how he is to rule.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore he that ruleth, mentioned in Rom. xii. 8, is the\nruling elder we seek, and that by divine right.\n\nThe major proposition is clear. For in the particulars of it, well\ncompared together, are observable both a plain delineation or\ndescription of the ruling elder's office; and also a firm foundation for\nthe divine right of that office. The ruling elder's office is described\nand delineated by these several clauses, which set out so many\nrequisites for the making up of a ruling elder, viz: 1. He must be a\nmember of Christ's organical body. Such as are without, pagans,\nheathens, infidels, &c., out of the Church, they are not fit objects for\nchurch government, to have it exercised by the Church upon them; the\nChurch only judges them that are within, (1 Cor. v. 12, 13,) much less\ncan they be fit subjects of church government to exercise it themselves\nwithin the Church. How shall they be officers in the Church that are not\nso much as members of the Church? Besides, such as are only members of\nthe invisible body of Christ, as the glorified saints in heaven, they\ncannot be officers in the Church; for not the Church invisible, but only\nthe Church or body of Christ visible is organical. So that every church\nofficer must first be a Church member, a member of the visible organical\nbody: consequently a ruling elder must be such a member. 2. He must have\nan office of ruling in this body of Christ. Membership is not enough,\nunless that power of rule be superadded thereto; for the whole office of\nthe ruling elder is contained in the matter of rule; take away rule, you\ndestroy the very office. Now, rule belongs not to every member: \"Salute\nall them that have the rule over you, and all the saints,\" Heb. xiii.\n24, where rulers and saints are made contradistinct to one another. In\nthe body natural all the members are not eyes, hands, &c., governing the\nbody, some are rather governed; so in the body of Christ, 1 Cor. xii. 3.\nThis his office of ruling must be an ordinary office; apostles had some\npower that was extraordinary, as their apostleship was extraordinary;\nbut when we seek for this ruling elder, we seek for a fixed, standing,\nordinary officer ruling in the church. 4. All that is not enough, that\nhe be a member of the church, that he have an office of rule in the\nchurch, and that office also be ordinary; but besides all these it is\nnecessary that he be also distinct from all other standing officers in\nthe church, viz. from pastors, teachers, deacons; else all the former\nwill not make up a peculiar kind of officer, if in all points he fully\nagree with any of the said three. But if there can be found such an\nofficer in whom all these four requisites do meet, viz: That, 1. Is a\nmember of Christ's organical body; 2. Hath an office of rule therein; 3,\nThat office is ordinary; and, 4. That ordinary office is distinct from\nall other ordinary standing offices in the church; this must unavoidably\nbe that very ruling elder which we inquire after. By this it is evident,\nthat in this proposition here is a plain and clear delineation of the\nruling elder's office. Now, in the next place, touching the foundation\nfor the divine right of this office; it also is notably expressed in the\nsame proposition, while it presupposeth, 1. That God is the giver of\nthis office; 2. That God is the guider of this office. For whatsoever\noffice or officer God gives for his Church, and having given it, guides\nand directs to the right discharge thereof, that must needs be of divine\nright beyond all contradiction. Thus this proposition is firm and\ncogent. Now let us assume:\n\n_Minor_. But _he that ruleth_, mentioned in Rom. xii. 8, is a member of\nChrist's organical body, having an ordinary office of ruling therein,\ngiven him of God, distinct from all other ordinary standing officers in\nthe church, together with direction from God how he is to rule.\n\nThis assumption or minor proposition (whereon the main stress of the\nargument doth lie) may be thus evidenced by parts, from this context:\n\n_He that ruleth_ is a member of Christ's organical body. For, 1. The\nChurch of Christ is here compared to a body, _We being many are one body\nin Christ_, ver. 5. 2. This body is declared to be organical, i.e.\nconsisting of several members, that have their several offices in the\nbody, some of teaching, some of exhorting, and some of ruling, &c. \"For\nas we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same\noffice, so we being many are one body in Christ, and every one members\none of another,\" &c., ver. 4-6, &c. 3. Among the rest of the members of\nthis body, _he that ruleth_ is reckoned up for one, ver. 5-8; this is\npalpably evident.\n\n_He that ruleth_ hath an office of ruling in this body of Christ. For,\n1. This word (translated) _he that ruleth_, in the proper signification\nand use of it, both in the Scriptures and in other Greek authors, doth\nsignify one that ruleth authoritatively over another, (as hereafter is\nmanifested in the 3d argument, \u00a7 2.) 2. Our best interpreters and\ncommentators do render and expound the word generally to this effect:\ne.g. He that is over[46]--one set over[47]--he that stands in the head\nor front[48]--as a captain or commander in the army, to which this\nphrase seems to allude--_he that ruleth_. 3. This word, wherever it is\nused in a genuine proper sense, in all the New Testament, notes rule, or\ngovernment. It is used metaphorically for taking care (as one set over\nany business) of good works, only in two places, Tit. iii. 8, and iii.\n14. Properly for government which superiors have over inferiors; and\nthat either domestical, in private families, so it is used in 1 Tim.\niii. 4, 5, 12, or ecclesiastical, in the church, which is the public\nfamily of God; in this sense it is used, 1 Thes. v. 12, 1 Tim. v. 17,\nand here, Rom. xii. 8, and these are all the places where this word is\nfound used in all the New Testament.\n\n3. _He that ruleth_ here, hath an ordinary, not an extraordinary office\nof rule in the church. For he is ranked and reckoned up in the list of\nChrist's ordinary standing officers, that are constantly to continue in\nthe church, viz. pastors, teachers, deacons. Commonly this place is\ninterpreted to speak of the ordinary church officers, and none other;\nconsequently he that ruleth is such a one.\n\n4. _He that ruleth_ here, is an officer distinct from all other ordinary\nofficers in the Church of Christ. For in this place we have a full\nenumeration of all Christ's ordinary officers, and he that ruleth is a\ndistinct officer among them all. 1. Distinct in name, he only is called\n_he that ruleth_, the rest have every one of them their several distinct\nname, ver. 7, 8. 2. Distinct in his work here appropriated to him; the\ndoctor teacheth; the pastor exhorteth; the deacon giveth; this elder\n_ruleth_, as the very name signifieth, ver. 8. Compare 1 Tim. v. 17, 1\nCor. xii. 28. As the elder ruleth, so he is distinct from the deacon\nthat hath no rule in the church; and as he only rules, so he is distinct\nfrom both pastor and teacher, that both teach, exhort, and rule; they\nboth have power of order and jurisdiction, the ruling elder hath only\npower of jurisdiction. 3. Finally, he is distinct among and from them\nall in the particular direction here given these officers about the\nright discharge of their functions. The teacher must be exercised _in\nteaching_; the pastor _in exhortation_; the deacon must _give with\nsingleness_; and the elder, he must _rule with diligence, studiousness_,\n&c. Now what other solid reason can be imagined, why _he that ruleth_\nshould here have a distinct name, distinct work and employment, and\ndistinct direction how to manage this work, than this, that the Holy\nGhost might set him out unto us as an ordinary officer in the church,\ndistinct from all the other standing officers here enumerated?\n\n5. God himself is the author and giver of this office of him that\nruleth, as well as of all the other offices here mentioned. For, 1. All\ngifts and endowments in the church in general, and in every member in\nparticular; they are from God, it is he that gives and divides them as\nhe will, _as God hath dealt to every one the measure of faith_, Rom.\nxii. 3. 2. All the special offices, and gifts for these offices in\nspecial, are also from the same God, _we having therefore gifts\naccording to the grace given unto us, differing; whether prophecy_, &c.,\nRom, xii. 6, 7, &c. Here it is plain that he distinguished betwixt grace\nand gifts. By grace here we are to understand that holy office or charge\nin the church, which is given to any man by the grace and favor of God.\nAnd in this sense the apostle in this very chapter, ver. 3, useth the\nword _grace: For I say through the grace given to me_, i.e. through the\nauthority of my apostleship, which by grace I have received, &c. By\ngifts, we are to understand those endowments wherewith God hath freely\nfurnished his officers in the church for their several offices. Now both\nthese gifts and this grace, both the endowments and the office, are\noriginally from God, his grace is the fountain of them; and both the\ngrace of each office, and the gifts for such office, relate to all these\nordinary offices here enumerated, as is evident by the current and\nconnection of the whole context, see ver. 6-8; consequently the grace,\ni.e. the office of ruling, which is of divine grace, and the gifts for\nthat office, arise from the same fountain, God himself.\n\n6. Finally, God himself is the guider and director of him that ruleth,\nhere prescribing to him how he is to rule, viz. _with diligence, with\nstudiousness_, &c., ver. 8. Now we may receive this as a maxim, That of\ndivine right may be done, for which God gives his divine rule how it is\nto be done: and that office must needs be of divine right, which God\nhimself so far approves as to direct in his word how it shall be\ndischarged.\n\nNow, to sum up all, he that ruleth here, 1. Is a member of Christ's\norganical body. 2. Hath an office of ruling in this body. 3. This his\noffice is not extraordinary but ordinary, standing, and perpetual. 4. He\nis an officer distinct from all other ordinary officers in the Church.\n5. God himself is the giver and author of this office. 6. And God\nhimself is the guider and director of this office: and then see if we\nmay not clearly conclude,\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore, he that ruleth, mentioned in Rom. xii. 8, is\nthe ruling elder we seek, and that by divine right.\n\nThe adversaries of ruling elders muster up divers exceptions against the\nalleging of Rom. xii. 8, for proof of the divine right of their office,\nthe weakness of which is to be discovered ere we pass to another\nargument. _Except_. 1. This is an arguing from a general to a special\naffirmatively. It doth not follow, because the apostle here in general\nmentioneth him that ruleth, therefore in special it must be the ruling\nelder.[49]\n\n_Ans_. This exception is the same with first exception against the\nsecond argument hereafter laid down. There see. For the same answer\nappositely and satisfactorily is applicable to both.\n\n_Except_. 2. But the apostle here speaks of them that rule, but we have\nnowhere received that such elders have rule over the church--and he\nspeaks of all that rule in the church, who therefore would wrest this\nplace only to elders? One cannot rightly attribute that word translated\n_he that ruleth_ to elders only, which is common unto more. If these\nelders he here meant, neither pastors nor teachers ought to rule, for\nthis word agrees no otherwise to him that ruleth, than the word of\nexhorting to him that exhorteth.[50]\n\n_Ans_. 1. That such elders rule in the church is evident, both by Rom.\nxii. 8, where this word implies rule as hath been showed, and he that\nruleth is reckoned up amongst ordinary church officers, as hath been\nsaid, therefore he rules in the church: these the apostle also calls\nruling elders, 1 Tim. v. 17, viz. officers in the church, and distinct\nfrom them that labor in the word and doctrine; as in the third argument\nwill appear: yea, they are governments set of God in the church,\ndistinct from other officers, 1 Cor. xii. 28, as in the second argument\nshall be evidenced: there see; therefore these elders have rule.\n\n2. Though in this term the apostle speaks of him that ruleth, yet he\nspeaks not of every one that ruleth. For, 1. He speaks singularly, he\nthat ruleth, as of one kind of ruling officer; not plurally, they that\nrule, as if he had indefinitely or universally meant all the ruling\nofficers in the church. 2. He reckons up here distinct kinds of ordinary\nofficers, pastors, teachers, elders, and deacons; and pastors and\nteachers, besides laboring in the word, have power of rule, 1 Thes. v.\n12, Heb. xiii. 7-17, and he that ruleth, here, is distinct from them\nboth; and therefore this term cannot mean all church rulers, but only\none kind, viz. the ruling elder.\n\n3. Though this name, _he that ruleth_, be common unto more rulers in the\nchurch, than to the mere ruling elder; yet it doth not therefore\nnecessarily follow, that it cannot here particularly point out only the\nmere ruling elder, inasmuch, as _he that ruleth_, is not here set\nalone, (for then this objection might have had some color,) but is\nenumerated with other officers as distinct from them.\n\n4. Though the ruling elder here be called _he that ruleth_, yet this\ndoth not exclude the pastor from ruling, no more than when the ordinary\nministers are called pastors and teachers, the apostles and evangelists\nare excluded from feeding and teaching, in Eph. iv. 11, 12; 1 Cor. xii.\n28. This elder is called, _he that ruleth_, not that there is no other\nruler than he, but because he doth no other thing but rule, others rule\nand preach also.\n\n_Except_. 3. If this were meant of such elders, then these elders were\nas necessary to the church as pastors, being given to the church by the\nlike reason. Consequently where these elders are not, there is no\nchurch; as there is no church where the word and sacraments are not.[51]\n\n_Ans_. 1. According to this argument deacons are as necessary as either\npastors, teachers, or elders, and without deacons there should be no\nchurch; for they are all enumerated here alike, Rom. xii. 7, 8, and in 1\nCor. xii. 28; but this would be absurd, and against experience. 2.\nThough both pastors and ruling elders belong to the church by divine\nright, yet doth it not follow that the ruling elder is equally as\nnecessary as the pastor. The ruling elder only rules, the pastor both\nrules and preaches, therefore he is more necessary to the church. There\nare degrees of necessity; some things are absolutely necessary to the\nbeing of a church, as matter and form, viz. visible saints, and a due\nprofession of faith, and obedience to Christ, according to the gospel.\nThus it is possible a church may be, and yet want both deacons, elders,\nand pastors too, yea, and word and sacraments for a time: some things\nare only respectively necessary to the well-being of a church; thus\nofficers are necessary, yet some more than others, without which the\nchurch is lame, defective, and miserably imperfect.\n\n_Except_. 4. Should ruling elders here be meant, then deacons that obey,\nshould be preferred before the elders that rule.[52]\n\n_Ans_. Priority of order is no infallible argument of priority of worth\nand dignity; as is evidenced in answer to the third exception against\nArg. II.--there see; we find Priscilla a woman named before Aquila a\nman, and her husband, Acts xviii. 18; Rom. xvi. 3; 1 Tim. iv. 19; is\ntherefore the woman preferred before the man? the wife before the\nhusband? And again, Aquila is set before Priscilla, Acts xviii. 2, 26, 1\nCor. xvi. 19, to let us see that the Holy Ghost indifferently speaks\nof superior and inferior before one another.\n\n_Except_. 5. But here the apostle speaketh of divers gifts and graces,\nfor so _differing gifts_ do import, not of divers offices: for then they\nmight not concur in one man, and consequently neither might the prophet\nteach, nor exhort, nor the deacon distribute, nor show mercy. Many gifts\nmay be common in one man, many offices cannot;--which of these gifts in\nthe apostles' times was not common as well to the people as to the\npastors; and to women as well as to men? &c.[53]\n\n_Ans_. Divers considerations may be propounded to discover the vanity of\nthis exception: chiefly take these three.\n\n1. There is no sufficient reason in this exception, proving the apostle\nhere to speak only of divers gifts and graces, and not of divers offices\nalso. For, 1. This is not proved by that expression, _differing gifts_,\nver. 6, for these differing gifts are not here spoken of abstractly and\nabsolutely, without reference to their subjects, but relatively with\nreference to their subjects wherein they are, viz. in the several\nofficers, ver. 7, 8, and therefore, as the apostle mentions the\n_differing gifts_, so here he tells us in the same sixth verse, that we\nhave these \"different gifts, according to the grace given unto us,\" i.e.\naccording to the office given unto us of God's grace, (as hath been\nmanifested,) after which immediately is subjoined an enumeration of\noffices. 2. Nor is this proved by the inference made, upon the granting\nthat divers offices are here meant, viz. [Then they might not concur in\none man, the prophet might not teach nor exhort, &c.; many gifts may be\ncommon in one man, many offices cannot.] For who is so little versed in\nthe Scriptures, but he knows that apostles, pastors, elders, deacons,\nare distinct officers one from another; yet all the inferior offices are\nvirtually comprehended in the superior, and may be discharged by them:\nelders may distribute as well as deacons; and beyond them, rule: pastors\nmay distribute and rule as well as deacons and elders, and beyond both\npreach, dispense sacraments, and ordain ministers. Apostles may do there\nall, and many things besides extraordinary. Much more may the prophet\nteach and exhort, and the deacon distribute and show mercy; these being\nthe proper acts of their office. 3. Nor, finally, is this proved by that\nsuggestion, that all these gifts in the apostles' times were common to\nall sorts and sexes, women as well as men; as he after takes much pains\nto prove, but to very little purpose. For not only in the apostles'\ntimes, but in our times also, all Christians may teach, exhort,\ndistribute, show mercy, &c., privately, occasionally, by bond of\ncharity, and law of fraternity towards one another mutually: but may not\nteach, exhort, rule, distribute, &c., authoritatively by virtue of their\noffice, so as to give themselves wholly to such employments, which is\nthe thing here intended; yet it is worth observing how far Bilson was\ntransported against ruling elders, that rather than yield to their\noffice, he will make all these gifts common to all sorts and sexes, men\nand women. This is new divinity; all sorts and sexes may both preach and\nrule. Let Bilson have the credit of symbolizing with the Separatists, if\nnot of transcending them.\n\n2. Here is good ground in the context to make us think that the apostle\nhere spoke of distinct church officers, and not only of distinct gifts.\nFor, 1. In the similitude of a natural body (whereunto here the church\nis compared) he speaks of distinct members, having distinct offices,\nver. 4. \"For as we have many members in one body, and all members have\nnot the same office.\" 2. In his accommodation of this similitude, he\nspeaks not only of gifts, but also of offices according to which these\ngifts are given, which he calls _grace_, ver. 6, (as was noted.). This\ngrace given, or this office given of grace, is branched out, first, into\ntwo general heads, viz. _prophecy_ and _ministry_, ver. 6, 7. Then these\ngenerals are subdivided into the special offices contained under them,\nviz.: Under prophecy the teacher, _he that teacheth_; and the pastor,\n_he that exhorteth_; under ministry the deacon, _he that distributeth_;\nand the ruling elder, _he that ruleth_. Now there is in the text just\nground for this resolution of the text, in making prophecy and ministry\ngenerals, and all the rest special kinds of officers; forasmuch as\nprophecy and ministry are expressed abstractly, _whether prophecy_,\n(not, whether we are prophets;) _whether ministry_, (not, whether we are\ndeacons, ministers:) and both prophecy and ministry are put in the\naccusative case; and both of them have relation, and are joined unto the\nparticiple of the plural number _having_, intimating that divers do\nshare in prophecy, pastor and teacher; divers in ministry, deacon and\nruling elder. But all the other are expressed concretely, and in the\nnominative case, and in the singular number, and to every of them the\nsingle article is prefixed, translated He--_He that teacheth--He that\nexhorteth--He that giveth--He that ruleth_. Hence we have great cause to\ncount prophecy and ministry as generals; all the rest as special offices\nunder them.\n\n_Argum_. II. The second argument for the divine right of the ruling\nelder shall be grounded upon 1 Cor. xii. 28: \"And God hath set some in\nthe church, first, apostles, secondly, prophets, thirdly, teachers,\nafterwards powers, then gifts of healing, helps, governments, kinds of\ntongue.\" God, in the first founding of Christianity and of the primitive\nchurches, bestowed many eminent gifts upon divers Christians; the church\nof Corinth greatly excelled in such gifts, 1 Cor. i. 5, 7. Hence their\nmembers gifted, grew spiritually proud, and despised their brethren; to\ncorrect which abuse of gifts, and direct them to the right use thereof\nfor the common profit of all, is the chief scope of this chapter, see\nverse 7, \"The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to\nprofit withal.\" For, 1. All their gifts flow from one and the same\nfountain, the Spirit of God, therefore should be improved for the common\ngood of all, especially considering no one man hath all gifts, but\nseveral men have several gifts, that all might be beholden to one\nanother, ver. 8-11. 2. The whole Church of Christ throughout all the\nworld is but one body, and that body organical, having several members\ntherein placed for several uses, as eyes, hands, &c., wherein the\nmeanest members are useful and necessary to the highest: therefore all\nmembers should harmoniously lay out their gifts for the good of the\nwhole body, without jars or divisions, ver. 12-28. 3. All the several\nofficers, whether extraordinary or ordinary, though furnished with\nseveral gifts and several administrations, yet are placed by one and the\nsame God, in one and the same general Church; and therefore should all\nlevel at the benefit of the whole church, without pride, animosities,\ndivisions, &c., ver. 28, to the end. These things being briefly premised\nfor the clearing the context and scope of the chapter, we may thus argue\nfrom ver. 28:\n\n_Major_. Whatsoever officers God himself, now under the New Testament,\nhath set in the Church as governors therein, distinct from all other\nchurch governors, whether extraordinary or ordinary; they are the ruling\nelders we inquire after, and that by divine right.\n\nThis proposition is so clear and evident of itself, that much needs not\nto be said for any further demonstration of it. For what can be further\ndesired for proof that there are such distinct officers as ruling elders\nin the Church of Christ, and that of divine right, than to evince, 1.\nThat there are certain officers set of God in the Church as governors\ntherein. 2. That those officers so set of God in the Church, are set in\nthe Church under the New Testament, which immediately concerns us, and\nnot under the Old Testament. 3. That these officers set of God as\ngovernors in the Church of the New Testament, are distinct from all\nother church governors, whether extraordinary or ordinary? For, by the\nthird of these, we have a distinct church officer delineated and\nparticularized: by the second we have this distinct church officer\nlimited to the time and state of the Church only under the New\nTestament, which is our case: and by the first of these, we have this\ndistinct New Testament officer's ruling power in the Church, and the\ndivine right thereof evidently demonstrated, by God's act in setting him\nthere in this capacity; (see Part 1. Chap. VI.;) so that by all put\ntogether, the consequence of this major proposition seems to be strong\nand unquestionable.\n\n_Minor_. But the governments named in 1 Cor. xii. 28, are officers which\nGod himself now under the New Testament hath set in the Church as\ngovernors therein, distinct from all other church governors, whether\nextraordinary or ordinary.\n\nThis minor or assumption is wholly grounded upon, and plainly contained\nin this text, and may thus be evidenced by parts.\n\n1. The church here spoken of [_in the church_] is the Church of Christ\nnow under the New Testament: for, 1. The church here mentioned, ver. 28,\nis the same with that ONE BODY mentioned, ver. 12, 13, of this chapter,\nas the whole context and coherence of the chapter evinceth; but that ONE\nBODY denotes not the Church of God under the Old Testament, but only the\nChurch of Christ under the New Testament; partly, inasmuch as it is\ncounted the Church of Christ, yea, (so intimate is the union between\nhead and members,) it is called CHRIST, _so also is_ CHRIST, ver. 12,\n(viz. not Christ personally considered, but Christ mystically\nconsidered, as comprehending head and body;) now this denomination of\nthe Church, viz. Christ, or the Church of Christ, &c., is peculiar to\nthe Church under the New Testament: for where in all the Scripture is\nthe Church of God under the Old Testament called the Church of Christ,\n&c.? and partly, inasmuch as all, both Jews and Gentiles, are\nincorporated jointly into this ONE BODY, and coalesce into one Church:\n\"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or\nGentiles, whether bond or free,\" 1 Cor. xii. 13. Now this union or\nconjunction of Jews and Gentiles into one body, one Church, is only done\nunder the New Testament; see Eph. ii. 11, to the end of the chapter. 2.\nThe officers here mentioned to be set in this Church, are only the New\nTestament officers, ver. 28. 3. The scope of the whole chapter is to\nredress abuses of spiritual gifts in the church of Corinth, which was a\nchurch under the New Testament; and therefore it would have been too\nremote for the apostle to have argued from the several distributions of\ngifts peculiar to the officers or members of the Church under the Old\nTestament.\n\n2. The governments here mentioned are officers set in this church as\ngovernors, or rulers therein: \"Hath set some in the Church, first,\napostles--governments.\" For clearing of this, consider the enumeration\nhere made; the denomination of these officers, governments; and the\nconstitution or placing of these governments in the Church. 1. The\nenumeration here made is evidently an enumeration of several sorts of\nchurch officers, some extraordinary, to endure but for a time, some\nordinary, to continue constantly in the Church; to this the current of\ninterpreters doth easily subscribe: and this the text itself plainly\nspeaks; partly, if we look at the matter, viz. the several officers\nenumerated, which are either extraordinary, these five, viz. apostles,\nprophets, powers, or miracles, gifts of healing, and kinds of tongues:\nthese continued but for a season, during the first founding of Christian\nchurches: (the proper and peculiar work of these extraordinary officers,\nwhat it was, is not here to be disputed.) Or ordinary, these three, viz.\n_teachers_, (there is the preaching elder,) _governments_, (there is the\nruling elder,) _helps_, (there is the deacon;) these are the officers\nenumerated; and however there be some other officers elsewhere\nmentioned, whence some conceive this enumeration not to be so absolutely\nperfect, yet this is undoubtedly evident, that it is an enumeration of\nofficers in the church: partly, this is evident, if we look at the\nmanner of the apostle's speech, which is in an enumerating form, viz.\nfirst, secondly, thirdly, afterwards, then: and partly, it is evident\nthat he intended to reckon up those officers that were distinct from all\nother parts of the mystical body of Christ, by his recapitulation, \"Are\nall apostles, are all prophets?\" &c., ver. 29, 30, i.e. not all, but\nonly some members of the body are set apart by God to bear these offices\nin the church. Now, if there be here a distinct enumeration of distinct\nofficers in the church, as is evident; then consequently _governments_\nmust needs be one of these distinct church officers, being reckoned up\namong the rest; and this is one step, that governments are in the roll\nof church officers enumerated. 2. The denomination of these officers,\n_governments_, evidenceth that they are governing officers, vested with\nrule in the Church. This word (as hath been noted in chap. II.) is a\nmetaphor from pilots or shipmasters governing of their ships by their\ncompass, helm, &c., James iii. 4, (who is hence called _governor_, viz.\nof the ship, Acts xxvii. 11; Rev. xviii. 17,) and it notes such officers\nas sit at the stern of the vessel of the Church, to govern and guide it\nin spirituals according to the will and mind of Christ: governments--the\nabstract is put for governors, the concrete: this name of governments\nhath engraven upon it an evident character of power for governing. But\nthis will be easily granted by all. All the doubt will be, whom the\napostle intended by these governments? Thus conceive, negatively, these\ncannot be meant, viz. not governors in general, for, besides that a\ngeneral exists not but in the particular kinds or individuals thereof, a\nmember of a body in general exists not but in this or that particular\nmember, eye, hand, foot, &c.: besides this, it is evident that Christ\nhath not only in general appointed governors in his Church, and left\nparticulars to the church or magistrate's determination, but hath\nhimself descended to the particular determination of the several kinds\nof officers which he will have in his Church; compare these places\ntogether, Eph. iv. 7, 11, 12; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Rom. xii. 7, 8: though in\nthe ordinance of magistracy God hath only settled the general, but for\nthe particular kinds of it, whether it should be monarchical, &c., that\nis left to the prudence of the several commonwealths to determine what\nis fittest for themselves. (See Part 2, chap. IX.) 2. Not masters of\nfamilies: for all families are not in the Church, pagan families are\nwithout. No family as a family is either a church or any part of a\nchurch, (in the notion that church is here spoken of;) and though\nmasters of families be governors in their own houses, yet their power is\nnot ecclesiastical but economical or domestical, common to heathens as\nwell as Christians. Not the political magistrate,[54] for the reasons\nhinted, (Part 1, chap. I.; see also Part 2, chap. IX.,) and for divers\nother arguments that might be propounded. 4. Not the prelatical bishops,\npretending to be an order above preaching presbyters, and to have the\nreins of all church government in their hands only; for, in Scripture\nlanguage, bishop and presbyter are all one order, (these words being\nonly names of the same officer;) this is evident by comparing Tit. i. 5,\nwith ver. 7. Hereunto also the judgment of antiquity evidently\nsubscribeth, accounting a bishop and a presbyter to be one and the same\nofficer in the church; as appears particularly in Ambrose, Theodoret,\nHierom, and others. Now, if there be no such order as prelatical\nbishops, consequently they cannot be governments in the church. 5. Not\nthe same with _helps_, as the former corrupt impressions of our Bibles\nseemed to intimate, which had it thus, _helps in governments_, which\nsome moderns seem to favor; but this is contrary to the original Greek,\nwhich signifies _helps, governments_; contrary to the ancient Syriac\nversion, which hath it thus, (as Tremel. renders it,) _and helpers, and\ngovernments_: and therefore this gross corruption is well amended in our\nlate printed Bible. _Helps, governments_, are here generally taken by\ninterpreters for two distinct officers. 6. Nor, finally, can the\nteaching elder here be meant; for that were to make a needless and\nabsurd tautology, the teacher being formerly mentioned in this same\nverse. Consequently, by _governments_ here, what can be intended, but\nsuch a kind of officer in the church as hath rule and government\ntherein, distinct from all governors forementioned? And doth not this\nlead us plainly to the ruling elder?\n\n3. These governments thus set in the Church, as rulers therein, are set\ntherein by God himself; God hath set some in the Church, _first,\napostles--governments--God hath set, put, made, constituted_, &c., (as\nthe word imports,) _in the Church_. What hath God set in the Church?\nviz. apostles and--governments, as well as apostles themselves. The\nverb, _hath set_, equally relates to all the sorts of officers\nenumerated. And is not that officer IA the Church of divine right, which\nGod himself, by his own act and authority, sets therein? Then doubtless\nthese governments are of divine right.\n\n4. Finally, these governments set in the Church under the New Testament\nas governors therein, and that by God himself, are distinct from not\nonly all governing officers without the Church, (as hath been showed,)\nbut also from all other governing officers within the church. For here\nthe apostles make a notable enumeration of the several sorts of church\nofficers, both extraordinary and ordinary, viz. eight in all. Five of\nthese being extraordinary, and to continue but for a season, for the\nmore effectual spreading and propagating of the gospel of Christ at\nfirst, and planting of Christian churches, viz. apostles, prophets,\npowers, gifts of healings, kinds of tongues: three of these being\nordinary, and to be perpetuated in the Church, as of continual use and\nnecessity therein, viz. teachers, governments, [i.e. ruling elders,] and\nhelps, [i.e. deacons, who are to help and relieve the poor and\nafflicted.] This is the enumeration. It is not contended, that it is\nabsolutely and completely perfect, for that some officers seem to be\nomitted and left out, which elsewhere are reckoned up, Eph. iv. 11; Rom.\nxii. 7, 8. Evangelists are omitted in the list of extraordinary\nofficers, and pastors are left out of the roll of the ordinary officers;\nand yet some conceive that pastors and teachers point not out two\ndistinct sorts of officers, but rather two distinct acts of the same\nofficers; and if this will hold, then pastors are sufficiently comprised\nunder the word teachers; yea, some think that both evangelists and\npastors are comprehended under the word teacher.[55] But, however, be\nthat as it will, these two things are evident, 1. That this enumeration\n(though evangelists and pastors be left out) is the fullest and\ncompletest enumeration of church officers which in any place is to be\nfound throughout all the New Testament. 2. That though we should grant\nthis defect in the enumeration, yet this is no way prejudicial to the\npresent argument, that governments here mentioned are ruling officers in\nthe Church, distinct from all other church officers that have rule; for\nthey are plainly and distinctly recited as distinct kinds of officers,\ndistinct from apostles, from prophets, from teachers, from all here\nmentioned. And thus interpreters[56] commonly expound this place, taking\ngovernments for a distinct kind of church officer from all the rest here\nenumerated.\n\nNow to sum up all that hath been said for the proof of the assumption;\nit is evident, 1. That the church here spoken of is the Church of Christ\nnow under the New Testament. 2. That the governments here mentioned, are\nofficers set in this church, (not out of the church,) as rulers\ngoverning therein. 3. That these governments set as rulers or governors\nin this church, are set there not by man, but by God himself; _God hath\nset in the Church--governments_. 4. And, finally, That these governments\nthus set in the Church, are distinct, not only from all governors out of\nthe Church, but also from all governing officers within the Church. And\nif all this laid together will not clearly evince the divine right of\nthe ruling elder, what will? Hence we may strongly conclude,\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore these governments in 1 Cor. xii. 28, are the\nruling elders we inquire after, and that of divine right.\n\nNow against the urging of 1 Cor. xii. 28, for the proof of the divine\nright of the ruling elders, divers exceptions are made, which are to be\nanswered before we pass to the third argument.\n\n_Except_. 1. The allegation of this place is too weak to prove the thing\nin question. For will any man that knoweth what it is to reason, reason\nfrom the general to the particular and special affirmatively? or will\never any man of common sense be persuaded that this consequence is good:\nThere were governors in the primitive church mentioned by the\nApostles--therefore they were lay governors? Surely I think not.[57]\n\n_Ans_. This exception hath a confident flourish of words, but they are\nbut words. It may be replied, 1. By way of concession, that to argue\nindeed from a general to a special, is no solid reasoning; as, This is a\nkingdom, therefore it is England; this is a city, therefore it is\nLondon; the apostle mentions government in the primitive Church,\ntherefore they are ruling elders: this were an absurd kind of reasoning.\n2. By way of negation. Our reasoning from this text for the ruling\nelder, is not from the general to a special affirmatively--there are\ngovernments in the Church, therefore ruling elders: but this is our\narguing--these governments here mentioned in 1 Cor. xii. 28, are a\nspecial kind of governing officers, set of God in the Church of Christ\nnow under the New Testament, and distinct from all other church\nofficers, whether extraordinary or ordinary: and therefore they are the\nruling elders which we seek after, and that by divine right. So that we\nargue from the enumeration of several kinds of church officers\naffirmatively: here is an enumeration or roll of divers kinds of church\nofficers of divine right; governments are one kind in the roll, distinct\nfrom the rest; therefore governments are of divine right, consequently\nruling elders; for none but they can be these governments, as hath been\nproved in the assumption. If the apostle had here mentioned governments\nonly, and none other kind of officers with them, there had been some\ncolor for this exception, and some probability that the apostle had\nmeant governors in general and not in special: but when the apostle sets\nhimself to enumerate so many special kinds of officers, apostles,\nprophets, teachers, &c., how far from reason is it to think that in the\nmidst of all these specials, governments only should be a general. 3. As\nfor Dr. Field's scoffing term of lay governors or lay elders, which he\nseems in scorn to give to ruling elders; it seems to be grounded upon\nthat groundless distinction of the ministry and people into clergy and\nlaity; which is justly rejected by sound orthodox writers[58], as not\nonly without but against the warrant of Scripture, clergy being nowhere\nappropriated to the ministry only, but commonly attributed to the whole\nchurch, 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. The Scripture term given to these officers is\n_ruling elders_, 1 Tim. v. 17; and so far as such, (though they be\nelected from among the people,) they are ecclesiastical officers.\n\n_Except_. 2. But it is not said here governors in the concrete, as\napostles, prophets, teachers are mentioned concretely, which are\ndistinct officers: but it is said governments, in the abstract, to note\nfaculties, not persons. The text may be thus resolved: The apostle first\nsets down three distinct orders, apostles, prophets, and teachers: then\nhe reckons up those common gifts of the Holy Ghost (and among the rest\nthe gift of governing) which were common to all three. So that we need\nnot here make distinct orders in the Church, but only distinct gifts\nwhich might be in one man.[59]\n\n_Ans_. 1. As the apostles, prophets, and teachers are here set down\nconcretely, and not abstractly, and are confessed to be three distinct\norders enumerated: so all the other five, though set down abstractly,\nare (by a metonymy of the adjunct for the subject) to be understood\nconcretely, helps for helpers; governments for governors, &c.; otherwise\nwe shall here charge the apostle with a needless impertinent tautology\nin this chapter, for he had formerly spoken of these gifts abstractly,\nver. 8-10, as being _all given to profit_ the Church _withal_, ver. 7;\nbut here, ver. 28-30, he speaks of these gifts as they are in several\ndistinct subjects, for the benefit of the organical body the church;\nelse what saith he here, more than he said before? 2. That all these\neight here enumerated, one as well as another, do denote, not distinct\noffices or acts of the same officer, but distinct officers, having\ndistinct administrations, and distinct gifts for those administrations,\nis evident, partly by the apostle's form of enumeration, _first,\nsecondly, thirdly, afterwards, then_ or _furthermore_: if he had\nintended only three sorts of officers, he would have stopped at thirdly,\nbut he goes on in an enumerating way, to show us those that follow are\ndistinct officers as well as those that go before; partly, by the\napostle's recapitulation, ver. 29, 30, which plainly points out\ndifferent officers, persons not gifts, besides those three: _Are all\napostles? are all prophets? are all teachers?_ (and here he stops not,\nbut reckons on) _are all workers of miracles? have all the gifts of\nhealing?_ &c. If it should be replied, But he doth not add, Are all\nhelps? are all governments? therefore these are not to be accounted\ndistinct officers from the rest; otherwise why should the apostle thus\nhave omitted them, had there been any such distinct officers in the\nChurch in his time? It may be replied, These two officers, helps and\ngovernments, are omitted in the recapitulation, ver. 29, 30, not that\nthe Church then had no such officers, for why then should they have been\ndistinctly mentioned in the enumeration of church officers, ver. 28? But\neither, 1. For that helps and governments were more inferior ordinary\nofficers, and not furnished with such extraordinary, or at least,\neminent gifts, as the other had, (which they abused greatly to pride,\ncontention, schism, and contempt of one another, the evils which the\napostle here labors so much to cure,) and so there was no such danger\nthat these helps and governments should run into the same distempers\nthat the other did. Or, 2. For that he would instruct these helps and\ngovernments to be content with their own stations and offices, (without\nstrife and emulation,) though they be neither apostles, nor prophets,\nnor teachers, nor any of the other enumerated, which were so ambitiously\ncoveted after; and the last verse seems much to favor this\nconsideration, _but covet earnestly the best gifts_, viz. which made\nmost for edification, not for ostentation.[60]\n\n_Except_. 3. But helps here are placed before governments, therefore it\nis not likely that governments were the ruling elders; Helps, i.e.\ndeacons, which is an inferior office, seeming here to be preferred\nbefore them.[61]\n\n_Ans_. This follows not. Priority of order is not always an argument of\npriority of worth, dignity, or authority. Scripture doth not always\nobserve exactness of order, to put that first which is of most\nexcellency: sometimes the pastor is put before the teacher, as Ephes.\niv. 11, sometimes the teacher before the pastor, as Rom. xii. 7, 8.\nPeter is first named of all the apostles, both in Matt. x. 2, and in\nActs i. 13, but we shall hardly grant the Papist's arguing thence to be\nsolid--Peter is first named, therefore he is the chief and head of all\nthe apostles; no more can we account this any good consequence--helps\nare set before governments, therefore governments are officers inferior\nto helps, consequently they cannot be ruling elders: this were bad\nlogic.\n\n_Except_. 4. But the word governments is general, and may signify either\nChristian magistrates, or ecclesiastical officers, as archbishops,\nbishops, or whatsoever other by lawful authority are appointed in the\nChurch.[62] And some of the semi-Erastians of our times, by governments\nunderstand the Christian magistracy, holding the Christian magistracy to\nbe an ecclesiastical administration.[63]\n\n_Ans_. 1. Governments, i.e. governors, (though in itself and singly\nmentioned, it be a general, yet) here being enumerated among so many\nspecials, is special, and notes the special kind of ruling elders, as\nhath been proved. 2. As for archbishops and diocesan bishops, they are\nnotoriously known to be, as such, no officers set in the Church by God,\nbut merely by the invention of man; therefore they have no part nor lot\nin this business, nor can here be meant. And if by others, by lawful\nauthority appointed in the Church, they mean those officers that God\nappoints well: if those whom man sets there without God, as chancellors,\ncommissioners, &c., such have as much power of government in the Church,\nas they are such, as archbishops and bishops, viz. just none at all by\nany divine warrant. 3. Nor can the civil Christian magistrate here be\nimplied. 1. Partly, because this is quite beside the whole intent and\nscope of this chapter, treating merely upon spiritual church-matters,\nnot at all of secular civil matters, viz: of spiritual gifts for the\nChurch's profit, ver. 1 to 12; of the Church herself as one organical\nbody, ver. 12 to 28; and of the officers which God hath set in this\norganical body, ver. 28, &c. Now here to crowd in the Christian\nmagistrate, which is a mere political governor, into the midst of these\nspiritual matters, and into the roll of these merely ecclesiastical\nofficers, how absurd is it! 2. Partly, because the magistrate, as such,\nis not set of God in the Church either as a church officer, or as a\nchurch member, (as hath been demonstrated formerly, chap. IX.;) and\nthough he become a Christian, that adds nothing to the authority of his\nmagistracy, being the privilege only of his person, not of his office.\n3. Partly, because when this was written to the Corinthians, the apostle\nwrites of such governments as had at that time their present actual\nbeing and existence in the Church: and neither then, nor divers hundreds\nof years after, were there any magistrates Christian, as hath been\nevidenced, chap. IX.[64]\n\n_Except_. 5. Teachers are here expressed, but pastors omitted; and\ntherefore well might governors be mentioned instead of pastors.[65]\n\n_Answ_. 1. Then, according to his judgment, pastors were a distinct kind\nof officers from teachers; otherwise the naming of teachers would have\nsufficiently implied pastors, without the addition of the word\ngovernors, one act or function of the office being put for the whole\noffice. But prelates did not love to hear of such a distinction.\nHowever, it is the judgment of many others no less learned or pious than\nthey, that in the same congregation where there are several ministers,\nhe that excels in exposition of scriptures, teaching sound doctrine, and\nconvincing gainsayers, may be designed hereunto, and called a teacher or\ndoctor: he that excels in application, and designed thereunto, may be\ncalled a pastor; but where there is only one minister in one particular\ncongregation, he is to perform, as far as he is able, the whole work of\nthe ministry. 2. If pastors are to be understood by this term governors,\nas contradistinct from teachers, formerly enumerated in the text; doth\nnot this seem to devolve the matter of government so wholly upon the\npastor, as that the teacher hath nothing to do with it? and hereby both\npastor and teacher are wronged at once: the teacher, while power of\ngoverning is denied him, which belongs to him as well as to the pastor;\nthe teacher being a minister of the word, hath power of administration\nof the sacraments and discipline, as well as the pastor: the pastor,\nwhile he consequently is deprived of the necessary and comfortable\nassistance of the teacher in point of government. Therefore the pastor\ncannot here be intended by governors. 3. Bilson himself was not very\nconfident of this gloss, and therefore he immediately adds, \"If this\ncontent you not, I then deny they are all ecclesiastical functions that\nare there specified,\" &c. What then doth he make them? viz. he makes\ndivers of them, and governments among the rest, to be but several gifts,\nwhereof one and the same officer might be capable. And a little after he\ningenuously confesses he cannot tell what these governors were, saying,\n\"I could easily presume, I cannot easily prove what they were. The\nmanner and order of those wonderful gifts of' God's Spirit, after so\nmany hundreds may be conjectured, cannot be demonstrated--governors they\nwere, or rather governments, (for so the apostle speaketh,) i.e. gifts\nof wisdom, discretion, and judgment, to direct and govern the whole\nchurch, and every particular member thereof, in the manifold dangers and\ndistresses which those days did not want. Governors also they might be\ncalled, that were appointed in every congregation to hear and appease\nthe private strifes and quarrels that grew betwixt man and man, lest the\nChristians, to the shame of themselves, and slander of the gospel,\nshould pursue each other for things of this life before the magistrates,\nwho then were infidels; of these St. Paul speaketh, 1 Cor. vi. 1-7.\nThese governors and moderators of their brethren's quarrels and\ncontentions I find, others I find not in the apostle's writings, but\nsuch as withal were watchmen and feeders of the flock.\" Thus\ninconsistent he is with himself: one while these governors must be\npastors; another while arbitrators or daysmen about private differences;\nanother while gifts, not officers; another while he cannot easily prove\nwhat they were. But they have been proved to be ruling elders, and the\nproof still stands good, notwithstanding all his or others' exceptions.\n\n_Argum_. III. The third argument for the divine right of the mere ruling\nelder shall be drawn from 1 Tim. v. 17, \"Let the elders that rule well,\nbe counted worthy of double honor, especially they that labor in the\nword and doctrine.\" From which words we may thus argue for the divine\nright of the ruling elder:\n\n_Major_. Whatsoever officers in the Church are, according to the word of\nChrist, styled elders, invested with rule in the Church, approved of God\nin their rule, and yet distinct from all them that labor in the word and\ndoctrine; they are the ruling elders in the Church which we inquire\nafter, and that by divine right.\n\nThis proposition seems clear and unquestionable. For, 1. If there be a\ncertain kind of church officer which Christ in his word calls an elder,\n2. Declares to have rule in his church, 3. Approves in this his rule,\nand, 4. Distinguished from him that labors in the word and doctrine;\nthis is plainly the ruling elder, and here is evidently the divine right\nof his office. Such a divine approbation of his office, testified in\nScripture, implies no less than a divine institution thereof.\n\n_Minor_. But the officers mentioned in 1 Tim. v. 17, are, according to\nthe word of Christ, styled elders, invested with rule in the church:\napproved of God in their rule, and yet distinct from all them that labor\nin the word and doctrine. This assumption may be thus evidenced by\nparts.\n\n1. The officers mentioned here in this word of Christ, are styled\nelders. This Greek word translated _elder_, is used in the New Testament\nchiefly in three several senses: 1. For men of ancient time, not now\nliving; and so it is opposed to modern: Tradition of elders, Matt. xv.\n2, i.e. of them of old time, see Matt. v. 21. 2. For elders in age now\nliving; so it is opposed to younger, 1 Tim. v. 1; 1 Pet. v. 5. 3. For\nelders in function or office, opposed to private men not in office, as\nActs xiv. 23; and in this last sense it is to be taken in this place, an\noffice of ruling being here ascribed to these elders. They are called\nelders, say some, because for the most part they were chosen out of the\nelder sort of men: others better, from the maturity of knowledge,\nwisdom, gifts, gravity, piety, &c., which ought to be in them. This name\nelder seems to have rule and authority written upon it, when applied to\nany church officer; and it is by the Septuagint often ascribed to rulers\npolitical, _elders in the gate_, Judges viii. 14; Ruth iv. 2, 3; 1 Sam.\nv. 3; 1 Chron. xi. 3. In this place (as it is well noted by some[66])\nthe word elders is a genus, a general attribute, agreeing both to them\nthat rule well, and also to those that labor in the word and doctrine:\nthe one sort only rule; the other sort both rule and preach; but both\nsorts are elders.\n\n2. The officers here mentioned are not only styled elders, but invested\nwith rule in the church. For it is plain both by the text and context\nduly considered, and the apostle's scope in writing of this epistle, 1\nTim. iii. 15, that these elders are officers in the Church. And that in\nthe church they are vested with rule appears not only by their name of\nelders, which when applied to officers, imports rule, authority, &c., as\nhath been said; but also by the adjunct participle _that rule_, or\n_ruling_, annexed to elders--_Let the elders ruling well_. So that here\nwe have not only the office, the thing, but the very name of ruling\nelders. The word seems to be a military term, for captains and\ncommanders in an army, _foremost slanders_, (as the word imports,) that\nlead on and command all the rest that follow them: hence metaphorically\nused for the foremost-standers, rulers, governors in the church. It\nnoteth not only those that go before others by doctrine, or good\nexample: but that govern and rule others by authority. For, 1. Thus the\nword is used in Scripture: \"One that ruleth well his own house, having\nhis children in subjection with all gravity,\" 1 Tim. iii. 4: where it\nplainly notes an authoritative ruling. Again, \"If a man know not how to\nrule his own house,\" 1 Tim. iii. 5. And again, \"Ruling their children\nand their own houses well,\" 1 Tim. iii. 12. And can any man be so absurd\nas to think that a master of a family hath not a proper authoritative\nrule over his own children and family, but rules them only by doctrine\nand example?\n\n2. Thus learned divines[67] and accurate Grecians[68] use the word to\ndenote authority: so that the Holy Ghost here calling them ruling\nelders, implies they are vested with rule: and those that deny this\nplace to hold out two sorts of elders, yet confess it holds out two\nsorts of acts, ruling and preaching.\n\n3. These ruling elders are here approved of God in their rule; and that\ntwo ways, viz: 1. In that God's Spirit here commends their ruling, being\nduly discharged, _ruling well, excellently_, &c. Did no rule in the\nChurch belong to them for matter, God would never command or approve\nthem for the matter. He cannot be accounted with God to do any thing\nwell, that hath no right to do it at all. 2. In that God's Spirit here\ncommands their well ruling to be honorably rewarded. _Let them be\ncounted worthy of double honor:_ or, _Let them be dignified with double\nhonor_. Here is not only reward, but an eminent reward appointed them,\nand that urged from Scripture, ver. 18. Where God thus appoints rewards,\nhe approves that for which he rewards; and what God thus approves is of\ndivine right. See part 1, chap. V.\n\n4. Yet, finally, These elders, vested with rule in the Church, and\ndivinely approved in their rule, are distinct from all them that labor\nin the word and doctrine. This may thus he evidenced from the text, as\nsome[69] have well observed: For, 1. Here is a general, under which the\nseveral kinds of officers here spoken of are comprehended, _elders_; all\nhere mentioned are elders. 2. Here are two distinct kinds of elders,\nviz: _those that rule well_, there is one kind; and _they that labor in\nthe word_ (as the pastors) _and doctrine_, (as the doctors and\nteachers,) here is the other kind. 3. Here are two participles\nexpressing these two species or kinds of elders--_ruling_, and\n_laboring_: those only rule, that is all their work, and therefore\nhere are called ruling elders; not because _they_ alone rule, but\nbecause their only work is to rule: but these not only rule, but, over\nand besides, _they_ labor in the word and doctrine. 4. Here are two\ndistinct articles distinctly annexed to these two participles--_they\nthat rule; they that labor_. 5. Finally, here is an eminent disjunctive\nparticle set betwixt these two kinds of elders, these two participles,\nthese two articles, evidently distinguishing one from the other, viz.\nespecially _they that labor in the word_, &c., intimating, that as there\nwere some ruling elders that did labor in the word and doctrine, so\nthere were others that did rule, and not labor in the word: both were\nworthy of double honor, but especially they that both ruled and labored\nin the word also. And wheresoever this word, here translated\n_especially_, is used in all the New Testament, it is used to\ndistinguish thing from thing, person from person, that are spoken of;\nas, \"Let us do good to all, but especially to those of the household of\nfaith,\" Gal. vi. 10: therefore there were some of the household of\nfaith, and some that were not; and accordingly we must put a difference\nin doing good to them. \"All the saints salute you, especially those of\nC\u00e6sar's household;\" some saints not of his household: all saluted them,\nbut especially those of C\u00e6sar's household. \"He that provides not for\nhis own, especially for them of his own house, he hath denied the\nfaith,\" 1 Tim. v. 8. A believer is to provide for his friends and\nkindred, but especially _for those of his own house_, wife and children.\nSee also 1 Tim. iv. 10; Tit. i. 11; 2 Tim. iv. 13; 2 Pet. ii. 10; Acts\nxx. 38, and xxvi. 3; in all which places the word _especially_ is used\nas a disjunctive particle, to distinguish one thing from another,\nwithout which distinction we shall but make nonsense in interpreting\nthose places. And generally the best interpreters[70] do from this text\nconclude, that there were two sorts of elders, viz: the ruling elder,\nthat only ruled; the preaching elder, that besides his ruling, labored\nin the word and doctrine also.\n\nNow, therefore, seeing the officers here mentioned are, 1. According to\nthe word of Christ, (for this is the word of Christ,) styled elders; 2.\nVested with rule; 3. Approved of God in their rule; and yet, 4. Distinct\nfrom all that labor in the word and doctrine, as hath been particularly\nproved; we may conclude, that,\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore the officers here mentioned are the ruling\nelders in the Church which we inquire after, and that by divine right.\n\nBut against this place of 1 Tim. i. 17, and the argument from it, divers\ncavils and exceptions are made; let them have a brief solution.\n\n_Except_. 1. There were two sorts of elders, some laboring in the word\nand doctrine, some taking care of the poor, viz. deacons; both were\nworthy of double honor, especially they that labored in the word,\n&c.[71]\n\n_Ans_. 1. This is a new distinction of elders without warrant of\nScripture. Deacons are nowhere in all the New Testament styled\nelders;[72] nay, they are contradistinguished from elders, both teaching\nand ruling. \"He that giveth _let him do it_ with simplicity: he that\nruleth, with diligence,\" Rom. xii. 8. \"Helps, governments,\" 1 Cor. xii.\n28. Compare also Tit. i. 5, 6, &c., 1 Tim. iii. 2, &c., with 1 Tim. iii.\n8, &c. 2. As deacons are not elders, so deacons have no rule in the\nchurch. It is true, they are to \"rule their children and their own\nhouses well,\" 1 Tim. iii. 12; this is only family rule: but as for the\nchurch, their office therein is to be _helps_, 1 Cor. xii. 28; _to\ndistribute_, Rom. xii. 8; _to serve tables_, Acts vi. 2, 3; but no rule\nis ascribed to them.\n\n_Except_. 2. But by ruling well, some understand living well, leading a\nholy, exemplary life. The apostle would have ministers not only to live\nwell themselves, but also to feed others by the word and doctrine; they\nthat live well are to be double honored, especially they who labor in\nthe word, &c., as 1 Thess. v. 12, 13.[73]\n\n_Ans_. 1. The apostle here speaks rather of officers than of acts of\noffice: of persons rather than of duties, if his phrase be observed. 2.\nLiving well is not ruling well here in the apostle's sense, who intends\nthe rule of elders over others; he that lives well rules well over\nhimself; not over others: else all that live well were church rulers;\nthey conduct by example, do not govern by authority, Altar. Damasc. c.\nxii. 8. If well ruling be well living, then double honor, double\nmaintenance from the church is due for well living, (1 Tim. v. 17, 18,)\nconsequently all that live well deserve this double honor. 4. This seems\nto intimate that ministers deserve double honor for living well, though\nthey preach not. _How absurd_! 5. D. Downham, once pleased with this\ngloss, after confessed it was not safe.\n\n_Except_. 3. Those that rule well may be meant of aged, infirm,\nsuperannuated bishops, who cannot labor in the word and doctrine.[74]\n\n_Ans_. 1. Here is no speech of prelatical bishops, but of ruling and\npreaching elders in this text. 2. How shall old, decrepit bishops rule\nwell, when they cannot labor in the word and doctrine? 3. By this gloss,\nthe preaching elders that labor in the word and doctrine, should be\npreferred before the most ancient bishop in double honor; such doctrine\nwould not long since have been very odious and apocryphal to our late\nprelates. 4. Those preachers that have faithfully and constantly spent\ntheir strength, and worn out themselves with ministerial labor, that\nthey cannot rule nor preach any longer, are yet worthy of double honor\nfor all their former travels in the service of Christ and his Church.\n\n_Except_. 4. Among ministers some did preach, others only administered\nthe sacraments; so Paul showeth that he preached and \"labored more than\nall the apostles,\" 1 Cor. xv. 10; but baptized few or none, 1 Cor i. 14,\nleaving that to be performed by others; and when Paul and Barnabas were\ncompanions, and their travels were equal, yet Paul is noted to have been\nthe chief speaker, (Acts xiv. 12:) all were worthy of double honor, but\nespecially they who labored in the word and doctrine.[75]\n\n_Ans_. 1. This gloss imagineth such a ministry in the apostles' times as\nthe prelates had erected of late in their days, viz: many dumb dogs that\ncould not bark nor preach at all, yet could administer the sacraments by\nthe old service-book. But the apostles, as Cartwright[76] observes,\nallowed no such ministers, will have every bishop or preaching elder to\nbe both \"apt to teach, _and_ able to convince,\" 1 Tim. iii. 2; Tit. i.\n9. So that it was far from Paul to countenance a non-preaching or\nseldom-preaching ministry, by allowing any honor at all, much less a\ndouble honor, to such. Sure, preaching is one part, yea, a most\nprincipal part or duty of the minister's office, (as hath been evidenced\nbefore, Part 2, Chap. VII.,) and shall he be counted worthy of double\nhonor that neglects a principal duty of his office? Nay, he deserves not\nthe very name of such an officer in the church: why should he be called\na pastor that doth not feed? or a teacher, that doth not teach his\nflock? &c., saith Chrysost. Hom. xv. in 1 Timothy. 2. Why should Paul's\nlaboring be restrained here to his preaching only? when Paul speaks of\nhis own labor elsewhere, he speaks of it in another sense, 2 Cor. xi.\n17, \"in labor and weariness\"--compare it with the context; and in this\nplace judicious Calvin seems rather to interpret it of other manner of\nlabor, and Pareus extends it, besides preaching, to divers other labors\nwhich Paul did undergo. 3. What warrant doth this exception hold out for\ntwo sorts of ministers here pretended, some _preaching_, others _only\nadministering the sacraments_? Thus, _Paul preached much, baptised but\nfew_: therefore, _there were some that only administered the\nsacraments_: well concluded. Yet Paul baptized some, 1 Cor. i. 14, 16,\ndistributed the Lord's supper to some, Acts xx. 7, 11; so that he both\npreached and dispensed the sacraments. Let any show where any person\ndispensed the sacraments that was not a preacher. Again, _Paul and\nBarnabas equally travelled together, but Paul was chief speaker_: what\nthen? therefore _some labored in the word, others in the sacraments\nonly_. This is woful logic. 4. To whomsoever the power of dispensing the\nsacraments was given by Christ, to them also the power of preaching was\ngiven; dispensing the word and sacraments are joined in the same\ncommission, Matt, xxviii. 18-20: what Christ joins together let not man\nput asunder. 5. Touching the preaching elder there is mentioned only one\nact peculiar to his office, viz. _laboring in the word_, &c.; but,\ntaking a part for the whole, we may understand his dispensing the\nsacraments also, and what else is peculiar to the preaching elder's\noffice, though for brevity's sake it be not here named.[77]\n\n_Except_. 5. By elders that rule well may be meant certain governors, or\ninferior magistrates, chosen to compose controversies or civil strifes.\nSuitable hereunto is the late Erastian gloss, that by elders ruling well\nmay be meant kings, parliament-men, and all civil governors.[78]\n\n_Ans_. 1. It is well known that in the primitive times there was no\nChristian magistrate in the Church, and for the Church to choose heathen\njudges or magistrates to be arbitrators or daysmen in civil\ncontroversies, is a thing utterly condemned by the apostle, 1 Cor. vi.\n1, &c. 2. The apostle speaks here of ecclesiastical, not of civil\nofficers, as the latter phrase intimates. The main scope of this epistle\nwas to instruct Timothy how to behave himself, not in the commonwealth,\nbut in the Church of God, (1 Tim. iii. 15,) and here he speaks of such\nofficers as were in being in the Church at that time. 3. If kings,\nparliament-men, and all civil governors be these ruling elders, then\nministers have not only an equal share with them in government by this\ntext, which the Erastians will not like well; but also are to have a\nsuperior honor or maintenance to kings, parliament-men, and all civil\ngovernors. Certainly the magistrates will never triumph in this gloss,\nnor thank them that devised it. 4. Sutlive seems to be against this\nopinion, (though no great friend to ruling elders,) saying Beza bestows\nmany words to prove that the judges in 1 Cor. vi. were not of the number\nof presbyters: which truly I myself should easily grant him. For there\nwere none such ever constituted. 5. This is a novel interpretation, as\nsome observe,[79] unknown among ancient writers.\n\n_Except_. 6. Those words [_especially they who labor in the word and\ndoctrine_] are added to the former explanatively, to teach us who they\nare that rule well, viz. _they who labor much in the word and doctrine_,\nand not to distinguish them that labor in the word, from elders ruling\nwell; as if Paul had said, \"Let the elders that rule well be counted\nworthy of double honor, greatly laboring in the word,\" &c. For the word\ntranslated _especially_ here more aptly signifies _much, greatly_, than\nespecially. For though with the adversative _but_ along with it, it\nsignifieth especially, yet alone (as it is here) it signifies _much,\ngreatly_.[80]\n\n_Ans_. 1. If this sentence [_especially they who labor_, &c.] were added\nonly to explain who are well-ruling elders, viz. such as greatly labor\nin the word, &c., then few of the prelatical bishops were to be counted\nwell-ruling elders, for very few, if any of them, were guilty of\nlaboring greatly in the word and doctrine. 2. Then also the apostle\nwould have said, either who especially labor, or simply without the\narticle, especially laboring; then especially, they who labor, as here\nhe doth, carrying his speech rather to distinct persons and officers,\nthan to distinct duties or actions. 3. This word translated\n_especially_, hath been already in the minor proposition proved to be\nrather disjunctive, than explanatory; a term of distinction to point out\na several sort of elders from only ruling elders, rather than a term of\nexplication, signifying who are to be reputed these well-ruling elders.\n4. The word _especially_ is used for a term of distinction, even in\nthose places where the adversative _but_ is not joined to it, as in Tit.\ni. 10, \"For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers,\nespecially they of the circumcision:\" where _especially_ distinguishes\n_them of the circumcision_, from all other _vain talkers, and\ndeceivers_; and in 1 Tim. iv. 10, \"Who is the Saviour of all men,\nespecially of them that believe;\" here _especially_ without _but_\ndistinguishes them that believe from all other men, as capable of a\nspecial salvation from God; if here it were not a note of distinction,\naccording to this gloss, we should thus read the place, \"Who is the\nSaviour of all men, greatly believing;\" but this were cold comfort to\nweak Christians of little faith. So here _especially_, though _but_ be\nwanting, distinguished them that labor in the word and doctrine, from\nthem that labor not therein, and yet rule well.\n\n_Except_. 7. It is one thing to preach, another thing to labor in the\nword and doctrine. If there be here any distinction of elders it is\nbetween those that labor more abundantly and painfully, and between\nthose that labor not so much. This objection takes much with some.[81]\nB. Bilson much presses this objection from the emphasis of the word\n_laboring_; signifying endeavoring any thing with greater striving and\ncontention, &c., to this sense, \"Let the elders that rule well be\ncounted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor and sweat,\n&c., in the word--who give themselves even to be tired and broken with\nlabors;\" and this, saith he, is the genuine signification of the word\ntranslated laboring, when it is borrowed from the labor of the body, to\ndenote the contention or striving of the mind, &c.[82]\n\n_Ans_. 1. This gloss takes it for granted, that this text speaks only of\npreaching, or the ministry of the word, and therein of the lesser or\ngreater pains taken: which (besides that it begs the thing in question)\nmakes the ministry of the word common to both sorts here distinctly\nspoken of, whereas rather the plain current of the text makes ruling\ncommon to both, over and beyond which the preaching elder _labors in the\nword_. 2. Doth not this interpretation allow a double honor to ministers\nthat labor not so much as others in the word? And can we think that the\nlaborious Paul intended to dignify, patronize, or encourage idle drones,\nlazy, sluggish, seldom preachers? Ministers must be exceeding instant\nand laborious in their ministry, 2 Tim. iv. 1-3. If this were the sense\nonly to prefer the greater before the less labor in the ministry, the\napostle would have used this order of words, \"Let the elders that rule\nwell be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor,\" &c.,\ntake upon themselves more weighty cares. For those words (in the word\nand doctrine) should either have been quite omitted, as now was\nexpressed, or should have been inserted immediately after them that rule\nwell, and before the word especially, to this effect, \"Let the elders\nthat rule well and preach the word and doctrine well, be counted worthy\nof double honor; but especially those who labor much in well ruling and\nin well preaching:\" in such an expression the case had been very clear\nand evident. 4. Should this comment stand, that they who labor more in\nthe ministry than others should have more honor, more maintenance, than\nothers, how many emulations and contentions were this likely to procure?\nWho shall undertake to proportion the honor and reward, according to\nthe proportion of every minister's labor? 5. As for the criticism of the\nword _laboring_, which Bilson lays so much stress upon, these things are\nevident, 1. That here _laboring_, signifies emphatically nothing else\nbut that labor, care, diligence, solicitude, &c., which the nature of\nthe pastoral office requires in every faithful pastor; as is implied 1\nThess. v., 12, 13, \"Know them which labor among you, and are over you in\nthe Lord;\" and the apostle saith that every minister \"shall receive a\nreward according to his own labor,\" 1 Cor. iii. 8. Such labor and\ndiligence also is required in them that rule, whilst they are charged to\nrule _with diligence_, Rom. xii. 8, which is as much as _with labor_:\nyea, the common charity of Christians hath its labor; and this very word\n_labor_ is ascribed thereunto, _labor of love_, 1 Thess. i. 3; Heb. vi.\n10. 2. That if the apostle had here intended the extraordinary labor of\nsome ministers above others, not ordinarily required of all, he would\nhave taken a more emphatical word to have set it out, as he is wont to\ndo in some other cases, as in 2 Cor. xi. 27, \"In labor and weariness.\" 1\nThess. ii. 9, \"For ye remembered, brethren, our labor and weariness.\" 6.\nFinally, \"If there be but one kind of church officers here designed,\nthen,\" as saith the learned Cartwright, \"the words (_especially those\nthat labor_) do not cause the apostle's speech to rise, but to fall; not\nto go forward, but to go backward; for to teach worthily and singularly\nis more than to teach painfully; for the first doth set forth all that\nwhich may be required in a worthy teacher, where the latter noteth one\nvirtue only of pains taking.\"\n\n_Except_. 8. Though it could be evinced, that here the apostle speaks of\nsome other elders, besides the ministers of the word, yet what advantage\ncan this be for the proof of ruling elders? For the apostle being to\nprove that the ministers of the word ought to be honored, i.e.\nmaintained; why might he not use this general proposition, that all\nrulers, whether public or domestic, whether civil or ecclesiastical, are\nto be honored? And when the apostle speaketh of the qualifications of\ndeacons, he requires them to be such as have ruled their own houses\nwell.[83]\n\n_Ans_. 1. This slight gloss might have appeared more tolerable and\nplausible, were it not, partly, that the grand scope of the apostle in\nthis chapter and epistle is to direct about church officers and church\naffairs, as both the context, and 1 Tim. iii. 14, 15, clearly evidence;\nand partly, had the word rulers been expressed alone in the text, and\nthe word elders left out: but seeing that the apostle speaks not\ngenerally of them that rule well, but particularly of the elders that\nrule well in the Church; here is no place for this poor faint gloss. 2.\nHad the apostle here intended such a lax and general proposition for all\nsorts of rulers, then had he also meant that an honorable maintenance is\ndue from the Church to domestic as well as public, yea, to civil as well\nas ecclesiastical rulers: then the Church should have charge enough:\nyea, and then should ministers of the word (according to this\ninterpretation) have more honor and maintenance than any other rulers,\ndomestic or public, civil or ecclesiastical. Magistrates will never\nthank him for this gloss. 3. Though some kind of skill to rule and\ngovern be required in deacons, yet that is no public rule in the Church,\nbut a private rule in their own houses only, which the apostle mentions,\n1 Tim. iii. 12.\n\n_Except_. 9. But these Well-ruling presbyters may be referred to these\npastors and teachers which were resident in every church, who therefore\nare properly said to have care and inspection of the faithful, as being\naffixed to that place for that end; but the word _laboring_, or _they\nthat labor_, may be referred to them who travelled up and down for the\nvisiting and confirming of the churches.[84] \"There were some that\nremained in some certain places, for the guiding and governing of such\nas were already won by the preaching of the gospel: others that\ntravelled with great labor and pains from place to place to spread the\nknowledge of God into all parts, and to preach Christ crucified to such\nas never heard of him before. Both these were worthy of double honor,\nbut the latter that builded not upon another man's foundation, more\nespecially than the former, that did but keep that which others had\ngotten, and govern those that others have gained.\"[85]\n\n_Ans_. 1. If this be the sense, that there were some ministers fixed,\nand limited to particular places and churches; others unfixed, having an\nunlimited commission, and these are to be especially honored: then the\nmeaning is, that the apostles and evangelists who were unfixed, and had\nunlimited commissions, and laid the foundation, were to be especially\nhonored above pastors and teachers that were fixed and limited, and only\nbuilt upon their foundation. But how should this be the meaning? For\nthis seems a needless exhortation; what church would not readily yield\nan especial honor to apostles and evangelists above pastors and\nteachers? This would savor too much of self-seeking in the apostle, and\nproviding for his own honor. This implies that the text hath reference\nto apostles and evangelists, whereas it evidently speaks only of\nordinary ruling and preaching presbyters.\n\n2. If this be the sense of Dr. Field and Bilson, that some mere\nordinary presbyters travelled laboriously to lay the foundation of\nChristianity, others were fixed to certain places to build upon that\nfoundation: this seems to be false; for we read that mere ordinary\npresbyters were ordained for several cities and places as their peculiar\ncharges, whom they were to feed, and with whom they were to remain, as\nActs xiv. 23; Tit. i. 5; herewith compare Acts xx. 28; 1 Pet. v. 2; 1\nThess. v. 12. But that mere ordinary presbyters were ordained and\nemployed in the Church without limitation of commission, where can it be\nevidenced in all the Scriptures? Wandering presbyters are nowhere\ncommended; wandering stars are condemned, Jude, ver. 13.\n\n3. To refer the word _laboring_ to them that travelled from place to\nplace for visiting and confirming of the churches, is very weak and\nunjustifiable in this place; for this clashes with Dr. Field's former\ngloss, (mentioned Except. 4, limiting _laboring_ to preaching.) But any\nthing for a present shift. This word is sometimes given to the apostle,\nas 1 Cor. xv. 10; 2 Cor. xi. 27: but where are apostles and evangelists\ncalled _laboring_, merely in respect of their travelling from place to\nplace, to lay the foundation of Christianity, thereby to distinguish\nthem from ordinary pastors and teachers? Nay, the apostle himself makes\n_them that rule_, and _them that labor_, the same, 1 Thess. v. 12, 13.\nSo here in 1 Tim. v. 17, _they that rule_--_and they that labor_--are\nthe same, i.e. both of them ordinary presbyters, both of them ruling,\nonly to one of them the office of _laboring_ in the word and doctrine is\nsuperadded; yea, the very women that _were_ godly were said _to labor in\nthe Lord_, Rom. xvi. 6, 12, not for their far travels up and down\nseveral countries to propagate the gospel, for where are Mary and Persis\nreported to have done this? Yet doubtless such good women privately\nlabored much to bring in others, especially of their own sex, to hear\nthe apostles, and entertain the gospel; and if the women may be said to\n_labor much in the Lord_, in respect of their private endeavors, how\nmuch more may labor be ascribed to presbyters in respect of both their\nprivate and public employments! So that this word _laboring_, which is\napplied in Scripture not only to ordinary presbyters, but also to women,\ncannot (without violence) be drawn peculiarly to signify apostles and\nevangelists, as this exception intends.\n\n_Except_. 10. Seeing in every minister of the word three things are\nrequisite, unblamableness of life, dexterity of governing, and integrity\nof doctrine; the two first are commended here, but especially the labor\nin doctrine above them both; therefore here are set down not a two-fold\norder of presbyters, but only two parts of the pastoral office,\npreaching and governing; both which the apostle joins in the office of\npastors, 1 Thes. v. 2-13.[86] \"The guides of the church are worthy of\ndouble honor, both in respect of governing and teaching, but especially\nfor their pains in teaching; so noting two parts or duties of\npresbyterial offices, not two sorts of presbyters.\"[87]\n\n_Ans_. 1. It is true, pastors have the power both of ruling and\npreaching belonging to their office, as is intimated, 1 Thes. v. 12, 13,\nand Heb. xiii. 7, and in other places; but doth it therefore follow,\nthat none have the power of ruling, but those that have the power of\npreaching? or that this text, or 1 Tim. v. 17, intends only those rulers\nthat preach? 2. Bilson, in this exception, confesseth that _laboring_\nbelongs to ordinary fixed pastors, and therefore contradicts himself in\nhis former objection, wherein he would have appropriated it to unfixed\napostles and evangelists; yea, by this gloss it is granted, that\npreaching presbyters are to be more honored than non-preaching ruling\nprelates. These are miserable shifts and evasions, whereby they are\nnecessitated thus to wound their own friends, and to cross their own\nprinciples. 3. According to this gloss, this should be the sense, \"Let\nthe ministers that rule well by good life, and skilful government, be\ncounted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word\nand doctrine.\" Now doth not this tacitly insinuate, that some ministers\nmay rule well, and be worthy of double honor, though they labor not in\nthe word and doctrine? and how absurd were this? But if the text be\ninterpreted not of several acts of the same office, but of several sorts\nof officers, this absurdity is prevented, _Let ruling elders be doubly\nhonored, especially those that both rule and preach_. 4. The text\nevidently speaks not of duties, but of persons; not of acts, but of\nagents; not of offices, but of officers; for it is not said, \"Let the\nelders be counted worthy of double honor, for well ruling; especially\nfor laboring\"--but, _Let the elders that rule well, especially they that\nlabor in the word, &c._ So that this gloss is vain, and against the\nplain letter of the text.\n\n_Except_. 11. Though the emphasis of the word, _they that labor_, be not\nto be neglected, yet the difference betwixt presbyters is not put by\nthat word, but by those (_in the word and doctrine_.) This does not\nsignify two kinds of presbyters, but two offices of ministers and\npastors; one general, to _rule well_; another special, _to labor in the\nword and doctrine_. To rule well, saith Hierom, is to fulfil his office;\nor, as the Syriac interpreter expounds it, \"to behave themselves well in\ntheir place;\" or as the Scripture speaks, _To go in and out before God's\npeople as becomes them, going before them in good works in their\nprivate conversations, and also in their public administrations_; whence\nthe apostle makes here a comparison betwixt the duties of ministers\nthus, \"All presbyters that generally discharge their office well are\nworthy of double honor; especially they who labor in the word, which is\na primary part of their office.\"[88]\n\n_Ans_. 1. For substance this objection is the same with objection 10,\nalready answered, therefore much more needs not to be added. 2. It is to\nbe noted, that the apostle saith not, \"Let the presbyters that rule well\nbe counted worthy of double honor, especially because they labor in the\nword--for then he should have pointed at the distinct offices of\nministers;\" but he saith, _especially they that labor_, which clearly\ncarries the sense to the distinction of elders themselves, who have\ndistinct employments. 3. If preaching presbyters only should here be\nmeant, and under that phrase (_that rule well_) their whole office in\ngeneral, and the right managing thereof, should be contained, whereas\n_laboring in the word and doctrine_ (as this exception implies) is but\none part thereof, then hence it would inevitably follow, that a minister\ndeserves more honor for the well administration of one part of his\noffice only, than for the well managing of the whole, which is absurd!\nHere therefore the apostle doth not compare one primary part of the\npastor's office, with the whole office and all the parts thereof; but\none sort of presbyters with another, distinguishing the mere ruling\npresbyter from the ruling and preaching presbyter, as the acute and\nlearned Whitaker hath well observed.\n\n_Except_. 12. It is evident in the text itself, that all these elders\nhere meant were worthy of double honor, whether they labored or\ngoverned; which by St. Paul's proofs, presently following, and by the\nconsent of all old and new writers, is meant of their maintenance at the\ncharges of the Church.[89] Now that lay-judges and censors of manners\nwere in the apostle's time found at the expense of the Church, or by\nGod's law ought to have their maintenance at the people's hands, till I\nsee it justly proved, I cannot believe it: which yet must be proved\nbefore this construction can be admitted.[90]\n\n_Ans_. 1. This word _honor_ signifies (after the custom of the Hebrews,\nExod. xx. 12) all pious offices and relief. This phrase (_double honor_)\ninterpreters expound either absolutely or comparatively. Absolutely\nthus: _double honor_, i.e. great honor, so some; maintenance in this\nlife, happiness in the life to come, so others; honor of reverence to\ntheir persons, and of maintenance for their labors, so Chrysostom, of\nwhich saith Calvin, \"That Chrysostom interprets double honor to be\nmaintenance and reverence, I impugn not.\" Comparatively thus: _double\nhonor_ here seems to relate to what was before spoken, ver. 3, \"Honor\nwidows that are widows indeed.\" Now here he intimates, that though\nwidows are to be honored, yet these should be much more honored; they\nshould have single, these double honor. In this last sense, which seems\nmost genuine, it seems most likely that the apostle here intended\nprincipally, if not only, the honor of maintenance; partly because the\nhonor appointed for widows, ver. 3, &c., was only maintenance; partly\nbecause the reason of this charge to honor, &c., refers only to\nmaintenance, ver. 18. Thus far we grant, that the text speaks of\nmaintenance. 2. It may be further yielded that all the presbyters here\nspoken of are to be counted worthy of double honor, of honorable,\nliberal maintenance; even they that rule well (if need require) are to\nbe thus honored, but the principal care of maintenance ought to be of\nthem that labor in the word and doctrine, because the apostle saith\n_especially they that labor, &c._: the like injunction, see Gal. vi. 6,\n\"Let him that is catechized, communicate to him that catechizeth him in\nall good things;\" and thus much this text plainly evidenceth. 3. What\nthen can be inferred hereupon by the adversaries of ruling elders?\n\"Therefore the ruling elders (in the reformed churches) that take no\nmaintenance of the church, are not the elders that rule well here\nmentioned?\" This follows not: the apostle Paul took no wages of the\nchurch of Corinth, 2 Cor. xi. 7-9, and xii. 12, 13, &c., was he\ntherefore not an apostle to them, as to other churches of whom he took\nmaintenance? Divers among us in these days labor in the word and\ndoctrine, and are not sufficiently maintained by their churches, but\nforced to spend of their own estates to do others service; are they\ntherefore no ministers? _Forgive them this wrong_. Most churches are not\nable (or at least not willing) to maintain their very preaching\npresbyters and their families comfortably and sufficiently, as the\ngospel requireth: if therefore in prudence, that the Church be not\nneedlessly burdened, those ruling elders are chosen generally that need\nno maintenance, doth their not taking maintenance of the church make\ntheir office null and void? Or if the church do not give them\nmaintenance (when they neither need it, nor desire it, nor is the church\nable to do it) is the church therefore defective in her duty, or an ill\nobserver of the apostolical precepts? Sure maintenance is not\nessentially and inseparably necessary to the calling of either ruling\nor preaching elder. There may be cases when not only the preaching, but\nthe ruling elders ought to be maintained, and there may be cases when\nnot only the ruling but also the preaching presbyter (as it was with\nPaul) should not expect to be maintained by the church. 4. It is as\nobservable that the apostle here saith, let them be counted worthy of\ndouble honor, though the reformed churches do not actually give double\nmaintenance to elders that rule well, yet they count them worthy of\ndouble maintenance, though the elders do not take it, though the\nchurches cannot give it.\n\nFinally, unto these testimonies and arguments from Scripture, many\ntestimonies of ancient and modern writers (of no small repute in the\nChurch of God) may be usefully annexed, speaking for ruling elders in\nthe Church of Christ from time to time: some speaking of such sort of\nelders, presbyters, or church-governors, as that ruling elders may very\nwell be implied in their expressions; some plainly declaring that the\nChurch of Christ _in fact_ had such officers for government thereof; and\nsome testifying that of right such officers ought to be in the Church of\nChrist now under the New Testament for the well guiding thereof; by\nwhich it may notably appear, that in asserting the office of the ruling\nelder in the Church, we take not upon us to maintain any singular\nparadox of our own devising, or to hold forth some new light in this old\nopinionative age: and that the ruling elder is not a church officer\nfirst coined at Geneva, and a stranger to the Church of Christ for the\nfirst 1500 years, (as the adversaries of ruling elders scornfully\npretend,) but hath been owned by the Church of Christ as well in former\nas in later times.[91]\n\n\n_An Appendix touching the Divine Right of Deacons._\n\nThough we cannot find in Scripture that the power of the keys is\ncommitted by Christ unto deacons, with the other church governors, but\nconceive that deacons, as other members of the church, are to be\ngoverned, and are not to govern; yet forasmuch as deacons are ordinary\nofficers in the Church of God, of which she will have constant use in\nall ages, and which at first were divinely appointed, and after\nfrequently mentioned in the New Testament; it will not be thought unfit,\nbefore we conclude this section, touching the divine right of Christ's\nchurch-officers, briefly to assert the divine right of deacons, as\nfolloweth.\n\nDeacons in the church are an ordinance of Jesus Christ. For,\n\n1. They are found in Christ's catalogue of church officers, distinct\nfrom all other officers, both extraordinary and ordinary. _Helps_, 1\nCor. xii. 28. The Greek word in the natural acceptation properly\nsignifies, to lift over against one in taking up some burden or weight;\nmetaphorically, it here is used for deacons, whose office it is to\n_help_ and _succor the poor and sick, to lend them a hand to lift them\nup_, &c., and this office is here distinctly laid down from all other\nordinary and extraordinary offices in the text. So they are\ndistinguished from all ordinary officers reckoned up, Rom. xii. 7, 8:\nunder _prophecy_, there is the _teacher_ and _pastor_; under _ministry_,\nthe _ruling elder_, and the _deacon_, verse 8. This officer was so well\nknown, and usual in the primitive churches, that when the apostle writes\nto the church at Philippi, he directs his epistle not only to the\nsaints, but to the officers, viz. _to the overseers, and deacons_,\nPhilip, i. 1. The occasion of the first institution of this office, see\nin Acts vi. 1, 2, &c. At the first planting of the Christian Church, the\napostles themselves took care to receive the churches' goods, and to\ndistribute to every one of their members _as they had need_, Acts iv.\n34, 35; but in the increase of the church, the burden of this care of\ndistributing alms increasing also, upon some complaints of the Greeks,\n_that their widows were neglected_, the office of deacons was erected,\nfor better provision for the poor, Acts vi. 1-7; and because the\nchurches are never like to want poor and afflicted persons, there will\nbe constant need of this officer. The pastor and deacon under the New\nTestament seem to answer the priests and Levites under the Old\nTestament.\n\n2. The qualifications of deacons are laid down by Christ in the New\nTestament, at large: 1 Tim. iii. 8-14, _Deacons also must be grave, not\ndouble-tongued_, &c., and Acts vi. 3, 5.\n\n3. The manner also of deacons' vocation or calling unto their office is\ndelineated, viz: 1. They must be chosen by the church; \"Look ye out\namong you seven men of honest report,\" &c., \"and they chose Stephen,\"\n&c., Acts vi. 3, 5. 2. They must first be proved and tried by the\nofficers of the church, before they may officiate as deacons; \"and let\nthese also first be proved, then let them use the office of a deacon,\nbeing blameless,\" 1 Tim. iii. 10. 3. They must be appointed by the\nofficers of the church to their office, and set apart with prayer, Acts\nvi. 3, 6: \"Look ye out men--whom we may appoint over this business--whom\nthey set before the apostles, and when they had prayed, they laid their\nhands on them.\"\n\n4. Deacons have by Scripture their work and employment appointed them.\nTheir work is, _to serve tables_, (hence the name deacon seems derived,)\nActs vi. 2, 3. To be an help, no hinderance in the church; called\n_helps_, 1 Cor. xii. 18.\n\n5. Deacons have a divine approbation and commendation in Scripture, if\nthey execute their office well. \"For they that have used the office of a\ndeacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in\nthe faith which is in Christ Jesus,\" 1 Tim. iii. 13. Here the well\nadministration of deaconship is commended as producing two good effects\nto such deacons, viz: 1. _A good degree_, i.e. great honor, dignity, and\nreputation, both to themselves and to their office; they adorn, grace,\nand credit their office in the church; not that they purchase to\nthemselves by desert a higher office in the church, that from deacons\nthey should be advanced to be presbyters, as some would interpret this\ntext. 2. _Much boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus._ For\nnothing makes a man more bold than a good conscience in the upright and\nfaithful discharge of our duties in our callings; innocency and\nintegrity make brave spirits; such with great confidence and boldness\nserve Christ and the church, being men that may be trusted to the\nuttermost. Now where God thus approves or commends the well managing of\nan office, he also divinely approves and allows the office itself, and\nthe officer that executes the same.[92]\n\n\nSECTION II.\n\n2. _Of the first receptacle, or subject of the power of church\ngovernment from Christ, viz. Christ's own officers._\n\nTouching the second, that Jesus Christ our Mediator hath peculiarly\nintrusted his own officers with the power of church government: take it\nthus--\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator did immediately commit the proper, formal,\nministerial, or stewardly authority and power for governing of his\nchurch to his own church guides as the proper immediate receptacle or\nfirst subject thereof.\n\nFor explication of this proposition, four things are to be opened.\n\n1. What is meant by proper, formal, ministerial or stewardly authority\nand power for church government? See this already discussed, Part 2,\nchapters III., V., and IX., in the beginning of Section 2, so that here\nthere needs no further addition, as to this point.\n\n2. What is meant by church guides? By church guides here understand,\nnegatively, 1. Not the political magistrate. For though he be the\n_nurse-father_ of the church, Isa. xlix. 23, _the keeper and avenger of\nboth the tables_; and _have an outward care of religion_, and _may\nexercise a political power about sacred things_, as did Asa,\nJehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, &c., yet hath he no proper, inward,\nformal power in sacred things, nor is it lawful for him to exercise the\nsame; as Korah, Num. xvi.; King Saul, 1 Sam. xiii. 9-15; Uzzah, 2 Sam.\nvi. 6-8, 1 Chron. xiii. 9, 10; and King Uzziah, 2 Chron. xxvi. 16-22,\ndid to the provoking of God, and to their own destruction. (But see what\npower is granted, and what denied to the civil magistrate in matters of\nreligion, and why, Part 2, Chap. IX. Sect. 1.) 2. Not any officer of\nman's mere invention and setting up in the church, whether papal, as\ncardinals, &c., prelatical, as deans, archdeacons, chancellors,\nofficials, &c., or political, as committees, commissioners, &c. For who\ncan create and institute a new kind of offices in the church, but Jesus\nChrist only, who alone hath the lordly magisterial power as Mediator\nappropriated to him? Eph. iv. 8, 11; Rom. xii. 5-8; 1 Cor. xii. 28; and\ntherefore how can such acts be sufficiently excused from bold usurpation\nupon Christ's own prerogative? 3. Nor the deacons themselves, (though\nofficers of Christ's appointment, as was formerly proved;) for their\noffice is not to rule and govern, but _to serve tables_, &c., Acts vi.\n2, 3. None of these are the church guides which Christ hath committed\nhis proper power unto. But affirmatively understand all these church\nguides extraordinary and ordinary, which Christ hath erected in his\nChurch, vesting them with power and authority therein, viz. apostles,\nprophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, governments, or ruling\nelders, mentioned together in Eph. iv. 8, 11; 1 Cor. xii. 28; 1 Tim. v.\n17; Rom. xii. 6-8. These are Christ's own church officers, these Christ\nhath made the immediate receptacle and first subject of the keys, or of\necclesiastical power derived from himself.\n\n3. What is meant by Christ's committing this stewardly power first and\nimmediately to the church guides? _Ans_. There is, 1. A priority and\nimmediateness of the donation of the power of the keys: thus Christ\nfirst and immediately gave keys to his own officers, whom Scripture,\ntherefore, calls _the ministers of Christ_, (not of the Church,) 1 Cor.\niv. 1, not first and immediately to the community of the faithful, or\nChurch, and then by the Church secondarily and mediately to the\nofficers, as her substitutes and delegates, acting for her, and not in\nvirtue of their own power from Christ. 2. A priority and immediateness\nof designation of particular individual persons to the office of\nkey-bearing, and this is done by the mediate intervening act of the\nchurch officers in separating of particular persons to the office which\nChrist instituted; though it is not denied but that the church or\ncompany of the faithful may lawfully nominate or elect individual\npersons to be officers in the congregation, which yet is no act of\nauthority or power.\n\n4. How hath Christ committed this power of the keys to his church\nguides, that thereby they become the most proper receptacle thereof?\n_Ans_. Thus briefly. All absolute lordly power is in God originally: all\nlordly magisterial mediatory power is in Christ dispensatorily: all\nofficial, stewardly power is by delegation from Christ only in the\nchurch guides[93] ministerially, as the only proper subject thereof that\nmay exercise the same lawfully in Christ's name: yet all power, both\nmagisterial in Christ, and ministerial in Christ's officers, is for the\nChurch of Christ and her edification objectively and finally.\n\nThese things thus explained and stated, we come now to the confirmation\nof the proposition. Consider these arguments:\n\n1. Jesus Christ committed immediately ecclesiastical power and the\nexercise thereof to his church guides. Thus we may argue:\n\n_Major_. All those that have ecclesiastical power, and the exercise\nthereof, immediately committed to them from Jesus Christ, are the\nimmediate subject or receptacle of that power.\n\nFor what makes any persons the immediate subject of power, but the\nimmediate derivation and commission of power to them from Jesus Christ,\nwho is the fountain of all power?\n\n_Minor_. But the church guides have the ecclesiastical power and the\nexercise thereof immediately committed to them from Jesus Christ. This\nmay be evinced many ways by Scriptures. 1. It is said expressly, \"Of\nour authority which the Lord hath given us for your edification,\" 2 Cor.\n10, 8: by _us_ here we are to understand church guides, for here they\nare set in opposition to the church members (_for edification_,) not\ndestruction of (you.) Here are edifiers and edified. Now these church\nguides have authority given them, and that from the Lord, i.e. Christ;\nhere is their commission or power, not from the Church or any creature,\nbut from Christ; hence the apostle calls church guides, \"Your rulers or\nguides in the Lord,\" 1 Thes. v. 12; _in the Lord_, i.e. by the Lord's\nauthority and commission. So that church officers are _rulers in the\nLord_, and the churches ruled by them; yea, ruling elders being one sort\nof church guides, have such an undoubted power of governing in the\nChurch divinely committed to them, that of them it is said, \"God hath\nset in the church governments\", 1 Cor. xii. 28, i.e. governors, the\nabstract being put for the concrete. If _God have set governors in the\nChurch_, then God vested those governors with a power of governing,\nwhence they have their name of governments.\n\n2. The keys of the kingdom of heaven, with all their acts, were\nimmediately committed to the church guides, viz. to the apostles and\ntheir successors to the end of the world; compare these testimonies,\nMatt. xvi. 16, 19, and xviii. 18-20; John xx. 21-23; with Matt, xxviii.\n18-20: therefore consequently ecclesiastical power was committed\nimmediately unto them as the subject thereof. For, _By the kingdom of\nheaven_ here we are to understand (according to the full latitude of the\nphrase) both the kingdom of grace in this world, and of glory in the\nworld to come; _binding and loosing both in earth and in heaven_, upon\nthe right use of the keys, being here the privileges promised to church\nguides; and _by kingdom of heaven_--on earth, understand the whole\nvisible Church of Christ in the earth, not only some single\ncongregation. By _keys of the kingdom of heaven_, thus apprehend, Christ\npromiseth and giveth not the sword _of the kingdom_, any secular power;\nnor the sceptre _of the kingdom_, any sovereign, lordly, magisterial\npower over the Church. But the _keys_, &c. i.e. a stewardly, ministerial\npower, and their acts, _binding and loosing_, i.e. _retaining and\nremitting sins on earth_, (as in John it is explained;) opening and\nshutting are proper acts of keys; binding and loosing but metaphorical,\nviz. a speech borrowed from bonds or chains wherewith men's bodies are\nbound in prison or in captivity, or from which the body is loosed: we\nare naturally all under sin, Rom. v. 12, and therefore liable to death,\nRom. vi. 23. Now sins are to the soul as bonds and cords, Prov. v. 22.\n_The bond of iniquity_, Acts viii. 23; and death with the pains thereof,\nare as chains, 2 Pet. ii. 4, Jude 6; in hell as in a prison, 1 Pet.\niii. 10: the remission or retaining of these sins, is the loosing or the\nbinding of the soul under these cords and chains. So that the keys\nthemselves are not material but metaphorical; a metaphor from stewards\nin great men's houses, kings' houses, &c., into whose hands the whole\ntrust and ordering of household affairs is committed, who take in and\ncast out servants, open and shut doors, &c., do all without control of\nany in the family save the master of the family. Such, in the Hebrew\nphrase, are said to be _over the house_, Gen. xliii. 18; Isa. xxii. 15;\n2 Kings xviii. 18: and the keys of the house are committed to them as a\nbadge of their power. So that when God threatens to put Shebna out of\nhis office in the king's house, and to place Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, in\nhis room, he saith, \"I will commit thy government into his hand--and the\nkey of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder,\" Isa. xxii. 21,\n22, parallel of that phrase, \"and the government shall be upon his\nshoulder,\" Isa. ix. 6. Hence, as key is in the Old Testament used for\nstewardly power and government, Isa. xxii. 21, 22; (only twice properly,\nJudges iii. 25; 1 Chron. ix. 27;) so in the New Testament, _key_ is\nalways used, metaphorically, to denote power, and that about\necclesiasticals or spirituals, viz. in Matt. xvi. 19; Luke xi. 52; Rev.\ni. 18, and iii. 7, and ix. 1, and xx. 1. So that _keys_, &c., are\nmetaphorically the ordinances which Christ hath instituted, to be\ndispensed in his church, preaching the word, administrations of the\nseals and censures: for it is not said _key_, but _keys_, which\ncomprehendeth them all: by the right use of which both the gates of the\nChurch here, and of heaven hereafter, are opened or shut to believers or\nunbelievers; and Christ promising or giving these _keys_ to Peter and\nthe apostles, and their successors _to the end of the world_, Matt.\nxxviii. 20, doth intrust and invest them with power and authority of\ndispensing these ordinances for this end, and so makes them _stewards_\nin his house _of the mysteries of God_, 1 Cor. iv. 1, so that we may\nconclude:\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore the church guides are the immediate subject and\nreceptacle of that ecclesiastical power, and of the exercise thereof.\n\n_Argum_. II. Jesus Christ our Mediator did institute ecclesiastical\noffices for church government under the New Testament before any\nChristian Church under the New Testament was gathered or constituted.\nTherefore those persons that were intrusted with those offices must\nneeds be the first and immediate receptacle or subject of the power of\nthe keys. Thus we may argue:\n\n_Major_. All those whose ecclesiastical offices for church government,\nunder the New Testament, were instituted by Christ, before any formal\nvisible Christian Church was gathered or constituted, are the first and\nimmediate receptacle or subject of the power of the keys from Jesus\nChrist.\n\n_Minor_. But the ecclesiastical offices of Christ's own officers for\ngoverning of the Church, now under the New Testament, were instituted by\nChrist before any formal visible Christian Church was gathered or\nconstituted.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore Christ's own officers for governing of the\nChurch now under the New Testament are the first and immediate\nreceptacle or subject of the keys from Jesus Christ.\n\nThe major proposition cannot reasonably be denied, and may be further\ncleared by these considerations, viz: 1. That the Church offices for\nchurch government under the New Testament are in their own nature\nintrinsically offices of power. The apostle styles it _power_, or\n_authority_, which is _given_ to these officers by _the Lord_, 2 Cor. x.\n8, and xiii. 10. _The keys of the kingdom of heaven_ are committed to\nthem, Matt. xvi. 19, and _keys_ import a stewardly power: compare Matt.\nxvi. 19, and xviii. 18, John xx. 21, 23, with Isa. xxii. 21, 22.\nMaterially, the acts and exercise of these officers are acts of power,\nas _binding, loosing_, &c., Matt, xviii. 18; not only _preaching_, &c.,\nbut _excommunicating_, is an act of power, 1 Cor. v. 4. Absolving the\npenitent, and confirming him again in the Church's love, is an act of\npower:--_to confirm love unto him_, i.e. authoritatively to confirm,\n&c., as the word signifies, 2 Cor. ii. 8. Formally, these acts are to be\ndone as acts of power, in Christ's name, and by his authority, Matt.\nxxviii. 19; 1 Cor. v. 4. Now if these offices be in their own nature\noffices of power, consequently they that have such offices conferred\nupon them by Christ, before the Christian Church had being or existence,\nthey must needs be the first and immediate recipient subject of the\npower of the keys from Christ. 2. Either those church officers, whose\noffices were instituted before the Christian Church was constituted,\nmust be the first subject of the power, &c., or some others. If any\nother, then, 1. Either heathens, or heathen magistrates, who are out of\nthe Church: but both these were absurd to grant; for then they that are\nnot so much as church members should be church governors, and the Church\nbe ecclesiastically judged by them that are without. 2. Or the first\nsubject of this power was the Christian Church itself before it had\nexistence; but that were notoriously absurd; and besides these, no other\ncan be imagined, but the church officers; therefore they must needs be\nthe first subject of the power of the keys.\n\nThe minor proposition (viz. But the ecclesiastical offices of Christ's\nown officers for governing of the Church now under the New Testament,\nwere instituted by Christ before any formal visible Christian Church\nwas gathered or constituted) is so evident in the current of the New\nTestament, that it needs little confirmation. For, 1. The church offices\nunder the New Testament, as apostleship, pastorship, &c., were\ninstituted by Christ either before his death--compare these places\ntogether, Mark iii. 13, 14, &c.; Luke ix. 1, &c., and x. 1, 2, &c.; John\nxx. 21-23; Matt, xxviii. 18-20--or presently upon his ascension, Eph.\niv. 8, 11, 12, &c.; Acts ii.; 1 Cor. xiii. 28. Now no formal Christian\nChurch was constituted and gathered till the feast of Pentecost and\nafterwards. Then, after the apostles had received the gifts of the Holy\nGhost, &c., Acts ii., great multitudes of Jews and Gentiles were\nconverted to Christ, and being converted, incorporated and associated\nthemselves into churches, as the history of the Acts, chap, ii., and\nforward, evidenceth abundantly. 2. Church officers, under the New\nTestament, are for the calling and gathering men unto Christ, and to his\nbody mystical; and for admitting of those that believe into that one\nbody, Matt, xxviii. 18, 19; 1 Cor. xii. 28. And is not he that calleth,\nbefore them that are called by them; they that baptize, before the\nbaptized; and they that gather the churches, before those churches which\nthey gather? May we not hence conclude, _Therefore_, &c.\n\n_Argum_. III. The names, titles, and other denominations purposely and\npeculiarly given to the church guides in Scripture, generally do bear\npower and authority engraven upon their foreheads. _Therefore_, they are\nthe proper, immediate, and only subjects of ecclesiastical power. Thus\nwe may argue:\n\n_Major_. All those persons in the Church, that have such names, titles,\nor denominations given to them peculiarly in the Scriptures by the\nSpirit of Christ, as generally have authority and power engraven upon\nthem in reference to the Church, are the immediate and only proper\nsubjects of ecclesiastical power.\n\n_Minor_. But Christ's officers in the Church have such names, titles, or\ndenominations given to them peculiarly in the Scriptures by the Spirit\nof Christ, as generally have authority and power engraven upon them in\nreference to the Church.\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore Christ's own officers in the Church are the\nproper, immediate, and only subjects or receptacles of ecclesiastical\npower.\n\nThis major proposition must be granted. For, 1. Is not this the Holy\nGhost's familiar and ordinary manner in Scripture, to give titles and\ndenominations, which are apt, pertinent, significative and instructing\nboth to others and themselves that have such denominations conferred\nupon them? As in the family, the husband is called _the head of the\nwife_, 1 Cor. xi., because he is to govern, she is to be subject: the\nwife is called _an help-meet_, &c., Gen. ii.: to teach the wife her\nduty, to help his good and comfort every way, to hinder it no way. So in\nthe commonwealth, magistrates are called _heirs of restraint, to put men\nto shame_, Judges xviii. 7, because they are to restrain disorders,\nshame evil-doers: higher powers, to teach others subjection to them,\nRom. xiii. 1. \"An ordinance of man or human creation,\" 1 Pet. ii. 13:\nbecause, though magistracy in general be an ordinance of God, yet this\nor that special kind of magistracy, whether monarchical, aristocratical,\n&c., is of man. Thus in the Church: the Church is called _Christ's\nbody_, Ephes. iv. 12, to show Christ's headship, the Church's subjection\nto Christ, and their near union to one another. Christians are called\n_members_, Rom. xii.; 1 Cor. xii., to teach them mutual love, care, and\nserviceableness to one another. Ministers are called _ambassadors of\nChrist_, 2 Cor. v. _Angels of the churches_, Rev. ii., to teach them to\nbe faithful in their offices, and others to respect them for their\noffices. _Salt of the earth_, Matt. v. 13, because they are to season\nothers spiritually. _Stars_, Rev. i., because they are to shine forth\nfor the enlightening and guiding of others, &c. 2. If this proposition\nbe denied, then to what end are such names and denominations, importing\nauthority, generally given by the Spirit of God to some sort of persons\nonly, and not to others? Is it for no end? That would be a dangerous\ncharge upon the Spirit of Christ. Is it for any end? Then what other can\nbe imagined, than to signify, hold forth, and instruct both themselves\nand others in their duties, and to distinguish them that are vested with\nauthority in the Church, from them that are not?\n\nThe _major proposition_ (viz. But Christ's own officers in the Church\nhave such names, titles, or denominations given to them peculiarly in\nthe Scriptures by the Spirit of Christ, as generally have authority and\npower engraven upon them in reference to the Church) may be evinced, 1.\nBy induction of particular names attributed to Christ's officers. 2. By\na denial of them, or the like, to any other members of the Church.\n\n1. By induction of particular titles or denominations attributed to\nChrist's officers, which generally have power and authority palpably\nengraven upon them: (yea, the self-same names are given to them, by\nwhich not only heathen writers, but also the Greek version of the Old\nTestament by the Septuagint, and the very original of the New Testament\nare wont to give to political officers, to express their political\nauthority, power, and government,) as, for instance:\n\n1. _Presbyter or elder_, is ascribed often to Christ's church officers,\nas in Acts xiv. 23, and xv. 2, 4, and xx. 17; 1 Tim. v. 17; Tit. v.; 1\nPet. v. 1. This same word is ascribed to _rulers political_, to _elders\nin the gate_, by the Septuagint, in Judges viii. 14; Ruth iv. 2, 3; 2\nSam. v. 3; 1 Chron. vi. 3.\n\n2. _Overseer_ or _bishop_, noting authority and power in having the\ncharge and oversight of the flock, is ascribed to church officers in\nActs xx. 28; Phil. i. 1; 1 Tim. iii. 2; Tit. i. 7. This same word is\nused by the Septuagint, to denote the power of the civil magistrate, to\nwhom the care and oversight of the commonwealth is committed, Numb.\nxxxi. 14; Judges ix. 28; 2 Kings xi. 15.\n\n3. _Guide, leader, conductor, captain, governor_, signifies them all,\nand is given to church officers, as contradistinct from the _church_ and\n_saints_, Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24. It is also attributed to civil rulers to\nset forth their power, in Deut. i. 13; Micah iii. 9, 11; 2 Chron. v. 1;\nEzek. xliv. 3, and xlv. 7; Dan. iii. 2; Acts vii. 10. This very word\n_governor_, is attributed to Christ himself, _out of thee shall come\nforth a governor, that shall rule_ (or _feed_) _my people Israel_, Matt.\nii. 6.\n\n4. _Steward, dispenser_. \"Stewards of the mysteries of God,\" is the\ntitle given to ministers, 1 Cor. iv. 1, 2. \"Steward of God,\" Tit. i. 7.\n\"That faithful and wise steward, whom his Lord shall make ruler over his\nhousehold,\" &c., Luke xii. 42. This also is a title of power given to\nthem that are set over families, as Gal. iv. 2, \"he is under tutors and\nstewards.\" And to them that are set over cities--as Rom. xvi. 23,\n\"Erastus the steward\" (or as we render it, _the chamberlain_) \"of the\ncity saluteth you.\"\n\n5. _Pastor_ is ascribed to Christ's officers; Eph. iv. 11, \"and some\npastors and teachers.\" They govern the Church as the shepherd his flock,\nfeeding, ruling them as well with the shepherd's staff, as with food.\nThis term is sometimes given to civil magistrates, Isa. xliv. 28; Micah\nv. 5: sometimes to Christ the great shepherd of the sheep, 1 Pet. v. 4;\nnoting his authority, Matt. xxvi. 31; John x. 2, 11, 14, 16; Heb. xiii.\n20; 1 Pet. ii. 25: sometimes to God himself the supreme Ruler of the\nworld, Ps. lxxx. 1.\n\n6. _Governments_, a denomination given to _ruling elders_, 1 Cor. xii.\n28, as hath been proved Sect. 1 of this Chapter. A metaphor from\nmariners or pilots, that steer and govern the ship: translated thence,\nto signify the power and authority of church governors, spiritual\npilots, steering the ship or ark of Christ's Church. This word is used\nalso by heathen authors, to signify political governors.[94]\n\n_Ruler_. 1 Tim. v. 17, \"Let the elders that rule well\"--and,\n\n\"He that ruleth,\" Rom. xii. 8, and \"Your rulers in the Lord,\" 1 Thes.\nv. 12, viz. not only in the fear of the Lord,[95] nor only in those\nthings that appertain to God's worship,[96] but also in the Lord; i.e.\nwho are over you, to rule according to the will of the Lord,[97] even by\nthe Lord Christ's power and authority derived to them. Now these names\nare among heathen authors ascribed to rulers of cities, armies, and\nkingdoms.[98]\n\nBy these among other titles given to Christ's officers in Scripture, he\nthat runs may read a plain authority and power enstamped on them in\nreference to the Church; and consequently on them that are thus\ndenominated, unless they be applied to them improperly, unfitly,\nabusively; which we suppose no sober intelligent reader dare affirm.\n\n2. By a denial of these and like titles to the whole Church of Christ,\nor to any other members of the Church whatsoever, besides church\nofficers. For where can it be showed in all the book of God, that in\nthis sense, either the whole Church or any members thereof besides\nofficers, are ever styled _presbyters, bishops, governors, stewards of\nGod, or of the mysteries of God, pastors, governments, or rulers_? The\ngreatest factors for popular government must let this alone forever.\nThus, from all that hath been said, we need not fear to conclude:\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore Christ's own officers in the Church are the\nproper, immediate, and only subjects or receptacles of ecclesiastical\npower.\n\n_Argum_. IV. The relations which Christ's officers have unto his Church,\nimply and comprehend in themselves authority and power in reference to\nthe Church, and therefore they are the proper subjects of ecclesiastical\npower. Thus we reason:\n\n_Major_. Whosoever they are that peculiarly stand in such relations to\nthe Church of Christ, as imply and comprehend in themselves authority\nand power for governing of the Church, they are the only subject of\necclesiastical power.\n\nThis proposition is evident; for, otherwise, to what end are those\npeculiar relations to the Church which comprehend government in them,\nunless such as are so peculiarly related be the only subjects of\ngovernment? Shall all those relations be mere names and shadows? or\nshall others in the church be counted the subject of this authority and\npower for church government, that have no such relations to the Church\nat all implying any such power?\n\n_Minor_. But the officers of Christ peculiarly stand in such relations\nto the Church of Christ as imply and comprehend in themselves authority\nand power for the government of the church.\n\nThis assumption or minor proposition will be evident by a due induction\nof some of their particular relations that have such power enstamped on\nthem; as for instance, Christ's officers stand in these relations of\npower to the Church and people of God.\n\n1. _They are pastors_, Eph. iv. 11. The church is the _flock_, John x.\n16; 1 Cor. ix. 7; _flock_, Acts xx. 28, 29; 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. Hath not the\n_pastor_ power to rule and govern his _flock_?\n\n2. They are _stewards_. \"Who is that faithful and wise steward?\" Luke\nxii. 42. \"Stewards of the mysteries of God,\" 1 Cor. iv. 1, 2. \"Stewards\nof God,\" Tit. i. 7. The Church and people of God are the Lord's\n_household_, over which these stewards are set, &c., Luke xii. 42.\n_God's house_, 1 Tim. iii. 15; Heb. iii. 6. Have not stewards power to\ngovern and order those _families_ over which they are set, and wherewith\nthey are intrusted? Gal. iv. 1.\n\n3. They are _bishops_ or _overseers_, Phil. i. 1; 1 Tim. iii. 2; Tit. i.\n7. The Church and people of God are that _charge_ which the Lord hath\ncommitted to their inspection. \"Over which the Holy Ghost hath made you\noverseers,\" Acts xx. 28. Have not _overseers_ power over that which is\n_committed to their inspection_?\n\n4. They are _catechizers_ and _teachers_, Rom. xii. 7, 8; Eph. iv. 11.\nThe Church and people are _catechized_, Gal. vi. 6; _taught_. Hath not\nhe that _catechizeth_ power for government of him that is _catechized_?\nHe that _teacheth_ of him that is _taught_?\n\n5. They are _co-workers_ with God, 1 Cor. iii. 9; 2 Cor. vi. 1.\n_Architects, builders_, &c., 1 Cor. iii. 10; some of them _laying the\nfoundation, others building thereupon_. The Church and people of God are\nGod's building. \"Ye are God's building,\" 1 Cor. iii. 9. Have not\n_builders_ power of disposing and ordering affairs appertaining to the\n_building_?\n\n6. Finally, to add no more, the officers of Christ in the Church are not\nonly as _nurses_; \"We _were_ gentle among you, even as a nurse\ncherisheth her children,\" 1 Thess. ii. 7: and as _mothers_; \"My little\nchildren, of whom I travail in birth again,\" Gal. iv. 19: but also as\n_fathers_, 1 Thess. ii. 11; 1 Cor. iv. 15, spiritual fathers in Christ:\nand the Church and people of God, they are the _sons_ and _daughters_,\nthe spiritual _babes_ and _children_, begotten, brought forth, and\nnursed up by them, 1 Thess. ii. 7, 11; Gal. iv. 19: and have fathers no\nauthority nor power of government over their children? See Eph. vi. 1-3;\n1 Tim. iii. 4.\n\nThus Christ's officers stand in such relation to the Church as do\nevidently carry power of government along with them; but where are any\nother members of the church besides officers, stated in such relation of\n_pastors, stewards, overseers, catechizers, builders, husbandmen,\nnurses, mothers_, and _fathers_ to the Church of God and members of\nChrist, that can be evidenced by the Scriptures? Why may we not then\nclearly conclude,\n\n_Conclusion_. Therefore the officers of Christ are the only subjects of\necclesiastical power.\n\n_Argum_. V. The many divine commands and impositions of duties of\nobedience, submission, subjection, &c., upon the Church and people of\nGod, to be performed by them to Christ's officers, and that in reference\nto their office, do plainly proclaim the officers of Christ to be the\nproper receptacle and subject of authority and power from Christ for the\ngovernment of his Church. Thus it may be argued:\n\n_Major_. Whatsoever persons they are to whom the Church and people of\nGod are peculiarly bound by the commands of Christ, to perform duties of\nobedience and subjection, and that in reference to their office in the\nchurch, they are the only subjects of authority from Christ for the\ngovernment of his Church.\n\nThis proposition needs no proof, unless we will be so absurd as to say\nthat the Church and people of God are peculiarly obliged by Christ's\ncommand to obey and be subject to them, that yet have no peculiar\nauthority nor power over them, and that in reference to their office in\nthe church.\n\n_Minor_. But the officers of Christ are those to whom the Church and\npeople of God are peculiarly bound by the commands of Christ to perform\nduties of obedience and subjection, and that in reference to their\noffice in the church.\n\nThis assumption or minor proposition may be evidenced, 1. Partly by\ninduction of some particular instances of Christ's commands, whereby the\nChurch and people of God are bound to perform duties of obedience and\nsubjection to the officers of Christ, in reference to their office in\nthe church. 2. Partly by a denial of the like commands in reference to\nall others in the church, except the officers of the church only.\n\nTouching the first, viz. the instances of such commands, consider these\nfollowing. The Church and people of God are commanded,\n\n1. To know their rulers. \"We beseech you, brethren, to know them that\nlabor among you, and are over you in the Lord,\" 1 Thess. v. 12. _To\nknow_, i.e., not simply and merely to know, but to acknowledge, accept,\nand approve of them as such rulers over you in the Lord. This teaches\nsubjection to the office of ruling.\n\n2. To love them exceedingly for their work's sake. \"Esteem them\nsuperabundantly in love for their work's sake,\" 1 Thess. v. 13. For what\nwork? viz. both laboring and ruling, mentioned verse 12. If they must\nlove them so exceedingly for ruling over them, must they not much more\nbe obedient to this rule?\n\n3. To count them worthy of double honor in reference to their\nwell-ruling. \"Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double\nhonor, especially--,\" 1 Tim. v. 17: whether we take _double honor_ here\nfor reverence or maintenance, or both; yet how can we esteem the _elders\nruling well worthy of double honor_ without some submission to their\nrule?\n\n4. To obey them that are their rulers and governors. _Obey ye your\nrulers, or governors_, Heb. xiii. 17; where the words _obey ye_ doth not\n(as some dream) signify a persuasion, but obedience, and in this sense\nit is commonly used, not only in profane authors, but also in the Holy\nScriptures, as James iii. 3, Gal. iii. 1.\n\n5. Finally, to submit and be subordinate unto them. The Church and\npeople of God are charged to submit unto them. \"Obey your governors and\nsubmit ye,\" Heb. xiii. 17. The word properly notes a submissive yielding\nwithout opposition or resistance; yea, it signifies intense obedience.\nThey must not only yield, but yield with subjection and submission,\nwhich relates to authority. They are also charged to be subordinate to\nthem. \"Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves to the elders,\" 1 Pet. v.\n5; i.e., _be ye subordinate_, (it is a military term,) viz: be ordered,\nranked, guided, governed, disciplined by them, as soldiers are by their\ncommanders. The word _elders_ here is by some taken only for elders in\nage, and not in office. But it seems better to interpret it of elders in\noffice; and the context well agrees with this; for the apostle having\nimmediately before charged the ruling preaching presbyters with their\nduties towards their flock, ver. 1-4, here he seems to enjoin the ruled\nflock (which commonly were younger in age and gifts) to look to their\nduties of subjection to their elders in office.\n\nTouching the second, viz. the denial of like commands, and upon like\ngrounds to all others in the church, except to the church officers only:\nwhere can it be evidenced in all the Scriptures that the people of God\nare commanded to know, to esteem very highly in love, to count worthy of\ndouble honor, to obey, and submit themselves to any persons in the\nchurch but to the ruling officers thereof in reference to their office,\nand the due execution thereof?\n\nNow, seeing the Church and people of God are peculiarly obliged, by so\nmany commands of Christ, to perform such duties of subjection and\nobedience to the officers of Christ, may it not be concluded,\n\nTherefore the officers of Christ are the only subjects of authority from\nChrist for the government of his Church?\n\n_Argum_. VI. Finally, the directions touching rule and government in the\nChurch; the encouragements to well-ruling by commendations, promises,\nrewards, together with the contrary deterring discouragements from\nill-ruling, by discommendations, threats, &c., being specially applied\nand appropriated by the word of Christ unto Christ's officers, very\nnotably discover to us that Christ's officers are the only subjects of\npower from Christ for the government of his Church. Thus it may be\nargued:\n\n_Major_. Whatsoever persons in the Church have directions for church\ngovernment, encouragements to well-ruling, and discouragements from\nill-ruling, particularly and peculiarly applied unto them by the word of\nChrist; they are the only subjects of power from Christ for the\ngovernment of his Church:\n\nThis proposition is evident: For, 1. How should it be consistent with\nthe infinite wisdom of God peculiarly to apply unto them directions\nabout ruling and governing the church that are not the only subjects in\nwhom the power of government is intrusted by Jesus Christ? 2. How can it\nstand with the justice of God to encourage them only unto well-ruling,\nby commendations, promises, rewards, &c., or to deter them from\nill-governing by dispraises, threats, &c., &c., to whom the power of\ngovernment doth not appertain, as to the only subjects thereof? 3. What\nstrange apprehensions and distractions would this breed in the hearts of\nChrist's officers and others, should those that have not the power of\nchurch government committed to them by Christ, be yet directed by his\nword how to govern, encouraged in governing well, and deterred from\ngoverning ill?\n\n_Minor_. But the officers of Christ in the church have directions for\nchurch government, encouragements to well-ruling, and discouragements\nfrom ill-ruling, particularly and peculiarly applied unto them by the\nword of God.\n\nThis assumption or minor proposition may be cleared by divers Scriptures\naccording to the particular branches thereof, viz:\n\n1. Directions for church government are particularly applied by the word\nof Christ to his own officers: as for instance, they are directed to\n_bind and loose_--to _remit_ and _retain sins on earth_, Matt. xvi. 19,\nand xviii. 18; John xx. 21, 23. _To judge them that are within the_\nChurch, _not without_, 1 Cor. v. 12. _Not to lord it, domineer_, or\n_overrule the flock of Christ_, 1 Pet. v. To _rule well_, 1 Tim. v. 17.\nTo rule _with diligence_, Rom. xii. 8. To _lay hands suddenly on no man,\nneither to be partakers of other men's sins, but to keep themselves\npure_, 1 Tim. v. 22. _Not to prefer one before another, nor do anything\nby partiality_, 1 Tim. v. 21. _To rebuke them that sin before all, that\nothers also may fear_, 1 Tim. v. 20. _To reject a heretic after once or\ntwice admonition_, Tit. iii. 10. To use the _authority that is given\nthem from the Lord to the edification, not to the destruction_ of the\nChurch, 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10; with divers such like rules specially\ndirected to Christ's officers.\n\n2. Encouragements to well-ruling are peculiarly directed to Christ's\nofficers. For, 1. They are the persons specially commended in that\nrespect; _well-ruling_, 1 Tim. v. 17. _Good and faithful steward_, Luke\nxii. 42. The angels of the churches are praised for their good\ngovernment, Rev. ii. 2, 3, 6, and ver. 18, 19. 2. They are the persons\nto whom the promises, in reference to good government, are directed, as\nMatt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18-20; John xx. 21, 23; Matt. xxviii. 19, 20;\nLuke xii. 42-44; 1 Pet. v. 4. 3. They are the persons whom the Lord will\nhave peculiarly rewarded, now with _double honor_, 1 Tim. v. 17;\nhereafter with _endless glory_, 1 Pet. v. 4.\n\n3. Discouragements, deterring from ill-governing, are also specially\napplied to Christ's officers, whether by way of dispraise or threats,\n&c., Rev. ii. 12, 14-16, and ver. 18, 20.\n\nNow if, 1. Rules for church government, 2. Encouragements in reference\nto well ruling, and, 3. Discouragements in reference to ill-ruling, be\nso peculiarly directed by the word of Christ to his own officers, we may\nconclude,\n\nTherefore the officers of Christ in the Church are the only subjects of\npower from Christ for the government of his Church.\n\n_Object_. But the church[99] of a particular congregation fully\nfurnished with officers, and rightly walking in judgment and peace, is\nthe first subject of all church authority, as appears from the example\nof the church of Corinth in the excommunication of the incestuous\nCorinthian, 1 Cor. v. 1-5; wherein it appears that the presbytery alone\ndid not put forth this power, but the brethren also concurred in this\nsentence with some act of power, (viz. a negative power:) for, 1. The\nreproof, for not proceeding to sentence sooner, is directed to the whole\nChurch, as well as to the presbytery. They are all blamed for not\nmourning, &c., 1 Cor. v. 2. 2. The command is directed to them all, when\nthey are gathered together, (_and what is that but to a church\nmeeting?_) to proceed against him, 1 Cor. v. 4, 13. 3. He declareth this\nact of theirs, in putting him out, to be a judicial act, ver. 12. 4.\nUpon his repentance the apostle speaketh to the brethren, as well as to\ntheir elders, to forgive him, 2 Cor. ii. 4-10. Consequently, Christ's\nchurch officers are not the peculiar, immediate, or only subject of the\npower of the keys, as hath been asserted.\n\n_Ans_. I. As for the main proposition asserted in this objection,\nsomething hath been formerly laid down to show the unsoundness of it.\n(See chap. X. near the end.) Whereunto thus much may be superadded. 1.\nWhat necessity is there that a particular congregation should be fully\nfurnished with officers, to make it the subject of all church authority?\nFor deacons are one sort of officers, yet what authority is added to the\nChurch by the addition of deacons, whose office it is only to serve\ntables, Acts vi., not to rule the Church? or if the Church have no\ndeacons, as once it had not, Acts i. 2, and before that, all the time\nfrom Christ, wherein is she maimed or defective in her authority? 2. If\nthe Church, fully furnished with officers, yet walk not in judgment and\npeace, then in such case it is granted, that a particular congregation\nis not the first subject of all church authority. Then a congregation\nthat walks in error or heresy, or passion, or profaneness, all which are\ncontrary to judgment; and that walks in divisions, schisms, contentions,\n&c., which are contrary to peace, loseth her authority. Stick but close\nto this principle, and you will quickly lay the church authority of most\nindependent congregations in the dust. But who shall determine whether\nthey walk in judgment and peace, or not? Not themselves; for that were\nto make parties judges in their own case, and would produce a very\npartial sentence. Not sister churches; for all particular churches,\naccording to them, have equal authority, and none may usurp one over\nanother. Not a presbyterial church, for such they do not acknowledge.\nThen it must be left undetermined, yea undeterminable, (according to\ntheir principles;) consequently, who can tell when they have any\nauthority at all? 3. Suppose the congregation had all her officers, and\nwalked in judgment and peace also, yet is she not the first subject of\nall authority; for there is a synodal authority, beyond a congregational\nauthority, as confessed by Mr. Cotton.[100]\n\nII. As for the proofs of this proposition asserted here, they seem\nextremely invalid and unsatisfying. For,\n\nThe instance of the church of Corinth excommunicating the incestuous\nperson, will not prove the congregation to be the first subject of all\nchurch authority: 1. Partly, because the church of Corinth was a\npresbyterial church, having several congregations in it, (as hereafter\nis evidenced, chap. XIII.;) now to argue from the authority of a\npresbyterial church, to the authority of a congregational,\naffirmatively, is not cogent. 2. Partly, because here were but two acts\nof power mentioned in this instance, viz. casting out and receiving\nagain of the incestuous person: suppose the community had joined the\npresbytery in these two acts, (which yet is not proved,) will it follow\ntherefore they are the first subject of all church authority? Are not\nordination of presbyters, determination in case of appeals, of schism,\nof heresy, &c., acts of authority above the sphere of a single\ncongregation? What one congregation can be instanced in the New\nTestament that did ever execute any of these acts of authority?\n\nThe reasons brought, prove not that the brethren did concur with the\npresbytery in this sentence with some act of power, as will appear\nplainly, if they be considered severally.\n\n1. Not the reproof, 1 Cor. v. 2, \"And ye are puffed up, and have not\nrather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away\nfrom among you.\" Here they are blamed, that they no more laid to heart\nso vile a scandal, which should have been matter of mourning to the\nwhole congregation; that they instead of mourning were puffed up,\ngloried in their shame; and that they sluggishly neglected to endeavor,\nin their sphere, his casting out. And all this blame might justly be\ncharged upon the whole church, the fraternity as well as the presbytery:\nthe scandal of one member should be the grief of the whole body of the\nchurch. What then? Hath therefore the fraternity, as well as the\npresbytery, power to cast him out? That were a miserable consequence\nindeed: the people should not only have mourned for the sin, but have\nurged the presbytery to have proceeded to sentence, and after sentence\nhave withdrawn from him, in obedience to the sentence; but none of all\nthese can amount to a proper act of church authority in them.\n\n2. Nor doth the apostle's command prove the people's concurrence in any\nact of power with the presbytery, 1 Cor. v. 4, 5, \"In the name of our\nLord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, to deliver such an one\nunto Satan,\" &c.: ver. 7, \"Purge out therefore the old leaven,\" &c.: and\nver. 13, \"Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.\"\nIn which passages it is supposed the apostle directs his injunction to\nthem all (as well as to their presbytery) when they come together in\ntheir church meeting to proceed to sentence.\n\nBut against this reason, well ponder upon these considerations, viz: 1.\nIt is certain beyond all controversy, that the apostle did not direct\nthese commands to the whole church of Corinth absolutely, and\nuniversally, without all exception and limitation to any members at all:\nfor by his own rule, \"Women must be silent in their churches, it being a\nshame for a woman to speak in the church,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35, and\nchildren or fools were not able to judge. Hence it is evident that a\nchurch absolutely and universally taken, cannot possibly be the\nministerial ruling church which hath the authority. 2. It is evident to\nany man that is but moderately acquainted with the Scriptures, that God\nuseth to direct his commands, reproofs, and other speeches to a people\nindifferently, and as it were collectively and generally, which yet he\nintends should be particularly applied and appropriated; not to all, but\nto this or that person or persons, only among such a people\ndistributively and respectively; according to their respective callings,\ninterests, relations, &c., as in the Old Testament God directs a command\nto the people of Israel indefinitely, and as it were collectively, to\nkill enticers to idolatry, false prophets, Deut. xiii. 9; but intended\nthat the judge should sentence him, finding him guilty by witnesses. The\nLord also directs his command to all the people, as it were\ncollectively, to put out of the camp \"every one that was a leper, and\nhad an issue, or was defiled by the dead,\" Numb. v. 2; but intended that\nthe priest should peculiarly take and apply this command to himself, who\nwas to judge in these cases. See Lev. xiii. and elsewhere. So in the New\nTestament the apostle praised the Corinthians indefinitely, and as it\nwere collectively, for \"remembering him in all things, and keeping the\nordinances as he delivered them to them,\" 1 Cor. xi. 2; wherein he\nintended only to commend the virtuous; and after he discommends them\nindefinitely for \"coming together not for better, but for worse,\" 1 Cor.\nxi. 17; intending only their dispraise that were herein particularly\ndelinquent among them. Again, he speaks indefinitely, and as it were\ncollectively and generally, \"Ye may all prophesy one by one,\" 1 Cor.\nxiv. 31; but he intended it only to the prophets respectively, not to\nall the members; for he saith elsewhere, \"Are all prophets?\" 1 Cor. xii.\n29. And writing to the churches of Galatia, Gal. i. 2, against false\nteachers he speaks thus to all those churches collectively, \"A little\nleaven leaveneth the whole lump,\" Gal. v. 9. And, \"I would they were\neven cut off who trouble you,\" ver. 12. Now every one of these churches\nwere to apply this to themselves respectively, Independents themselves\nbeing judges. So here in this present case of the church of Corinth, the\napostle directs his commands to them, as it were collectively, about\nputting away the incestuous person, which commands were particularly to\nbe put in execution by the presbytery in that church in whose hands the\nchurch authority was.[101]\n\nThus taking these commands, 1 Cor. v. 4, 7, 13, though directed\nindefinitely, and as it were collectively to the whole church, yet\nintended respectively to be put in execution by the presbytery in that\nchurch, they hold forth no concurrence of the people in any act of power\nat all with the church officers or presbytery. And it is a good note\nwhich Cameron[102] hath upon this place, \"These things that are written\nin this epistle are so to be taken of the presbytery and of the people,\nthat every one both of the presbyters and of the people, should\ninterpret the command according to the reason of his office.\" 3. When\nthe apostle reciteth the proceedings of the church in this very case of\nthe incestuous person, in his 2d epistle, he saith, \"Sufficient to such\na man is this punishment\" (or censure) \"which was inflicted of many,\" 2\nCor. ii. 6. It is very observable, he saith not, _of all_; nor _of\nmany_, but _of the chief ones_, viz. the church officers, who had the\nrule and government of the church committed to them: (the article _the_\nbeing emphatical;) for this word translated _many_ may as well be\ntranslated chief, denoting worth, &c., as many, denoting number. And in\nthis sense the Holy Ghost ofttimes useth this word in the New Testament;\nas for instance, \"Is not the life better than meat?\" Matt. vi. 25.\n\"Behold, a greater than Jonah is here,\" Matt. xii. 41. \"And behold, a\ngreater than Solomon is here,\" Matt. xii. 41. \"To love him with all the\nheart,\" &c., \"is more than all whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices,\"\nMark xii. 33. And again, ver. 43, \"This poor widow hath cast more than\nall they,\" &c. And thus it is frequently used to signify quality, worth,\ngreatness, dignity, eminency, &c., and so it may be conveniently\ninterpreted in this of the Corinthians. 4. Though all proper acts of\nauthority appertain only to the church officers, yet we are not against\nthe people's fraternal concurrence therewith. People may incite the\npresbytery to the acts of their office; people may be present at the\nadministration of censures, &c., by the elders, as Cyprian of old would\ndispatch all public acts, the people being present; people may judge\nwith a judgment of discretion, acclamation, and approbation, &c., as the\nelders judge with a judgment of power; and people afterwards may, yea\nmust, withdraw from delinquents sentenced, that the sentence may attain\nits proposed end. But none of these are properly any acts of power.\n\n3. Nor doth the apostle's expression, verse 12, \"Do you not judge them\nthat are within?\" prove that the people concur with any authoritative\nact in the elders' sentence. For, 1. This being spoken to them\nindefinitely, was to be applied distributively and respectively, only to\nthem to whom it properly appertained, viz. the elders, as hath been\nshowed. They only have authority to judge. 2. Such a judgment is allowed\nto the saints in church censures, as shall be allowed to them when the\nsaints shall judge the world, yea angels, 1 Cor. vi. 1-3, viz. in both a\njudgment of acclamation, approbation, &c., as assessors, as people judge\nat the assizes; not in either a judgment of authority, which the judge\nand jury only do pronounce.\n\n4. Nor, finally, doth the apostle's direction to forgive the incestuous,\nbeing penitent, 2 Cor. ii. 4-10, which seems to be given to all, prove\nthe people's concurrence with the elders in any act of power. For the\nauthoritative forgiving and receiving him again, belonged only to the\nelders; the charitable forgiving, receiving, and comforting of him,\nbelonged also to the people. As the judge and jury at an assizes, acquit\nby judgment of authority, the people only by judgment of discretion and\nacclamation.\n\nThus it appears how little strength is in this instance of the church of\nCorinth, (though supposed to be the strongest ground the Independents\nhave,) for the propping up of their popular government, and\nauthoritative suffrage of the people.\n\n\nSECTION III.\n\nIII. Having thus considered the subject of authority and power for\nchurch government: 1. Negatively, what it is not, viz. neither the\npolitical magistrate, nor yet the community of the faithful, or whole\nbody of the people, Chap. IX. and X. 2. Positively, what it is, viz.\nChrist's own officers in his church, as hath been explained and\nevidenced, Sect. 2, of this Chap. 3. Now, in the third and last place,\nwe are to insist a little further upon this subject of the power, by way\nof explanation: and to inquire, seeing Christ's officers are found to be\nthe subject of this power, in what sense or notion they are the subject\nand receptacle of this authority and power from Christ, whether jointly\nor severally; as solitarily and single from one another, or associated\nand incorporated into assemblies with one another; or in both respects?\n\nFor resolution herein we must remember that distribution of the keys, or\nof proper ecclesiastical power, (which was briefly mentioned before in\nPart 2, Chap. III.) into that which is,\n\n1. More special and peculiar to the office of some church governors,\nwhich by virtue of their office they are to execute and discharge: thus\nit is peculiar to the minister's office, 1. To preach the word; compare\nthese places together, Matt. xxviii. 18-20, John xx. 21-23, Rom. x. 15,\n1 Tim. v. 17, Heb. xiii. 7, 2 Tim. iv. 1, 2, &c. 2. _To dispense the\nsacraments_, Matt. xxviii. 18-20, 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25. The word and\nsacraments were joined together in the same commission to the same\nofficers, viz. the preaching presbyters, &c., as is evident in that of\nMatt. xxviii. 19.\n\n2. More general and common to the office of all church governors, as the\npower of censures, viz. admonishing, excommunicating, and absolving, and\nof such other acts as necessarily depend thereupon; wherein not only the\npreaching, but also the ruling elders are to join and contribute their\nbest assistance; as may be collected from these several testimonies of\nScripture, Matt. xviii. 17, 18, _Tell the Church_,[103] 1 Cor. v. 2-13,\n2 Cor. ii. 6-12, compared with Rom. xii. 8, 1 Cor. xii. 28, and 1 Tim.\nv. 17.\n\nNow these officers of Christ, viz. they that labor in the word and\ndoctrine, and the ruling elders, are the subject of this power of\njurisdiction as they are united in one body, hence called a Church,\nMatth. xviii. 18, viz. the governing or ruling church; for no other can\nthere be meant; and presbytery,[104] i.e. a society or assembly of\npresbyters together, 1 Tim. iv. 14.\n\nThe presbyters, elderships, or assemblies wherein these officers are\nunited and associated, are of two sorts, viz: 1. The lesser assemblies,\nconsisting of the ministers and ruling elders in each single\ncongregation; which, for distinction's sake, is styled the\ncongregational eldership. 2. The greater assemblies, consisting of\nchurch governors sent from several churches and united into one body,\nfor governing of all these churches within their own bounds, whence\ntheir members were sent. These greater assemblies are either\npresbyterial or synodal. 1. Presbyterial, consisting of the ministers\nand elders of several adjacent or neighboring single congregations, or\nparish churches, ruling those several congregations in common; this kind\nof assembly is commonly called the presbytery, or, for distinction's\nsake, the classical presbytery, i.e. the presbytery of such a rank of\nchurches. 2. Synodal, consisting of ministers and elders, sent from\npresbyterial assemblies, to consult and conclude about matters of common\nand great concernment to the church within their limits. Such was that\nassembly mentioned, Acts xv. These synodal assemblies are either, 1. Of\nministers and elders from several presbyteries within one province,\ncalled provincial. 2. Or of ministers and elders from several provinces\nwithin one nation, called therefore national. Or, 3. Of ministers and\nelders from the several nations within the whole Christian world,\ntherefore called ecumenical: for all which assemblies, congregational,\npresbyterial, and synodal, and the subordination of the lesser to the\ngreater assemblies respectively, there seems to be good ground and\ndivine warrant in the word of God, as (God willing) shall be evinced in\nthe xii., xiii., xiv., and xv. chapters following.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\n_Of the Divine Right of Congregational Elderships or Kirk Sessions, for\nthe government of the Church._\n\n\nTouching congregational elderships, consisting of the ministers and\nruling elders of the several single congregations, which are called the\nlesser assemblies, or smaller presbyteries, and which are to manage and\norder all ecclesiastical matters within themselves, which are of more\nimmediate, private, particular concernment to their own congregations\nrespectively; and consequently, of more easy dispatch, and of more daily\nuse and necessity. Concerning these congregational presbyteries, we\nshall not now take into consideration either, 1. What are the members\nconstituting and making up these elderships; whether ruling elders by\ndivine warrant may be superadded to the pastors and teachers, and so be\nassociated for the government of the congregation. For the divine right\nof the ruling elders, distinct from the preaching elder for the\ngovernment of the church, hath been evidenced at large, Chapter XI.,\nSection 1, foregoing. And if any acts of government in the church belong\nto the ruling elder at all, sure those acts of common jurisdiction, to\nbe dispatched in these least assemblies, cannot of all other be denied\nunto him. 2. Nor shall it here be discussed, what the power of\ncongregational elderships is, whether it be universally extensive to all\nacts of government ecclesiastical whatsoever, without exception or\nlimitation; and that independently, without subordination to the greater\nassemblies, and without all liberty of appeal thereunto in any cases\nwhatsoever, though of greatest and most common concernment. Which things\nare well stated and handled by others;[105] and will in some measure be\nconsidered afterwards in Chapter XV.\n\n3. But the thing for the present to be insisted upon, against the\nErastian and prelatical party, is, the divine right of authority and\npower for church government, which is in congregational presbyteries or\nelderships, in reference to their respective congregations. Take it\nthus:\n\nElderships of single congregations vested and furnished with\necclesiastical authority and power to exercise and dispense acts of\ngovernment in and over those respective congregations whereunto they do\nbelong, are by divine right warrantable.\n\nFor confirmation hereof the light of nature, the institution of Christ,\nthe apostolical practice, and the law of necessity, seem to speak\nsufficiently unto us.\n\n1. The common light of nature thus far directeth all sorts of smaller\nsocieties, whether political or ecclesiastical, to compose all\nparticular and more private differences and offences within themselves;\nand to decide and determine small, common, easy causes and matters, by\nsmaller courts and judicatories appointed for that end: a vain thing to\ntrouble more and greater assemblies with those matters, that may as well\nbe determined by the lesser. It was wise and grave counsel which Jethro,\nMoses' father-in-law, gave to Moses, that he should set up over the\npeople certain judges inferior to himself, who themselves might judge\nall smaller matters, but all _great and hard matters to be brought to\nMoses_, Exod. xviii. 22, 26. And our Saviour seems to insinuate, that\nthe Jews had their inferior courts for inferior causes, superior\njudicatories for greater, in that gradation of his, Matt. v. 22.\nLikewise they had lesser and greater ecclesiastical assemblies, (as\nafter will appear.) Now, to what use are greater and lesser\njudicatories, civil or ecclesiastical, but that the lesser and lighter\ncauses may be judged in the inferior, harder and greater in the\nsuperior?\n\n2. The institution of Christ recorded Matt. xviii. 15-21, seems to hold\nforth notably both single congregational elderships, and their power.\nAnd this, whether we consider the Jewish form, unto which our Saviour\nseems to refer; or whether we observe the matter of his discourse.\n\n1. As for the Jewish form of church government (unto which our Saviour\nhere seems to allude) we may observe it was managed by two, if not three\nsorts of ecclesiastical courts, viz: By the Sanhedrin, presbytery, and\nsynagogue, (much like to the evangelical synod, presbytery, and\ncongregational eldership since Christ.) 1. They had their\necclesiastical,[106] as well as their civil Sanhedrin, for high and\ndifficult affairs of the church; which seems first to be constituted,\nExod. xxiv. 1, and after decay thereof, it was restored by King\nJehoshaphat, 2 Chron. xix. 8; and from this court that national church's\nreformation proceeded, Neh. vi. 13. 2. Again, it is very probable they\nhad between their Sanhedrin and their synagogue a middle ecclesiastical\ncourt called _The Presbytery_, Luke xxii. 66, and Acts xxii. 5, _and the\nwhole presbytery_. Let such as are expert in Jewish antiquities and\ntheir polity, consider and judge. 3. Finally, they had their lesser\njudicatories in their synagogues, or congregational meetings: for, their\nsynagogues were not only for prayer, and the ministry of the word, in\nreading and expounding the Scriptures, but also for public censures,\ncorrecting of offences, &c., as that phrase seems to import, \"And I\npunished them oft in every synagogue,\" Acts xxvi. 11. His facts and\nproceedings, it is true, were cruel, unjust, impious. But why inflicted\n_in every synagogue_, rather than in other places, and that by virtue of\nthe _high priest's letters_, Acts ix. 1, 2; but there the Jews had\njudicatories, that inflicted public punishments upon persons\necclesiastically offending? Besides, we read often in the New Testament\nof the _rulers of the synagogue_, as Mark v. 35, 36, 38; Luke viii. 41,\nand xiii. 14; and of Crispus and Sosthenes the chief _rulers of the\nsynagogue_, Acts xviii. 8, 17; whence is intimated to us, that these\nsynagogues had their rule and government in themselves; and that this\nrule was not in one person, but in divers together; for if there were\nchief rulers, there were also inferiors subordinate unto them: but this\nis put out of doubt, in Acts xiii. 15, where after the lecture of the\nlaw and the prophets, _the rulers of the synagogue sent unto\nthem_--_synagogue_ in the singular number, and rulers in the plural.\nThus analogically there should be ecclesiastical rulers and governors in\nevery single congregation, for the well guiding thereof. But if this\nsatisfy not, add hereunto the material passages in our Saviour's speech.\n\n2. Now touching the matter of our Saviour's discourse, it makes this\nvery clear to us; for by a gradation he leadeth us from admonition\nprivate and personal, to admonition before two or three witnesses, and\nfrom admonition before two or three witnesses, to the representative\nbody of one church, (as the phrase _tell the church_ must here\nnecessarily be interpreted,) if there the difference can be composed,\nthe offence removed, or the cause ended; rather than unnecessarily\nrender the offence, and so our brother's shame, more public and\nnotorious. And that the presbytery or eldership of a particular\ncongregation, vested with power to hear and determine such cases as\nshall be brought before them, is partly, though not only here intended,\nseems evident in the words following, which are added for the\nstrengthening and confirming of what went before in ver. 17: \"Verily, I\nsay unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in\nheaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in\nheaven. Again, I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth\nas touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of\nmy Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered\ntogether in my name, there am I in the midst of them,\" Matt. xviii.\n18-20. In which passages these things are to be noted: 1. That this\nchurch to which the complaint is to be made, is invested with power of\n_binding_ and _loosing_, and that so authoritatively that what by this\nchurch shall be bound or loosed on earth shall also be bound or loosed\nin heaven, according to Christ's promise. 2. That these acts of\n_binding_ or _loosing_, may be the acts but of two or three, and\ntherefore consequently of the eldership of a particular congregation;\nfor where such a juridical act was dispatched by a classical presbytery,\nit is said to be done of _many_, 2 Cor. ii. 6, because that in such\ngreater presbyteries there are always more than _two or three_. And\nthough some do pretend, that the faults here spoken of by our Saviour in\nthis place, were injuries, not scandals; and that the church here\nmentioned was not any ecclesiastical consistory, or court, but the civil\nSanhedrin, a court of civil judicature; and yet most absurdly they\ninterpret the binding and loosing here spoken of, to be doctrinal and\ndeclarative; not juridical and authoritative; as if the doctrinal\nbinding and loosing were in the power of the civil Sanhedrin:[107] yet\nall these are but vain, groundless pretences and subterfuges, without\nsubstance or solidity, as the learned and diligent reader may easily\nfind demonstrated by consulting these judicious authors mentioned in the\nfoot note,[108] to whom for brevity's sake he is referred for\nsatisfaction in these and divers such like particulars.\n\n3. The consideration of the apostolical practice, and state of the\nChurch of God in those times, may serve further to clear this matter to\nus. For, 1. We sometimes read of single congregations; and as the Holy\nGhost doth call the whole body of Christ _the Church_, Matt. xvi. 18, 1\nCor. xii. 28, and often elsewhere; and the larger particular members of\nthat body of Christ (partaking the nature of the whole, as a drop of\nwater is as true water as the whole ocean) churches; as, _the church of\nJerusalem_, Acts viii. 1; _the church of Antioch_, Acts xiii. 1; _the\nchurch of Ephesus_, Rev. ii. 1; _the church of Corinth_, 2 Cor. i. 1;\n(these being the greater presbyterial churches, as after will appear,\nChap. XIII.;) so the same holy Spirit of Christ is pleased to style\nsingle congregations, _churches_, \"Let women keep silence in the\nchurches,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 34, i.e. in the single congregations of this one\nchurch of Corinth: and often mention is made of the church that is in\nsuch or such an _house_, as Rom. xvi. 5; 1 Cor. xvi. 19; Col. iv. 15;\nPhilem. 2; whether this be interpreted of the church made up only of the\nmembers of that family, or of the church that ordinarily did meet in\nsuch houses, it implies a single congregation. Now shall single\ncongregations have the name and nature of churches, and shall we imagine\nthey had not in them the ordinary standing church officers, viz. pastors\nand teachers, governments, or elders _ruling well_, and helps or\ndeacons? or is it probable they were furnished with these officers, and\nyet the officers furnished with no power for the government of these\nsingle congregations at all? 2. We find that the apostles being crowned\nwith such success in their ministry, as to be instruments of converting\nsuch multitudes to the faith as were sufficient to make up many several\nchurches from time to time, did diligently take care to ordain them\npresbyters, or elders _in every church_, Acts xiv. 23; Tit. i. 5. Now\ncan it be clearly evidenced by any, that these were not ruling as well\nas preaching presbyters; especially when it appears by other places that\nthe primitive churches had both? Rom. xii. 8; 1 Cor. xii. 28;\n\n1 Tim. v. 17. Or can we think that the apostles were not as careful to\nerect elderships in several congregations, as to appoint elders?\notherwise how could the apostles have answered it to their Lord and\nMaster Jesus Christ, in leaving them without that necessary provision of\ngovernment, which Christ himself had allowed to them, at least, in some\ncases, as hath been evidenced?\n\n4. Finally, necessity (which is a strong and cogent law) plainly and\nforcibly pleads for elderships in particular congregations endowed with\nauthority and power from Christ for government within themselves. For,\n1. How wearisome a thing would it be to all congregations, should every\none of their members be bound to attend upon synods and greater\npresbyteries, (which in the country are at a great distance from them,)\nin all ecclesiastical matters of judicature, if they had no relief in\ntheir own congregations? How impossible would it be for the greater\npresbyteries, not only to hear and determine all hard and weighty, but\nalso all small and easy causes that would be brought before them? And\nwhat should become of such a congregation as either voluntarily\ntransplants itself, or is accidentally cast among heathens or pagans in\nfar countries, where there are no Christians or churches to join and\nassociate withal, if they be denied an authoritative presbytery within\nthemselves, for preventing and healing of scandals, and preserving\nthemselves from destruction and ruin, which anarchy would unavoidably\nbring upon them?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII.\n\n_Of the Divine Right of Presbyteries, (for distinction's sake called\nClassical Presbyteries,) for the government of the Church._\n\n\nHaving spoken of the lesser, viz. congregational elderships, we come now\nto the greater ruling assemblies, which are either presbyterial or\nsynodal. And first, of the presbyterial assembly, or classical\npresbytery, viz. an assembly made up of the presbyters of divers\nneighboring single congregations, for governing of all those respective\ncongregations in common, whereunto they belong, in all matters of common\nconcernment and greater difficulty in the Church. The divine warrant and\nright of this presbytery, and of the power thereof for church\ngovernment, may principally be evidenced, 1. By the light of nature. 2.\nBy the light of Scripture, which light of Scripture was followed by the\nChurch in the ages after the apostolical times.\n\nI. The light of nature and right reason may discover to us (though more\ndimly) the divine warrant of the greater presbyteries, and of their\npower for the governing of the church. For,\n\n1. There are many ecclesiastical matters which are of common concernment\nto many single congregations, as trial of church officers, ordination\nand deposition of ministers, dispensation of censures, judicial\ndetermination of controversies, resolution in difficult cases of\nconscience, ordering of things indifferent, &c.; here the rule holds\nwell, that which concerns many congregations, is not to be considered\nand determined upon only by one, but those many concerned and interested\ntherein.\n\n2. Single congregational elderships stand in need of all mutual help and\nassistance one of another in the Lord, being, 1. Inwardly weak in\nthemselves; too prone to be turned out of the way, Heb. xii. 13, Gal. v.\n15, and too feeble for divers great tasks: as examination and ordination\nof ministers, &c., which weakness is healed by association with others\nassisting them. 2. Outwardly opposed by many dangerous and subtle\nadversaries: men as grievous wolves, &c., Acts xx. 28-30; 2 Pet. ii. 1;\nPhil. iii. 2; 1 Tim. iv. 1-7; Eph. iv. 14; devils, 1 Pet. v. 8. In such\ncases two are better than one: \"Wo to them that are alone; if they fall,\nwho shall take them up?\"\n\n3. Such intricate cases may fall out as cannot be determined and settled\nby the eldership of a single congregation. As for instance, some member\nin the congregation may conceive himself so wronged by the eldership\nthereof, that he cannot submit to their unjust sentence; shall he not in\nsuch case have liberty of appeal from them? If not, then he is left\nwithout a remedy, (which is the calamity of the Independent government.)\nIf he may, whether shall he appeal regularly but to an associated\npresbytery? therefore there must be such a presbytery to appeal unto.\nAgain, there may be a controversy betwixt the whole congregation, and\ntheir presbytery; yea, the presbytery itself may be equally divided\nagainst itself; yea, one single congregation may have a great and\nweighty contest with another sister congregation, (all single\ncongregations being equal in power and authority, none superior, none\ninferior to others.) Now, in these and such like cases, suppose both\nparties be resolute and wilful, and will not yield to any bare moral\nsuasion or advice without some superior authority, what healing is left\nin such cases, without the assistance of an authoritative presbytery,\nwherein the whole hath power to regulate all the parts?\n\n4. Single congregations, joined in vicinity and neighborhood to one\nanother, should avoid divisions, (which are destructive to all\nsocieties, as well ecclesiastical as civil,) and maintain peace and\nunity among themselves, (which is conservative to all societies;)\nneither of which, without associated presbyteries, can be firmly and\ndurably effected. Both which ought with all diligence to be endeavored.\nFor, 1. Peace and unity in the Church are in themselves amiable, and\nought to be promoted, Psal. cxxxiii. 1, &c.; Eph. iv. 3, 13; 1 Cor. i.\n10. 2. Schisms and divisions are simply evil, and all appearance, cause,\nand occasion thereof, ought carefully to be avoided, 1 Cor. xii. 25;\nRom. xvi. 17; 1 Thes. iv. 22. 3. All congregations are but as so many\nbranches, members, parts of that one church, one body, one family, one\ncommonwealth, one kingdom, whereof Christ is Head, Lord, and King; and\ntherefore they should communicate together, and harmoniously incorporate\nand associate with one another, (so far as may be,) for the common good,\npeace, unity, and edification of all. See 1 Cor. xii. 12-29; Eph. ii.\n12-16, and iv. 12-14, and v. 23-25.\n\nII. The light of Scripture will hold forth the divine warrant of greater\npresbyteries and their power for church government, far more clearly\nthan the light of nature. Forasmuch as we find in the Scriptures a\npattern of these greater presbyteries, and of their presbyterial\ngovernment over divers single congregations in common in the primitive\napostolical churches. For the greater evidence and perspicuity hereof,\ntake this proposition:\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath laid down in his word a pattern of\npresbyterial government in common over divers single congregations in\none Church, for a rule to his Church in all after ages. For confirmation\nhereof, there are chiefly these three positions to make good, which are\ncomprised in this proposition, viz: 1. That there is in the word a\npattern of divers single congregations in one church. 2. That there is\nin the word a pattern of one presbyterial government in common over\ndivers single congregations in one church. 3. Finally, that the pattern\nof the said presbyterial government, is for a rule to the churches of\nChrist in all after ages.\n\n\nPOSITION I.\n\nThat there is in the word a pattern of divers single congregations in\none church, may be plentifully evinced by four instances of churches,\n(to mention no more,) viz. the churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus,\nand Corinth. Touching which four these two things are clear in the\nScripture, viz: 1. That every of them was one church. 2. That in every\none of these churches there were more congregations than one. Both which\nwill fully evince a pattern of divers single congregations in one church\nheld forth in the word.\n\n1. The former of these, viz. That every one of these was one church,\nmay be proved by induction of particulars. 1. All the believers in\nJerusalem were one church; hence they are often comprised under the word\nchurch, of the singular number:--\"Against the church which was at\nJerusalem,\" Acts viii. 1. \"Then tidings of these things came unto the\nears of the church which was in Jerusalem,\" Acts ii. 22. \"And when they\nwere come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the\napostles and elders,\" Acts xv. 4. 2. All the believers in Antioch were\none church. \"Now there were in the church that was at Antioch, certain\nprophets,\" Acts xiii. 1. \"And when he had found him, he brought him to\nAntioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled\nthemselves with the church, and taught much people, and the disciples\nwere first called Christians in Antioch,\" Acts xi. 26. 3. All the\nbelievers in Ephesus were one church: \"And from Miletus he sent to\nEphesus, and called the elders of the church,\" Acts xx. 17. And after he\ngives them this charge, \"Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to all\nthe flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed\nthe church of God,\" ver. 28; all were but _one flock, one church_. \"Unto\nthe angel of the church of Ephesus, write,\" Rev. ii. 1. 4. All the\nbelievers in Corinth were one church, and comprised under that singular\nword, church: \"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth,\" 1 Cor. i. 2.\n\"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will of God, and Timothy our\nbrother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth,\" 2 Cor. i. 1. Thus\nin all these four instances it is clear beyond all contradiction, that\nthey were every of them respectively one church.\n\nThe latter of these, viz. that these primitive apostolical churches of\nJerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, and Corinth, were not every of them\nseverally and respectively only one single congregation, (as some\nimagine,) but consisted every of them of more congregations than one.\nThis shall be manifested in these four churches severally, as followeth:\n\nThe church of Jerusalem in Judea contained in it more congregations than\none. This may be convincingly evidenced divers ways, particularly from,\n1. The multitude of believers in that church. 2. The multitude of church\nofficers there. 3. The variety of languages there. 4. The manner of the\nChristians' public meetings in those primitive times, both in the church\nof Jerusalem, and in other churches.\n\n1. From the multitude of believers in the church of Jerusalem. For it is\npalpably evident to any impartial reader that will not wilfully shut his\neyes, and subject his reason unto the groundless dictates of men,\nagainst the clear light of the Scripture, that there were more believers\nin the church of Jerusalem, than could ordinarily meet in one\ncongregation, to partake of all the ordinances of Christ.\n\nAnd this may fully appear by these many instances following. 1. Christ\nafter his resurrection, and before his ascension, \"was seen of above\nfive hundred brethren at once,\" 1 Cor. xv. 6. 2. \"After that of James,\nthen of all the apostles,\" ver. 7. 3. At the election of Matthias, and\nbefore Christ's ascension, there were disciples together, the \"company\nof their names together was as it were one hundred and twenty,\" Acts i.\n15. 4. At Peter's sermon, \"they that gladly received his word, were\nbaptized. And that day were added about three thousand souls,\" Acts ii.\n1, 4. 5. And \"The Lord added to the Church daily such as should be\nsaved,\" ver. 27. 6. Afterwards at another of Peter's sermons, \"Many of\nthem that heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about\nfive thousand,\" Acts iv. 4. 7. After that, \"Believers were the more\nadded to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women,\" Acts v. 14. 8.\nFurthermore, the disciples multiplying, and the work of the ministry\nthereupon much increasing, the apostles were necessitated to appoint\nseven deacons for serving of tables, that they might wholly \"give\nthemselves to the ministry of the word and prayer,\" Acts vi. 1 to 7;\nwhence some have thought, that there were seven congregations in\nJerusalem, a deacon for every one. Certainly there were rather more than\nfewer, (saith the author of the Assertion of the Government of the\nChurch of Scotland,[109]) though we cannot determine how many. However\nthis, the Holy Ghost clearly testifieth that \"The word of God increased,\nand the number of the disciples in Jerusalem multiplied greatly.\" 9.\n\"And a great company of the priests became obedient to the faith,\" Acts\nvi. 7; and probably the example of the priests drew on multitudes to the\nGospel. All these forementioned were in a short time converted, and\nbecame members of this one church of Jerusalem, and that before the\ndispersion occasioned by the persecution of the Church, Acts viii. 1.\nNow should we put all these together, viz. both the number of believers\nexpressed in particular, which is 8,620, and the multitudes so often\nexpressed in the general, (which, for aught we know, might be many more\nthan the former,) what a vast multitude of believers was there in\nJerusalem! and how impossible was it for them to meet all together in\none congregation, to partake of all the ordinances of Jesus Christ! 10.\nIn like manner, after the dispersion forementioned, the word so\nprospered, and the disciples brought into the faith by it, so\nmultiplied, that it was still far more impossible for all the believers\nin the church of Jerusalem to meet in one congregation to partake of\nall the ordinances of Christ, than before. For it is said, \"Then had the\nchurches rest throughout all Judea\" (and the church of Jerusalem in\nJudea was doubtless one of those churches) \"and Galilee and Samaria, and\nwere edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and comfort of the\nHoly Ghost, were multiplied.\" 11. Again, \"the word of the Lord increased\nand multiplied,\" Acts xii. 24. 12. Furthermore, when Paul, with other\ndisciples, his fellow-travellers, came to Jerusalem, and \"declared to\nJames and the elders, what things God had wrought by his ministry among\nthe Gentiles--They glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest,\nbrother, how many\" myriads (or ten thousands) \"of believing Jews there\nare, and they are all zealous of the law\"--Acts xxi. 20. Our translation\nseems herein very defective, rendering it how many thousands; whereas it\nshould be, according to the Greek, how many ten thousands: and these\nmyriads seem to be in the church of Jerusalem, seeing it is said of\nthem, ver. 22, \"The multitude must needs come together, for they will\nhear that thou art come.\" Now considering this emphatical expression,\nnot only _thousands_, but _ten thousand_: not _only ten thousand_ in the\nsingular number, but _ten thousands, myriads_, in the plural number: nor\nonly _myriads, ten thousands_, in the plural number, but _how many ten\nthousands_; we cannot in reason imagine but there were at least three\nten thousands, viz: thirty thousand believers, and how all they should\nmeet together in one congregation for all ordinances, let the reader\njudge. Thus far of the proof, from the multitude of believers in the\nchurch of Jerusalem.\n\n_Except_. But the five thousand mentioned Acts iv. 4, are no new number\nadded to the three thousand, but the three thousand included in the five\nthousand, as Calvin and Beza think.\n\n_Ans_. 1. Then it is granted that five thousand one hundred and twenty,\nbesides an innumerable addition of converts, were in Jerusalem; which if\nsuch a number, and multitudes besides, could for edification meet in one\nplace, to partake of all the ordinances, let the reader judge.\n\n2. Though Calvin and Beza think the three thousand formerly converted to\nbe included in this number of five thousand, Acts iv. 4, yet divers both\nancient and modern interpreters are of another mind, as Augustine. There\ncame unto the body of the Lord in number three thousand faithful men;\nalso by another miracle wrought, there came other five thousand.[110]\nThese five thousand are altogether diverse from the three thousand\nconverted at the first sermon: so Lorinus, Aretius, and divers others.\n\n3. Besides a great number of testimonies, there are reasons to induce us\nto believe, that the three thousand are not included in the five\nthousand, viz: 1. As the three thousand mentioned in Acts ii. 41, did\nnot comprehend the one hundred and twenty mentioned Acts i. 15, so it\nholds in proportion that the three thousand mentioned there, are not\ncomprehended here in Acts iv. 4. Besides, 2. This sermon was not by\nintention to the church, or numbers already converted, but by occasion\nof the multitude flocking together to behold the miracle Peter and John\nwrought on the \"man that was lame from his mother's womb;\" as Acts iii.\n10-12; so that 'tis more than probable that the five thousand mentioned\nActs iv. 4, are a number superadded besides the three thousand already\nconverted.\n\n_Except_. But suppose such a number as three thousand, and afterwards\nfive thousand were converted in Jerusalem, yet these remained not\nconstant members of that Church, for the three thousand were not\ndwellers at Jerusalem, but strangers who came out of all countries to\nkeep the feast of Pentecost: yea, Acts ii. 9, they are said expressly to\nbe \"dwellers of Mesopotamia, Cappadocia,\" &c., and so might erect\nchurches where they came.\n\n_Ans_. 1. 'Tis said, Acts ii. 14, \"Peter standing\" (when he began to\npreach this sermon wherein the three thousand were converted) \"said, Ye\nmen of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, hearken to my voice;\"\nintimating that these he preached to dwelt at Jerusalem.\n\nBut grant that some of these men that heard Peter's sermon were formerly\ndwellers in Mesopotamia and Cappadocia, what hinders but that they might\nbe now dwellers at Jerusalem?\n\n3. The occasion of their coming up to Jerusalem at this time was not\nonly the observation of the feast of Pentecost, (which lasted but a\nday,) but also the great expectation that the people of the Jews then\nhad of the appearance of the Messiah in his kingdom, as we may collect\nfrom Luke xix. 11, where it is said, \"They thought the kingdom of God\nshould immediately appear;\" so that now they might choose to take up\ntheir dwellings at Jerusalem, and not return, as they had been wont, at\nthe end of their usual feasts.\n\n4. The Holy Ghost makes mention that in the particular places mentioned,\nver. 9, 10, that of all those nations there were some that dwelt at\nJerusalem; read Acts ii. 5, \"There were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews,\ndevout men out of every nation under heaven;\" if out of every nation,\nthen out of those nations there specified; and even there dwelling at\nJerusalem. 5. Those who were scattered by reason of persecution into\nJudea and Samaria, and other parts of the world, did not erect new\nchurches, but were still members of that one church in Jerusalem; so\nsaith the Scripture expressly, that \"they\" (of the church of Jerusalem)\n\"were all scattered abroad throughout the region of Judea and Samaria,\"\nActs viii. 1.\n\n_Except_. Although it should be granted that before the dispersion\nmentioned Acts viii. 1, 2, the number was so great that they could not\nmeet together in one place, yet the persecution so wasted and scattered\nthem all, that there were no more left than might meet in one\ncongregation?\n\n_Ans_. After the dispersion there were more believers in Jerusalem than\ncould meet together in one place for all acts of worship, as appears by\nActs ix. 31, \"The churches had rest throughout all Judea,\" &c., \"and\nwere multiplied;\" Acts xii. 24, \"The word of God grew and multiplied;\"\nand Acts xxi. 20, James saith of the believers of this church, \"how many\nthousands of the Jews there are which believe, and are zealous of the\nlaw;\" or, as it is in the Greek, thou seest how many _ten thousands_\nthere are of the Jews which believe; this text will evince, that there\nwere many thousands in the church of Jerusalem after the dispersion, as\nhath been observed: and if this number were not more after the\ndispersion than could meet together to partake of all ordinances, let\nthe reader judge.\n\n_Except_. But the text saith expressly, all were scattered except the\napostles.\n\n_Ans_. _All_ must be understood either of all the believers, or all the\nteachers and church officers in the church of Jerusalem, except\nbelievers; but it cannot be understood of all the believers that they\nwere scattered: and therefore it must be understood that all the\nteachers and church officers were scattered, except the apostles. That\nall the believers were not scattered will easily appear: For, 1. 'Tis\nsaid that Paul broke into houses, \"haling men and women, committed them\nto prison,\" ver. 3, and this he did in Jerusalem, Acts xxvi. 10;\ntherefore all could not be scattered. 2. \"They that were scattered,\npreached the word,\" ver. 4, which all the members, men and women, could\nnot do; therefore by all that were scattered must of necessity be meant,\nnot the body of believers in the church, but only the officers of the\nchurch. 3. If all the believers were scattered, to what end did the\napostles tarry at Jerusalem--to preach to the walls? this we cannot\nimagine.\n\n_Except_. But can any think the teachers were scattered, and the\nordinary believers were not, except we suppose the people more\ncourageous to stay by it than their teachers?\n\n_Ans_. It is hard to say, that those that are scattered in a\npersecution, are less courageous than those that stay and suffer. In the\ntime of the bishops' tyranny, many of the Independent ministers did\nleave this kingdom, while others of their brethren did abide by it,\nendured the heat and burden of the day, \"had trial of cruel mockings,\nbonds and imprisonments:\" now the Independent ministers that left us,\nwould think we did them wrong, should we say that they were less\ncourageous than those that stayed behind, enduring the hot brunt of\npersecution.\n\nII. From the multitude of church officers in Jerusalem, it may further\nappear, that there were more congregations than one in the church of\nJerusalem. For there were many apostles, prophets, and elders in this\nchurch of Jerusalem, as is plain, if we consider these following\npassages in the Acts of the Apostles. After Christ's ascension, \"the\neleven apostles returned to Jerusalem, and continued in prayer and\nsupplication,\" Acts i. 12-14. Matthias chosen by lot, was also \"numbered\nwith the eleven apostles,\" Acts i. 26. \"And when the day of Pentecost\nwas fully come, they were all with one accord in one place,\" Acts ii. 1.\n\"Peter standing up with the eleven, lift up his voice and said,\" Acts\nii. 14. \"They were pricked in their heart, and said to Peter and to the\nrest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?\" Acts ii. 37.\n\"And the same day there were added about three thousand souls, and they\ncontinued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in\nbreaking of bread, and in prayers,\" Acts ii. 42. \"And with great power\ngave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus,\" Acts\niv. 33. \"As many as were possessors of lands or houses, sold them, and\nbrought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at\nthe apostles' feet,\" Acts iv. 34, 35, 37. \"Then the twelve called the\nmultitude of the disciples to them,\" Acts vi. 2. \"Now, when the apostles\nwhich were at Jerusalem,\" Acts viii. 14. \"They determined that Paul and\nBarnabas and certain other of them should go up to Jerusalem unto the\napostles and elders about this question. And when they were come to\nJerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and\nelders; and the apostles and elders came together,\" Acts xv. 2, 4, 6,\n22, 23; xi. 30. And \"in those days came prophets from Jerusalem unto\nAntioch,\" Acts xi. 27. In all which places, the multitude of apostles,\nelders, and prophets in this church of Jerusalem is evident. And it is\nfurther observable, that the apostles devolved the serving of tables\nupon the seven deacons, that they might wholly \"give themselves to\nprayer and the ministry of the word,\" Acts vi, 2; which needed not, nor\nwould there have been full employment for the apostles, if there had\nnot been divers congregations in that one church of Jerusalem.\n\n_Except_. 'Tis true, the apostles were for a time in Jerusalem, yet when\nin Judea or elsewhere any received the gospel, the apostles went abroad\nto erect other churches.\n\n_Ans_. Touching the apostles going abroad, there can be given but one\ninstance, Acts viii. 14, where the whole twelve went not forth, but only\ntwo were sent, viz. Peter and John: but suppose it were granted, that\nupon some special occasions the apostles went out from Jerusalem, can it\nbe imagined that the apostles' ordinary abode would be at Jerusalem, to\nattend only one single congregation, as if that would fill all their\nhands with work?\n\n_Except_. The apostles were well employed when they met in an upper\nroom, and had but one hundred and twenty for their flock, and this for\nforty days together; now if they stayed in Jerusalem when they had but\none hundred and twenty, and yet had their hands filled with work, the\npresence of the apostles argues not more congregations in Jerusalem than\ncould meet in one place for all acts of worship.\n\n_Ans_. 1. From Christ's ascension (immediately after which they went up\nto the upper chamber) to the feast of Pentecost, there were but ten\ndays, not forty; so that there is one mistake.\n\n2. During that time betwixt Christ's ascension and the feast of\nPentecost, (whether ten or forty days is not very material,) the\napostles were especially taken up in prayer and supplication, waiting\nfor the promise of the Spirit to qualify them for the work of the\nministry: now, because the twelve apostles, before they had received the\nextraordinary gifts of the Spirit, did continue for a short time in\nJerusalem with a small number in prayer, will it therefore follow that\nafter they had received these extraordinary gifts, that they were bound\nup within the limits of one single congregation?\n\n_Except_. The argument that there were many teachers in Jerusalem,\nproves not that there were more congregations in Jerusalem than one,\nbecause there were then many gifted men, which were not officers, which\nyet occasionally instructed others, as Aquila did Apollos; therefore it\nseems they were only gifted persons, not officers.\n\n_Ans_. 1. Grant that in those times there were many gifted men, not in\noffice, which might occasionally instruct others, as Aquila did Apollos;\nyet it is further to be noted, that,\n\n2. This instructing must be either private, or public; if private only,\nthen the objection is of no force, (because these teachers instructed\npublicly;) if in public, then if this objection were of force, it would\nfollow, that women might instruct publicly, because Priscilla, as well\nas Aquila, instructed Apollos.\n\n3. The current of expositors say, that the seventy disciples were at\nJerusalem among the one hundred and twenty, Acts i. 16, who were\nteachers by office.\n\nIII. From the variety of languages among the disciples at Jerusalem, it\nis evident there were more congregations than one in that one church:\nthe diversity of languages among them is plainly mentioned in divers\nplaces, \"And there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men out of\nevery nation under heaven. Now every man heard them speak in his own\nlanguage,\" &c., Acts ii. 5, 8-12. Now, of those that heard this variety\nof languages, and Peter's sermon thereupon, \"They that gladly received\nhis word, were baptized, and the same day there were added about three\nthousand souls,\" Acts ii. 41, which diversity of languages necessitated\nthose members of the church of Jerusalem to enjoy the ordinances in\ndivers distinct congregations in their own language. And that they might\nso do, the Spirit furnished the apostles, &c., with diversity of\nlanguages, which diversity of languages were as well for edification of\nthem within the Church, as for a sign to them that were without.\n\n_Except_. Though the Jews being dispersed were come in from other\ncountries, yet they were all generally learned, and understood the\nHebrew tongue, the language of their own nation, so that diversity of\ntongues proves not, that of necessity there must be distinct places to\nmeet in.\n\n_Ans_. 1. It is easier said than proved, that the Jews were so generally\nskilled in the Hebrew tongue, when, while they were scattered in Media\nand Parthia, and other places, they had no universities or schools of\nlearning. Besides, it is not to be forgotten, that the proper language\nor dialect in those days in use among the Jews was Syriac; as appears by\ndivers instances of Syriac words in the New Testament, as of the Jews'\nown terms: Acts i. 19, which \"in their proper tongue, is called\nAceldama;\" John xix. 13. 17, _Gabbatha, Golgotha_, &c.; Mark xv. 34,\n_Eloi, Eloi, lama-sabachthani_; with divers other pure Syriac terms.\nGrant they did; yet,\n\n2. There were in Jerusalem proselytes also, Romans, Cappadocians,\nCretians, and Arabians, Acts ii. 10, 11; how could they be edified in\nthe faith, if only one congregation, where nothing but Hebrew was\nspoken, met in Jerusalem; if so be there were not other congregations\nfor men of other languages, that understood not the Hebrew tongue?\n\nIV. From the manner of Christians' public meetings in those primitive\ntimes, both in the church of Jerusalem and in other churches. It is\nplain that the multitudes of Christians in Jerusalem, and other\nchurches, could not possibly meet all together in one single\ncongregation, inasmuch as they had no public temples, or capacious\nplaces for worship and partaking of all ordinances, (as we now have,)\nbut private places, _houses, chambers_, or _upper rooms_, (as the\nunsettled state of the Church and troublesomeness of those times would\npermit,) which in all probability were of no great extent, nor any way\nable to contain in them so many thousand believers at once, as there\nwere: \"They met from house to house, to break bread,\" Acts ii. 46. \"In\nan upper room the apostles with the women and brethren continued in\nprayer and supplication,\" Acts i. 12-14. We read of their meetings in\nthe _house of Mary_, Acts xii. 12. In the school _of one Tyrannus_, Acts\nxix. 9. In an _upper chamber at Troas_, Acts xx. 8. In _Paul's own hired\nhouse_ at Rome, Acts xxviii. 30, 31. In the _house of Aquila and\nPriscilla_, where the church met, therefore called the _church in his\nhouse_, Rom. xvi. 5; 1 Cor. xvi. 19. In the _house of Nimphas_, Col. iv.\n15, and in the _house of Archippus_, Philem. 2. This was their manner of\npublic meetings in the apostles' times: which also continued in the next\nages, as saith Eusebius,[111] till, by indulgence of succeeding\nemperors, they had large churches, houses of public meeting erected for\nthem.\n\nTo sum up all: 1. There were in the church at Jerusalem greater numbers\nof believers than could possibly meet at once to partake of all Christ's\nordinances. 2. There were more church officers than one single\ncongregation could need, or than could be fully employed therein, unless\nwe will say, that they preached but seldom. 3. There was such diversity\nof languages among them, that they must needs rank themselves into\nseveral congregations, according to their languages, else he that spoke\nin one language to hearers of many several languages, would be a\nbarbarian to them, and they to him. 4. Finally, their places of ordinary\nmeeting were private, of small extent, incapable of containing so many\nthousands at once as there were believers; and by all these, how evident\nis it, that there must needs be granted that there were more\ncongregations than one in this one church of Jerusalem!\n\nII. The church of Antioch, in Syria, consisted also of more\ncongregations than one. This appears,\n\n1. From the multitude of believers at Antioch. For, 1. After the\ndispersion upon Saul's persecution, _the Lord Jesus was preached at\nAntioch, and a great number believed_, &c., Acts xi. 21. 2. Upon\n_Barnabas's_ preaching there, _much people was added to the Lord_, Acts\nxi. 24. 3. _Barnabas_ and _Saul_ for a year together taught much people\nthere, and disciples there so mightily multiplied, that there Christ's\ndisciples first received the eminent and famous denomination of\nCHRISTIANS, and so were and still are called throughout the whole world,\nActs xi. 25, 26.\n\n2. From the multitudes of prophets and preachers that ministered at\nAntioch. For, 1. Upon the dispersion of the Jews at Jerusalem, _divers\nof them (being men of Cyprus and Cyrene) preached the Lord Jesus at\nAntioch_, Acts xi. 20; here must be three or four preachers at least,\notherwise they would not be _men of Cyprus and Cyrene_. 2. After this\n_Barnabas_ was sent to preach at Antioch; there is a fifth, Acts xi.\n22-24. 3. _Barnabas_ finds so much work at _Antioch_, that he goes to\nTarsus to bring _Saul_ thither to help him; there is a sixth, ver. 25,\n26. 4. Besides these, _there came prophets from Jerusalem to Antioch in\nthose days_; there are at least two more, viz. eight in all, Acts xi.\n27, 28. 4. Further, besides _Barnabas_ and _Saul_, three more teachers\nare named, viz. _Simon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen_, Acts\nxii. 1-3. 6. Yea, \"Paul and Barnabas continued in Antioch, teaching and\npreaching the word of the Lord, with many others also,\" Acts xv. 35. Now\nsum up all, what a multitude of believers, and what a college of\npreachers were here at Antioch! How is it possible that all these\npreachers should bustle themselves about one congregation (and doubtless\nthey abhorred idleness) in dispensing the ordinances of Christ to them\nonly? or how could so many members meet in one single congregation at\nonce, ordinarily to partake of all ordinances?\n\nIII. The church of Ephesus (_in Asia Minor_, Acts xix. 22) had in it\nmore congregations than one: For,\n\n1. The number of prophets and preachers at Ephesus were many. _Paul_\ncontinued there _two years and three months_, Acts xix. 8, 10; and\n_Paul_ settled there about twelve _disciples who prophesied_, Acts xix.\n1, 6, 7. And how should these thirteen ministers be employed, if there\nwere not many congregations? Compare also Acts xx. 17, 28, 36, 37, where\nit is said of the bishops of Ephesus, that \"Paul kneeled down and prayed\nwith them all, and they all wept sore.\" Here is a good number implied.\n\n2. The gift of tongues also was given unto all these twelve prophets,\nActs xix. 6, 7. To what end, if they had not several congregations of\nseveral languages, to speak in these several tongues unto them?\n\n3. The multitude of believers must needs be great at Ephesus: For, 1.\nWhy should _Paul_, who had universal commission to plant churches in all\nthe world, stay _above two years together_ at Ephesus if no more had\nbeen converted there than to make up one single congregation? Acts xix.\n8, 10. 2. During this space, \"all that dwelt in Asia,\" usually meeting\nat Ephesus for worship, \"heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and\nGreeks,\" Acts xix. 10. 3. At the knowledge of _Paul's_ miracles, \"fear\nfell upon all the Jews and Greeks dwelling at Ephesus, and the name of\nthe Lord Jesus was magnified,\" Acts xix. 17. 4. _Many_ of the believers\n_came and confessed, and showed their deeds_, ver. 18, whereby is\nintimated that more did believe than did thus. 5. \"Many also of them\nthat used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them\nbefore all men, and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty\nthousand pieces of silver,\" (this they would never have done publicly if\nthe major part, or at least a very great and considerable part of the\ncity, had not embraced the faith, that city being so furiously zealous\nin their superstition and idolatry,) \"so mightily grew the word of God,\nand prevailed,\" Acts xix. 19, 20. 6. _Paul_ testifies that at Ephesus _a\ngreat door and effectual was open unto him_, viz. a most advantageous\nopportunity of bringing in a mighty harvest of souls to Christ, 1 Cor.\nxvi. 8, 9. Put all together, 1. The number of prophets and preachers; 2.\nThe gifts of tongues conferred upon those prophets; and, 3. The\nmultitude of believers which so abounded at Ephesus: how is it possible\nto imagine, upon any solid ground, that there was no more but one single\ncongregation in the church of Ephesus?\n\nIV. The church of Corinth in Gr\u00e6cia comprised in it also more\ncongregations than one, as may be justly concluded from, 1. The\nmultitude of believers. 2. The plenty of ministers. 3. The diversity of\ntongues and languages. 4. And the plurality of churches at Corinth. Let\nall these be well compared together.\n\n1. From the multitude of believers. There appears to be a greater number\nof believers at Corinth than could all at once meet together to partake\nof all the ordinances of Christ: For, 1. At Paul's first coming to\nCorinth, and at his first sermon preached in the house of Justus, it is\nsaid, \"And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the\nLord, and all his house, and many of the Corinthians hearing, believed\nand were baptized,\" Acts xviii. 1, 7, 8. Here is Crispus and all his\nhouse, (which probably was very great, he being the chief ruler of the\nsynagogue,) and _many of the Corinthians, believing_; an excellent\nfirst-fruits; for who can justly say but Paul at his first sermon\nconverted so many as might be sufficient to make up one single\ncongregation? 2. Immediately after this (Paul having shook his raiment\nagainst the Jews, who, contrary to his doctrine, opposed themselves and\nblasphemed; and having said unto them, \"Your blood be upon your own\nheads, I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles,\" Acts\nxviii. 6) the Lord comforts Paul against the obstinacy of the Jews by\nthe success his ministry should have among the Gentiles in the city of\nCorinth: \"Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not\nafraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: for I am with thee, and no\nman shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this\ncity,\" Acts xviii. 9, 10. _Much people_ belonging to God, according to\nhis secret predestination, over and besides those that already were\nactually his by effectual vocation. And _much people_, in respect of the\nJews that opposed and blasphemed, (who were exceeding many,) otherwise\nit would have been but small comfort to Paul if by _much people_ should\nbe meant no more than could meet at once in one small single\ncongregation. 3. Paul himself continued at Corinth \"a year and six\nmonths teaching the word of God among them,\" Acts xviii. 11. To what end\nshould Paul the apostle of the Gentiles stay so long in one place, if he\nhad not seen the Lord's blessing upon his ministry, to bring into the\nfaith many more souls than would make up one congregation, having so\nmuch work to do far and near? 4. \"They that believed at Corinth were\nbaptized,\" Acts xviii. 8. (Baptism admitted them into that one body of\nthe Church, 1 Cor. xii. 13.) Some were baptized by Paul, (though but few\nin comparison of the number of believers among them: compare Acts xviii.\n8, with 1 Cor. 14-17,) the generality consequently were baptized by\nother ministers there, and that in other congregations wherein Paul\npreached not, as well as in such wherein Paul preached; it being\nunreasonable to deny the being of divers congregations for the word and\nsacraments to be dispensed in, himself dispensing the sacrament of\nbaptism to so few.\n\n2. From the plenty of ministers and preachers in the church of Corinth,\nit is evident it was a presbyterial church, and not only a single\ncongregation; for to what end should there be many laborers in a little\nharvest, many teachers over one single congregation? &c. That there were\nmany preachers at Corinth is plain: For, 1. Paul himself was the\nmaster-builder there that laid the foundation of that church, 1 Cor.\niii. 10, their spiritual father; \"In Christ Jesus I have begotten you\nthrough the gospel,\" 1 Cor. iv. 15. And he stayed with them _one year\nand a half_, Acts xviii. II. 2. While the apostle sharply taxeth them as\nguilty of schism and division for their carnal crying up of their\nseveral teachers: some doting upon one, some upon another, some upon a\nthird, &c. \"Every one of you saith, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and\nI of Cephas, and I of Christ,\" 1 Cor. i. 12. Doth not this intimate that\nthey had plenty of preachers, and these preachers had their several\nfollowers, so prizing some of them as to undervalue the rest? and was\nthis likely to be without several congregations into which they were\ndivided? 3. When the apostle saith, \"Though ye have ten thousand\ninstructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers,\" 1 Cor. v. 15;\nthough his words be hyperbolical, yet they imply that they had great\nstore of teachers and preachers. 4. We have mention of many prophets in\nthe church of Corinth: \"Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the\nother judge--And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the\nprophets,\" 1 Cor. xiv. 20, 31. Here are _prophets_ speaking _two or\nthree_; and prophets judging of their doctrine, which sure were more\nthan they that were judged; it being unreasonable for the minor part to\npass judgement upon the major part. And though these prophets had\nextraordinary gifts, (as the church of Corinth excelled all other\nchurches in gifts, 1 Cor. i. 7,) and were able to preach in an\nextraordinary singular way; yet were they the ordinary pastors and\nministers of that church of Corinth, as the whole current of this\nfourteenth chapter evidenceth, wherein so many rules and directions,\naptly agreeing to ordinary pastors, are imposed upon them for the well\nordering of their ministerial exercises. Now, where there were so many\npastors, were there not several congregations for them to feed? Or were\nthey idle, neglecting the exercise and improvement of their talents?\n\n3. From the diversity of tongues and languages, wherein the church did\neminently excel. \"In every thing ye are enriched by him, in all\nutterance, and in all knowledge--So that you come behind in no gift,\"\n&c., i.e., ye excel in every gift, more being intended than is\nexpressed, 1 Cor. i. 5, 7. Among other gifts some of them excelled in\ntongues which they spake, the right use of which gift of tongues the\napostle doth at large lay down, 1 Cor. xiv. 2, 4-6, 13, 14, 18, 19, 23,\n26, 27. \"If any speak in _an unknown_ tongue let it be by two, or at the\nmost by three, and that by course, and let one interpret.\" So that there\nwere many endued with gifts of tongues in that church. To what end? Not\nonly for a _sign to unbelievers_, ver. 22, but also for edification of\ndivers congregations, of divers tongues and languages within that church\nof Corinth.\n\n4. From the plurality of churches mentioned in reference to this church\nof Corinth. For the apostle regulating their public assemblies and their\nworship there, saith to the church of Corinth, \"Let your women keep\nsilence in the churches.\" It is not said, in the _church_, in the\nsingular number; but in the _churches_, in the plural; and this of the\n_churches in Corinth_, for it is said, _Let your women_, &c., not\nindefinitely, _Let women_, &c. So that according to the plain letter of\nthe words, here are churches in the church of Corinth, viz. a plurality\nof single congregations in this one presbyterial church. And this\nplurality of churches in the church of Corinth is the more confirmed if\nwe take the church of Cenchrea (which is a harbor or seaport to\nCorinth) to be comprised within the church of Corinth, as some learned\nauthors do conceive it may.[112]\n\n\nPOSITION II.\n\nThat there is in the word of Christ a pattern of one presbyterial\ngovernment in common over divers single congregations in one church.\nThis may be evidenced by these following considerations: For,\n\n1. Divers single congregations are called one church, as hath at large\nbeen proved in the second position immediately foregoing; inasmuch as\nall the believers in Jerusalem are counted one church: yet those\nbelievers are more in number than could meet for all ordinances in any\none single congregation. And why are divers congregations styled one\nchurch? 1. Not in regard of that oneness of heart and soul which was\namong them, \"having all things common,\" &c., Acts iv. 32. For these\naffections and actions of kindness belonged to them by the law of\nbrotherhood and Christian charity to one another, (especially\nconsidering the then present condition of believers,) rather than by any\nspecial ecclesiastical obligation, because they were members of such a\nchurch. 2. Not in regard of any explicit church covenant, knitting them\nin one body. For we find neither name nor thing, print nor footstep of\nany such thing as a church covenant in the church of Jerusalem, nor in\nany other primitive apostolical church in all the New Testament; and to\nimpose an explicit church covenant upon the saints as a necessary\nconstituting form of a true visible Church of Christ, and without which\nit is no Church, is a mere human invention, without all solid warrant\nfrom the word of God. 3. Not in regard of the ministration of the word,\nsacraments, prayers, &c. For these ordinances were dispensed in their\nsingle congregations severally, it being impossible that such multitudes\nof believers should meet all in one congregation, to partake of them\njointly, (as hath been evidenced.) 4. But in regard of one joint\nadministration of church government among them, by one common\npresbytery, or college of elders, associated for that end. From this one\nway of church government, by one presbytery in common, all the believers\nin Jerusalem, and so in other cities respectively, were counted but one\nchurch. 2. In every such presbyterial church made up of divers single\ncongregations, there were ecclesiastical ruling officers, which are\ncounted or called the officers of that church, but never counted or\ncalled governors, elders, &c., of any one single congregation therein;\nas in the church of Jerusalem, Acts xi. 27, 30, and xv. 2: of Antioch,\ncompare Acts xiii. 1-3, with xv. 35: of Ephesus, Acts xx. 17, 28: and of\nthe church of Corinth, 1 Cor. i. 12, and iv. 15, and xiv. 29.\n\n3. The officers of such presbyterial churches met together for acts of\nchurch government: as, to take charge of the church's goods, and of the\ndue distribution thereof, Acts iv. 35, 37, and xi. 30: to ordain,\nappoint, and send forth church officers, Acts vi. 2, 3, 6, and xiii. 1,\n3: to excommunicate notorious offenders, 1 Cor. v. 4, 5, 7, 13, compared\nwith 2 Cor. ii. 6: and to restore again penitent persons to church\ncommunion, 2 Cor. ii. 7-9.\n\n_Except_. Receiving of alms is no act of government.\n\n_Ans_. True, the bare receiving of alms is no act of government, but the\nordering and appointing how it shall be best improved and disposed of,\ncannot be denied to be an act of government, and for this did the elders\nmeet together, Acts xi. 30.\n\n4. The apostles themselves, in their joint acts of government in such\nchurches, acted as ordinary officers, viz. as presbyters or elders. This\nis much to be observed, and may be evidenced as followeth: for, 1. None\nof their acts of church government can at all be exemplary or obligatory\nupon us, if they were not presbyterial, but merely apostolical; if they\nacted therein not as ordinary presbyters, but as extraordinary apostles.\nFor what acts they dispatched merely as apostles, none may meddle withal\nbut only apostles. 2. As they were apostles, so they were presbyters,\nand so they style themselves, \"The elder to the elect lady,\" 2 John i.\n\"The elders which are among you I exhort,\" saith Peter, \"who am also an\nelder,\" (i.e. who am a fellow-elder, or co-presbyter,) 1 Pet. v. 1;\nwherein he ranks himself among ordinary presbyters, which had been\nimproper, unless he had discharged the offices and acts of an ordinary\npresbyter. 3. Their acts were such, for substance, as ordinary\npresbyters do perform, as preaching and prayer, Acts vi. 4: ordaining of\nofficers, Acts vi. 6, and xiv. 23: dispensing of the sacraments, 1 Cor.\ni. 14; Acts ii. 42, and xx. 7: and of church censures, 1 Cor. v. 4, 5,\ncompared with 1 Tim. v. ver. 1, ult.: which acts of government, and such\nlike, were committed by Christ to them, and to ordinary presbyters\n(their successors) to the end of the world; compare Matt. xvi. 19, and\nxviii. 17, 18, to the end, and John xx. 21, 23, with Matt. xxviii.\n18-20. 4. They acted not only as ordinary elders, but also they acted\njointly with other elders, being associated with them in the same\nassembly, as in that eminent synod at Jerusalem, Acts xv. 6, 22, 23, and\nxvi. 4, \"And as they went through cities, they delivered them the\ndecrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which\nwere at Jerusalem.\" 5. And, finally, they took in the church's consent\nwith themselves, wherein it was needful, as in the election and\nappointment of deacons, Acts vi. 2, 3. 6. The deacons being specially to\nbe trusted with the church's goods, and the disposal thereof, according\nto the direction of the presbytery, for the good of the church, &c.\n\nLet all these considerations be impartially balanced in the scales of\nindifferent unprejudiced judgments; and how plainly do they delineate in\nthe word, a pattern of one presbyterial government in common over divers\nsingle congregations within one church!\n\n_Except_. The apostles' power over many congregations was founded upon\ntheir power over all churches; and so cannot be a pattern for the power\nof elders over many.\n\n_Ans_. 1. The apostles' power over many congregations as one church, to\ngovern them all as one church jointly and in common, was not founded\nupon their power over all churches, but upon the union of those\ncongregations into one church; which union lays a foundation for the\npower of elders governing many congregations.\n\n2. Besides, the apostles, though extraordinary officers, are called\nelders, 1 Pet. v. 1, to intimate to us, that in ordinary acts of church\ngovernment, they did act as elders for a pattern to us in like\nadministrations.\n\n_Except_. The apostles, it is true, were elders virtually, that is,\ntheir apostleship contained all offices in it, but they were not elders\nformally.\n\n_Ans_. 1. If by formally be meant, that they were not elders really,\nthen it is false; for the Scripture saith Peter was an elder, 1 Peter v.\n1. If by formally be meant that they were not elders only, that is\ngranted; they were so elders, as they were still apostles, and so\napostles as they were yet elders: their eldership did not exclude their\napostleship, nor their apostleship swallow up their eldership.\n\n2. Besides, two distinct offices may be formally in one and the same\nperson; as Melchisedec was formally a king and priest, and David\nformally a king and prophet; and why then might not Peter or John, or\nany of the twelve, be formally apostles and elders? And ministers are\nformally pastors and ruling elders.\n\n_Except_. 'Tis true, the apostles acted together with elders, because\nit so fell out they met together; but that they should meet jointly to\ngive a pattern for an eldership, is not easy to prove; one apostle might\nhave done that alone, which all here did.\n\n_Ans_. 1. 'Tis true, the apostles as apostles had power to act singly\nwhat they did jointly; yet, when they acted jointly, their acts might\nhave more authority in the Church: upon which ground they of Antioch may\nbe conceived to have sent to the whole college of apostles and elders at\nJerusalem, (rather than to any one singly;) why was this, but to add\nmore authority to their acts and determinations?\n\n2. Why should not their meeting together be a pattern of a presbytery,\nas well as their meeting together when they took in the consent of the\npeople, Acts vi., in the choice of the deacons, to be a pattern or\nwarrant that the people have a power in the choice of their officers?\n(as those of contrary judgment argue:) if one be taken in as an\ninimitable practice, why not the other?\n\n3. If the apostles joining with elders, acted nothing as elders, then we\ncan bring nothing of theirs into imitation; and by this we should cut\nthe sinews, and raze the foundation of church government, as if there\nwere no footsteps thereof in the holy Scriptures.\n\n\nPOSITION III.\n\nFinally, That the pattern of the said presbytery and presbyterial\ngovernment is for a rule to the churches of Christ in all after ages,\nmay appear as followeth:\n\n1. The first churches were immediately planted and governed by Christ's\nown apostles and disciples; 1. Who immediately received the keys of the\nkingdom of heaven from Christ himself in person, Matt. xvi. 19, and\nxviii. 17,18; John xx. 21, 23. 2. Who immediately had the promise of\nChrist's perpetual presence with them in their ministry, Matt, xxviii.\n18-20; and of the plentiful donation of the Spirit of Christ to lead\nthem into all truth, John xiv. 16, and xvi. 13-15; Acts i. 4, 5, 8 3.\nWho immediately received from Christ, after his resurrection and before\nhis ascension, \"commandments by the Holy Ghost,\"--\"Christ being seen of\nthem forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of\nGod,\" Acts i. 2, 3; and, 4. Who were first and immediately _baptized by\nthe Holy Ghost_, extraordinarily, Acts ii. 1-5. Now, who can imagine\nthat the apostles and disciples were not actuated by the Spirit of\nChrist bestowed upon them? or did not discharge Christ's commandments,\ntouching his kingdom imposed upon them? or did not duly use those keys\nof Christ's kingdom committed to them in the ordering and governing of\nthe primitive churches? And if so, then the pattern of their practices\nmust be a rule for all the succeeding churches, 1 Cor. xi. 1; Phil, iv.\n9.\n\n2. To what end hath the Holy Ghost so carefully recorded a pattern of\nthe state and government of the primitive churches in the first and\npurest times, but for the imitation of successive churches in after\ntimes? \"For whatsoever things wore written aforetime, were written for\nour learning,\" or instruction. But what do such records instruct us?\nOnly _in fact_, that such things were done by the first churches? or _of\nright_ also, that such things should be done by the after churches?\nSurely, this is more proper and profitable for us.\n\n3. If such patterns of Christ's apostles, disciples, and primitive\nchurches in matters of the government will not amount to an obligatory\nrule for all following churches, how shall we justify sundry other acts\nof religion commonly received in the best reformed churches, and founded\nonly or chiefly upon the foundation of the practice of Christ's apostles\nand the apostolical churches? As the receiving of the Lord's supper on\nthe Lord's days, Acts xx. 7, &c.; which notwithstanding are generally\nembraced without any considerable opposition or contradiction, and that\nmost deservedly.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV.\n\n_Of the Divine Right of Synods, or Synodal Assemblies._\n\n\nThus far of the ruling assemblies, which are styled presbyterial; next\ncome into consideration those greater assemblies, which are usually\ncalled synodal, or synods, or councils. They are so called from their\nconvening, or coming together: or rather from their calling together.\nBoth names, viz. synod and council, are of such latitude of\nsignification, as that they may be applied to any public convention of\npeople: but in the common ordinary use of these words, they are\nappropriated to large ecclesiastical assemblies, above classical\npresbyteries in number and power. These synodal assemblies are made up,\n(as occasion and the necessity of the church shall require.) 1. Either\nof presbyters, sent from the several classical presbyteries within a\nprovince, hence called provincial synods: 2. Or of presbyters, sent from\nthe several provincial synods within a nation, hence called national\nsynods: 3. Or of presbyters, delegated or sent from the several\nnational churches throughout the Christian world, hence called\necumenical synods, or universal and general councils.\n\nTouching the divine warrant of synods, and their power in church\naffairs, much need not be said, seeing divers learned authors have so\nfully stated and handled this matter.[113] Yet, that the reader may have\na short view hereof, and not be left wholly unsatisfied, these two\nthings shall briefly be opened and insisted upon, viz: 1. Certain\nconsiderations shall be propounded, tending to clear the state of the\nquestion about the divine right of synods, and their power. 2. The\nproposition itself, with some few arguments adduced, for the proof\nthereof.\n\nFor the former, viz: The true stating of this question about the divine\nright of synods, and of their power, well weigh these few\nconsiderations.\n\n1. Synods differ in some respects from classical presbyteries, handled\nin Chap. XIII., though the nature and kind of their power be the same\nfor substance. For, 1. Synods are more large extensive assemblies than\nclassical presbyteries, the members of presbyteries being sent only from\nseveral single congregations, the members of synods being delegated from\nseveral presbyteries, and proportionably their power is extended also.\n2. The exercise of government by presbyteries, is the common ordinary\nway of government held forth in Scripture. By synods it is more rare and\nextraordinary, at least in great part, as in case of extraordinary\ncauses that fall out: as, for choosing an apostle, Acts i., healing of\nscandals, &c., Acts xv.\n\n2. All synods are of the same nature and kind, whether provincial,\nnational, or ecumenical, though they differ as lesser and greater, in\nrespect of extent, from one another, (the provincial having as full\npower within their bounds, as the national or ecumenical within theirs.)\nSo that the proving of the divine right of synods indefinitely and in\ngeneral, doth prove also the divine right of provincial, national, and\necumenical synods in particular: for, greater and lesser do not vary the\nspecies or kind. What is true of ecclesiastical synods in general,\nagrees to every such synod in particular.\n\n_Object_. But why hath not the Scripture determined these assemblies in\nparticular?\n\n_Ans_. 1. It is not necessary the Scripture should in every case descend\nto particulars. In things of one and the same kind, general rules may\nserve for all particulars; especially seeing particulars are so\ninnumerable, what volumes would have contained all particulars? 2. All\nchurches and seasons are not capable of synods provincial or national:\nfor, in an island there may be no more Christians than to make up one\nsingle congregation, or one classical presbytery. Or in a nation, the\nChristian congregations may be so few, or so dispersed, or so involved\nin persecution, that they cannot convene in synods, &c.\n\n3. The power of synods contended for, is, 1. Not civil; they have no\npower to take cognizance of civil causes, as such; not to inflict any\ncivil punishments; as fines, imprisonments, confiscations, banishments,\ndeath, (these being proper to the civil magistrate:) but merely\nspiritual; they judge only in ecclesiastical causes, in a spiritual\nmanner, by spiritual censures, to spiritual ends, as did that synod,\nActs xv. 2. Not corruptive, privative, or destructive to the power of\nclassical presbyteries, or single congregations; but rather perfective\nand conservative thereunto. As suppose a single congregation should\nelect a minister unsound in judgment, or scandalous in conversation, the\nsynod may annul and make void that election, and direct them to make a\nbetter choice, or appoint them a minister themselves; hereby this\nliberty of election is not at all infringed or violated, but for their\nown advantage regulated, &c. 3. Not absolute, and infallible; but\nlimited and fallible: any synod or council may err, being constituted of\nmen that are weak, frail, ignorant in part, &c., and therefore all their\ndecrees and determinations are to be examined by the touchstone of the\nScriptures, nor are they further to be embraced, or counted obligatory,\nthan they are consonant thereunto, Isa. viii. 20. Hence there is liberty\nof appeal, as from congregational elderships to the classical\npresbytery, and from thence to the provincial synod, so from the\nprovincial to the national assembly, &c. 4. Finally, the power of synods\nis not only persuasive and consultative, (as some think,) able to give\ngrave advice, and to use forcible persuasions in any case, which if\naccepted and followed, well; if rejected and declined, there is no\nfurther remedy, but a new non-communion instead of a divine church\ncensure: but it is a proper authoritative juridical power, which all\nwithin their bounds are obliged reverently to esteem, and dutifully to\nsubmit unto, so far as agreeable to the word of Christ.\n\n4. Finally, this authoritative juridical power of synods is threefold,\nviz. _doctrinal, regulating, and censuring_. 1. _Doctrinal_, in\nreference to matters of faith, and divine worship; not to coin new\narticles of faith, or devise new acts of divine worship: but to explain\nand apply those articles of faith and rules of worship which are laid\ndown in the word, and declare the contrary errors, heresies,\ncorruptions. Hence the Church is styled, _the pillar and ground of\ntruth_, 1 Tim. iii. 15. Thus to the Jewish Church _were committed of\ntrust the oracles of God_, Rom. iii. 2. 2. _Regulating_, in reference to\nexternal order and polity, in matters prudential and circumstantial,\nwhich are determinate according to the true light of nature, and the\ngeneral rules of Scripture, such as are in 1 Cor. x. 31, 32; Rom. xiv.;\n1 Cor. xiv. 26, 40, &c.; not according to any arbitrary power of men. 3.\n_Censuring_ power, in reference to error, heresy, schism, obstinacy,\ncontempt, or scandal, and the repressing thereof; which power is put\nforth merely in spiritual censures, as admonition, excommunication,\ndeposition, &c. And these censures exercised, not in a lordly,\ndomineering, prelatical way: but in an humble, sober, grave, yet\nauthoritative way, necessary both for preservation of soundness of\ndoctrine, and incorruptness of conversation; and for extirpation of the\ncontrary. This is the power which belongs to synods. Thus much for\nclearing the right state of this question.\n\nII. For the second thing, viz. the proposition itself, and the\nconfirmation thereof, take it briefly in these terms.\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath laid down in his word sufficient ground\nand warrant for juridical synods, and their authority, for governing of\nhis Church now under the New Testament. Many arguments might be produced\nfor proof of this proposition: as, 1. From the light of nature. 2. From\nthe words of the law, Deut. xvii. 8, 12, compared with 2 Chron. xix. 8,\n11; Ps. cxxii. 4, 5, holding forth an ecclesiastical Sanhedrin in the\nChurch of the Jews, superior to other courts. 3. From the words of\nChrist, Matt, xviii. 15-21. 4. From the unity of the visible Church of\nChrist now under the New Testament. 5. From the primitive apostolical\npattern laid down, Acts xv., &c., and from divers other considerations;\nbut for brevity's sake, only the two last arguments shall be a little\ninsisted upon.\n\n_Argum_. I. The unity or oneness of the visible Church of Christ now\nunder the New Testament, laid down in Scripture, gives us a notable\nfoundation for church government by juridical synods. For, 1. That Jesus\nChrist our Mediator hath one general, visible Church on earth now under\nthe New Testament, hath been already proved, Part 2, Chap. VIII. 2. That\nin this Church there is a government settled by divine right, is\nevidenced, Part 1, Chap. I. 3. That all Christ's ordinances, and\nparticularly church government, primarily belong to the whole general\nChurch visible, for her edification, (secondarily to particular churches\nand single congregations, as parts or members of the whole,) hath been\nmanifested, Part 2, Chap. VIII. Now, there being one general visible\nChurch, having a government set in it of divine right, and that\ngovernment belonging primarily to the whole body of Christ; secondarily,\nto the parts or members thereof; must it not necessarily follow, that\nthe more generally and extensively Christ's ordinance of church\ngovernment is managed in greater and more general assemblies, the more\nfully the perfection and end of the government, viz. the edification of\nthe whole body of Christ, is attained; and on the contrary, the more\nparticularly and singly church government is exercised, as in\npresbyteries, or single congregational elderships, the more imperfect it\nis, and the less it attains to the principal end: consequently, if there\nbe a divine warrant for church government by single congregational\nelderships, is it not much more for church government by presbyteries,\nand synods, or councils, wherein more complete provision is made for the\nedification of the general Church or body of Jesus Christ?\n\n_Argum_. II. The primitive apostolical practice in the first and purest\nages of the Church after Christ, may further evidence with great\nstrength the divine warrant for church government by juridical synods or\ncouncils. Let this be the position:\n\nJesus Christ our Mediator hath laid down in his word a pattern of a\njuridical synod, consisting of governing officers of divers presbyterial\nchurches, for a rule to the Church of Christ in all succeeding ages.\n\nFor proof hereof take these two assertions: 1. That Jesus Christ hath\nlaid down in his word a pattern of a juridical synod. 2. That this\njuridical synod is for a rule to the churches of Christ in all\nsucceeding ages.\n\n\nASSERTION I.\n\nThat Jesus Christ hath laid down in his word a pattern of a synod, yea,\nof a juridical synod, consisting of governing officers of divers\npresbyterial churches, is manifest, Acts xv. and xvi., where are plainly\nset forth: 1. The occasion of the synod. 2. The proper members of the\nsynod. 3. The equal power and authority exercised by all those members.\n4. The way and method of ordinary synodal proceeding. 5. The juridical\nacts of power put forth by the synod; with the issue and consequent of\nall upon the churches.\n\nFirst, Here was a proper ground and occasion for a juridical synod. For\nthus the text expressly declareth, that \"certain men which came down\nfrom Judea, taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised\nafter the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved; when therefore Paul and\nBarnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they\ndetermined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go\nup to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders about this question,\" Acts\nxv. 1, 2, compared with ver. 5--\"But there rose up certain of the sect\nof the Pharisees, which believed, saying, that it was needful to\ncircumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses;\" and with\nver. 23, 24--\"The apostles, and elders, and brethren send greeting unto\nthe brethren which are of the Gentiles, in Antioch, and Syria, and\nCilicia: Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from\nus, have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must\nbe circumcised and keep the law.\" In which passages these things are\nevident:\n\n1. That false doctrine, destructive to the doctrine of Christ in his\ngospel, did arise in the Church, viz: That circumcision and keeping of\nthe ceremonial law of Moses was necessary to salvation, ver. 1, 5, 24;\nand this false doctrine promoted with lying, as if the apostles and\nelders of Jerusalem had sent forth the false teachers with directions to\npreach so, as their apology (\"to whom we gave no such commandment,\" ver.\n24) seems to import. Here is corruption both in doctrine and manners fit\nfor a synod to take cognizance of.\n\n2. That this corrupt doctrine was vented by certain that came down from\nJudea. It is evident, it was by certain of the sect of the Pharisees\nthat believed; as Paul and Barnabas make the narrative to the church at\nJerusalem, ver. 5, therefore the false teachers coming from Judea (where\nthe Churches of Christ were first of all planted, and whence the church\nplantation spread) published their doctrines with more credit to their\nerrors and danger to the churches; and so both the churches of Judea\nwhence they came, and of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, whither they came,\nwere interested in the business.\n\n3. That the said false teachers by the leaven of their doctrine troubled\nthem with words, subverting the souls of the brethren, both at Antioch,\nSyria, and Cilicia, ver. 23, 24; here was the disturbance and scandal of\ndivers churches: compare ver. 39 with 41.\n\n4. That Paul and Barnabas at Antioch had no small dissension and dispute\nagainst the false teachers, ver. 1, 2, that so (if possible) they might\nbe convinced, and the Church's peace preserved, without craving further\nassistance in a solemn synod.\n\n5. That after these disputes, and for the better settling of all the\nchurches about this matter, (which these disputes could not effect,)\n_they decreed_ (or ordained) _that Paul and Barnabas, and some others of\nthemselves, should go up to the apostles and elders at Jerusalem about\nthis question, ver_. 2. Here was an authoritative mission of delegated\nofficers from the presbyterial church at Antioch, and from other\nchurches of Syria and Cilicia also, ver. 23, 41, to a synodal assembly\nwith the presbyterial church at Jerusalem.\n\nSecondly, Here were proper members of a synod convened to consider of\nthis question, viz. the officers and delegates of divers presbyterial\nchurches: of the presbyterial church at Jerusalem, the apostles and\nelders, Acts xv. 6: of the presbyterial church at Antioch, Paul,\nBarnabas, and others; compare verse 2 and 12. And besides these, there\nwere brethren from other churches, present as members of the synod; as\nmay appear by these two considerations, viz:\n\n1. Partly, because it is called \"The whole multitude,\" ver. 12; \"The\napostles and elders with the whole church,\" ver. 22; \"The apostles, and\nelders, and brethren,\" ver. 23. This whole multitude, whole church, and\nbrethren, distinct from the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem,\ncannot be _the company of all the faithful at Jerusalem_, for (as hath\nbeen evidenced, Chap. XIV., Position 2,) they were too many to meet in\none house. But it was the synodal multitude, the synodal church,\nconsisting of apostles, and elders, and brethren; which brethren seem to\nbe such as were sent from several churches, as Judas and Silas, ver. 24,\nwho were assistants to the apostles and evangelists--Judas, Acts xv. 22,\n32; Silas, Acts xv. 32, 40, and xvi. 19, and xvii. 4, 14, 15, and xviii.\n5. Some think Titus was of this synod also.\n\n2. Partly because the brethren of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, were\ntroubled with this question, ver. 23, 24. Therefore it cannot be\nreasonably imagined, but all those places sought out for a remedy; and\nto that end, severally and respectively sent their delegates to the\nsynod at Jerusalem: else they had been very regardless of their own\nchurch peace and welfare. And the epistle of the synod was directed to\nthem all by name, ver. 23; and so did formally bind them all, having men\nof their own members of the synod, which decrees did but materially, and\nfrom the nature of the thing, bind the other churches at Lystra and\nIconium, Acts xvi. 4. Now, if there were delegates but from two\npresbyterial churches, they were sufficient to constitute a synod; and\nthis justifies delegates from ten or twenty churches, proportionably,\nwhen there shall be like just and necessary occasion.\n\nThirdly, Here all the members of the synod, as they were convened by\nlike ordinary authority, so they acted by like ordinary and equal power\nin the whole business laid before them; which shows it was an ordinary,\nnot an extraordinary synod. For though apostles and evangelists, who had\npower over all churches, were members of the synod, as well as ordinary\nelders; yet they acted not in this synod by a transcendent, infallible,\napostolical power, but by an ordinary power, as elders. This is evident,\n\n1. Because the Apostle Paul, and Barnabas his colleague, (called a\nprophet and teacher, Acts xiii. 1, 2, and an apostle, Acts xiv. 14,)\nwere sent as members to this synod, by order and determination of the\nchurch of Antioch, and they submitted themselves to that determination,\nActs xv. 2, 3; which they could not have submitted unto as apostles, but\nas ordinary elders and members of the presbytery at Antioch: they that\nsend, being greater than those that are sent by them. Upon which ground\nit is a good argument which is urged against Peter's primacy over the\nrest of the apostles, because the college of apostles at Jerusalem sent\nPeter and John to Samaria, having received the faith, Acts viii. 14.\n\n2. Because the manner of proceeding in this synod convened, was not\nextraordinary and apostolical, as when they acted by an immediate\ninfallible inspiration of the Spirit, in penning the Holy Scriptures,\n(without all disputing, examining, or judging of the matter that they\nwrote, so far as we can read,) 2 Tim. iii. 16,17; 2 Pet. i. 20, 21; but\nordinary, presbyterial, and synodal; by ordinary helps and means, (as\nafterwards shall appear more fully;) stating the question, proving and\nevidencing from Scripture what was _the good and acceptable will of God_\nconcerning the present controversy, and upon evidence of Scripture\nconcluding, _It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us_, Acts xv. 28;\nwhich words, any assembly, having like clear evidence of Scripture for\ntheir determination, may without presumption use, as well as this synod\ndid.[114]\n\n3. Because the elders and brethren (who are as authoritatively members\nof the synod as the apostles) did in all points as authoritatively act\nas the apostles themselves. For, 1. Certain other of the church of\nAntioch, as well as _Paul_ and _Barnabas_, were sent as delegates from\nthe church of _Antioch_, Acts xv. 2. 2. They were all sent as well to\nthe _elders_, as to the _apostles_ at _Jerusalem_, about this matter,\nver. 2. 3. They were received at _Jerusalem_, as well by the _elders_,\nas the _apostles_, and reported their case to them both, ver. 4. 4. The\n_elders_, as well as the _apostles_, met together to consider thereof,\nver. 6. 5. The letters containing the synodal decrees and\ndeterminations, were written in the name of the _elders and brethren_,\nas well as in the name of the _apostles_, ver. 23. 6. The _elders and\nbrethren_, as well as the _apostles_, blame the false teachers for\ntroubling of the Church, _subverting of souls_; declaring, that they\ngave the false teachers _no such commandment_ to preach any such\ndoctrine, ver. 24. 7. The _elders and brethren_, as well as the\n_apostles_, say, \"It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us,\" ver. 28.\n8. The _elders_ and _brethren_, as well as the _apostles_, did impose\nupon the churches \"no other burden than these necessary things,\" ver.\n28. 9. The _elders_, as well as the _apostles_, being assembled,\n\"thought good to send chosen men of themselves,\" viz. _Judas_ and\n_Silas_, with _Paul_ and _Barnabas_, to _Antioch_, to deliver the\nsynodal decrees to them, and to tell them the same things by mouth, ver.\n22, 25, 27. 10. And the decrees are said to be ordained as well by the\n_elders_, as by the _apostles at Jerusalem_, Acts xvi. 4. So that\nthrough this whole synodal transaction, the elders are declared in the\ntext to go on in a full authoritative course of judgment with the\napostles, from point to point. And therefore in this synod, the apostles\nacted as ordinary elders, not as extraordinary officers.\n\nFourthly. Here was the ordinary way and method of synodal proceedings by\nthe apostles, elders, and brethren, when they were convened unanimously,\nver. 25. For,\n\n1. They proceeded deliberatively, by discourses and disputes,\ndeliberating about the true state of the question, and the remedy of the\nscandal. This is laid down, 1. More generally, \"and when there had been\nmuch disputing,\" ver. 7. 2. More particularly, how they proceeded when\nthey drew towards a synodal determination, Peter speaks of the Gentiles'\nconversion, and clears the doctrine of justification \"by faith without\nthe works of the law,\" ver. 7-12. Then Barnabas and Paul confirm the\nconversion of the Gentiles, \"declaring the signs and wonders wrought by\nthem among the Gentiles,\" ver. 12. After them James speaks, approving\nwhat Peter had spoken touching the conversion of the Gentiles,\nconfirming it by Scripture; and further adds (which Peter did but hint,\nver. 10, and Paul and Barnabas did not so much as touch upon) a remedy\nagainst the present scandal, ver. 13-22. Here is now an ordinary way of\nproceeding by debates, disputes, allegations of Scripture, and mutual\nsuffrages. What needed all this, if this had been a transcendent,\nextraordinary, and not an ordinary synod?\n\n2. They proceeded after all their deliberative inquiries and disputes\ndecisively to conclude and determine the matter, ver. 20-30. The result\nof the synod (as there is evident) is threefold. 1. To set down in\nwriting their decrees and determinations. 2. To signify those decrees in\nan epistle to the brethren at Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia. 3. To send\nthese letters by some from among themselves, viz. Judas and Silas,\ntogether with Paul and Barnabas, to all the churches that were offended\nor endangered, that both by written decrees and word of mouth, the\nchurches might be established in faith and peace.\n\nFifthly, Here were several authoritative and juridical acts of power,\nput forth in this synod, according to the exigency of the present\ndistempers of the churches. This appears plainly,\n\n1. By the proceedings of the synod in accommodating a suitable and\nproportionable remedy to every malady at that time distempering the\nChurch, viz. a triple medicine for a threefold disease.\n\n1. Against the heresy broached, viz. that they must be circumcised and\nkeep the ceremonial \"law of Moses, or else they could not be saved,\"\nActs xv. 2. The synod put forth a doctrinal power, in confutation of the\nheresy, and clear vindication of the truth, about the great point of\n\"justification by faith without the works of the law,\" Acts xv. 7-23;\nand (Independents themselves being judges) a doctrinal decision of\nmatters of faith by a lawful synod, far surpasseth the doctrinal\ndetermination of any single teacher, or of the presbytery of any single\ncongregation; and is to be reverently received of the churches as a\nbinding ordinance of Christ.\n\n2. Against the schism, occasioned by the doctrine of the false teachers\nthat troubled the Church, Acts xv. 1, 2, the synod put forth a censuring\npower, stigmatizing the false teachers with the infamous brands of\ntroubling the Church with words, subverting of souls, and (tacitly, as\nsome conceive from that expression, \"Unto whom we gave no such\ncommandment,\" ver. 24) of belying the apostles and elders of Jerusalem,\nas if they had sent them abroad to preach this doctrine.\n\n_Object_. But the synod proceeded not properly to censure the false\nteachers by any ecclesiastical admonition, or excommunication; therefore\nthe power exercised in the synod was only doctrinal, and not properly\njuridical.\n\n_Ans_. 1. They censured them in some degree, and that with a mark of\ninfamy, ver. 24, as was manifested. And this was not only a warning and\nhint to the churches, to note such false teachers, avoid them, and\nwithdraw from them, compare Rom. xvi. 17, 18, with 1 Tim. vi. 3-5; but\nalso was a virtual admonition to the false teachers themselves, while\ntheir doctrines and ways were so expressly condemned. 2. They proceeded\nnot to present excommunication, it is granted; nor was it at first dash\nseasonable, prudent, or needful. But the synod knew well, that if these\nfalse teachers, after this synodal mark of disgrace set upon them,\nshould still persist in their course, incurably and incorrigibly\nobstinate, they might in due time be excommunicated by course; it being\na clear case in itself that such heretics or schismatics, as otherwise\ncannot be reduced, are not to be suffered, but to be cast out of the\nchurches. \"An heretic, after once or twice admonition, reject,\" Tit.\niii. 10, 11; see Rev. ii. 2, 14, 20.\n\n3. Against the scandal of the weak Jews, and their heart-estrangement\nfrom the Gentiles, who neglected their ceremonial observances, as also\nagainst the scandal of the Gentiles, who were much troubled and offended\nat the urging of circumcision, and the keeping of the law as necessary\nto salvation, ver. 1, 2, 19, 24, the synod put forth an ordering or\nregulating power, framing practical rules or constitutions for the\nhealing of the scandal, and for prevention of the spreading of it,\ncommanding the brethren of the several churches to abstain from divers\nthings that might any way occasion the same: \"It seemed good to the Holy\nGhost, and to us, to impose\" (or lay) \"upon you no further burden than\nthese necessary things,\" Acts xv. 28, 29. Here is _burden_ and\n_necessary things_, (so judged to be necessary for those times, and that\nstate of the Church,) and imposing of these upon the churches: will not\nthis amount to a plain ordering power and authority? Especially\nconsidering that the word _to impose_, or _lay on_, when it is used of\nthe judgment, act, or sentence of an assembly, ordinarily signifies an\nauthoritative judgment, or decree, as, \"Why tempt ye God, to lay, or\nimpose, a yoke upon the neck of the disciples?\" Acts xv. 10. Thus some in\nthe synod endeavored to carry the synod with themselves, authoritatively\nto have imposed the ceremonies upon the churches; whom Peter thus\nwithstands. So, \"They bind heavy burdens, and hard to be borne, and\nimpose them upon men's shoulders,\" Matt, xxiii. 4: and this laying on of\nburdens by the Pharisees, was not by a bare doctrinal declaring, but by\nan authoritative commanding, as seems by that, \"teaching for doctrines\nthe commandments of men,\" Matt. xv. 9.\n\n2. By the title or denomination given to the synodal results contained\nin their letters sent to the brethren. They are styled, \"The decrees\nordained, or judged,\" Acts xvi. 4. Here are plainly juridical\nauthoritative constitutions. For it is very observable,\n\nThat wheresoever the words translated _decree_ or _decrees_ are found in\nthe New Testament, thereby are denoted, laws, statutes, or decrees: as\n\"Decrees of C\u00e6sar,\" Acts xvii. 7: \"A decree from C\u00e6sar,\" Luke ii. 1:\nMoses' ceremonial law, \"The hand-writing to ordinances,\" Col. ii. 14:\n\"The law of commandments in ordinances,\" Eph. ii. 15: and this word is\nfound used only in these five places in the whole New Testament: and the\nSeptuagint interpreters often use the word in the Old Testament to this\npurpose; for _laws_, Dan. vi. 8; for _decrees_, Dan. ii. 13, and iii.\n10, 29, and iv. 3, and vi. 9.\n\nAnd the other word translated _ordained_, when applied to an assembly by\nthe Septuagint, is used for a judgment of authority, as, \"And what was\ndecreed against her,\" Esth. ii. 1; and so a word derived from it,\nsignifies a _decree_, Dan. iv. 14, 21.\n\nIn this sense also the word is sometimes used in the New Testament, when\napplied to assemblies; as, \"Take ye him, and judge him according to your\nlaw,\" John xviii. 31; \"Whom we laid hold upon, and would have judged\naccording to our law,\" Acts xxiv. 6.\n\nNow, if there be so much power and authority engraven upon these two\nwords severally, how strongly do they hold forth authority, when they\nare applied to any thing jointly, as here to the synodal decisions!\n\n3. By the consequent of these synodal proceedings, viz. the cheerful\nsubmission of the churches thereunto. This appears both in the church of\nAntioch, where the troubles first were raised by the false teachers;\nwhere, \"when the epistle\" of the synod \"was read, they rejoiced for the\nconsolation,\" Acts xv. 30, 31; and Judas and Silas exhorted and\nconfirmed the brethren by word of mouth, according to the synod's\ndirection, ver. 32; and in other churches, to which Paul and Timothy\ndelivered the \"decrees ordained by the apostles and elders which were at\nJerusalem; and so were the churches confirmed in the faith, and abounded\nin number daily,\" Acts xvi. 4, 5; whence we have these evidences of the\nchurches' submission to the synodal decrees: 1. The decrees are counted\nby the churches a consolation. 2. They were so welcome to them, that\nthey _rejoiced for the consolation_. 3. They were hereby notably\n_confirmed in the faith_, against the false doctrines broached among\nthem. 4. The churches _abounded in number daily_, the scandal and\nstumbling-blocks that troubled the Church being removed out of the way.\nHow should such effects so quickly have followed upon the publication of\nthe synodal decrees, in the several churches, had not the churches\nlooked upon that synod as vested with juridical power and authority for\ncomposing and imposing of these their determinations?\n\n\nASSERTION II.\n\nThat this juridical synod is for a rule to the churches of Christ in all\nsucceeding ages, there need no new considerations for proof hereof;\nonly let the reader please to look back to Position iv. of the last\nchapter, where the substance of those considerations which urge the\npattern of presbyteries and presbyterial government for a rule to\nsucceeding churches, is applicable (by change of terms) to the pattern\nof juridical synods.[115]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV.\n\n_Of the subordination of particular churches to greater assemblies for\ntheir authoritative and judicial determination of causes ecclesiastical,\nand the divine right thereof._\n\n\nThe divine right of ecclesiastical assemblies, congregational,\nclassical, and synodal, and of their power for church government, being\nthus evidenced by the Scriptures, now in the last place take a few words\nbriefly touching the subordination of the lesser to the greater\nassemblies, and the divine warrant thereof. In asserting the\nsubordination of particular churches to higher assemblies, whether\nclassical or synodal,\n\n1. It is not denied, but particular churches have within themselves\npower of discipline entirely, so far as any cause in debate particularly\nand peculiarly concerneth themselves, and not others.\n\n2. It is granted, that where there is no consociation, or neighborhood\nof single churches, whereby they may mutually aid one another, there a\nsingle congregation must not be denied entire jurisdiction; but this\nfalls not within the compass of ordinary rules of church government left\nus by Christ. If there be but one congregation in a kingdom or province,\nthat particular congregation may do much by itself alone, which it ought\nnot to do where there are neighboring and adjacent churches that might\nassociate therewith for mutual assistance.\n\n3. It is granted, that every single congregation hath equal power, one\nas much as another, and that there is no subordination of one to\nanother; according to that common and known axiom, An equal hath no\npower or rule over an equal. Subordination prelatical, which is of one\nor more parishes to the prelate and his cathedral, is denied; all\nparticular churches being collateral, and of the same authority.\n\n4. It is granted, that classical or synodal authority cannot be by\nScripture introduced over a particular church in a privative or\ndestructive way to that power which God hath bestowed upon it; but\ncontrarily it is affirmed, that all the power of assemblies, which are\nabove particular congregations, is cumulative and perfective to the\npower of those inferior congregations.\n\n5. It is granted, that the highest ecclesiastical assembly in the world\ncannot require from the lowest a subordination absolute, and at their\nown mere will and pleasure, but only in some respect; subordination\nabsolute being only to the law of God laid down in Scripture. We detest\npopish tyranny, which claims a power of giving their will for a law.\n'Tis subjection in the Lord that is pleaded for: the straightest rule in\nthe world, unless the holy Scripture, we affirm to be a rule to be\nregulated; peace being only in walking according to Scripture canon,\nGal. vi. ver. 16.\n\n6. Nor is it the question whether friendly, consultative, fraternal,\nChristian advice or direction, be either to be desired or bestowed by\nneighboring churches, either apart or in their synodal meetings, for the\nmutual benefit of one another, by reason of that holy profession in\nwhich they are all conjoined and knit together: for this will be granted\non all hands, though when it is obtained, it will not amount to a\nsufficient remedy in many cases.\n\nBut this is that which we maintain, viz. that the law of God holdeth\nforth a subordination of a particular church to greater assemblies,\nconsisting of divers choice members, taken out of several single\ncongregations: which assemblies have authoritative power and\necclesiastical jurisdiction over that particular church, by way of\ngiving sentence in and deciding of causes ecclesiastical. For\nconfirmation of this assertion, thus:\n\n_Argum_. I. The light of nature may be alleged to prove, that there\nought to be this subordination: this is warranted not only by God's\npositive law, but even by nature's law. The church is a company of\npeople who are not outlawed by nature. The visible church being an\necclesiastical polity, and the perfection of all polity, doth comprehend\nin it whatsoever is excellent in all other bodies political. The church\nmust resemble the commonwealth's government in things common to both,\nand which have the same use in both. The law of nature directs unto\ndiversities of courts in the commonwealth, and the greater to have\nauthority over the lesser. The church is not only to be considered as\nemployed in holy services, or as having assemblies exercised in\nspiritual things, and after a spiritual manner, but it is also to be\nconsidered as consisting of companies and societies of men to be\nregularly ordered, and so far nature agreeth to it, that it should have\ndivers sorts of assemblies, and the lower subordinate to the higher.\nThat particular parts should be subject to the whole for the good of the\nwhole, is found necessary both in bodies natural and politic. Is the\nfoot to be lanced? though it have a particular use of its own, and a\npeculiar employment, yet it is to be ordered by the eye, the hand, and\nthe rest. Kingdoms have their several cities and towns, which all have\ntheir governments apart by themselves; yet for the preservation of the\nwhole, all join together in the Parliament. Armies and navies have their\nseveral companies and ships, yet in any danger every particular company\nand ship is ordered by the counsels and directions of the officers and\nguides of the whole army or navy. The Church is spiritual, but yet a\nkingdom, a body, an army, &c. D. Ames himself affirms that the light of\nnature requires that particular churches ought to combine in synods for\nthings of greater moment. The God of nature and reason hath not left in\nhis word a government against the light of nature and right reason.\nAppeals are of divine and natural right, and certainly very necessary in\nevery society, because of the iniquity and ignorance of judges. That\nthey are so, the practices of all ages and nations sufficiently testify.\n\n_Argum_. II. The Jewish church government affords a second argument. If\nin that they had synagogues in every city, which were subordinate to the\nsupreme ecclesiastical court at Jerusalem, then there ought to be a\nsubordination of particular churches among us to higher assemblies; but\nso it was among them: therefore,\n\nThat the subordination was among them of the particular synagogues to\nthe assembly at Jerusalem, is clear--Deut. xvii. 8, 12; 2 Chron. xix. 8,\n11; Exod. xviii. 22, 26.\n\nThat therefore it ought to be so among us, is as plain: for the dangers\nand difficulties that they were involved in without a government, and\nfor which God caused that government to be set up among them, are as\ngreat if not greater among us, and therefore why should we want the same\nmeans of prevention and cure? Are not we in greater danger of heresies\nnow in the time of the New Testament, the churches therein being thereby\nto be exercised by way of trial, as the apostle foretells, 1 Cor. xi.\n19? Doth not ungodliness in these last times abound, according to the\nsame apostle's prediction? Is there not now a more free and permitted\nintercourse of society with infidels than in those times?\n\nNor are the exceptions against this argument of any strength: as, 1.\nThat arguments for the form of church government must yet be fetched\nfrom the Jewish Church; the government of the Jews was ceremonial and\ntypical, and Christians must not Judaize, nor use that Judaical compound\nof subordination of churches: the Mosaical polity is abrogated now under\nthe New Testament. Not to tell those that make this exception, 1. That\nnone argue so much from the Jewish government as themselves for the\npower of congregations, both in ordination and excommunication, because\nthe people of Israel laid hands on the Levites, and all Israel were to\nremove the unclean; 2. We answer, the laws of the Jewish church, whether\nceremonial or judicial, so far are in force, even at this day, as they\nwere grounded upon common equity, the principles of reason and nature,\nand were serving to the maintenance of the moral law. 'Tis of especial\nright, that the party unjustly aggrieved should have redress, that the\nadverse party should not be sole judge and party too, that judgment\nought not to be rashly or partially passed upon any. The Jewish polity\nis only abrogated in regard of what was in it of particular right, not\nof common right: so far as there was in their laws either a typicalness\nproper to their church, or a peculiarness of respect to their state in\nthat land of promise given unto them. Whatsoever was in their laws of\nmoral concernment or general equity, is still obliging; whatsoever the\nJewish Church had not as Jewish, but as it was a political church, or an\necclesiastical republic, (among which is the subordination of\necclesiastical courts to be reckoned,) doth belong to the Christian\nChurch: that all judgments were to be determined by an high-priest, was\ntypical of Christ's supremacy in judicature; but that there were gradual\njudicatories for the ease of an oppressed or grieved party, there can be\nno ceremony or type in this. This was not learned by Moses in the\npattern of the Mount, but was taught by the light of nature to Jethro,\nExod. xviii. 22, and by him given in advice to Moses. This did not\nbelong unto the peculiar dispensation of the Jews, but unto the good\norder of the church.\n\nTo conclude our answer to this exception, if the benefit of appeals be\nnot as free to us as to the Jews, the yoke of the gospel should be more\nintolerable than the yoke of the law; the poor afflicted Christian might\ngroan and cry under an unjust and tyrannical eldership, and no\necclesiastical judicatory to relieve him; whereas the poor oppressed Jew\nmight appeal to the Sanhedrin: certainly this is contrary to that\nprophecy of Christ, Psal. lxxii. 12, 14.\n\n_Argum_. III. A third argument to prove the subordination of particular\ncongregations, is taken from the institution of our Saviour Christ, of\ngradual appeals, Matt, xviii. 17, 18, where our Saviour hath appointed a\nparticular member of a church (if scandalous) to be gradually dealt\nwithal; first to be reproved in private, then to be admonished before\ntwo or three witnesses, and last of all to be complained of to the\nchurch: whence we thus argue:\n\nIf Christ hath instituted that the offence of an obstinate brother\nshould be complained of to the church; then much more is it intended\nthat the obstinacy of a great number, suppose of a whole church, should\nbe brought before a higher assembly: but the former is true, therefore\nthe latter. The consequence, wherein the strength of the argument lies,\nis proved several ways.\n\n1. From the rule of proportion: by what proportion one or two are\nsubject to a particular church, by the same proportion is that church\nsubject to a provincial or a national assembly; and by the same\nproportion that one congregation is governed by the particular eldership\nrepresenting it, by the same proportion are ten or twelve congregations\ngoverned by a classical presbytery representing them all.\n\n2. From the sufficiency of that remedy that Christ here prescribes for\nthose emergent exigencies under which the Church may lie; since,\ntherefore, offences may as well arise between two persons in the same\ncongregation, Christ hath appointed that particular congregations, as\nwell as members, shall have liberty to complain and appeal to a more\ngeneral judgment for redress: the salve here prescribed by Christ is\nequal to the sore; if the sore of scandal may overspread whole churches,\nas well as particular persons, then certainly the salve of appeals and\nsubordination is here also appointed. If a man be scandalized by the\nneighbor-church, to whom shall he complain? The church offending must\nnot be both judge and party.\n\n3. From that ecclesiastical communion that is between churches and\nchurches in one and the same province or nation, whereby churches are\njoined and united together in doctrine and discipline into one body, as\nwell as divers particular persons in a particular congregation; since,\ntherefore, scandals may be committed among them that are in that holy\ncommunion one with another, most unworthy of and destructive to that\nsacred league, certainly those scandals should be redressed by a\nsuperior judicatory, as well as offences between brother and brother.\n\n4. He that careth for a part of a church must much more care for the\nwhole; he whose love extends itself to regard the conversion of one, is\ncertainly very careful of the spiritual welfare of many, the edification\nof a whole church; the influence of Christ's love being poured upon the\nwhole body, bride and spouse, by order of nature, before it redound to\nthe benefit of a finger or toe, viz. some one single person or other.\nNor are the exceptions against this institution of gradual appeals of\nany moment.\n\nThe grand one, and that makes directly against our position is, that our\nSaviour would have the controversy between brother and brother to be\nterminated in a peculiar church, and that its judgment should be\nultimately requested, he saith, _Tell the church_, not churches. The\nsubordination here appointed by Christ is of fewer to more, but still\nwithin the same church, not without it. To which we answer, our Saviour\nmeans not by church only one single particular congregation, but also\nseveral, combined in their officers, as appears by these following\nreasons.\n\n1. A particular church in sundry cases cannot decide the difference, or\nheal the distemper our Saviour prescribes against; as when a particular\nchurch is divided into two parts, both in opposition one to the other;\nor when one church is at variance with another; if Christ here limits\nonly to a particular church, how shall such distempers be remedied?\n\n2. When Christ bids _tell the church_, he speaks in allusion to the\nJewish Church, which was represented not only by parts in the single\nsynagogue or congregation, but wholly in their sanhedrin, consisting of\nselect persons, appointed by God, for deciding controversies incident to\ntheir particular congregations, and their members. So that we may thus\nreason: the subordination here established by Christ is so far to be\nextended in the Christian Church, as in the Church of the Jews, for\nChrist alludeth to the Jewish practice; but in the Jewish Church there\nwas a subordination of fewer to more, not only within the same synagogue\nor congregation, but within the whole nation, for all synagogues were\nunder the great council at Jerusalem. Now that Christ gives here the\nsame rule that was of old given to the Jews for church government, is\nclear, 1. From the censure of the obstinate, who was to be reputed a\nheathen and a publican; wherein is a manifest allusion to the present\nestate of the Church of the Jews; and, 2. From the familiarity and\nplainness of Christ's speech, _Tell the church_, which church could not\nhave been understood by the disciples had not Christ spoken of the\nJewish judicatory; besides which they knew none for such offences as\nChrist spake of to them, there being no particular church which had\ngiven its name to Christ: as also, 3. From his citing the words of that\ntext, Deut. xix. 15, where the witnesses and offenders were, by way of\nfurther appeal, to stand before the Lord, before the priests for\njudgment, ver. 17.\n\n3. It is plain that our Saviour intended a liberty of going beyond a\nparticular congregation for determining cases of controversy, from the\nreason of that subordination which Christ enjoins, of one to two or\nthree, and of them to the church. The reason of that gradual progress\nthere set down, was because in the increase of numbers and greatness of\nassemblies, more wisdom, judgment, and gravity is supposed to be, than\nin the admonitions of a few and smaller number; now, then, this power of\nright admonition increaseth with the number of admonishers, as well\nwithout as within the same congregation; if ten go beyond two in wisdom\nand gravity, forty will go beyond ten, and be more likely to win upon\nthe offender, and regain him.\n\n_Argum_. IV. A fourth argument is taken from the pattern of the\napostolical churches, Acts xv.\n\nThe church of Antioch (though presbyterial, as was proved Chapter XIII.,\nPosition II.) was subordinate to the synod at Jerusalem; therefore a\nparticular church is subordinate to higher assemblies, &c.\n\nIf a synodal decree did bind them in those times, then may it bind\nparticular churches now, and these ought even still to be subject to\nsynods.\n\nThe consequence is undeniable, unless we hold that what the synod there\nimposed was unjust, or that we have now less need of those remedies than\nthey had; nay, since the apostles (who were assisted with an\nextraordinary spirit of inspiration) would nevertheless in a doubtful\nbusiness have synodal conventions for determining of controversies, much\nmore ought we to do so whose gifts are far inferior to theirs; and\nunless it had been in their determination to leave us their example of a\nsynodal way of church government for our pattern, they had not wanted\nthe meeting together of so many with them for decision of the doubt,\nwhose doctrine was infallible, and of itself, without an assembly, to be\nbelieved.\n\nThe exceptions against this pattern of church polity are of no validity,\ne.g.\n\n1. This was no synod. First, that it was no synod appears, in that we\nread of no word of a synod. Secondly, no commissioners from Syria and\nCilicia, which churches should have sent their delegates, had they been\na synod, and had their decrees been to have bound in a synodal way.\nThirdly, all the believers had voices here.\n\n2. If it were a synod, yet it is no pattern for us, in regard it was\nconsisting of members guided by an infallible and apostolical spirit.\n\nWe answer, 1. Here is the thing synod, though not the word, which is a\nmeeting consisting of the deputies of many single churches.\n\n2. That Jerusalem and Antioch had their commissioners there, is evident;\nand by consequence many single churches had their commissioners, for\nthere were many single congregations at Jerusalem and Antioch, as hath\nbeen proved, Chapter XIII., Position II.; that these met together, the\nword used, verse 6, _they came together_, evidenceth, and verse 25. For\nthe churches of Syria and Cilicia not sending their commissioners, it\nfollows not that because _they are not named_, therefore _they were not\nthere_; and if _they were not there_, therefore _they ought not to have\nbeen_: but it is rather thought Syria and Cilicia had commissioners\nthere, in regard the synodal decrees are directed to them as well as\nothers, and the decrees bound them, which they could not do as formal\nScripture; for the words, _it seemeth good to us_, and their submitting\nthe matter to disputation, argue the contrary; therefore as synodal\ndecrees, which inasmuch as they bound those churches, they either were\npresent, or were obliged to be present by their commissioners.\n\n3. To that exception, that the multitude of believers had voices there,\nand therefore it is not one of our synods, ver. 22--\n\nWe answer, it can nowise be proved that every particular believer had a\nsuffrage in the assembly.\n\nEminent divines[116] understand by _multitude_ and _church_, the\nmultitude and whole church of apostles and elders, who are said to be\n_gathered together_, verse 6, _to consider of the matter_; besides which\nno other multitude is said to be gathered together, while the matter was\nin debate; yet we shall not deny even to other members the liberty of\ntheir consent and approbation, and freedom to examine all determinations\nby the rule of God's word: but the ordaining and forming those decrees\nis here evinced to be by the apostles and elders, when as they are\ncalled _their decrees_, Acts xvi. 4,6.\n\n3. Those only had definitive votes, who met together synodically to\nconsider of the question; but they were only the apostles and elders,\nActs xv. 6. That the epistle is sent in the name of all, is granted;\nbecause it was sent by common consent, and withal thereby was added some\nmore weight to the message.\n\n4. Further, if the believers of Jerusalem voted in that assembly, by\nwhat authority was it? How could they _impose a burden_ upon, and\ncommand decrees unto the churches of Syria and Cilicia, and other\nchurches, who, according to our brethren's opinion, were not only absent\nin their commissioners, but independent in their power?\n\nTo the exception, that other synods may not pretend to the privileges of\nthat, since its decrees were indited by the Holy Ghost; and therefore no\npattern for our imitation--\n\n_Ans_. The decrees of this assembly did oblige, as synodal decrees, not\nas apostolical and canonical Scripture: this appears several ways:\n\n1. The apostles, in framing these canons, did proceed in a way synodal\nand ecclesiastical, and far different from that which they used in\ndictating of Scripture, and publishing divine truths; their decrees were\nbrought forth by much disputation, human disquisition, but divine\noracles are published without human reasonings, from the immediate\ninditing of the Spirit, 2 Pet. i. 2.\n\n2. Besides the apostles, there were here commissioned elders and other\nbrethren, men of ordinary rank, not divinely and infallibly inspired.\nThe apostles in the penning of Scripture consult not with elders and\nbrethren, (as our opposites here say they did:) our brethren make\nmandates of ordinary believers divine and canonical Scripture.\n\n3. Divine writ is published only in the name of the Lord; but these in\nthe name of man also, \"It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us,\" Acts\nxv. 28.\n\n4. Canonical and apostolical writing of new Scripture shall not continue\ntill Christ's coming, because the canon is complete, Rev. xxii. 18, 19,\n&c.; but thus to decree through the assistance of the Holy Ghost, who\nremaineth with the Church to the end, and to be directed by Scripture,\nshall still continue. Therefore this decreeing is not as the inditing of\nthe Holy Scripture. The minor is clear both from Christ's promise,\n\"Where two or three are met together,\" Matt. xvii. 18-20; Matt. viii.\n20; as also by the Spirit's inspiring those councils of Nice of old, and\nDort of late: Therefore the apostles here laid aside their apostolical\nextraordinary power, descending to the places of ordinary pastors, to\ngive them examples in future ages.\n\nTo conclude, it is plain, that all the essentials in this assembly were\nsynodal, as whether we consider: 1. The occasion of the meeting, a\ncontroversy; 2. The deputation of commissioners from particular\nchurches, for the deciding of that controversy; or 3. The convention of\nthose that were deputed; or 4. The discussion of the question, they\nbeing so convened; or 5. The determination of the question so discussed;\nor 6. The imposition of the thing so determined; or 7. The subjection to\nthe thing so imposed.\n\n1 Tim. i. 17\n\nTO THE IMMORTAL GOD ALONE BE GLORY FOR EVER AND EVER.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[Footnote 1: This truth, that Jesus Christ is a king, and hath a kingdom\nand government in his Church distinct from the kingdoms of this world,\nand from the civil government, hath this commendation and character\nabove all other truths, that Christ himself suffered to the death for\nit, and sealed it with his blood. For it may he observed from the story\nof his passion, this was the only point of his accusation, which was\nconfessed and avouched by himself, Luke xxiii. 3; John xviii. 33, 36,\n37; was most aggravated, prosecuted, and driven home by the Jews, Luke\nxxiii. 2; John xix. 22, 23; was prevalent with Pilate as the cause of\ncondemning him to die, John xix. 12, 13, and was mentioned also in his\nsuperscription upon his cross, John xix. 19; and although in reference\nto God, and in respect of satisfaction to the Divine justice for our\nsins, his death was [Greek: lytron] a price of redemption; yet in\nreference to men who did persecute, accuse, and condemn him, his death\nwas [Greek: martyrion] a martyr's testimony to seal such a truth.--Mr.\n_G. Gillespie, in his Aaron's Rod Blossoming, &c., Epist. to the\nReader_.]\n\n[Footnote 2: _Cent. I. lib. 2, cap._ 7, _p._ 407 _ad_ 418, _Edit. Basil.\nAn._ 1624. De rebus ad Gubernationem Ecclesiae pertinentibus, Apostoli\ncertos quosdam, Canones tradiderunt: quos ordine subjiciemus, &c.]\n\n[Footnote 3: Directions of the Lords and Commons, &c. Aug. 19, 1645, p.\n10]\n\n[Footnote 4: (1) The ancient discipline of the Bohemian Brethren,\npublished in Latin, in octavo, _Anno_ 1633, pages 99, 100.\n\n(2) The discipline of Geneva, _Anno_ 1576, in _Art._ 1, 22, 57, 86, and\n87.\n\n(3) The discipline of the French church at Frankfort, _Edit._ 2, in\noctavo, _Anno_ 1555, _in cap. de Disciplina et Excom.,_ p. 75, and the\nEcclesiast. Discipline of the reformed churches of France, printed at\nLondon, _Anno_ 1642, _Art._ 15, 16, and 24, p. 44. (1) The Synodal\nConstitution of the Dutch churches in England, chap. 4, _Art._ 13, and\n_Tit._ 1, _Art._ 2; and the Dutch churches in Belgia, (see _Harmonia\nSynodorum Belgicarum_,) _cap._ 14, _Art._ 7, 11, and 15, p. 160. (5) The\nreformed churches at Nassau, in Germany, as _Zeoper_ testifies, _De\nPolitei Eccles.,_ printed _Herborne, Anno_ 1607, in octavo, _Tit. de\nCensuris Ecclesiast., Part_ 4, _Art._ 64, p. 813. (6) The discipline in\nthe churches constituted by the labor of _Joannes \u00e2 Lasco_, entitled\n_Forma ac ratio tota Ecclesiastici Miniterii, &c._, _author Joannes \u00e2\nLasco Poloniae Barone, Anno_ 1555, p. 291. (7) The discipline agreed\nupon by the English exiles that fled from the _Marian_ persecution to\nFrankfort, thence to Geneva, allowed by _Calvin_; entitled _Ratio ac\nforma public\u00e8 orandi Deum, &c., Genevae_, 1556, _Tit. de Disciplina_, p.\n68. (8) The Order of Excommunication and Public Repentance used in the\nChurch of Scotland, _Anno_ 1571, _Tit._ The offences that deserve public\nrepentance, &c., pp. 87, 88.]\n\n[Footnote 5: See more in chap. 10, sect. 1.]\n\n[Footnote 6: R. Park, de Polit. Eccl. 1. 2, cap. 42.]\n\n[Footnote 7: Malcolm. Com. in loco.]\n\n[Footnote 8: Calvin in loco.]\n\n[Footnote 9: Chrys. wisheth--\"But, O that there had not wanted one that\nwould have delivered diligently unto us the history of the apostles, not\nonly what they wrote, or what they spake, but how they behaved\nthemselves throughout their whole life, both what they did eat, and when\nthey did eat, when they sat, and whither they went, and what they did\nevery day, in what parts they lived, and into what house they entered,\nand whither they sailed, and that would accurately have expounded all\nthings; so full of manifold utility are all things of theirs.\"--Chrys.,\nArgum. in Epist. ad Philem. And elsewhere he affirmeth,--\"Nor hath the\ngrace of the Holy Ghost without cause left unto us these histories\nwritten, but that he may stir us up to the imitation and emulation of\nsuch unspeakable men. For when we hear of this man's patience, of that\nman's soberness, of another man's readiness to entertain strangers, and\nthe manifold virtue of every one, and how every one of them did shine\nand become illustrious, we are stirred up to the like zeal.\" Chrys. in\nGen. xxx. 25. Homil. 57, in initio.]\n\n[Footnote 10: \"For this cause, therefore, the conversation of these most\nexcellent men is accurately related, that by imitation of them our life\nmay be rightly led on to that which is good.\"--Greg. Nyssen, lib. de\nVita Mosis, tom. i. p. 170, vid. tot. lib.]\n\n[Footnote 11: Perkins on Matth. vi. 16. See him also on Heb. xi. 6, p.\n28, in fol. col. 2, B, C, &c., and on Heb. xi. 22, p. 131, col. 2, D,\nand notably on Heb. xii. 1, p. 200, col. 2, C, D, &c., and on Rev. ii.\n19, p. 313, col. 1, B, and his Art of Prophesying, p. 663, col. 1 and 2.\nVide Pet. Martyr in lib. Jud. p. 2, col. 1, and in Rom. iv. 23, 24. And\nCalvin in Heb. xii. 1; and in Rom. iv. 23, 24, and in 1. Pet. i. 21,\n&c.]\n\n[Footnote 12: Park. de Pol. Eccl. 1. 2, c. 42.]\n\n[Footnote 13: 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10.]\n\n[Footnote 14: Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 15-18; 1 Cor. v. 4, 5; 2 Cor. x.\n8, and xiii. 10.]\n\n[Footnote 15: 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17; 1 Tim. iii. 14, 15, with all places\nthat mention any thing of government.]\n\n[Footnote 16: Eph. iv. 8, 11, 12; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Matt. xxviii. 18-20;\nJohn xx. 21-23; Matt. xvi. 19; 2 Cor. x. 8.]\n\n[Footnote 17: Matt. xvi. 19, and xxviii. 19; John xx. 21, 23; 2 Cor. x.\n8, and xiii. 10.]\n\n[Footnote 18: Matt, xxviii. 18-20; Acts vi. 4; 2 Tim. iv. 2.]\n\n[Footnote 19: Matt, xxviii. 18-20; 1 Cor. xi. 24.]\n\n[Footnote 20: Matt, xviii. 15-17; Tit. iii. 19; 1 Tim. v. 20; 1 Cor. v.\n4, 5, 13; 2 Cor. ii. 6: 1 Tim. i. 20; 2 Cor. ii 7, 8, &c.]\n\n[Footnote 21: 1 Cor. iv. 1.]\n\n[Footnote 22: 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10.]\n\n[Footnote 23: [Greek: Ekklaesia], Acts xix. 32, 39, 40; Eph. v. 23; 1\nCor. xii. 98.]\n\n[Footnote 24: Cameron. Praelect de Eccles. in fol. pp. 296-298.]\n\n[Footnote 25: Who in relating such things can refrain from weeping?]\n\n[Footnote 26: See Mr. Edwards's Antapologia, page 201, printed in anno\n1644, proving this out of their own books. Especially see a little book\nin 12mo. printed in anno 1646, styled a collection of certain matters,\nwhich almost in every page pleads for Independency and Independents by\nname: from which most of the Independent principles seem to be derived.]\n\n[Footnote 27: Let not any man put off this Scripture, saying, This is in\nthe Old Testament, but we find no such thing in the gospel; for we find\nthe same thing, almost the same words used in a prophecy of the times of\nthe gospel, Zech. xiii. 3. In the latter end of the xii. chapter, it is\nprophesied that those who pierced Christ, should _look upon him and\nmourn_, &c., having a _spirit of grace and supplication_ poured upon\nthem, chap. xiii. 1. \"There shall now be opened a fountain for sin, and\nfor uncleanness,\" ver. 3. \"It shall come to pass that he that takes upon\nhim to prophesy, that his father and mother that begat him, shall say\nunto him, Thou shalt not live, for thou speakest lies in the name of the\nLord: and his father and his mother that begat him, shall thrust him\nthrough, when he prophesieth.\" You must understand this by that in\nDeuteronomy. The meaning is not that his father or mother should\npresently run a knife into him, but that though they begat him, yet they\nshould be the means to bring him to condign punishment, even the taking\naway his life; these who were the instruments of his life, should now be\nthe instruments of his death.--Mr. Jer. Burroughs in ills Irenicum,\nchap. v., Pages 19, 20, printed 1646.]\n\n[Footnote 28: But schismatics and heretics are called evil-workers,\nPhil. iii. 2; and heresy is classed among the works of the flesh, Gal.\nv. 20.]\n\n[Footnote 29: Mr. Burroughs in his _Irenicum_, c.v. page 25; printed\n1646.]\n\n[Footnote 30: See this evidenced upon divers grounds in _Appollon. jus\nMajest._, pp. 25, 26.]\n\n[Footnote 31: See M.S. to A.S., pages 55-60.]\n\n[Footnote 32: The civil magistrate is no proper church officer, as was\nintimated, Part 1 c. 1., and will be further evidenced in this chapter.]\n\n[Footnote 33: That the civil magistrate is not the vicar of Christ our\nMediator, see abundantly proved by Mr. S. Rutherford, in his Divine\nRight of Church Government, &c., Ch. 27, Quest. 23, pages 595 to 647.]\n\n[Footnote 34: The formal difference or distinction betwixt these two\npowers, is fully and clearly asserted by that learned bishop, Usher, in\nthese words: \"God, for the better settling of piety and honesty among\nmen, and the repressing of profaneness and other vices, hath established\ntwo distinct powers upon earth: the one of the keys, committed to the\nChurch; the other of the sword, committed to the civil magistrate. That\nof the keys, is ordained to work upon the inward man; having immediate\nrelation to the remitting or retaining of sins, John xx. 23. That of the\nsword is appointed to work upon the outward man; yielding protection to\nthe obedient, and inflicting external punishment upon the rebellious and\ndisobedient. By the former, the spiritual officers of the Church of\nChrist are inclinable to govern well, 1 Tim. v. 17. To _speak_, and\n_exhort_, and _rebuke_ with all _authority_, Tit. ii. 15. To loose such\nas are penitent, Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18. To commit others to the\nLord's prison, until their amendment, or to bind them over to the\njudgment of the great day, if they shall persist in their wilfulness and\nobstinacy. By the other, princes have an imperious power assigned by God\nunto them, for the defence of such as do well, and executing revenge and\nwrath, Rom. xiii. 4, upon such as do evil, whether by death, or\nbanishment, or confiscation of goods, or imprisonment, Ezra vii. 26,\naccording to the quality of the offence.\n\n\"When St. Peter, that had the keys committed unto him, made bold to draw\nthe sword, he was commanded to put it up, Matt. xxvi. 52, as a weapon\nthat he had no authority to meddle withal. And on the other side, when\nUzziah the king would venture upon the execution of the priest's office,\nit was said unto him, 'It pertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn\nincense unto the Lord, but to the priests, the sons of Aaron, that are\nconsecrated to burn incense,' 2 Chron. xxvi. 18. Let this therefore be\nour second conclusion: That the power of the sword, and of the keys, are\ntwo distinct ordinances of God; and that the prince hath no more\nauthority to enter upon the execution of any part of the priest's\nfunction, than the priest hath to intrude upon any part of the office of\nthe prince.\" In his speech delivered in the Castle-chamber at Dublin,\n&c., concerning the oath of supremacy, pages 3, 4, 5. Further\ndifferences betwixt these two powers, see in Gillespie's Aaron's Rod,\nBook 2, Chap. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 35: See this proposition for substance fully and clearly\nasserted by that acute and pious author, Mr. P. Bains, in his Diocesan's\nTrial, quest. 3, pages 83, 84, conclus. 3.]\n\n[Footnote 36: See Cotton's Keys, &c., pp. 31-33, and Mr. Thomas Goodwin,\nand Mr. Philip Nye, in their epistle prefixed thereunto, do own this\nbook as being for substance their own judgment.]\n\n[Footnote 37: See that judicious treatise, Vindiciae Clavium, chap. III.\nIV. V., pp. 33-52.]\n\n[Footnote 38: John Cameron, Praelect. in Matt, xviii. 15, p. 149-151, in\nfol, and Baine's Diocesan's Trial, the third quest, pp. 79, 80, and D.\nParcus in Matt. xviii. 15. This is fully discussed and proved by Mr.\nRutherford in his Peaceable Plea, Chap. viii. p. 85, &c.]\n\n[Footnote 39: A difference arose betwixt two gentlemen in that church\nabout singing of hymns: the second gentleman was complained of to the\nchurch by the first, and upon hearing of the whole business, and all the\nwords that passed between them, this second gentleman was censured by\nthe church, and Mr. Nye _charged sin upon him_ (that was the phrase) in\nmany particulars, and still at the end of every charge Mr. Nye repeated,\n\"this was your sin.\" After this censure, so solemnly done, the gentleman\ncensured brings in accusations against Mr. Nye, in several articles,\ncharging him with pride, want of charity, &c., in the manner of the\ncensure; and this being brought before the church, continued in debate\nabout half a year, three or four days in a week, and sometimes more,\nbefore all the congregation. Divers of the members having callings to\nfollow, they desired to have leave to be absent. Mr. Goodwin oft\nprofessed publicly upon these differences, If this were their church\nfellowship, he would lay down his eldership; and nothing was more\ncommonly spoke among the members, than that certainly for matter of\ndiscipline they were not in the right way, for that there was no way of\nbringing things to an end. At last, after more than half a year's\ndebate, not being able to bring these differences to an end, and being\ncome into England, they had their last meeting about it, to agree not to\npublish it abroad when they came into England, &c. Mr. Edwards's\nAntapolog., pp. 36, 37.]\n\n[Footnote 40: Mr. J. Cotton, in his Way of the Churches of Christ in New\nEngland, chap, ii. sect. 7, p. 43.]\n\n[Footnote 41: Were the power in the church, the church should not only\ncall them, but make them out of virtue and power received into herself;\nthen should the church have a true lordlike power in regard of her\nministers. Besides, there are many in the community of Christians\nincapable of this power regularly, as women and children. Mr. P. Bain in\nhis Diocesan's Trial, quest. 3, conclus. 3, page 84, printed 1621.]\n\n[Footnote 42: If spiritual and ecclesiastical power be in the church or\ncommunity of the faithful, the church doth not only call, but make\nofficers out of virtue and power received into herself, and then should\nthe church have a true lordlike power in regard of her ministers. For,\nas he that will derive authority to the church, maketh himself lord of\nthe church, so, if the church derive authority to the ministers of\nChrist, she maketh herself lady or mistress over them, in the exercise\nof that lordlike authority; for, as all men know, it is the property of\nthe lord and master to impart authority. Did the church give power to\nthe pastors and teachers, she might make the sacrament and preaching\nwhich one doth in order, no sacrament, no preaching; for it is the order\ninstituted of God that giveth being and efficacy to these ordinances;\nand if the power of ruling, feeding, and dispensing the holy things of\nGod do reside in the faithful, the word and sacrament, in respect of\ndispensation and efficacy, shall depend upon the order and institution\nof the society. If the power of the keys be derived from the community\nof the faithful, then are all officers immediately and formally servants\nto the church, and must do every thing in the name of the church, rule,\nfeed, bind, loose, remit, and retain sins, preach and administer the\nsacraments; then they must perform their office according to the\ndirection of the church, more or less, seldom or frequent, remiss or\ndiligent; for from whom are they to receive direction how to carry\nthemselves in their offices, but from him or them of whom they receive\ntheir office, whose work they are to do, and from whom they must expect\nreward? If their office and power be of God immediately, they must do\nthe duties of their place according to his designment, and unto him they\nmust give account; but if their power and function be from the church,\nthe church must give account to God, and the officers to the church,\nwhom she doth take to be her helpers, &c. Mr. John Ball, in his Trial of\nthe grounds tending to separation, chap. xii. pages 252, 253, &c.]\n\n[Footnote 43: See Vindiciae Clavium, judiciously unmasking these new\nnotions.]\n\n[Footnote 44: Here understand by this phrase, (_over you in the Lord_,)\nviz: Not only in the fear of the Lord, nor only in those things that\nappertain to God's worship, but also according to the will, and by the\nauthority of the Lord Christ derived to them.]\n\n[Footnote 45: See the Apologetical narration by the five Independents,\npage 8; and Mr. Jo. Cotton, at large, asserts the divine institution of\nthe ruling elder. Way of the Churches of Christ, &c., chap. 2, sect. 2,\npage 13-35.]\n\n[Footnote 46: Calvin, Beza, Pareus, Pagnin.]\n\n[Footnote 47: Arias Montan.]\n\n[Footnote 48: Tremel. out of the Syriac; so the old Geneva translation,\nand our new translation.]\n\n[Footnote 49: Field, of the Church, book 5, chap. 26.]\n\n[Footnote 50: Sutlive, who afterwards declared, that he was sorry with\nall his heart, that ever he put pen to paper to write against Beza as he\nhad done, in behalf of the proud domineering prelates; and he spoke this\nwith great indignation.]\n\n[Footnote 51: Mat. Sutliv. de Presbyterio, cap. 12, p. 87, edit. 1591.]\n\n[Footnote 52: Ibid. pages 72 and 87, edit. 1591.]\n\n[Footnote 53: Bilson's perpetual Government of Christ's Church, c. 10,\np. 136, 137, 138, printed in Ann. 1610.]\n\n[Footnote 54: That the magistrate cannot be here meant, see fully\nevidenced in Mr. Gillespie's Aaron's Rod, &c., book ii. chap. 6, pages\n218-224, and also chap. 9, p. 284.]\n\n[Footnote 55: Pareas in 1 Cor. xii. 28.]\n\n[Footnote 56: D. Field, Of the Church, book v. chap. xxvi.]\n\n[Footnote 57: Peter Martyr, Beza, Piscator, and Calvin.]\n\n[Footnote 58: Calvin in 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. _Vid. etiam Jacob. Laurent.\nComment, in_ 1 Pet. v. 2, 3, _ubi fusius de hac distinctione disserit_,\np. 322, ad. 325.]\n\n[Footnote 59: Mat. Sutliv. De Presbyterio, cap. 12, page 72 and 87:\nedit. Lond., an. 1591. Bilson's Perpetual Government of Christ's Church,\nchap. 10, page 141; in 4to. printed in anno 1610.]\n\n[Footnote 60: _Vide_ Calv. in loc.]\n\n[Footnote 61: Sutlive.]\n\n[Footnote 62: Whitgift.]\n\n[Footnote 63: Coleman.]\n\n[Footnote 64: Who desire more full satisfaction touching this poor and\nempty gloss, that the civil magistrate should be meant by these\ngovernments, let them consult Mr. Gillespie's elaborate treatise, called\nAaron's Rod Blossoming, book 2, chap, 6, pp. 218 to 224.]\n\n[Footnote 65: Bilson.]\n\n[Footnote 66: Mr. Rutherford in his Due Right of Presbyteries, p. 145.]\n\n[Footnote 67: Calvin, Beza, &c. on this place.]\n\n[Footnote 68: See Gillespie's Aaron's Rod, book 2, chap. 9.]\n\n[Footnote 69: Mr. Rutherford in his Due Rights of Presbyteries, chap. 7,\nsec. 7, pages 145-147.]\n\n[Footnote 70: Beza, Piscata, Calvin, on this verse.]\n\n[Footnote 71: Bilson's Perpetual Government of Christ's Church, chap. x.\npages 130, 131.]\n\n[Footnote 72: Altar. Damas. cap. xii., page 918 and page 920.]\n\n[Footnote 73: B. King, in his Sermon on Cant. viii., Bilson in his\nPerpetual Government of Christ's Church, c. x. page 132, &c.]\n\n[Footnote 74: B. King, in his Sermon on Cant. viii., page 40.]\n\n[Footnote 75: B. Whitgift in his Defence against Cartwright's first\nReply. This is one of D. Field's three glosses. Field, Of the Church,\nlib v., chap. 26.]\n\n[Footnote 76: Bishops that have no tolerable gift of teaching, are like\nidols, their cases, or rather coffins, set up in the church's choice.\nCartwright Testam. _Annot_., in 1 Tim. v. 17.]\n\n[Footnote 77: Altar. Damasc. chap, xii., page 919.]\n\n[Footnote 78: Bridge, Hussey.]\n\n[Footnote 79: Altar. Damasc. chap, xii., page 919.]\n\n[Footnote 80: Sutlive.]\n\n[Footnote 81: Sutlive, De Presbyterio, cap. 12, pages 72, 73.]\n\n[Footnote 82: Bilson's Government of the Church, page 133.]\n\n[Footnote 83: Sutlive, De Presbyterio, c. 12, pages 72, 73.]\n\n[Footnote 84: Bilson, page 135.]\n\n[Footnote 85: Field, Book v.]\n\n[Footnote 86: Bilson, page 133.]\n\n[Footnote 87: Field, Book v.]\n\n[Footnote 88: D. Downham. See Altar. Damasc. c. xii. page 924.]\n\n[Footnote 89: Chrysost. Homil. 15, in 1 Tim. 5, Hier. in 1 Tim. cap. 5,\nAmbr. in 1 Tim. cap., Calv. in 1 Tim. cap. 5, Bullinger in 1 Tim. cap.\n5, Beza in 1 Tim. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 90: Bilson, Sutlive, and Downham.]\n\n[Footnote 91: The London ministers have here inserted the testimonies of\nthese ancient writers in favor of the divine right of the office of the\nruling elder, viz. Ignatius, Purpurius, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian,\nOptatus, Ambrose, Augustine, and Isidorus; and of these three late ones,\nviz. Whitaker, Thorndike, and Rivet. The amount of their testimony, when\ntaken together, appears to be simply this, that there have been ruling\nelders, as distinct from preaching elders, in the Church of Christ from\nthe beginning. It is therefore judged unnecessary to give the quotations\nfrom these authors at large.--_Editor_.]\n\n[Footnote 92: Against the office of deacons, and the divine right\nthereof, fourteen objections are answered by Mr. S. Rutherford in his\nDue Right of Presbyteries, chap. 7, pages 159 to 175. To which the\nreader that shall make any scruple about the deacon's office, is\nreferred for his further satisfaction.]\n\n[Footnote 93: Some of our brethren in New England, observing what\nconfusion necessarily depends upon the government which hath been\npractised there, have been forced much to search into it within this\nfour years, and incline to acknowledge the presbyters to be the subject\nof the power without dependence upon the people. \"We judge, upon mature\ndeliberation, that the ordinary exercise of government must be so in the\npresbyters, as not to depend upon the express votes and suffrages of the\npeople. There hath been a convent or meeting of the ministers of these\nparts, about this question at Cambridge in the Bay, and there we have\nproposed our arguments, and answered theirs, and they proposed theirs,\nand answered ours; and so the point is left to consideration.\" Mr.\nThomas Parker in his letter written from Newbury in New England,\nDecember 17, 1643, printed 1644.]\n\n[Footnote 94: Vid. Hen. Steph. Thes. L. Graec. in verb.]\n\n[Footnote 95: Piscator.]\n\n[Footnote 96: Beza.]\n\n[Footnote 97: Zanch. in loco.]\n\n[Footnote 98: Vid. Hen. Steph. Thes. ad verb.]\n\n[Footnote 99: Mr. Jo. Cotton's Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, chap. vii.\nin propos. 3, pages 44-46.]\n\n[Footnote 100: See Mr. Cotton's own words in chap. XIV. at the end, in\nthe margin.]\n\n[Footnote 101: See John Calvin, in 1 Cor. v. 4.]\n\n[Footnote 102: Cameron, in Matt. xviii. 15.]\n\n[Footnote 103: Thus Mr. Bayne remarkably expounds this text, Matt.\nxviii., saying: Where first mark, that Christ doth presuppose the\nauthority of every particular church taken indistinctly. For it is such\na church as any brother offended may presently complain to. Therefore no\nuniversal, or provincial, or diocesan church gathered in a council. 2.\nIt is not any particular church that he doth send all Christians to, for\nthen all Christians in the world should come to one particular church,\nwere it possible. He doth therefore presuppose indistinctly the very\nparticular church where the brother offending and offended are members.\nAnd if they be not both of one church, the plaintiff must make his\ndenunciation to the church where the defendant is. 3. As Christ doth\nspeak it of any ordinary particular church indistinctly, so he doth by\nthe name of church not understand essentially all the congregation. For\nthen Christ should give not some, but all the members of the church to\nbe governors of it. 4. Christ speaketh it of such a church to whom we\nmay ordinarily and orderly complain; now this we cannot to the whole\nmultitude. 5. This church he speaketh of then doth presuppose it, as the\nordinary executioner of all discipline and censure. But the multitude\nhave not this execution ordinary, as all but Morelius, and such\ndemocratical spirits, do affirm. And the reason ratifying the sentence\nof the church, doth show that often the number of it is but small, \"For\nwhere two or three are gathered together in my name;\" whereas the church\nor congregations essentially taken for teachers and people, are\nincomparably great. Neither doth Christ mean by church the chief pastor,\nwho is virtually as the whole church.--Mr. Bayne's Diocesan's Trial.]\n\n[Footnote 104: Timothy received grace by the laying on of the hands of\nthe presbytery. For that persons must be understood here, is apparent by\nthe like place, when it is said, by the laying on of my hands, he noteth\na person, and so here a presbytery. 2. To take presbytery to signify the\norder of priesthood, is against all lexicons, and the nature of the\nGreek termination. 3. Timothy never received that order of a presbyter,\nas before we have proved. 4. It cannot signify, as Greek expositors take\nit, a company of bishops; for neither was that canon of three bishops\nand the Metropolitan, or all the bishops in a province, in the apostle's\ntime; neither were these who were now called bishops, then called\npresbyters, as they say, but apostles, men that had received apostolic\ngrace, angels, &c. Finally, it is very absurd to think of companies of\nother presbyters in churches that Paul planted, but presbyteries of such\npresbyters as are now distinguished from bishops, which is the grant of\nour adversaries.--Bayne's Diocesan's Trial, page 82.]\n\n[Footnote 105: See Assertion of the Government of the Church of\nScotland, Part I. Chap. 2, p. 122, &c.]\n\n[Footnote 106: Mr. Gillespie's Aaron's Rod Blossoming, book i. chap.\niii. pages 8-38.]\n\n[Footnote 107: Vid. Joannis Seldeni de Anno Civili, and Calendario, &c.\nDissertationem in Praefat., page 8. See also Mr. John Lightfoot's\nCommentary upon the Acts, c. x. 28, pages 235-239.]\n\n[Footnote 108: John Cameron, Praelect. in Matt. xviii. 15, page 143 ad\n162, and Mr. G. Gillespie's Aaron's Rod Blossoming, &c., book i., chap.\n3, page 8, &c., and book ii., chap. 9, page 294-297; and book iii.,\nchapters 2-6, handling this elaborately, pages 350-423.]\n\n[Footnote 109: Assertion, &c., part 2, chap. 3, p. 139.]\n\n[Footnote 110: Basilius in Psal. cxv. Oecumenius in loc. Jerom.\nChrysostome, hom. 33, in Matt. Irenaeus, lib. 1, chap. 11. Salmeron.]\n\n[Footnote 111: Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 1. 8 c. 1.]\n\n[Footnote 112: If Cenchrea be comprehended under the church of Corinth\nin this epistle, and the apostle writing to the Corinthians, wrote also\nto this church, called, Rom. xvi. 1, _the church of Cenchrea_, then have\nwe more congregations than one at Corinth. Now, Cenchrea was a seaport\nor harbor of the Corinthians. It was a place near to Corinth, on the\neast of the Egean Sea. Rutherford, in his Due Right of Presbyteries,\npage 462.]\n\n[Footnote 113: Paget, Gillespie, and the four Leyden professors, unto\nwhose judicious and elaborate treatises, the reader is referred for more\nfull satisfaction against the usual cavils and exceptions that are made\nagainst synods, and their power.]\n\n[Footnote 114: This is the judgment of the learned Whitaker upon these\nwords: other lawful councils may in like manner assert \"their decrees to\nbe the decrees of the Holy Ghost, if they shall be like to this council,\nand shall keep the same rule, which in this council the apostles did\nkeep and follow. For if they shall decree and determine nothing but from\nScripture, (which was done in this council.) and if they shall examine\nall questions by the Scripture, and shall follow the voice of the\nScriptures in all their decrees, then they may assert, that the Holy\nGhost so decreed,\" &c. Whitaker, Cont. page 610.]\n\n[Footnote 115: That there is an authoritative, juridical synod; and that\nthis synod, Acts xv., was such a one; and that this synod is a pattern\nto us;--all this is most ingenuously acknowledged and asserted by that\nlearned Independent, Mr. John Cotton, in these words, viz:\n\n\"IV. Proposition, in case a particular church be disturbed with errors\nof scandal, and the same maintained by a faction among them. Now a synod\nof churches, or of their messengers, is the first subject of that power\nand authority, whereby error is judicially convinced and condemned, the\ntruth searched out and determined; and the way of truth and peace\ndeclared and imposed upon the churches.\n\n\"The truth of this proposition may appear by two arguments\n\n\"_Argum_. 1. From the want of power in such a particular church, to pass\na binding sentence where error or scandal is maintained by a faction;\nfor the promise of binding and loosing which is made to a particular\nchurch, Matt, xviii. 18, is not given to the church when it is leavened\nwith error and variance. And the ground----If then the church, or a\nconsiderable part of it, fall into error through ignorance, or into\nfaction; by variance, they cannot expect the presence of Christ with\nthem according to his promise, to pass a blind sentence. And then as\nthey fall under the conviction and admonition of any other sister\nchurch, in a way of brotherly love, by virtue of communion of churches;\nso their errors and variance, and whatsoever scandals else do accompany\nthe same, they are justly subject to the condemnation of a synod of\nchurches.\n\n\"2. A second argument to prove that a synod is the first subject of\npower, to determine and judge errors and variances in particular\nchurches, is taken from the pattern set before us in that case, Acts xv.\n1-28: when certain false teachers having taught in the church of Antioch\na necessity of circumcision to salvation, and having gotten a faction to\ntake part with them, (as appeareth by the dissension and disputation of\nPaul and Barnabas against them,) the church did not determine the case\nthemselves, but referred the whole matter to the _apostles and elders at\nJerusalem_, Acts xv. 1, 2. Not to the apostles alone, but to the\napostles and elders. The apostles were as the elders and rulers of all\nchurches; and the elders there were not a few, the believers in\nJerusalem being many thousands. Neither did the apostles determine the\nmatter (as hath been said) by apostolical authority from immediate\nrevelation: but they assembled together with the elders, _to consider of\nthe matter_, ver. 6, and a _multitude of brethren_ together with them,\nver. 12, 22, 23; and after searching out the cause by an ordinary means\nof disputation, ver. 7, Peter cleared it by the witness Of the Spirit to\nhis ministry in Cornelius's family; Paul and Barnabas by the like effect\nof their ministry among the Gentiles: James confirmed the same by the\ntestimony of the prophets, wherewith the whole synod being satisfied,\nthey determine of a JUDICIAL SENTENCE, and of a way to publish it by\nletters and messengers; in which they CENSURE the false teachers as\ntroublers of their church, and subverters of their souls; they reject\nthe imposition of circumcision as a yoke which neither they nor their\nfathers were able to bear; they IMPOSE upon the Church none but some\nnecessary observations, and them by way of THAT AUTHORITY which the Lord\nhad given them, ver. 28: which PATTERN clearly showeth us to whom the\nkey of authority is committed, when there groweth offence and difference\nin a church. Look as in the case of the offence of a faithful brother\npersisted in, the matter is at last judged and determined in a church:\nso in the offence of the church or congregation, the matter is at last\njudged in a congregation of churches, a church of churches; for what is\na synod else but a church of churches?\"--Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,\npages 47-49.]\n\n[Footnote 116: Junius, Beza, Calvin, and Piscator.]\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nNO. 1.[117]\n\n_Of the Scriptural Qualifications and Duties of Church Members._\n\n\n_Quest_. What persons have a right in the sight of God to be actual\nmembers of the Church of Christ?\n\n_Ans_. Only regenerated and converted persons, such as are married to,\nand have put on Christ; such as are savingly and powerfully enlightened,\nquickened, and convinced of sin, righteousness, and judgment;[118] such\nas have chosen Christ for their Lord and Saviour, and resigned and made\nover themselves to him, and received him upon his own terms;[119] such\nonly as are reconciled unto, and are in favor with God; as are justified\nby faith, sanctified by the Spirit, and set apart for holiness, and unto\na living to God, and no more unto themselves:[120] such as are the\nbeloved of God, called effectually to be saints, and have really and\nsincerely taken upon them the yoke of Christ Jesus, I say such persons,\nand only such, doth Jesus Christ account worthy of this privilege and\ndignity.[121] Although men do not certainly know those that are such,\nand by reason of their darkness and fallible judgments they may and do\nadmit others into the Church, and unto her privileges, yet in truth\nthese have no right unto them, and ought not to be there; for these\nspiritual holy things are for, and only for, spiritual and holy persons.\nChrist prepares men by his grace, word, and Spirit to make them fit\nmaterials, and then he calls them to join together and become a\nspiritual house, for his delight, service, and glory.[F] And therefore\nholy persons, and such only, ought to be full members of the Church of\nChrist.\n\nThis will appear by these following particulars:\n\n1. Because God often declares his detestation and abhorrence of others\nbeing there, and manifests his indignation against them. As to the man\nthat came to the marriage supper without the wedding-garment, Matt.\nxxii. 11-13; and the five foolish virgins, chap. xxv.; and the dreadful\nend of the tares, chap. xiii. 38-44, which were the hypocrites, that by\nthe devil's instigation had crept into the Church. It is true that such\nwere, and will be, in the best of churches, although their guides may do\nall they can to prevent it, because they cannot make an infallible\njudgment of persons' states; yet it is as certain these are usurpers and\nought not to be there. For, although they are in God's providence\npermitted to creep in, yet we may be sure they are not there with his\napprobation:--they are not all Israel that are of Israel; for, saith God\nto all uncircumcised, What have you to do to take my covenant into your\nmouth, seeing you hate instruction and cast my words behind your back,\n(as all hypocrites do,) Ps. l. 16, 17. And Christ says, that such as\nwill not have him to reign over him (and to be sure hypocrites will not)\nshall be destroyed, Luke xix. 27. Now, as hypocrites are most loathsome\nand abominable persons in the sight of God, as may be seen at large in\nMatt, xxiii. 13-35, they have no right unto the spiritual privileges of\nthe Church of Christ, because, in the sight of God, the gospel Church\nshould consist only of new creatures and real members of Jesus Christ.\n\nII. That all church members ought to be sincere-hearted believers\nappears by the high titles which the Lord Jesus gives unto them in\nScripture: they are described to be like the king's daughter, all\nglorious within. They are called saints, holy brethren, and beloved,\nelect, dear children of God, the spouse of Christ, a holy temple of God,\nlively stones, built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, and the\nLord's sealed ones. Now such honorable titles belong not unto mere\nformal professors, but only unto the real members of Christ: not unto\nthose that have a name only; but to such as are so indeed and in truth.\n\nIII. A third reason is taken from the ends of God in instituting and\nappointing churches. They are said to be built by the Spirit for God,\ni.e. for God to dwell and walk in them, to repose himself in them, as in\nhis holy garden, house, and temple. They are designed for promoting his\nglory in the world, to distinguish his people from others; that they\nshould be to the praise of his glorious grace, and be the living\nwitnesses to his name, truths, and ways; that they should be the\nhabitations of beauty and glory, of fame and renown in the world, and be\nthe light thereof; and that with one heart and mouth they should glorify\nGod. Believers are united into a church capacity for their spiritual\nprofit and advantage, that God may there give them his love, and\ncommunicate his grace, truths, and counsels to them, as to his avowed\nhousehold and family Christ walks there, and God the Father dwells\nthere, and the Holy Spirit speaks to them in a special and frequent\nmanner to distribute liberally of their love and fulness. They are\nformed and set up by Jesus Christ to be the only seats and subjects of\nhis laws, ordinances, power, and authority, that they might receive,\nobey, and observe his laws, declare before the world their owning of him\nfor their Lord, by their open and public profession of, and subjection\nunto him, as such; and that, by their regular and distinct following of\nhim in their united church state, they might manifest to all men, that\nthey are his subjects and disciples, that they have chosen him for their\nLord and King, and his law for the rule of their faith and obedience;\nthat they are not their own, but his; and that they have reposed\nthemselves in him, as their happiness and eternal blessedness; that they\nare called out of the world and set apart by his grace for himself, to\nlive unto him; and that they have taken upon themselves his holy yoke,\nand the observation of all his laws. God has united believers into\nchurches, that by his Spirit and ministers he may feed and nourish them\nthere as his flock, water them as his garden, support them as his house,\nand order and govern them as his family and household.\n\nIV. The Church of Christ should consist of new creatures and\nsincere-hearted believers, because they only can and will answer and\nprosecute the foresaid, and such like holy ends of God, in and by his\nChurch. They are fitted and framed, moulded and polished, by the Holy\nGhost, for their growing up into a holy temple in the Lord; and so, by\nthe constant and promised guidance and conduct of their living head\nJesus Christ, with their spiritual qualifications, they are enabled to\nanswer and perform the great ends of God, in erecting and building them\nup in a church state. But unregenerate persons cannot do this, because\nthey are strangers in heart to Jesus Christ, and to the power of\ngodliness; nor would they if they could, because they have not the\nsaving knowledge of Christ in them, but are full of obstinacy against\nGod.\n\nV. Because all the laws, ordinances, and works of church members are\nholy, spiritual, and heavenly. They are such as the natural man\nunderstands not, and cannot discern what they are, because they are\nspiritual and holy; and therefore they that are not taught of God\nsavingly to form a proper judgment of them, do think and judge of them\ncarnally and vainly. But believers have them written in their hearts\nbeforehand. Yet they have them not without book, I mean they have the\nsame laws of Christ written in the books of their hearts which they find\nin the Bible, by which they are in some measure enabled to understand,\nreceive, love, and rightly to obey, the laws and ordinances of Christ\nwithout. Their laws are holy and spiritual, and their works in a church\nstate are so likewise. They have a holy God, who is a Spirit, to serve\nand worship; a spiritual Head to believe in and obey; holy and spiritual\nwork to do; and therefore they need to be holy and spiritual persons,\nnot only externally in profession, but also internally, in truth. Almost\nall the laws and ordinances of Christ are committed unto them, and God\nexpects his principal and choicest worship from his Church; and these\nare all above and beyond the reach of carnal minds.\n\nVI. The Church ought to be composed of believers and regenerated\npersons, because they are called to continue and stand fast in all\nstorms and tempests; and to hold out unto the end, as being built upon\nthe rock Jesus Christ. For whatever church is built upon the sand, and\nnot upon the Lord Jesus, and by the authority of his word and Spirit,\nwill not stand long, because it wants a foundation to bear up its\nweight. They must all be built upon the rock and chief corner-stone, the\nsure foundation that God hath laid. The Lord Jesus tells us, Matt. xvi.\n18, that upon this rock (i.e. himself and the truths that Peter had\nconfessed) will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not\nprevail against it. But it is certain that hypocrites are not built upon\nChrist by faith, but fix their vain hopes on a sandy foundation.\nTherefore, if their persons are not built upon Christ, their church\nstate cannot; but upon the sand. Hence then it follows that only true\nbelievers are built on Christ, and so they are the only persons that\nChrist wishes to have built up into holy temples; because the churches\nthat Christ builds shall be built upon himself, that they may stand\nimpregnable against all opposition: and therefore they should only be\ncomposed of such as are united to him by faith, and have chosen him for\ntheir only rock and foundation, and not of such as do secretly reject\nhim.\n\n_Quest_. What qualifications should believers find in themselves for\ntheir own satisfaction, before they enter into full communion with the\nvisible Church of Christ?\n\n_Ans_. They should be able to answer the following questions in the\naffirmative.\n\nI. Can you say indeed that you do seriously and heartily desire to see,\nand to be more deeply and powerfully convinced of your own vileness and\nsinfulness, of your own weakness and wretchedness, and of your wants and\nunworthiness? and that, in order to your deep and spiritual humiliation\nand self-debasing, that you may be more vile in your own eyes, and Jesus\nChrist and free grace more precious and excellent, more high and\nhonorable, and more sweet and desirable, that your hearts may be melted\ninto godly sorrow, and that you may be moved thereby to abhor\nyourselves, and to repent in dust and ashes? Job xlii. 5, 6.\n\nII. Can you say that you do seriously and heartily desire and endeavor\nto believe in Christ, and to receive and accept of him in the gospel\nway, such as you find in Mark viii. 34; Luke xiv. 26-28, and elsewhere?\nDo you thus desire and choose to have him with his yoke and cross? Matt.\nxi. 28, 29. And do you so deny yourselves, and your sinful self,\nrighteous self, worldly self, supposed able, powerful self, and every\nother carnal and spiritual self, that Christ only may be exalted, that\nyou may be nothing in your justification and salvation, but that Jesus\nChrist and free grace may be all, and in all things? Col. iii. 11; Phil.\niii. 7, 8. Do you desire, choose, and endeavor to have Christ on the\nhardest terms; and do you desire, that all may go for Christ's person,\nblood, and righteousness, his grace, love, life, and Spirit, for the\npardon of your sins, and the justification of your persons, that you may\nbe found in him, not having your own righteousness, but the\nrighteousness of Christ by faith? Phil. iii. 9. And do you go and\npresent yourselves as destitute condemned sinners to him, and to God the\nFather in and by him, that you may be clothed with the righteousness of\nChrist, and that God may pardon, justify, and accept you for his sake\nonly?\n\nIII. Do you seriously and heartily desire and choose to have Christ\nJesus for your Lord and Ruler too, Col. ii. 6; that he may rule in you,\nand over you, and that your lusts and yourselves, your interests, and\nyour all, may be subject unto him, and be wholly at his command and\ndisposal continually? Is Christ the Lord as acceptable to you as Christ\nJesus the Saviour? and are you willing to obey him, and to be subject to\nhis authority and dominion, as well as to be saved by him? Would you\nhave him to destroy your lusts, to make an end of sin, and to bring all\nunder his obedience?\n\nIV. Do you seriously and heartily desire and endeavor never to sin more;\nbut to walk with God unto all well-pleasing continually? Col. i. 10. And\ndo you pray earnestly that God would work in you that which is\nwell-pleasing in his sight, Heb. xiii. 21, that you may in all your ways\nhonor and glorify him, as the end of your living in this world? 2 Cor.\nv. 15. Would you indeed live to the praise of his glorious grace, be an\nornament unto his name and gospel, and be fruitful in every good word\nand work? Are these things the scope, aim, and intent of your hearts and\nsouls (in some good measure and degree) daily, in duties and ordinances,\nand at other times?\n\nV. Do you seriously and heartily choose and desire communion with\nChrist, and in truth endeavor to obtain and keep it? Do you so seek for\nit in the way of gospel obedience, and in observing your duty in keeping\nChrist's commandments? And do you prefer it to all earthly, carnal\nthings? Do your hearts breathe and pant after it, and are you willing to\ndeny self, and all self-interests to get it? Are you glad when you find\nit, and sad when by your own carelessness you lose it? Doth it when\nobtained quicken your love to and zeal for Christ? Doth it warm your\nhearts, and cause them for a time to run your race in gospel obedience\ncheerfully? Doth it lead you unto, and cause your hearts to centre in\nChrist? and doth it oblige and bind them faster unto him and stir you up\nto thankfulness?\n\nVI. Do you sincerely and heartily desire, seriously choose, and\nearnestly endeavor, to be filled with gospel sincerity towards God and\nman, and would you rather be true-hearted towards God than seem to be so\ntowards man? Would you much rather have the praise of God, and be\napproved of by him, than the praise of men, and be extolled by them? Is\nit the great thing you aim at, in your profession and practice, to\nattain sincerity and uprightness in heart? Is all hypocrisy hateful and\nabominable unto you? Are you afraid of it, and do you watch and strive\nagainst it, as against an enemy to God and your own souls, and are you\ngrieved indeed when you find it in you?\n\nVII. Do you desire and choose Jesus Christ for the great object of your\nlove, delight, and joy? and do you find him to be so in some measure? Do\nyou desire and endeavor to make him the object of your warmest\naffections, and to love him sincerely, heartily, spiritually, fervently,\nand constantly; and do you express your love to him by keeping his\ncommandments? Are you grieved in spirit, because you can love him no\nmore? and do you earnestly pray unto him to shed abroad his love into\nyour hearts by the Holy Ghost, that you may love him as ye ought? Rom.\nv. 5. Doth his love and loveliness attract your hearts to him, and cause\nyou to yield the obedience of faith to his holy laws?\n\nVIII. Is it the desire, choice, and endeavor of your souls to have all\nsins purged out of them, and to have them filled with Christ's grace,\ntruth, and holiness; and do you hate your sin, watch and fight against\nit, and endeavor to keep it under? Do you indeed aim at, desire, labor,\nand strive, to be holy in heart and life, and conformable unto Jesus\nChrist in all things possible? Are your lusts your heaviest burdens and\nyour greatest afflictions, and do you intend and endeavor their utter\nruin and destruction? Will no degree of grace satisfy you until you be\nperfect to the utmost as Christ is? Are you so much concerned for\nChrist's honor, and your soul's holiness and happiness, that you dare\nnot knowingly sin against them for a world; or do, in word or deed, by\nomission or commission, that which may dishonor, grieve, or wound them?\nAre these things so indeed?\n\nIX. Have you a measure of spiritual knowledge and discerning of\nspiritual things? Do you understand the nature and concerns of the house\nof God, and the work and duties, the privileges and enjoyments thereof,\nand what you have to do there; together with the ends of God in\ninstituting and erecting gospel churches?\n\nX. Do you intend and resolve, in the light, life, and power of Christ,\nto seek for, and endeavor unfeignedly to obtain, and prosecute the ends\nof church fellowship, when you shall he accepted among them? and do you\ndesire and aim at the holy ends appointed by God in desiring communion\nwith them? as, 1. To enjoy God and communion with him in all his\nordinances. 2. To worship God there in spirit and truth, and to give him\nyour homage and service in his house. 3. To show your subjection and\nobedience to him, and to make a public and open profession of him, and\nof his truths before men. 4. To receive of his grace, to enrich your\nsouls with his fulness, and to be sealed by his Spirit unto the day of\nyour redemption. 5. That you may walk orderly and beautifully, and shine\nas lights in the Church, and in the world, before saints and sinners. 6.\nThat you may be established in the truth, live under the watch and care\nof Christ's ministers, and of fellow-members; that by their inspection\nand faithful dealings with you you may be kept, or brought back from sin\nto God, by their wise reproofs and holy instructions. 7. That you may\nyield up yourselves in holy obedience to Christ, and do all things\nwhatsoever he commands you, that you may have the right use and\nenjoyment of all your purchased privileges, and be secured against the\ngates of hell. Are these and such like ends in your hearts and minds, in\nyour walk and in church fellowship, and can you find the forementioned\nsigns of grace in you in some suitable measure, though not so clearly\nand fully as you would wish? Then I may venture to assure you, that you\nare qualified for being actual members of the Church of Christ, that you\nare called and invited into his house, and that you are indispensably\nbound to answer to the call of God, and to enter into his holy temple.\n\nI say that church privileges are yours, the doors of God's house stand\nopen for you, Christ stands at the door and waits for you, he invites\nyou to come in and to sit down at his table, and you shall be most\nfreely and heartily welcome to your Lord, and to his people.\n\n_Quest_. What are those qualifications, which the rulers of a church,\nfor their own satisfaction, should look for, and find in such persons,\nas they admit into full communion with the Church of Christ?\n\n_Ans_. It is certain that all that profess the name of Christ and his\nways, ought not, and may not be admitted into the Lord's holy temple,\nbecause many, if not the most of them, are very ignorant of Christ and\nhis ways, and notoriously scandalous in their lives, as sad and woful\nexperience shows. If church rulers should admit known hypocrites, they\nbetray their trust, and defile Christ's holy temple, by taking in such\npersons as they know, or ought to know, he would not have there: and\nthat they ought to try and prove persons, that they may know their\nfitness, before they admit them in, is clear in Acts ix. 26, 27, and\nbecause Christ hath committed the keys of his house to take in and\nexclude according to his will and appointment.\n\nAs to satisfying qualifications in persons desiring admission into the\nchurch, when they appear to be real sound-hearted believers, according\nto the judgment of charity, by the rules of the word, the church ought\nto receive them in the Lord.\n\nI. If they can satisfy the church, by giving Scripture evidence of their\nregeneration, conversion, repentance, and faith in Christ; of their\nknowledge of Christ, his laws and ordinances; of their lost and\nperishing state by reason of sin, and of their sincere desires and\nresolutions to become the Lord's, and to walk with him unto all\nwell-pleasing in all his ways.\n\nII. If they are sound in the faith of the gospel; I mean in the chief\nand principal doctrines thereof, although they may be ignorant of, or\nmistaken in matters of less importance. If they have some distinct\nknowledge and faith concerning these, and other such truths and matters\ncontained in the word of God; as of the state and condition in which man\nwas at first created; how he lost that holy and blessed estate, and the\nmisery into which he brought himself and all his posterity thereby.\nConcerning themselves, that they are by nature children of wrath, dead\nin trespasses and sins, and condemned to eternal death; that they are\nenemies to, and at enmity with, God; that they have neither will nor\npower by nature to will and to do that which they ought, and which is\nwell-pleasing to God; that they have forsaken God, and are under the\ncurse of the law; and that they are the children, subjects, and servants\nof the devil, the world, and their own lusts; that God left not all men\nin this lost state and condition, but provided an all-sufficient remedy,\nnamely, Jesus Christ, and that by an everlasting covenant, entered into\nwith him, in the behalf of men, before the foundation of the world, Tit.\ni. 2; 2 Tim. i. 9; Prov. viii.: and that, in pursuance thereof, he\nelected and gave some to Christ, that he might save them out of his mere\ngrace and love. John vi. 37, 40:--That God the Father gave and sent his\nSon, the second person of the Trinity, to mediate peace between God\nand man, and to reconcile them to God, by his active and passive\nobedience;--that Jesus Christ gave himself, and became a propitiation\nfor their sins;--that he assumed our nature into a personal union with\nhimself, whereby there are two natures in one person, by which he was\nmade capable of his mediatorship;--that he, being God and man in one\nperson, took upon himself our guilt and punishment, obeyed the whole law\nof God, that men had broke, and did always the things that pleased\nGod;--that, when he had finished his active obedience, he became\nobedient unto the death of the cross, to the wrath of God, and to the\ncurse of the law, Gal. iii. 13; Phil. ii. 8;--that he really died and\nwas buried, lay in the grave, and rose again the third day; and after\nforty days he ascended into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of\nGod; and that he will come again to judge the quick and the dead;--that\nhe is king, priest, and prophet; a king to give laws unto men, and to\ncommand their obedience to him, to rule and govern his subjects, and to\nreward the obedient, and to punish the disobedient;--that all power in\nheaven and earth is committed unto him; and that he is coequally and\ncoeternally God with the Father and Holy Spirit;--that as a High Priest\nhe died and made atonement for the sins of his people, and sits in\nheaven to make intercession, and to appear in the presence of God for\nthem, Heb. vii. 25, and ix. 24;--that there are three persons in the\nGodhead, yet but one God;--that the Holy Ghost is eternally God, was\nsent into the world, and came from the Father and Son, for the elect's\nsake;--that it is he that regenerates persons, works effectually in\ntheir hearts, applies Jesus Christ and all his benefits to men, and\nsavingly convinces his elect of sin, righteousness, and judgment. That\nall that rightly believe in Christ shall be saved, but those that\nbelieve not shall be damned; and that all that believe in him must be\ncareful to perform good works. That believers are made righteous,\nthrough the righteousness of Jesus Christ, and that they have none of\ntheir own to commend them unto God. That God hath made Jesus Christ unto\nhis chosen, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption; and\nthat they are made the righteousness of God in him. That God imputed\ntheir sins to Christ, and imputes the blood and righteousness of Christ\nto them; and that they are justified thereby, and not by inherent\nholiness and righteousness. That God loves, pardons, justifies, and\nsaves men _freely_, without any respect unto their good works, as any\ncause thereof; but that all the moving cause (without himself) is Jesus\nChrist in his mediation. That the ground and reason of their obedience,\nin performing good works, is the revealed will and pleasure of Christ\ncommanding them, and the ends of them are to express their thankfulness\nto God for his grace and love, to please and honor him, to meet with\nGod, and to enjoy communion with him, to receive of his grace and the\ngood of many promises; to shine as lights in the world, and to be useful\nunto men; to declare whose and what they are, and to lay up a reward in\nanother world; to keep their lusts under, and their graces in use and\nexercise; and to manifest their respect and subjection to Jesus Christ,\nhis authority, and law. That the law, for the matter of it, as in the\nhand of Christ, is the rule of all obedience; and that all are bound to\nyield subjection to it. That there shall be a resurrection of the just\nand unjust. That regeneration is absolutely necessary to salvation, and\nthat without it none can enter into the kingdom of heaven. That the\nScriptures of the Old and New Testaments contain, and exhibit unto men,\nthe whole revealed will of God, and are sufficient to make the man of\nGod perfect, thoroughly furnished unto every good work; and that\nwhatsoever they are to believe and do is contained therein; and that it\nis the ground of their faith, hope, and practice. That Jesus Christ hath\ninstituted and appointed many ordinances of worship, for his own glory\nand his people's good, and that all are bound to observe and to wait on\nGod in them. That all persons are indispensably bound to mind, and\ncarefully to observe the principal manner and end of all their duties,\nand to see that they be right, holy, and spiritual indeed, and not to\nplease themselves with the matter of them alone. That no man can serve\nGod, or do any work acceptable unto him, until he be regenerated, and\nbrought into a state of grace.\n\nThese are some of the matters of faith that they should in some measure\nbe acquainted with and believe, that are admitted into full communion\nwith the Church of Christ. And these and other truths must not be known\nand believed in a general, notional, light, and speculative manner; but\nheartily, powerfully, and particularly: not for others, but for\nthemselves; otherwise their faith and knowledge will no way profit their\nsouls to salvation.\n\nIII. They must be qualified also with a blameless conversation. Their\nconversation must be as becometh the gospel, otherwise they are not meet\nfor communion with the gospel church. Carnal walking will not suit\nspiritual temples: for they will greatly pollute and defile them, and\nstain and obscure their beauty and glory. Therefore they must not be\nbrawlers and contentious persons, covetous and worldly-minded, vain and\nfrothy. They must not be froward and peevish, nor defraud others of\ntheir right. Nor must they neglect the worship of God in their families,\nnor be careless in governing and educating them in good manners, and in\nthe things of God. They must not be such as are known to omit the\nduties and ordinances of religion in their proper seasons, or to have\nvicious families through their neglect: nor to have any other kind of\nconversation hateful to God and to his people. And therefore, whatever\ntheir profession be, they may not be admitted into the Church of God,\nuntil they have repented of these, or any other scandal in their life\nand conduct.\n\nIV. They ought to be such as have chosen the Lord Jesus Christ for their\nking and head, and dedicated and devoted themselves to him, to live in\nhim and for him: such as have singled him out, and set him apart, (as it\nwere,) to be the object of their love, trust, and delight, of their\nservice and obedience. They must have chosen and closed with him upon\nhis own terms, (i.e. _freely_,) renouncing and rejecting all their own\nrighteousness, worthiness, interest, and sufficiency, and choosing and\nappropriating him to themselves, for their righteousness, worthiness,\nportion, and sufficiency, under a sight and conviction of their own\nemptiness and deformity; and with a heart-satisfied persuasion of the\nloveliness and fulness of Christ.\n\nV. All this must be done seriously, humbly, and heartily, so far as men\ncan judge. If persons declare their knowledge of God and faith in Christ\nin such a manner, and apparently by such a spirit as evidences some\nsense and feeling of what they do declare, church rulers may be much\nhelped in forming a right judgment of them, that they are fitted by God\nfor church-membership. If they do seriously profess, that what they do\nis in obedience to the will, and, as they judge, to the call of Christ\nas their indispensable duty;--that they join in church fellowship to\nmeet with and enjoy God, to receive out of his fulness to enable them to\nperform all duties, and to conform their hearts and lives in his will to\nall things;--such persons may undoubtedly be accounted worthy members,\nand admitted as such.\n\n_Quest_. What are the duties of church members towards one another?\n\n_Ans_. I. The greatest is love; love and spiritual affections are the\nholy cords which tie the hearts, souls, and judgments of believers\ntogether. This is that which, together with the fear of God, makes them\navoid all things that may give just offence or grief to one another, and\nthat which provokes them to follow after the things that make for peace\nand edification. Love is the bond of peace. It is that which, together\nwith divine light and truth, causes church members to draw together as\nin one yoke, and unanimously as with one heart and soul to design, aim\nat, and carry on mutual and common good in the church. Without this they\ncannot, they will not cement, nor long abide and live together as a\nchurch, in peace and unity, nor promote any good work among themselves.\nWithout heart-uniting love they will receive and entertain jealousies\nand suspicions one of another, and put the worst construction on\nwhatever is said or done; and they cannot walk together comfortably and\nprofitably when these are entertained. Therefore it is absolutely\nnecessary for all church members to be firmly united in cordial love and\ncharity, which is the bond of perfectness to and in all other duties.\nGod highly commends and strictly commands this love one to another, and\nputs it into the heart of his peculiar people, that they may do what he\ncommands.\n\n1. God highly commends it wherever he finds it in act and exercise; 1\nThess. iv. 10, \"and indeed,\" says he, \"ye do it towards all the\nbrethren.\" To this duty, and to manifest his high approbation of it, God\nhath promised a great reward, Heb. vi. 10.\n\n2. God commands it and vehemently exhorts to it often in the gospel. Oh\nhow importunately did the Lord Jesus enjoin it, and frequently press it\non his disciples when he was on earth! John xiii. 34, \"A new commandment\ngive I unto you.\" What is that new commandment? Why, \"That ye love one\nanother, as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.\" And in\nJohn xv. 12, 17, \"This is my commandment, that ye love one another, as I\nhave loved you;\" i.e. Take the pattern of my love to you for your\npattern in loving one another. I have loved and will love you--1. With\n_great_ love, John xv. 13: so do you likewise. 2. My love to you is\n_free_, without any desert in you: let yours be free, without carnal\nrespects one to another also. 3. My love to you is _real, hearty_, and\n_unfeigned_: so let yours be one to another, 1 Pet. i. 22. 4. My love to\nyou is an exceeding _fruitful love_. I loved you so, as to labor, toil,\nsweat, and die for you: so must you love one another with a fruitful,\nprofiting love. 5. My love to you is a _pitying, sparing, and forgiving\nlove; a forbearing and tender-hearted love_: so must you be to one\nanother, Col. iii. 12, 13. 6. I love you with a _warm and fervent love_:\nso do you love one another. 7. I love with a _holy, spiritual love_, as\nnew men who have my image stamped on, and my holy nature in you, and as\nyou are made perfect by the comeliness and beauty I have put on you: so\ndo you love one another, because you are a lovely and holy people unto\nme. 8. I love you with a _constant and unchangeable love_;\nnotwithstanding of all your weaknesses, yea, unkindness too, and\nunworthy walkings before me: thus you are bound to love one another.\n\nO that church members and all other Christians would seriously,\nsincerely, diligently, and constantly mind and practise this grand and\nindispensable duty to one another, in all their ways and actions, and\nnot lay it aside as a little, useless, or indifferent matter, which they\nmay neglect at their own will and pleasure.\n\n2. As we are indispensably bound to love one another; so we are as\nabsolutely and perfectly bound to walk in a loving and encouraging\nmanner towards one another. Our behavior ought to be such in all things,\nas to invite all to love us, as holy, humble, and blameless saints, and\nbrethren in Christ. The Lord Jesus expects church members to walk\nlovingly towards one another, as well as to love one another. They\nought, therefore, as much as possible, to provoke and encourage each\nother, and to remove out of the way of love all such stumbling-blocks as\nmay any way hinder it, as we cannot love a sour, peevish, contentious,\nand cross-grained professor, with as much complacency as a meek, quiet,\nhumble, affable, and courteous one.\n\n3. Christ hath charged and strictly commanded all church members to live\nin peace: to be at peace among themselves; to follow peace with all men,\nand as much as in them lieth to live peaceably with all men. O how\noften, and with what vehemency doth the Holy Ghost press and enjoin this\nduty, especially among church members, in the Holy Scriptures! See Psal.\nxxxiv. 14; 1 Pet. iii. 11; Rom xiv. 19; 2 Cor. xiii. 11; 1 Thess. v. 13;\nHeb. xii. 14; Eph. v. 3. The apostle Paul earnestly warns church members\nagainst all debates, strifes, and contentions one with another,\nespecially in their church meetings, Phil. ii. 3. David tells us, that\nit is a most pleasant and lovely thing for brethren to dwell together in\nunity, Psal. cxxxiii. 1, 2. Then how much more pleasant and lovely is it\nfor spiritual brethren to love and worship God in this manner together\nChrist came into the world and lived here a peace-maker, and pronounces\nthem blessed that are so, Matt. v. 9. He is a lover of peace and\nconcord, especially in his Church; but he is an implacable hater of\nstrife and discord, and will not endure it therein: much less will he\nwink at such as are the first sowers of these seeds. The truth is,\nstrivers and disputers in a church are the devil's agents, do a great\ndeal of mischief to it, and are real plagues in it. They greatly hinder\nedification, and spoil the order, beauty, and harmony there: they are\nthe proud, self-conceited men, who are vainly puffed up with high\nthoughts of themselves, and their own abilities, because they have got\nsome speculative knowledge into their heads, with a volubility of\nspeech, while they are destitute of spiritual wisdom and humility in\ntheir hearts; and therefore they conceive that they are wiser than the\nchurch, and more able to manage and order church affairs than their\nrulers. Their pride and self-conceit make them slight and contemn their\nteachers, and rise up in a rebellious contention with, and opposition\nunto them; as the prophet complains, Hos. iv. 4, _This people are they\nthat strive with the priests_. Take heed then of strife and contention,\nand follow peace one with another, especially in your assembling\ntogether about the work of the church. Endeavor to get humble hearts,\nand then you will not be contentious, but quiet and peaceable.\n\n4. Church members ought to sympathize with, and to help to bear one\nanother's burdens as need requires, Rom. xii. 15, 16; Gal. vi. 2. They\nought to make their brethren's crosses, losses, temptations, and\nafflictions their own. And, when they need the helping hand of\nfellow-members to support or lift them up, when fallen, they must give\nit to them freely, readily, and cheerfully, and not turn a deaf ear to,\nnor hide their eyes from, them and their cries. And, if they are cruel\nto, or careless of, one another in affliction, our Lord Jesus will\nrequire it at their hands, and lake it as done to himself. Therefore,\nseeing it is the will of God, and our indispensable duty to one another,\nwho are members of the church, let us put on bowels of mercies and\nkindness, Col. iii. 12, and be tender-hearted, pitiful, and courteous to\neach other, Eph. iv. 32; 1 Pet. iii. 8.\n\n5. Church members ought to exhort and comfort one another, for so is the\nwill of God concerning them. This is not only their teacher's duty and\nwork, but theirs also to each other, Heb. x. 24, 25; Heb. iii. 13; 1\nThess. v. 14. Christians stand in continual need of one another's\nexhortations and consolations; and if they manage this work well they\nmay be very useful and profitable to one another, and may help to\nawaken, quicken, and provoke one another, to the love and practice of\nholiness.\n\n6. It is the will of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Church's head, that her\nmembers should be each other's keepers; that they should watch over one\nanother, and admonish and reprove one another, as need requires. It is\nnot meant, that they should pry into one another's secrets, or be\nbusybodies in other men's matters, but that they should watch over one\nanother's life and conversation, that if they do well they may be\nencouraged; if ill, that they may, by counsel, reproof, instruction, and\nexhortation, be brought to a real sight and sense of their misconduct,\nand to unfeigned repentance. By which good work, you will do them, the\nchurch, yea, Christ himself, good and acceptable service. Church members\nshould carefully observe, if all do keep close to their duty in the\nchurch, or are remiss and negligent;--if they conduct themselves in a\nholy, righteous, and sober way; or if, on the contrary, they are frothy,\nvain, proud, extravagant, unjust, idle, careless, or any way scandalous.\nThey should strictly observe if there be any tattlers, backbiters, or\nsowers of discord; or such as speak contemptibly of their brethren,\nespecially of their elders, (ruling or preaching,) and of their\nadministrations: as also, if there be any such as combine together, and\nmake parties in the church, or endeavor to obstruct any good work which\ntheir elders are carrying on, for promoting the glory of Christ and the\ngood of his people, and deal with them accordingly. They ought carefully\nto observe if any be fallen under sin or temptation in any case, and\npresently to set their hands to help, to relieve, and to restore them,\nRev. vi. 1. They must watch, and endeavor to gain a sinning member, 1.\nBy their private admonition, in case the offence be private; and if that\nwill not do, to take one or two more to see what effect that will have.\n2. But if that will not answer the end, then they are bound to bring it\nto the church representative, that they may deal with the offending\nbrother, and proceed against him as commanded: This is another great and\nindispensable duty required of church members, that they be not\npartakers of other men's sins.\n\n7. Church members ought to forbear and forgive one another; for this is\nanother commanded duty, Eph. iv. 2, 32; Col. iii. 13. When a brother\noffends or does another any injury, the offended brother should tell him\nof it, examine the matter and search out the circumstances of it, and\nsee whether he did it unadvisedly, through weakness or ignorance; or\nwhether he did it wilfully and knowingly. If upon an impartial search he\nis found to have wronged his brother through ignorance or weakness, he\nmust judge charitably of him, and not be harsh and severe towards him,\nin his carriage or censure. But if it clearly appear, upon impartial\ninquiry, that he did the injury knowingly and wilfully, then the\noffended brother must deal with him as a wilful transgressor. He must\nlay his sin before him, and show him what laws he hath transgressed;\nwhat evil he hath done him, what wrong to his own soul, and what offence\nhe hath done to Christ, by breaking his holy laws. He must admonish him\nagain and again of his sin, and reprove him, but not too severely, until\nhe find him obstinate and stubborn. And if God convince him of his sin,\nand give him repentance unto life, he must readily forgive him. And, if\nhe be once truly convinced of, and humbled for, his sin, he will most\nfully confess it to his brother, as well as to God, and endeavor to make\nhim amends, and give him all possible satisfaction for the injury he\nhath done him, most freely and willingly: for it is a certain sign that\na person is not powerfully and savingly convinced of, and humbled for,\nhis sin, while he bears off, and must be sought after to make\nsatisfaction to such as he hath wronged; because were his heart really\nmelted into the will of God, he could not be quiet, until he have given\nall possible satisfaction to his brother whom he has injured, Luke xix.\n8. But in case he remain obstinate, and will not hearken to reproof,\nthen the offended brother should take one or two more and deal with him;\nand if that will not do, he ought to bring it to the church\nrepresentative, i.e. the elders of the church, that they may see what\nthey can do with him. But if they cannot prevail on him to repent and to\nmake satisfaction, then he ought to be cast out of the communion of the\nchurch, Matt, xviii. 17.\n\n8. It is the indispensable duty of church members to hearken to and\nreceive instruction, admonition, and reproof from one another. For if\nsome are indispensably bound at certain times to give them, surely\nothers who need them are as much bound to receive them, Prov. viii. 33,\nx. 17, and xxix. 1. These are bound to hearken to their brethren's\nreproofs, counsels, and admonitions, with all humility, patience, and\nfreedom of spirit, with all love, meekness, and thankfulness to God, and\nto the givers of them: for they are great mercies to such as need them,\nand they are their real and profitable friends, who seek their good, and\nendeavor to prevent their destruction. Let it therefore never be said\njustly of any of you that are church members, that you were reproved and\nadmonished of any known sin by a brother, and that you refused and\nslighted their counsel or reproof, justified yourselves in your sins,\nand were displeased with or angry at such as admonished you, and did\ntheir indispensable duty to you, under your sin, for your salvation.\n\n9. Church members ought to pray for one another, and that with a real\nlove, fervency, and importunity, as they do for themselves, James v. 16.\nO with what serious minds and strong affections should all church\nmembers pray for one another! They should be much in building up one\nanother, and praying in the Holy Ghost one for another, Jude 20. They\nshould carry one another in their hearts at the throne of grace,\nespecially such as are under affliction, the whole Church in general,\nand her teachers in particular, Heb. xiii. 18, and wrestle with God for\nthem; for they have the spirit of prayer given them, and audience and\ninterest in heaven, for others, as well as for themselves.\n\n10. Church members should often meet together for prayer and holy\nconversation, by two or three or more, as they may have opportunity.\nThis was wont to be the commendable practice of our forefathers, when\nChrist, duty, heaven, and religion lay warmer on their hearts than now\nthey do; and this is still the practice of some, that are now alive. God\nhath promised his glorious teaching, and his warming, strengthening,\nsanctifying, and comforting presence to such as do so, Matt, xviii. 20.\nChurch members find time enough to visit one another, and meet together\nto tell some idle stories, to tattle about other men's matters, which\ndo not concern them, and perhaps to _backbite_ some of their brethren,\nand to prejudice the minds of persons against their teachers and their\nwork, if they do not please them. And will not such meetings have\nbitterness in the end? Is it not great iniquity for Christians to tempt\none another to sin, and to wrong their own souls, by misspending that\nprecious time which they might have employed in the service of God, and\none another's spiritual profit. Men and women were wont to discourse\noften of the things of God and their experiences one to another, Mal.\niii. 16. But, alas! few persons are now to be found, who can find time\nand inclination for such an exercise. And the reason seems to be, that\nmost are great strangers to God and to themselves, and are so much\nintoxicated with the things of this world, that they will not attend\nwith any pleasure unto the spiritual duties of religion.\n\n11. Church members ought to encourage one another by their example, to\nattend regularly on the public ordinances of God's worship in his\nchurch. Whenever the church meets for the celebration of the worship of\nGod, all her members are bound to meet together at the appointed time,\nexcept in extraordinary cases; otherwise good order cannot be kept, and\nthe public duties performed, for the glory of God, and the edification\nof the church. By church members wilfully or carelessly absenting\nthemselves at the time of meeting, they give an evil example to others,\ntempt them to do the like, and cast a stumbling-block in the way of\ntheir duty, Heb. x. 25.\n\n12. Church members must be charitable to the poor that are among them,\nand freely contribute to them according to their ability and _their_\nnecessity. They are indispensably bound to impart their help and\nassistance to the poor, and to give them a little of their estates. It\nis a debt which they owe to God, and a duty to them. They will comfort\nthem thereby; but they will much more profit themselves than them. It is\na more blessed thing to give than to receive. Wealthy persons are\nstewards for the poor, and a part of what God hath given those was\ndesigned for these, 1 Pet. iv. 10, and therefore, says God, Deut. xv. 7,\n8, \"Thou shalt not shut thine hand from thy poor brother, but shalt open\nit wide unto him.\" The rich must not only give to keep the poor alive in\nmisery, but make comfortable provisions for them, that they may have\nenough to keep them from the temptations of poverty and pressing wants,\nand to fit them for, and encourage them in, their work and duty, to God\nand man.\n\n13. Church members ought carefully, watchfully, diligently, and\nconscientiously to beware of and avoid whatever may give any just\noffence or scandal to one another. For we are charged to \"give none\noffence neither to Jew nor Gentile, nor to the Church of God,\" 1 Cor. x.\n32. And our Saviour tells us, that \"wo to them by whom the offence\ncometh,\" Matt, xviii. 7.\n\nYou must take heed of such evils as the following, and avoid them,\nbecause they all carry scandal in their nature to your own and others'\nsouls: as, 1. Proud, disdainful, and haughty words conduct, and\nconversation; for these are grievous and provoking evils, which will\njustly offend all the observers of them. 2. Sullen, sour, and churlish\nlanguage and behavior, which is offensive unto all sorts of persons; for\nthis is an evil altogether unbecoming the followers of Jesus Christ. 3.\nA cross, captious, and contradictive spirit and conduct, delighting in\nopposition to the judgment of the church and her rulers. This is very\nscandalous to the brethren, and very reproachful unto themselves. 4.\nSpeaking evil of one another behind their backs; backbiting or\npublishing their real or supposed evils, before they have been spoken to\nin secret. 5. Speaking lightly or contemptibly of one another, either to\nthemselves or to others in their absence, as few men can bear patiently\nto be despised by the slighting carriages of their brethren. 6. Vain,\nfoolish, and frothy discourses, which are very offensive to gracious\nsaints. 7. Earthly-mindedness and greedy pursuits after worldly things;\nfor as these are offensive to God, and hurtful to the soul, so they are\noffensive to saints. 8. Strife and contention among brethren, and\ngrudging or envying one another's prosperity; as these produce many evil\nand wicked fruits, and cast blame upon the providence of God, who\nbestows his mercies as he will. 9. Defrauding and breaking promises.\nContracting debts and unduly delaying or refusing to pay them, and\ndisappointing men of their just expectations in virtue of promises made\nto them. Those also are scandalous, and cause the name of God to be evil\nspoken of. 10. Entering into a marriage relation with such as are\napparently in an unbelieving, carnal, and unconverted state and\ncondition; for this also is very offensive to holy serious men, although\nmany make very light of it. 11. Idleness and slothfulness in your\nexternal calling, neglecting to provide for your own house, as that will\nprove a scandalous sin to others and to yourselves too. 12. Taking up a\nreport rashly against one another of a scandalous nature, giving ear\nunto tattlers, and busybodies; or being busybodies in other men's\nmatters yourselves, as this will give great offence.\n\n\n\n\nNO. II.[122]\n\n\n_Quest_. Who have a right to preach the gospel and dispense the public\nordinances of religion?\n\n_Ans_. Without some proper furniture, it is absurd to imagine any should\nbe sent of God to the ministerial work. When the ascended Jesus gave to\nthe church apostles, evangelists; pastors and teachers, he gave gifts to\nmen. _Who_, saith he, _goeth at, any time a warfare on his own charges?_\nWhat is the furniture, the qualifications prerequisite, according to the\nHoly Scriptures? A blameless conversation, a good report; experience of\nthe self-debasing work of the Spirit of God; compassion to the souls of\nmen; a fixedness in the Christian doctrines; a disposition faithfully to\nperform his vows; an aptness to teach the ignorant, and convince\ngainsayers. Knowledge of languages, knowledge of the history and\nsciences of this world, are useful handmaids to assist us in the study\nof divine things. To preach from the oracles of God, without capacity to\nperuse the original, especially if versant in romances and plays, we\nabhor and detest. This aptness to teach, however, consists not chiefly\nin any of these, but in a capacity to conceive spiritual things, and\nwith some distinctness to express their conceptions to the edification\nof others, in that energy and life, whereby one, as affected himself,\ndeclares the truths of God, in a simple, serious, bold, and\nconscience-touching manner. The difference of this, from human\neloquence, loud bawling, and theatrical action, is evident. These may\ntouch the passions, and not affect the conscience: they may procure\nesteem to the preacher, none to Christ. These are the product of natural\nart: this the distinguished gift of God, without which, in a certain\ndegree, none can have evidence that he was divinely sent to minister the\ngospel of Christ.\n\nNo appearance of furniture, real or pretended, can warrant a man's\nexercising of the ministry, unless he have a regular call. That _all may\nprophesy one by one_ is indeed hinted in the sacred records: but there\nit is evident inspiration treats of what pertains to extraordinary\nofficers in the church; hence there is mentioned _the gift of tongues_,\nextraordinary _psalms, revelations_: the _all_ that might prophesy are,\ntherefore, not _all_ the members of the church; not _women_, who are\nforbid to speak in the church; but _all_ the extraordinary officers\ncalled prophets, 1 Cor. xiv. 31. The _all_ that were scattered abroad\nfrom Jerusalem, and _went about preaching the gospel_, Acts viii. 2,\ncould not be _all_ the believers; for there remained at Jerusalem a\nchurch of believers for Saul to make havoc of. It must therefore have\nbeen _all_ the preachers, besides the apostles. To strengthen this, let\nit be observed, that the word here rendered _preaching_ is nowhere in\nScripture referred to one out of office: that every one of this\ndispersion, we afterward hear of, are represented as evangelists,\npastors, or teachers, Acts ix. 1, 11, 19, and xiii. 1. Parents and\nmasters convey the same instruction that ministers do; but with a\ndifferent authority: not as ministers of Christ, or officers in his\nChurch. If other gifts or saintship entitled to preach the gospel, wo\nwould be unto every gifted person, every saint, that did not preach it.\nIf our adored Redeemer refused the work of a civil judge because not\nhumanly vested with such power, will he allow his followers to exercise\nan office far more important, without any regular call? His oracles\ndistinguish between the mission of persons, and their gifts, sometimes\ncalled a receiving of the Holy Ghost, John xx. 21, 23.\n\nTo render the point incontestably evident, he demands, how men shall\npreach _except they be sent_? declares, that _no man_ rightly _taketh\nthis honor to himself but he that is called of God, as was Aaron_. \"I\nsent them not, therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith\nthe Lord.\" The characters divinely affixed to ministers, preachers, or\nheralds, ambassadors, stewards, watchmen, angels, messengers, brightly\nmark their call and commission to their work. The inspired rules for the\nqualifications, the election, the ordination of ministers, are divinely\ncharged to be kept till _the day_, the second coming _of Jesus Christ_.\nFor intermeddling with the sacred business without a regular call, has\nthe Almighty severely punished numbers of men. Witness the destruction\nof Korah and his company; the rejection of Saul; and the death of Uzza;\nthe leprosy of Uriah; the disaster of the sons of Sceva, &c., Num. xvi.;\n1 Sam. xiii.; 1 Chron. xiii.; 2 Chron. xxvi.; Acts xix.\n\nTo rush into it, if gifted, or to imagine we are so, at our own hand,\nintroduces the wildest disorder, and the most shocking errors: it did so\nat Antioch, and the places adjacent, where some falsely pretended a\nmission from the apostles. This, too, was its effect with the German\nanabaptists, and with the sectaries of England. Aversion at manual work,\npride of abilities, a disturbed imagination, a carnal project to promote\nself, prompts the man to be preacher. Such ultroneous rushing is\ninconsistent with the deep impression of the charge, and the care to\nmanifest their mission, everywhere in Scripture obvious in the ministers\nof Christ. However sound his doctrine, great his abilities, warm his\naddress, where is the promise of God's especial presence, protection,\nor success, to the ultroneous preacher? Where is his conduct commanded,\ncommended, or unmarked with wrath, exemplified in the sacred words? How\nthen can the preaching, or our hearing, of such, be in faith? How can it\nbe acceptable to God, or profitable to ourselves? For _whatsoever is not\nof faith is sin_. Falsely this preacher pretends a mission from Christ:\nwickedly, he usurps an authority over his Church: rebelliously he\ndeserts his own calling, and attempts to make void the office his\nSaviour has appointed; to frustrate the dispensation of the gospel\ncommitted to his faithful ambassadors. For how can they fulfil their\nministry, if others take the work out of their hand? How can they\n_commit it to faithful men_, if, not waiting their commission, men rush\ninto it at pleasure?\n\nIn vain pleads the ultroneous preacher, that a particular mission to the\noffice of preaching and dispensing the sacraments was only necessary,\nwhen the gospel was preached to the heathen. From age to age, it is _as\nnew_, to children _as new_, to such as never heard it. Nor, when hinting\nthe necessity of a mission, does the inspiring Spirit make any\ndistinction, whether the gospel be newly dispensed or not. _What\ntherefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder_. In vain he\npleads an immediate commission from God: in his infallible statutes,\nhaving fixed standing rules of vocation to the ministry, by the\nmediation of men, God gives us no command, no encouragement, to hope for\nan immediate call, till the end of time. Absurdly then we allow any to\nhave such a call, till we see _the signs of an apostle wrought in him_.\nIt is not sufficient he be sound in his doctrine, exemplarily holy in\nhis life, active in his labors, disinterested in his aims, seeking not\nhis own, but the honor of Christ, not his own carnal profit, but the\nspiritual welfare of men: every ordinary preacher is, or ought to be so.\nBut, to this claimant of a mission uncommon, working of miracles, or\nsuch extraordinary credentials, must demonstrate he hath not run unsent.\n\nIn vain the ultroneous preacher boasts of his feelings; his success; his\nmoving his audience; his reforming their lives; as if these demonstrated\nhis call from God. On earth, was ever delusion carried on without\npretence to, or without appearances of these? Let them, who know the\nhistory of Popery, of Mahometanism, Quakerism, &c., say if they were.\nWho knows not, that the Pharisaic sect pretended far more strictness,\nfar more devotion, than the family of Christ? Who knows not, that Satan\nmay, and has oft _transformed_ himself _into an angel of light_; his\nministers into the form of inspired apostles; and his influences, almost\nindiscernibly similar to those of the Spirit of Jesus Christ? Who knows\nnot, how oft vain-glory, proud and falsely extolling of himself and\nparty, in their number, their spiritual experience and high advances in\nholiness, mark the distinguished impostor? How oft his sermons are\nlarded with these!\n\nNo more tell us, if the sermon be good, you do not regard who preach it.\nIf God has prescribed a method of call, has stated the qualifications of\nthe candidate, has warned against preachers unsent, has oft marked their\nguilt with visible strokes of his wrath, be ashamed to talk at so\narrogant, so careless a rate. Lay it not in the power of the\nMesopotamian wizard! Lies it not in the power of a Romish Jesuit, nay,\nif permitted, of Beelzebub, for a time to preach to you many truths of\nthe gospel, in the warmest strain, the loftiest language? Would you\nacknowledge the _three_ for honored ambassadors of Christ? Tell us not\nyour preacher is wonderfully pious and good: perhaps you have only his\nown attestation; when better known he may be a drunkard, a swearer, a\nvillain, for you. Suppose he were pious, so was Uzziah; yet it pertained\nnot to him to execute the priest's office. Say not he is wonderfully\ngifted--speaks like _never man_: perhaps so was Korah, a man famous and\nof renown: such perhaps were the vagabond sons of Sceva. Say not his\nearnestness in his work marks his heavenly call: no, such were the\nSatanic exorcists just mentioned; such was Mahomet, the vilest impostor.\nTo abolish the idolatry, and various other abominations of his country,\nhe exposed himself to cruel reproach, to manifold hardship and hazard of\nlife; about fourteen years almost unsuccessful he persevered in this\ndifficult, but delusive attempt. What hunger, what cold, what torment\nand death have some Jesuitic and other antichristian missionaries\nundergone, to propagate the most ruining delusions of hell; all under\nthe pretence of earnestness to gain sinners to Christ and his church.\nThe Scripture, however, nowhere saith, how shall they preach except they\nbe gracious? except they be gifted? except they be in earnest? But, _how\nshall they preach except they be sent_?\n\n\n\n\nNO. III.[123]\n\n_On the same subject--Who have a right to preach the gospel_?\n\n\nIt is expressly enjoined in the word of God that we should earnestly\ncontend for the faith once delivered to the saints. This faith includes\nall the ordinances, as well as all the doctrines of Christ; and it is no\nless our duty to contend for the former than for the latter. They have\nbeen equally opposed, and there is the same necessity why we should\ncontend for both. Among the ordinances of Christ, the preaching of the\ngospel holds a principal place, and it hath accordingly, in all ages,\nmet with considerable opposition. Like other ordinances, it hath been\noften grievously abused, and perverted to the most unworthy purposes. By\nmany who would be esteemed the wise of the world, it is counted unworthy\nthe attention of any but the vulgar: it has been called the foolishness\nof preaching. The infidels of our time, and some who, by attachment to\nthe Arian and Socinian system, are in a progress to infidelity, cry it\ndown as a human device or piece of craft. This need not, however,\noccasion any great surprise: the spirit of the world savoreth not the\nthings that be of God, and the enemies of the truth naturally wish to\nhave full scope to propagate their delusions. But it is matter of regret\nthat the preaching of the gospel is, by many who attend upon it, too\nlittle regarded as an ordinance of Christ. And some of the professed\nfriends of gospel doctrine so far mistake the nature and institution of\npreaching, as to engage in it without any other call than their own\nabundant zeal, and even to plead that all should do so who find\nthemselves qualified. To show that such a sentiment and practice have no\nwarrant from the word of God, the following observations are offered.\n\nI. The preaching of the gospel is an ordinance that Christ hath\nappointed for the gathering and edification of his Church; and, being a\nmatter of positive institution, all that belongs to the administration\nof it can be learned only from the rules and approved examples recorded\nin the New Testament. It is not like those duties that are incumbent\nupon all, according to the opportunities they have in providence for the\nperformance of them, and which, without any express commandment, could\nbe urged upon Christians by the common principles of moral obligation,\nsuch as to teach and admonish one another. And because the obligation to\nsuch moral duties depends not upon positive institution, it must equally\nextend to all, and no person whatever can be free from it. But it is\notherwise as to the preaching of the gospel, which is a positive\ninstitution of Christ; for it is a duty enjoined upon some only; yea,\nsome are even absolutely prohibited from intermeddling in it, 1 Cor.\nxiv. 34; 1 Tim. ii. 12: and this could not be the case if it were a\nmatter of common moral obligation. All arguments therefore taken from\ngeneral principles, to prove the obligation that Christians are under to\nexert themselves for promoting the cause of religion, are to no purpose\nhere, as they do not prove that the preaching of the gospel is one of\nthose means that all are warranted to use.\n\nII. There is an instituted ministry of the ordinances of Christ unto his\nChurch, by such ministers and office-bearers as he hath appointed. And\nthe preaching of the gospel is frequently referred to as a principal\npart of that ministry. We read of a ministry of the word, Acts vi. 4; a\nministry received of the Lord Jesus to testify the gospel of the grace\nof God, Acts xx. 24; a ministry of reconciliation, 2 Cor. v. 18; and a\nministry into which some are put by the Lord Christ, 1 Tim. i. 12. This\nministry is not left open to all the members of the church, in such a\nmanner as that everyone who finds himself disposed, of supposes himself\nto be qualified, may engage in it as he finds opportunity; but\noffice-bearers are appointed for it by the Lord Christ, Eph. iv. 11,12:\n\"And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and\nsome pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the\nwork of the ministry, and for the edifying of the body of Christ.\" Some\nof these officers were extraordinary and temporary; they had an\nextraordinary call, and were endued with miraculous powers, which are\nnow ceased: but the work of the ministry, and particularly the preaching\nof the gospel, is to continue to the end of the world, as appears from\nthe promise given for the encouragement of those that are employed in\nit, Matt, xxviii. 20. There are accordingly ordinary officers, pastors,\nand teachers, appointed for the continued exercise of that ministry.\n\nTo these instituted office-bearers is this ministry exclusively\ncommitted, Mark xvi., Matt, xxviii. The gospel of Christ, in respect of\nthe public ministry thereof by preaching, is frequently mentioned as a\nspecial and peculiar _trust_ committed unto them, 2 Cor. v. 18-20; 1\nTim. i. 11, and vi. 20. In all the passages of Scripture where we have\nany mention of a charge or commission to preach the gospel, it would be\neasy to show that it is directed only to persons in office; and a\nvariety of names are given to those that are employed in a ministry of\nthe word, all of which are expressive of their peculiar office. They are\ncalled ministers, 1 Cor. iii. 6; officers and stewards, 1 Cor. iv. 1;\nambassadors for Christ, 2 Cor. v. 20; heralds (so the word preacher\nsignifies) and teachers, 2 Tim. i. 11.\n\nThere is no room to plead here, that though a constant ministry of the\nword, in a pastoral charge, belongs only to persons in office, yet all\nmay occasionally exercise their gifts in preaching the gospel. The word\nof God acknowledges no such distinction as that between a constant and\nan occasional ministry of the gospel. It enjoins upon those who are\ncalled to the work of the ministry, not an occasional, but a constant\nexercise of that ministry; so that whether they be paid pastors, or\nitinerant preachers, they are not to entangle themselves with the\naffairs of this life, but must be devoted wholly to the work of the\ngospel, 1 Tim. iv. 13-16; 2 Tim. ii. 4, and iv. 2. And because they must\nthus devote their time and attention to this work, the word of God also\nenjoins that a maintenance be given them by those to whom they exercise\ntheir ministry, 1 Cor. ix. 7-14; Gal. vi. 6; 1 Tim. v. 17. This is a\nfarther evidence that the ministry of the word is restricted to persons\nin office, and that they are to devote their time and attention to it,\nnot entangling themselves in the prosecution of a secular business.\n\nIII. Those only can be warrantably employed in a ministry of the\nordinances of Christ, and particularly in preaching the gospel, who are\nthereunto called by him, and admitted according to the rule laid down in\nthe word. And none can be warrantably acknowledged and received as\noffice-bearers, to whom that ministry is committed without some proper\nevidence of their being called and sent by Christ. \"How shall they\npreach except they be sent?\" Rom. x. 15. How, without this, can they do\nit warrantably or profitably? And, without some evidence of this, what\nground have we to expect a blessing in waiting upon their ministry? It\nis not a mere providential sending that is here meant, as if there were\nno more necessity than abilities, and an opportunity of exercising them;\nfor so the ministers of Satan may be sent, and a lying spirit was thus\nsent among the prophets of Ahab. But this sending means the call of\nChrist, intimated in such a way as to warrant the preacher, and with\nsuch evidence as may satisfy the conscience of the hearers, in receiving\nhis ministry as the ordinance of Christ. A zeal for God, a strong desire\nof being useful to souls, and even a persuasion of having the call of\nChrist, cannot be sufficient warrant to the preacher; far less can the\nhearers, in receiving him, proceed upon grounds so uncertain.\n\nThe apostles, and some other ministers in the beginning of the Christian\ndispensation, had an extraordinary call and immediate mission by Christ,\nand this was evidenced to all by the miraculous powers bestowed on them.\nThese powers are now ceased, and it is vain to plead any such immediate\ncall. The ordinary call of Christ to the work of the ministry is\nintimated by or through the church, judging thereof by the rules laid\ndown in the word; and according to these rules, they that are found\nqualified and called, are to be admitted to the ministry by them who are\nalready invested with it. The charge is given to the office-bearers of\nthe church, to commit that ministry which they have received \"to\nfaithful men, who shall be able to teach others also,\" 2 Tim. ii. 2;\nTit. i. 5. And for their direction in this matter, the qualifications\nnecessary, both as to character and abilities, are laid down in the\nWord, particularly in 1 Tim. iii.; of these qualifications they are\nrequired to make an impartial and deliberate examination, so as to _lay\nhands suddenly on no man_, 1 Tim. iv. 22, but to admit to the office of\nthe ministry those only, who, by this trial, they have reason to judge\nare called and sent by Christ.\n\nIt is vain to distinguish here between a pastor of a congregation and an\nitinerant preacher; as if the call of the church was necessary only to\nthe former and not to the latter. If by the call of the church is meant\nonly the choice and call of the people, it is admitted, that this is\nonly necessary to fix a pastoral relation to that part of the flock; but\na regular admission to the work of the ministry, by the office-bearers\nof the church, is equally necessary in the case of all that are employed\nin it, whether they have a fixed charge or not. Timothy, who had no\nfixed charge, and though pointed out by prophecy as designed for the\nministry, was ordained and admitted to it by the presbytery. And though\nPaul and Barnabas had an extraordinary call, yet the prophets and\nteachers of the church at Antioch are directed to separate and send them\nout, according to the call of the Holy Ghost, to preach the gospel unto\nthe Gentiles, Acts xiii. A principal design of this seems to have been,\nto set an example of procedure to the church in after times.\n\nIt appears, then, that the preaching of the gospel is an ordinance or\ninstitution of Christ--that the ministry of that and other ordinances\nbelongs only to those office-bearers whom he hath appointed and\ncommissioned for that end--and that in ordinary cases, none can be\nacknowledged as sent by him, but such as are admitted to the ministry in\nthe way above mentioned. These observations would have admitted a much\nlarger illustration; but as they are, they may assist an attentive\nreader to consult his Bible for further satisfaction. It is necessary,\nhowever, to take some notice of the arguments urged in support of the\nopposite sentiment, and of the attempt to prove that every man who is\nqualified has a right to preach the gospel, without any regular call and\nadmission by the church. And,\n\n1st. It is pretended that this is enjoined upon all that are qualified\nfor it, because Christians are called to teach, exhort, and admonish one\nanother. But even supposing that this were to be understood of\npreaching, or a public ministry of the word, such directions, though\nexpressed generally, would not apply to all, but to those only who are\ncalled to the ministry, according to the limitation and restriction that\nis laid down in other places of Scripture. There is, however, no\nnecessity of understanding these directions in that sense. The\nScripture evidently distinguishes the preaching of the gospel, or that\npublic teaching which belongs to an instituted ministry, from that\nprivate teaching which is competent to, and obligatory on, all\nChristians by the law of love; the latter is enjoined upon some to whom\nthe former is absolutely prohibited: compare 1 Tim. ii. 12, with Tit.\nii. 3, 4. Christians in a private station have abundant opportunity, and\nordinarily much more than they improve, to exercise their talents in\nteaching their families, friends, and neighbors, without interfering\nwith that public ministry of the word which is committed to those who\nare especially called thereto.\n\n2d. Some passages of Scripture are urged, wherein it is supposed all\nChristians are enjoined to exercise their qualifications in public\nteaching or preaching: particularly Rom. xii. 6-8; 1 Pet. iv. 10, 11.\nThese Scriptures, on the contrary, restrict the public ministry of the\nword to those invested with an office, and it is that ministry which\nbelongs to their office that is spoken of. In Rom. xii. persons in\noffice are exhorted to apply themselves faithfully and diligently to\nthat ministry to which they are called, whether it be a ministry of the\nword, and of spiritual things, or a ministry of temporal things, and\nthat without envying others who have a different office and ministry.\nAnd, to enforce this exhortation, the apostle compares the Church to the\nnatural body, ver. 4, in which all members have not the same office, but\none member is appointed to one office, and another member to a different\noffice: and so it is in the Church of Christ, ver. 5. The same allusion\nis applied more largely, 1 Cor. xii. 27, 28, to illustrate this very\npoint. The other passage, 1 Pet. iv. 10, 11, is of the very same import:\nthose in office are called to exercise their ministry faithfully,\nwhether it be in spiritual or temporal things, and are addressed as\nstewards, ver. 10; \"As every man hath received the gift, even so\nminister the same one to another as good stewards of the manifold grace\nof God.\" Some are led to mistake the meaning of these Scriptures, by\nmisunderstanding the word _gift_, as if it meant only talents or\nqualifications; whereas, in these and many other passages, it means a\ncertain office and ministry to which one is appointed. Eph. iv. 8, 11:\nHe gave gifts unto men; he gave some apostles, some prophets, &c. 1 Tim.\niv. 14: \"Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by\nprophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.\" Timothy\nwas ordained to the office of the ministry in consequence of special\ndirection of the spirit of prophecy. See 1 Tim. i. 18.\n\n3d. It is also supposed and much insisted on by some, that both precept\nand example for the preaching of the gospel, by what they call every\ngifted brother, may be found in 1 Cor. xiv. 31, which is particularly\nurged in support of their opinion: \"For ye may _all_ prophesy, one by\none, that _all_ may learn, and _all_ may be comforted.\" But universal\nterms, such as are here used, are limited or extended according to the\nsubject; and that even in the same verse, as in chap. xv. 22. In like\nmanner here, the _all_ that may prophesy are not the same _all_ that may\nlearn and be comforted. The latter may extend to all the members of the\nchurch, and even to strangers who might come into their assemblies; the\nformer could apply only to a few. Some members of the church are\nexpressly prohibited from public teaching, ver. 34. Besides, all were\nnot prophets, chap. xii. 29, and therefore all could neither prophesy,\nnor could warrantably attempt it. The state of matters referred to in\nthat chapter seems to have been this: The church at Corinth was\nnumerous, and had many ministers, of whom the most, if not all, were\nendowed with some miraculous power, such as that of prophecy, of\nspeaking strange languages, and the like; they were proud of these\ngifts, and forward to show them, ver. 26, which occasioned disorder in\ntheir assemblies for worship; those that had the gift of tongues\nprevented the prophets, and did not modestly give place to one another.\nThese disorders the apostle reproves, and exhorts them to exercise their\ngifts in a more regular and decent manner, for the edification of the\nchurch. This being the case, it is strange to plead this passage as a\nwarrant for the preaching of the gospel by those who are in no office,\nand who neither have any miraculous power to prove their immediate call\nby Christ to the work of the ministry, nor are admitted thereto by the\ncall of the church.\n\n4th. Further, we are referred to Acts viii. 1-4, for an example of the\npreaching of the gospel by persons not in office. We are told, ver. 1,\nthat \"there was a great persecution against the church which was at\nJerusalem, and they were all scattered abroad--_except the apostles_.\"\nAnd it is said, ver. 4, \"_they_, that were scattered abroad, went\neverywhere _preaching the word_.\" From this it is argued, that _the\nChurch in general_ proclaimed the gospel of the Lord Jesus. But why\nmention the Church in general, when the method of reasoning used would\nequally prove that the Church universally did so; and the absurdity of\nsuch reasoning must be evident upon a very little consideration of the\nsubject. How absurd to suppose that _all_ mentioned in ver. 1, refers to\nand comprehends all the members of that church, and that all the\nthousands and ten thousands belonging to it were all scattered abroad,\nor that they all, men, women, and children, went _everywhere preaching_\nthe word! Are we not told, ver. 3, that some of them, probably many of\nthem, both men and women, were haled and committed to prison? Or, had\nall the members of the church been driven from Jerusalem, how were the\napostles to be employed? Did they only tarry to gather a new church?\nWhen it is said, ver. 3, that Saul entered into every house, how absurd\nwould it be to suppose that it is meant every house in Jerusalem, or\neven every house in which there was a Christian! The expression, also,\n_everywhere_, ver. 4, must be limited. It would therefore be\nunreasonable to object against a proper limitation of the word _all_,\nver. 1. And about the just limitation of it we need be at no loss. They\nwere all scattered abroad--except the apostles. What reason can there be\nfor mentioning only the apostles as excepted, while there were so many\nother members of that church still remaining at Jerusalem, but this,\nthat the persons referred to were of the same description in general\nwith the apostles, persons in office, ministers of the church? Others\nmight also be scattered, but these are here spoken of; and Philip, an\nevangelist, and endowed with miraculous powers, is mentioned as one of\nthem.\n\n5th. As to the case of Apollos, which some urge as affording\nirresistible evidence to prove that all who are qualified may preach the\ngospel, a few words may suffice. He spoke boldly in the synagogue, the\npractice of which is no rule to the Christian Church. He was not yet\nacquainted with some important doctrines of the New Testament Church,\nmuch less could he be acquainted with the ordinances of it. Two\nintelligent Christians instructed him more perfectly in the way of God.\nHe was recommended by the brethren to the church at Corinth, and there\nhe labored successfully in the work of the ministry. And what is all\nthis to the purpose for which his example is urged? We have no\ninformation, indeed, of what time, nor in what manner, he was called and\nadmitted to the work of the ministry, more than we have about many\nothers mentioned in Scripture: but he is expressly called a minister,\nand is, once and again, classed with the chiefest of the apostles, 1\nCor. i. 12, iii. 5, 22.\n\nLest these and the like arguments should be found insufficient, recourse\nis had by some to the plea of pure motives and good designs, with a kind\nof appeal to the judgment of the great day, and profession of trust,\nthat they are such as will not then be condemned. It is a great\nsatisfaction to have the testimony of conscience to the purity of\nmotives in every part of conduct that is warranted by the word of God,\nand also to know that the judgment of the saints at the great day will\nbe a judgment of mercy. But every part of the truth of Christ will be\ndetermined at that day in exact conformity to what is now declared in\nthe word. And the purest motives and most noble designs are no rule of\nconduct to any; much less can they give satisfaction to others.\n\nThese observations concerning the institution of a gospel ministry, the\nwriter is persuaded, are agreeable to the word of God: if they be not,\nit would be idle to appeal to his motives in support of them. But he can\nfreely say that they are here offered to the public, not from a desire\nof controversy, but from a conviction, that at this time it is\nnecessary, on different accounts, to call people's attention to the mind\nand will of Christ, as revealed in the word concerning this subject. Let\nnot such of the friends of religion, as may be of different sentiments\nfrom what are here expressed, be offended at an attempt, in the spirit\nof meekness, to remove their mistakes: nor let them impute it to envy,\npride, or selfish principles. In a perfect consistency with all that he\nhath advanced, the writer can say, \"Would to God that all the Lord's\npeople were prophets.\"\n\nIt is a necessary consequence of what is advanced on this subject, that\nall should be careful that the ministry of the ordinances they attend\nupon be such as is warranted in the word. If none can warrantably preach\nexcept they be sent, we cannot warrantably attend on the ministry of any\nbut those who we have reason to believe have Christ's call and mission.\nAnd if it be an objection against a pastor of a congregation, that he is\nimposed upon the flock without their choice, it is no less an objection\nagainst a preacher, if he be not admitted to the ministry of the word by\nthose whose office it is to examine his qualifications, and judge of his\ncall. It must, however, be acknowledged, that to have gone through the\nordinary forms of admission is no sufficient evidence of one's having\nthe call of Christ. The outward forms may be observed, while the spirit\nand design of them is neglected, and the rule of the word transgressed.\nNor can any be acknowledged as sent by Christ, unless their character\ncorrespond with that pointed out and required in the word, and unless\nthe doctrine they teach be the gospel of Christ. None can be supposed to\nhave a mission from Christ, who do not bring his message, 2 John ver.\n10: \"If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him\nnot into your house, neither bid him God speed.\" But when we are favored\nwith the pure gospel, and an administration of it agreeable to the word,\nlet us wait upon it diligently; regarding the preaching of the gospel as\nan ordinance of Christ, and depending on his promised blessing to make\nit effectual: for when \"the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased\nGod, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe,\" 1 Cor.\ni. 21.\n\nBoth parts of this number are recommended to the serious consideration\nof what are called _lay-preachers_, and of such as favor that scheme.\nAnd let all intruders upon the office of the holy ministry, with their\ndeluded votaries, beware lest it should be said to them, _Who hath\nrequired this at your hands_?\n\n\n\n\nNO. IV.\n\n\n_Quest_. Have not the people a divine right to choose their own pastors\nand other church officers?\n\n_Ans_. In those divinely qualified for the ministry, there are\ndiversities of gifts, though but one spirit. As the same food, though\nabundantly wholesome and nourishing, is not equally suited to the taste,\nappetite, and constitutions of different persons and nations; so the\nsame gifts in a candidate for the gospel ministry are not equally\nadapted to every person and place. To secure edification there must\ntherefore be a choice of the gifts most suitable. And who fitter to make\nit than those who are to enjoy the use thereof, if their senses be\nexercised to discern good and evil? Can any man pretend to know better\nwhat gifts suit the case of my soul than I do myself?\n\nThose ignorant of the fundamental truths of Christianity; those\nscandalous, profane deniers of the divine original of the Old and New\nTestaments, or of any truth therein plainly revealed; those neglecters\nof the public, private, and secret worship of God; those given to\ncursing, swearing, Sabbath profanation, drunkenness, whoredom, or other\nscandalous courses, are destitute of capacity and right to choose a\ngospel minister. The ignorant are utterly incapable to judge of either\nthe preacher's matter or method. The openly wicked have their hatred of\nChrist, and a faithful minister, marked in their forehead; neither are\nsuch qualified to be visible members of the Christian Church. To admit\nthem therefore to choose a Christian pastor would be a method,\nintroducing ruin and we; a method equally absurd as for unfreemen to\nchoose the magistrates of a burgh: rather, equally absurd as if ignorant\nbabes, and our enemies the French, should be sustained electors of our\nmembers of parliament and privy council.\n\nWhether visible believers, adults, and having a life and conversation\nbecoming the gospel, have a right from God to choose their pastors and\nother church officers, must now be examined.\n\nAll along from the Reformation it has been the avowed principle of\nScotch Presbyterians, that they have a divine warrant to choose their\nown pastors and other ecclesiastic officers. The first book of\ndiscipline, published A.D. 1560, declares the lawful calling of the\nministry to consist in the election of the people, the examination of\nthe ministry, and administration by both, and that no pastor should be\nintruded on any particular kirk without their consent. Their second book\nof discipline declares that the people's liberty of choosing church\nofficers continued till the Church was corrupted by antichrist: that\npatronage flowed from the Pope's canon law, and is inconsistent with the\norder prescribed in God's word. From various documents the assembly of\n1736 declared it obvious, that from the Reformation it had been the\nfixed principle of this church that no minister ought to be intruded\ninto any church contrary to the will of the congregation. They seriously\nrecommended a due regard hereunto in planting the vacancies, as\njudicatories would study the glory of God, the honor of God, and the\nedification of men. It is the law of heaven, however, the book of the\nLord, that here and everywhere we intend to build our faith upon.\n\nThat of Matthias is the first instance of an election of an officer in\nthe Christian Church. No doubt, then, it is marked in the sacred history\nas a pattern for the ages to come. Being an officer extraordinary, his\ncall was in part immediately divine, by the determination of the lot.\nBeing a church officer, he was chosen by the Church as far as consistent\nwith his extraordinary office. The disciples about Jerusalem (120) were\ngathered together. Peter represented the necessity of filling up Judas's\nplace in the apostolate with one who could be a meet witness of Jesus'\ndoctrines, miracles, death, and resurrection. The one hundred and twenty\ndisciples chose, appointed, or presented to whom they judged proper for\nthat work. The office being extraordinary, and perhaps the votes equal,\nthe decision which of these two was referred to the divine determination\nof the lot. After prayer for a perfect _one_, it fell upon Matthias, and\nhe was, by suffrages, or votes, added to the number of the apostles.\n\nHad the next election of a church officer entirely excluded the\nChristian people, one had been tempted to suspect that Matthias's\nextraordinary case was never designed for a pattern. Instead hereof, the\nchoice being of an ordinary officer, is entirely deposited in their\nhands. Never were men better qualified for such an election than the\ninspired, the spirit-discerning apostles; yet when restrained by\nlaborious attendance to their principal work, the ministry of the word\nand of prayer, from sufficient leisure to distribute their multiplied\nalms to their now numerous poor, and directed by the Holy Ghost, they\nordered the Christian people _to look out_, choose seven of their\nnumber, _men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom_,\nwho might be ordained to the office of deacons. Judging of the mentioned\nqualifications, the Christian multitude, entirely of their own accord,\nchose Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and\nNicolas. These they presented to the apostles, who immediately ordained\nthem by prayer, and imposition of hands, Acts vi. 1-6. Here, by inspired\nappointment, the people had the whole power of electing their deacons.\nIf they have the power of electing one ordinary officer, why not of all?\nIf in the case of deacons they can judge of the qualifications of\n_honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom_, what hinders them\nto judge of these and the like of ministers? If Jesus and his apostles\nargued from the less to the greater, Matt. vi. 30,1 Cor. ix. 10, who can\nforbid us to argue so? If it be right and equal for the Christian people\nto choose deacons who take care of their sacred alms, is it not much\nmore right and equal that they have the choice of their pastors, who\ntake the oversight of their souls?\n\nA third instance of the Christian people electing their ecclesiastical\nofficers, relates to the joint travels of Paul and Barnabas at Lystra\nand places around, Acts xiv. 23. These two divinely directed messengers\nof Christ, having ordained (or, as properly translated from the Greek,\n_through suffrages or votes constituted) them elders_ (presbyters) _in\nevery city, and prayed with fasting, commended them to the Lord_. Here\nit is plainly marked that these elders, _presbyters_, were chosen by\n_suffrages (votes)_ in order to ordination. This the Greek word in our\nversion, by the fraud of the English bishops rendered _had ordained_,\nplainly imports. The root of this word is borrowed from the custom of\ngiving votes at Athens and elsewhere in Greece, by lifting up of the\nhand. Wherever it is used in the Greek Testament, and for anything we\nknow in every Greek author, not posterior to Luke, the writer of the\nActs, it constantly implies _to give vote or suffrage_. In the text\nbefore us it agrees with Paul and Barnabas; because they presided in the\nchoice, and finished the design of it by ordination. Here, moreover, it\nis evident that the persons chosen for elders _(presbyters)_ were set\napart to their office, not by a hurried prayer and riotous banquet, but\n_by prayer and fasting:_ and this manner of choice and ordination was\nused in every church. The very performance of the work of ordination in\npublic conjunction with the church tacitly infers their consent.\n\nChrist's commanding his people _to try the spirits_, to try false\nprophets, and to flee from them, 1 John iv. 1, 2, necessarily imports a\nright to choose the worthy, and reject the vile; to choose what suits\nour edification, and to reject what doth not; for, if we must receive\nwhoever is imposed, there is no occasion for trial, we can have no\nother. The privilege of trial here allowed to his people by Christ\nplainly supposes their having some ability for it; and, by a diligent\nperusal of his word, and consulting his ministers, they may become more\ncapable. Has our adored Redeemer thus intrusted to his adult members the\nelection of their pastors? at what peril or guilt do any ministers or\nlaics concur to bereave them thereof, thrusting men into the evangelic\noffice by another way; thus constituting them spiritual _thieves_ and\n_robbers_? Instead of being _gentle_ to church members, as a _nurse\ncherisheth her children_; instead of _condescending to men of low\ndegree_, and _doing all things to the glory of God_ and the _edification\nof souls_, is not this to set at naught their brethren; exercise lordly\ndominion over the members of Christ; and rule them with rigor?\n\nIn the oracles of God, where is the hint, that the choice of pastors for\nthe Christian people is lodged in any but themselves?--Since men\napostolic and inspired put the choice from themselves to the Christian\npeople; who can believe that it belongs to the clergy? Acts i. and vi.\nWhen Christ avers _his kingdom is not of this world_; when he threatens\njudgment without mercy to such as in his worshipping assemblies more\nreadily give a seat to the rich, with his gold ring and gay clothing,\nthan to the poor; can it be imagined that he has intrusted the choice of\nhis ambassadors to men, for their greatness?\n\nThere is indeed a haughty objection often stated against the people's\nchoice: Shall a cottager, poor and unlearned, who pays not one farthing\nof the stipend, and at next term will perhaps remove from the\ncongregation, have an equal choice of a minister with his master, a\ngentleman, a nobleman, of liberal education, of distinguished abilities,\nwho is head of a large family, has a fixed property and residence in the\nparish, and furnishes almost the whole benefice? Will you fly in the\nface of our civil law? Will you plead for the method of choosing church\nofficers, which already has produced so much strife, bloody squabbling,\nor riot? If Christ's _kingdom_, as himself when dying attested, _is not\nof this world_, how can outward learning, riches, settled abode, or any\nworldly thing, constitute one a member thereof? These do not make one a\nbetter Christian. No. _Not many wise men after the flesh, not many\nmighty, not many noble, are called_ with a holy calling. How ordinarily\ndo rich men oppress the saints, draw them before judgment-seats, and\nblaspheme Jesus' worthy name, by which they are called! If worldly\nprivileges and endowments cannot make one a subject of the Mediator's\nspiritual kingdom, how can they entitle any to, or raise him above his\nbrethren in, the privileges thereof? If by the Son of God the poor\ncottager has been made free indeed; has been taught to profit; is rich\nin faith; is a king and priest unto God; and hath received a kingdom\nthat cannot be moved; in the view of the Omniscient and his angels, and\nevery man wise to salvation, how little is he inferior to his rich,\nperhaps his graceless, master? Your rich man has college education,\nunderstands philosophy, history, law, agriculture; but will that infer\nthat he understands his Bible, understands Christian principles,\nspiritual experiences, and what spiritual gifts best correspond\ntherewith, better than his cottager, who daily searches the Scriptures,\nand has heard and learned of the Father? How oft are the great things of\nGod hid from the wise and prudent, and revealed unto babes! Christ\ncrucified was to the learned Greeks foolishness; but to the poorest\nbeliever the power of God and the wisdom of God. \"The natural man,\"\nhowever learned, \"receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, neither\ncan he know them; for they are spiritually discerned,\" 1 Cor. ii. 14.\nHow easy to find the herdman, or the silly woman, who will endure a\ntrial on Christian principles to far better purpose than many of your\nrich, your great men!--Your great man is the head of a numerous family,\nand has great influence in the corner. That, no doubt, is a strong\nmotive for him, if he is a Christian, to be exceeding wary in his\nchoice: if he is so, no doubt his Christian judgment, as far as is\nconsistent with spiritual liberty, is to have its own weight. But while\nChrist's _kingdom is not of this world_; while in him there is _neither\nmale nor female, bond nor free_; headship over a family can found no\nclaim to a spiritual privilege. Thousands of heads of families are\nplainly _aliens from the commonwealth of Israel_, without God, and\nwithout hope in the world. Many are heads of families who, by neglect of\nthe daily worship of God, of religious instruction, and by other\nunchristian conduct, ruin the same.\n\nBoast not of the great man's settled abode, boast not of to-morrow, for\nthou knowest not what a day may bring forth; how suddenly may disaster\nand death pluck him up by the roots! The rich fathers, where are they?\nDo the nobles live forever? Shall their dwelling continue to all\ngenerations? How often, in a few years, the rich inheritance changes its\nmaster, while the race of the poor hovers about the same spot for many\ngenerations! What if the cottager attend more to gospel ministrations,\nin one year, than the rich in forty! what if, removing at next term, he\ncarry his beloved pastor in his heart, and by effectual fervent prayers,\navailing much, by multiplied groanings that cannot be uttered, he bring\nmanifold blessings on the parish and ministry which he leaves; while\nyour rich man, if wicked, if of the too common stamp, continues in it,\nfor no better purpose than to distress the faithful pastor, corrupt the\npeople, bring down a curse, and cumber the ground! The great man bears\nthe load of the stipend no more than the poorest cottager. He purchased\nhis estate with this burden upon it, and on that account had its price\nproportionally abated. Suppose it were otherwise, might not a poor\nwidow's _two mites_ be more in Jesus' account than all he gives? Will\nwe, with the Samaritan sorcerer, indulge the thought that the _gifts of\nGod_, the spiritual privileges of his Church, _are to be purchased with\nmoney_? For money to erect the church or defray the benefice we must\nnot, with the infamous traitor, betray the Son of God in his church--his\nordinance, his ministry, into the hands of sinners to be crucified.\n\nIt is in vain to mention the civil law: the very worst statute thereof,\nrelative to the point in hand, indirectly supposes the consent of the\ncongregation. It leaves to the presbytery the full power to judge\nwhether the presentee is fit for that charge. If the congregation\ngenerally oppose, with what candor do the presbytery, in Jesus' name,\ndetermine that he is fit? The last statute relative hereto declared the\npresentation void, unless accepted. Nor is there in being any, but the\n_law of sin and death_ within them, the law of itch after worldly gain,\nthat obliges candidates to accept. How unmanly, how disingenuous, to\nblame the civil law with the present course of intrusions!--Since the\nresurrection of Christ, we think we may almost defy any to produce an\ninstance of bloody squabbling, or like outrageous contention, in the\nchoice of a pastor, where none but the visible members of Christ's\nmystical body, adult, and blameless in their lives, were admitted to act\nin the choice. But if at any called popular elections, the power was\nsinfully betrayed into the hands of such baptized persons, as in\nignorance and loose practice equalled, if not transcended, _heathen men\nand publicans_; into the hand of those who, to please a superior, to\nobtain a paltry bribe, or a flagon of wine, were readily determined in\ntheir vote for a minister; let the prostitutes of Jesus' ordinance\nanswer for the unhappy consequences of their conduct. If they so\nenormously broke through the hedge of the divine law, no wonder a\nserpent bit them. But who has forgot what angry contentions, what\nnecessity of a military guard at ordinations, the lodging of the power\nof elections in patrons or heritors, _as such_, has of late occasioned?\n\nTo deprive the Christian people of their privilege in choosing their\npastor, and give it to others upon worldly accounts, is the grossest\nabsurdity. It overturns the nature of Christ's spiritual kingdom,\nfounding a claim to her privileges on worldly character and property. It\ngives those blessed lips the lie, which said, _\"My kingdom is not of\nthis world.\"_ It counteracts the nature of the church, as a voluntary\nsociety; thrusting men into a momentous relation to her, without, nay\ncontrary to, her consent. It settles the ministerial office upon a very\nrotten foundation: for how hard is it to believe the man is a minister\nof a Christian congregation, who never consented to his being such! to\nbelieve he has a pastoral mission from Christ, for whom providence would\nnever open a regular door of entrance to the office; but he was obliged\nto be thrust in by the window, _as a thief and a robber_! If he comes\nunsent, how can I expect edification by his ministry, when God has\ndeclared, _such shall not profit his people at all_? It implies the most\nunnatural cruelty. If the law of nature allow me the choice of my\nphysician, my servant, my guide, my master, how absurd to deny me the\nchoice of a physician, a servant, a guide, to my soul; and to give it to\nanother, merely because he has some more money, has a certain _piece of\nground_, which I have not! How do these qualify him, or entitle him to\nprovide, what the eternal salvation of my soul is so nearly connected\nwith, better than myself, if taught of God?\n\nBy patronage how oft the honor of Christ and the souls of men are\nbetrayed into the hands of their declared enemies! If the patron is\nunholy, profane, how readily the candidate he prefers is too like\nhimself! If a candidate be faithful, be holy, how readily, like Ahab in\nthe case of Micaiah, he hates, he sends not for him! The complaisant\nchaplain, who almost never disturbed the family with the worship of God;\nwho along with the children or others took off his cheerful glass; sung\nhis wanton song; attended the licentious ball, or play-house; connived\nat, or swore a profane oath; took a hand at cards; or ridiculed the\nmysteries, the experiences, the circumspect professor of the Christian\nfaith, is almost certain to have the presentation: perhaps he covenanted\nfor it as part of his wages. For what simony, sacrilege, and deceitful\nperjury, with respect to ordination vows, patronage opens a door, he\nthat runs may read. Shocked with the view, let us forbear!\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nN.B. The London ministers in the preceding treatise have a large note\nrespecting the election of ministers, which does not fully invest this\nright in the people. The editor, therefore, omitted that note\naltogether, and has inserted this number, extracted from Brown's\nLetters, in the place of it, as better adapted to the nature of the\ngospel church, and to that liberty wherewith Christ has made his people\nfree.\n\n\n\n\nNO. V.[124]\n\n_Of the Ordination and Duty of Ministers._\n\n\nThat the ordination of pastors is an ordinance of Christ, the sacred\nvolumes clearly prove. Through election by suffrages (or votes) Paul and\nBarnabas ordained _elders_ (presbyters) _in every church_, Acts xiv. 23.\nBy Paul's inspired orders Titus was left at Crete to ordain elders\n(presbyters) in every city, Tit. i. 5. By the laying on of the hands of\nthe presbytery was Timothy himself ordained: he was apostolically\nauthorized and directed to ordain others; and informed that these\ndirections are to be observed, _till the day of Jesus Christ_, 1 Tim.\niv. 14, 15.\n\nThat not election, but ordination, confers the sacred office is no less\nevident. Election marks out the person to be ordained; ordination fixes\nthe relation of a candidate to a particular congregation, upon receiving\na regular call; while at the same time it constitutes him a minister of\nthe whole catholic Church. Ordination made men _presbyters_ and\n_deacons_, which were not so before. If a person be destitute of the\ndistinguishing ministerial gift, or any other essential qualification,\nten thousand elections or ordinations cannot render him a minister of\nChrist. But solemnly tried and found qualified, he is to be set apart to\nthe ministry, by prayer, fasting, and laying on of the hands of the\npresbytery.\n\nNowhere in the heavenly volume do we find either precept or example that\nChristian people have a whit more right to ordain their pastor, than\nmidwives have to baptize the children they assist to bring forth.\nOrdination appears to have been performed by apostles, by evangelists,\nand by a presbytery, Acts vi. 6, and xiv. 23; Tit. i. 5; 1 Tim. v. 22,\nand iv. 14: but never by private Christians. Could these ordain their\npastors or other ecclesiastic officers, to what purpose did Paul leave\nTitus at Crete to _ordain elders in every city_? or why did he write\nnever a word about ordination to the people, in any of his epistles, but\nto their rulers?\n\nThus regularly ordained, the Christian pastor must enter upon his\nimportant work. Endowed with spiritual wisdom and understanding;\npossessed of inward experience of the power of divine truth; inflamed\nwith zeal for the glory of God, love to his work, and compassion to the\nperishing souls of men, he is to endeavor to acquaint himself with the\nspiritual state of his flock; and to feed them, not with heathenish and\nArminian harangues, but with the gospel of Christ, the sincere milk of\nthe word, diligently preaching and rightly dividing it, according to\ntheir diversified state and condition, 1 Pet. v. 3; 2 Cor. v. 11; 1 Cor.\nix. 16. Assiduously growing in the knowledge and love of divine things,\nhe is to instruct and confirm his hearers therein. Every divine truth he\nis to publish and apply, as opportunity calls for: chiefly such as are\nmost important, or, though once openly confessed, are in his time\nattacked and denied, 1 Tim. vi. 20, iii. 15. Painfully is he to\ncatechize his people, and in Jesus' name to visit and teach them from\nhouse to house. To awaken their conscience, to promote the conversion of\nsinners, to direct and comfort the cast down, perplexed, tempted, and\ndeserted; to ponder the Scripture, and his own and others' experience,\nto qualify him for this work, must be his earnest care. Faithfully is he\nto administer the sacraments to such (only) as are duly prepared; and in\nthe simple manner prescribed by Christ. Tenderly is he to take care of\nthe poor; to sympathize with the afflicted; impartially to visit the\nsick; to deal plainly with their consciences, and to exhort and pray\nover them in the name of the Lord. With impartiality, zeal, meekness,\nand prudence, he is to rule and govern the church, to admonish the\nunruly, to rebuke offenders, to excommunicate the incorrigible, and to\nabsolve the penitent. Habitually is he to give himself to effectual\nfervent prayer, for his flock, and for the Church of God, travailing as\nin birth till Jesus be formed in the souls of men. Be a man's parts,\ndiligence, and apparent piety what they will, negligence in this will\nblast his ministrations, and too clearly mark, that he is therein\nchiefly influenced by some carnal motive of honor or gain. Finally, he\nis constantly to walk before his flock a distinguished pattern of\nsobriety, righteousness, holiness, humility, heavenliness, temperance,\ncharity, brotherly kindness, and every good word and work. Without this\nhis ministrations appear but a solemn farce of deceit, 2 Tim. ii. 4; 1\nTim. iv. 15; 2 Tim. iv. 2.\n\nCan ministers' reading of sermons consist with the dignity of their\noffice? Did Jesus or his apostles ever show them an example of this? No.\nAt Nazareth, when he read his text in the book of Esaias, he _closed his\nbook_, and discoursed to the people. On the mount _he opened his mouth,\nand taught_: we hear not that he took out his papers and read. Peter, in\nhis sermon at Pentecost, _lifted up his voice, and said_: his papers and\nreading we hear nothing of. After reading of the law and the prophets,\nthe rulers of the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia, desired Paul and\nBarnabas, not to _read_, but to _say on_. Our adored Saviour knew well\nenough how to direct his ambassadors; yet he ordered them to _go and\npreach_, not _read_, the gospel to every creature, Luke iv. 20, 21;\nMatt. v. 2; Acts ii. 14, and xiii. 15. How hard to believe, that he who\ngives gifts to men, for the edifying of his body, would send the\nsermonist, whose memory and judgment are so insufficient, that from\nneither he can produce an half hour's discourse without reading it! How\ndull and insipid the manner! How absurdly it hinders the Spirit's\nassistance, as to matter during the discourse! How shameful! Shall the\nbookless lawyer warmly and sensibly plead almost insignificant trifles,\nand shall the ambassador of Christ, deprived of his papers, be incapable\nto plead so short a space in favor of his Master, and of the souls of\nmen?\n\n\n\n\nNO. VI.[125]\n\n_Of Ruling Elders._\n\n\nThe rule and government of the Church, or the execution of the authority\nof Christ therein, is in the hand of the elders. All elders in office\nhave rule, and none have rule in the church but elders: _as such_, rule\ndoth belong unto them. The apostles by virtue of their special office\nwere intrusted with all church power; but therefore they were elders\nalso, 1 Pet. v. 1; 3 John i.: see Acts xxi. 17; 1 Tim. i. 17. They are\nsome of them on other accounts called bishops, pastors, teachers,\nministers, guides; but what belongs to any of them in point of rule, or\nwhat interest they have therein, it belongs unto them as elders, and not\notherwise, Acts xx. 17, 18. The Scriptures affirm, 1st, That there is a\nwork and duty of rule in the Church, distinct from the work and duty of\npastoral feeding, by the preaching of the word and administration of the\nsacraments, Acts xx. 28; Rom. xii. 8; 1 Cor. xii. 28; 1 Tim. v. 17; 2\nTim. iv. 5; Heb. xiii. 7, 17; Rev. ii. 3.\n\n2d. Different and distinct gifts are required unto the discharge of\nthese distinct works and duties. This belongs unto the harmony of the\ndispensation of the gospel. Gifts are bestowed to answer all duties\nprescribed. Hence they are the first foundation of all power, work, and\nduty in the church. Unto every one of us is given grace according to the\nmeasure of the gift of Christ, that is, ability for duty, according to\nthe measure wherein Christ is pleased to grant it; Eph. iv. 7: see also\n1 Cor. xii. 4, 7, 8-10; Rom. xii. 6-8; 1 Pet. iv. 10: wherefore\ndifferent gifts are the first foundation of different offices and\nduties.\n\n3d. That different gifts are required unto the different works of\npastoral teaching on the one hand, and practical rule on the other, is\nevident, 1st, From the light of reason, and the nature of the works\nthemselves being so different. And, 2d, From experience; some men are\nfitted by gifts for the dispensation of the word and doctrine in a way\nof pastoral feeding, who have no useful ability in the work of rule; and\nsome are fitted for rule, who have no gifts for the discharge of the\npastoral work in preaching, Yea, it is very seldom that both these sort\nof gifts do concur in any eminent degree in the same persons, or without\nsome notable defect.\n\n4th. The work of rule, as distinct from teaching, is in general to watch\nover the walk or conversation of the members of the church with\nauthority, exhorting, comforting, admonishing, reproving, encouraging,\nand directing of them, as occasion shall require. The gifts necessary\nhereunto are diligence, wisdom, courage, and gravity; as we shall see\nafterwards. The pastoral work is principally to reveal the whole counsel\nof God, to divide the word aright, or to labor in the word and doctrine,\nboth as unto the general dispensation and particular application of it,\nin all seasons and on all occasions. Hereunto spiritual wisdom,\nknowledge, sound judgment, experience, and utterance are required; all\nto be improved by continual study of the word and prayer. But this\ndifference of gifts unto these distinct works doth not of itself\nconstitute distinct offices, because the same persons may be suitably\nfurnished with those of both sorts.\n\n5th. Yet distinct works and duties, though some were furnished with\ngifts for both, were a ground in the wisdom of the Holy Ghost, for\ndistinct offices in the church, where one sort of them were as much as\nthose of one office could, ordinarily attend unto, Acts vi. 2-4.\nMinistration unto the poor of the church, for the supply of their\ntemporal necessities, is an ordinance of Christ, instituted that the\napostles might give a more diligent attendance unto the word and prayer.\n\n6th. The work of the ministry in prayer, and preaching of the word, or\nlabor in the word and doctrine, whereunto the administration of the\nseals of the covenant is annexed, with all the duties that belong unto\nthe special application of these things before insisted on unto the\nflock, are ordinarily sufficient to take up the whole man, and the\nutmost of their endowments who are called unto the pastoral office in\nthe church. The very nature of the work in itself is such, as that the\napostle giving a short description of it adds, as an intimation of its\ngreatness and excellency, \"Who is sufficient for these things?\" 2 Cor.\nii. 16. And the manner of its performance adds unto its weight. For not\nto mention that intenseness of mind in the exercise of faith, love,\nzeal, and compassion, which is required of them in the discharge of\ntheir whole office; the diligent consideration of the state of the\nflock, so as to provide spiritual food for them; with a constant\nattendance unto the issues and effects of the word in the consciences\nand lives of men; is enough for the most part to take up their whole\ntime and strength. It is gross ignorance or negligence that causeth any\nto be otherwise minded. As the work of the ministry is generally\ndischarged, consisting only in a weekly provision of sermons, and the\nperformance of some stated offices by reading, men have time and liberty\nenough to attend unto other occasions. But in such persons we are not at\npresent concerned. Our rule is plain, 1 Tim. iv. 12-17.\n\n7th. It doth not hence follow, that those who are called unto the\nministry of the word, as pastors and teachers, who are elders also, are\ndivested of their right to rule in the church, or discharged from the\nexercise of it, because others, not called unto their office, are\nappointed to be assistant unto them, that is, _helps in the government_.\nFor the right and duty of rule is inseparable from the office of elders,\nwhich all bishops and pastors are. The right is still in them, and the\nexercise of it, consistent with their more excellent work, is required\nof them. The apostles in the constitution of elders in every church\nderogated nothing from their own authority, nor discharged themselves of\ntheir care. So when they appointed deacons to take care of supplies for\nthe poor, they did not forego their own right, nor the exercise of their\nduty as their other work would permit them, Gal. ii. 9, 10. And in\nparticular the apostle Paul manifested his concernment herein, in the\ncare he took about _collection for the poor_ in all churches.\n\n8th. As we observed at the entrance of this chapter, the whole work of\nthe church, as unto authoritative teaching and rule, is committed unto\nthe elders. For authoritative teaching and ruling, is teaching and\nruling by virtue of office: and this office whereunto they do belong is\nthat of elders, as is undeniably attested, Acts xx. 17, &c. All that\nbelongs unto the care, inspection, oversight, rule, fend instruction of\nthe church, is committed unto the _elders_ of it expressly. For _elders_\nis a name derived from the Jews, denoting them that have _authority_ in\nthe church.\n\n9th. To the complete constitution of any church, or to the perfection of\nits organical state, it is required that there be _many elders_ in it;\nat least more than one. I do not determine what their number ought to\nbe; but it is to be proportioned to the work and end designed. Where the\nchurches are small, the number of elders must be so also. So many are\nnecessary in each office as are able to discharge the work which is\nallotted unto them. But that church, be it small or great, is defective,\nwhich hath not more elders than one; so many as are sufficient for their\nwork. The pattern of the first churches constituted by the apostles,\nwhich it is our duty to imitate and follow as our rule, plainly\ndeclares, that many elders were appointed by them in every church, Acts\nxi. 30, xiv. 23, xv. 2, 4, 6, 22, xvi. 4, xx. 17; 1 Tim. v. 17; Phil. i.\n1; Tit. i. 5; 1 Pet. v. 1.\n\n10th. We shall now make application of these things unto our present\npurpose. I say then, 1st, Whereas there is a work of rule in the Church,\ndistinct from that of pastoral feeding: 2d, Whereas this work is to be\nattended unto with diligence, which includes the whole duty of him that\nattends unto it: 3d, That the ministry of the word and prayer, with all\nthose duties that accompany it, is a full employment for any man, and so\nconsequently his principal and proper work, which it is unlawful for him\nto be remiss in, by attending on another with diligence: 4th, That, in\nthe wisdom of the Holy Ghost, distinct works did require distinct\noffices for their discharge: and, 5th, Whereas there ought to be many\nelders in every church, that both the works of _teaching_ and _ruling_\nmay be constantly attended unto; all which we have proved already: our\ninquiry herein is, whether the same Holy Spirit hath not distinguished\nthis office of elders into those two sorts, namely, those who are called\nunto teaching and rule also, and those who are called unto rule only,\nwhich we affirm.\n\nThe testimonies whereby the truth of this assertion is confirmed are\ngenerally known and pleaded. I shall insist on some of them only,\nbeginning with that which is of uncontrollable evidence, if it had any\nthing to conflict with but prejudices and interest, and this is 1 Tim.\nv. 17, the meaning of which is, the elders or presbyters in office,\nelders of the church _that rule well_ or discharge their presidency for\nrule in due manner, are worthy, or ought to be reputed worthy, _of\ndouble honor_; especially those of them who labor, or are engaged in the\ngreat labor and travail of the word and doctrine.\n\nAccording to this sense the words of the text have a plain and obvious\nsignification, which at first view presents itself unto the common sense\nand understanding of all men. On the first proposal of this text, that\nthe elders that rule well are worthy of double honor, especially those\nwho labor in the word and doctrine, a rational man, who is unprejudiced,\nand never heard of the controversy about ruling elders, can hardly avoid\nan apprehension that there are _two sorts of elders_, some that labor in\nthe word and doctrine, and some who do not. This is the substance of the\ntruth in the text. There are elders in the Church; there are or ought to\nbe so in every church. With these elders the whole rule of the Church is\nintrusted; all these, and only these, do rule in it. Of these elders\nthere are two sorts; for a description is given of one sort distinct\nfrom the other, and comparative with it. The first sort doth rule, and\nalso labor in the word and doctrine. That these works are distinct and\ndifferent was before declared: yet by the institution of Christ the\nright of rule is inseparable from the office of pastors or teachers. For\nall that are rightly called thereunto are elders also, which gives them\nan interest in rule. But there are elders which are not pastors or\nteachers. For there are some who rule well, but labor not in the word\nand doctrine; that is, who are not pastors or teachers.\n\nElders which rule well, but labor not in the word and doctrine, are\nruling elders only; for he who says, The elders who rule well are worthy\nof double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine,\nsaith that there are, or may be elders who rule well, who do not labor\nin the word and doctrine; that is, who are not obliged to do so.\n\nThe argument from these words may be otherwise framed, but this contains\nthe plain sense of this testimony.\n\nOur next testimony is from the same apostle, Rom. xii. 6, 7, _He that\nruleth with diligence_. Our argument from hence is this: there is in the\nChurch one that ruleth with authority by virtue of his office. For the\ndischarge of this office there is a differing peculiar gift bestowed on\nsome, ver. 7, and there is the special manner prescribed for the\ndischarge of this special office, by virtue of that special gift; it is\nto be done with peculiar _diligence_. And this ruler is distinguished\nfrom him that exhorteth, and him that teacheth, with whose special work,\nas such, he hath nothing to do; even as they are distinguished from\nthose who give and show mercy; that is, there is an elder by office in\nthe Church, whose work and duty it is to _rule_, not to exhort or teach\nministerially, which is our ruling elder. He that ruleth is a distinct\nofficer, and is expressly distinguished from all others. Rule is the\nprincipal part of him that ruleth; for he is to attend unto it with\n_diligence_; that is, such as is peculiar unto _rule_, in\ncontradistinction unto what is principally required in other\nadministrations.\n\nThere is the same evidence given unto the truth argued for in another\ntestimony of the same apostle, 1 Cor. xii. 28: that there is here an\nenumeration of offices and officers in the Church, both extraordinary\nfor that season, and ordinary for continuance, is beyond exception. Unto\nthem is added the present exercise of some extraordinary gifts, as\nmiracles, healing, tongues. That by _helps_ the deacons of the Church\nare intended most do agree, because their original institution was as\nhelpers in the affairs of the Church. _Governments_ are governors or\nrulers; that is, such as are distinct from teachers; such hath God\nplaced in the Church, and such there ought to be. It is said that\n_gifts_, not _offices_, are intended; the gift of government, or the\ngift for government. If God hath given gifts for government to abide in\nthe Church, distinct from those given unto _teachers_, and unto other\npersons than the teachers, then there is a distinct office of rule or\ngovernment in the Church, which is all we plead for.\n\n\n_Of the Duties of Ruling Elders._\n\n1st. To watch diligently over the ways, walk, and conversation of all\nthe members of the church, to see that it be blameless, without offence,\nuseful, exemplary, and in all things answering the holiness of the\ncommands of Christ, the honor of the gospel, and the profession thereof\nwhich they make in the world. And upon the observation which they make\nin the watch wherein they are placed, to instruct, admonish, charge,\nexhort, encourage, or comfort as they see cause. And this they are to\nattend unto, with courage and diligence.\n\n2d. To endeavor to prevent every thing that is contrary unto that love\nwhich the Lord Christ requireth in a peculiar and eminent manner to be\nfound among his disciples. This he calls his own _new command_, with\nrespect unto his authority requiring it, his example first illustrating\nit in the world, and the peculiar fruits and effects of it which he\nrevealed and taught. Wherefore, the due observance of this law of love\nin itself and all its fruits, with the prevention, removal, or\ncondemnation of all that is contrary unto it, is that in which the _rule\nof the church_ doth in a great measure consist. And considering the\nweakness, the passions, the temptations of men, the mutual provocations\nand differences that are apt to fall out even among the best, the\ninfluence that earthly objects are apt to have upon their minds, the\nfrowardness sometimes of men's natural tempers; the attendance unto\nthis one duty, or part of rule, requires the utmost diligence of them\nthat are called unto it.\n\n3d. To warn all the members of the church of their special church\nduties, that they be not found negligent or wanting in them. These are\nspecial duties required respectively of all church members, according\nunto the distinct talents which they have received, whether in things\nspiritual or temporal. Some are rich and some are poor; some old and\nsome young; some in peace and some in trouble; some have received more\nspiritual gifts than others, and have more opportunity for their\nexercise: therefore it belongs unto the rule of the church, that all be\nadmonished, instructed, and exhorted to attend unto their respective\nduties, by those in _rule_, according to the observation which they make\nof people's diligence or negligence in them.\n\n4th. To watch against the beginning of any church disorders, such as\nthose that infested the church of Corinth, or any of the like sort; and\nto see that the members of the church attend regularly upon the\nordinances of the gospel, as by slothfulness in this, decays in faith,\nlove, and order have insensibly prevailed in many, to the dishonor of\nChrist, and the danger of their own souls.\n\n5th. It belongs unto them also to visit the sick, and especially such as\ntheir inward or outward conditions do expose them unto more than\nordinary trials in their sickness; that is, the poor, the afflicted, the\ntempted in any kind. This in general is a moral duty, a work of mercy;\nbut it is moreover a peculiar church duty by virtue of divine\ninstitution, ordaining, that the disciples of Christ may have all that\nspiritual and temporal relief, which is necessary for them, and useful\nto them, in their troubles and distresses.\n\n6th. To assist the pastor in watching over and directing the flock, and\nto advise with the deacons concerning the relief of the poor. According\nto the advantage which they have by their peculiar inspection of the\nconversation of all the members of the church, they ought to acquaint\nthe teaching elders with the state of the flock, as to their knowledge,\nconditions, and temptations, which may be of singular use unto them, for\ntheir direction in the exercise of their ministry. The liberal\ncontributions at Antioch for the brethren which dwelt in Judea, were\nsent by the hands of Barnabas and Saul unto the elders in Judea, Acts\nxi. 27, 30.\n\n7th. To unite with teaching elders in admitting members into the\nfellowship of the church, upon a visible evidence of their being\nqualified as the Scriptures direct. Unto them God bath given the keys of\nthe kingdom of heaven, to open the door of admission unto those whom God\nhath received, Matt. xvi. 19.\n\n8th. To meet and consult with the teaching elders about such things of\nimportance as are to be proposed to the members of the church for their\nconsent. Hence nothing rash or indigested, nothing unsuited to the duty\nof the church, will at any time be proposed therein, so as to give\noccasion for contests, janglings, or disputes, contrary to order or\ndecency, but all things may be preserved in a due regard unto the\ngravity and authority of the rulers.\n\n9th. To sit in judgment upon offenders, to take the proof, to weigh the\nevidence and determine accordingly, justifying the innocent, and\nordaining censure to be inflicted on the convicted brother, according to\nthe nature of the offence, Matt. xviii. 15, 17, 18.\n\n10th. Whereas there is generally but one teaching elder in a church,\nupon his death or removal, it is the work and duty of the ruling elders\nto preserve the church in peace and unity, to take care of the\ncontinuation of its public ordinances, to prevent irregularities in any\npersons or parties among them, and to give all necessary aid and advice\nin the choice and call of some other meet person to be their pastor, in\nthe room of the deceased or removed.\n\n\n\n\nCONCLUSION.\n\n_A Summary of the preceding Treatise on Church Government,_\n\nBY QUESTION AND ANSWER.\n\n\n_Quest_. What is meant by church government?\n\n_Ans_. That particular form and order, which Christ has fixed in his\nChurch, for the proper management thereof.\n\n_Quest_. How does it appear that there is a particular form of\ngovernment appointed in the New Testament Church?\n\n_Ans_. As there is as great, if not greater, need of a government, in\nthe New Testament Church, than there was in the Old, all the ordinances\nof which were most minutely described. Satan is now more experienced in\ndeceiving, and his agents are still alive, and very actively employed,\nin attempting to waste and destroy this sacred vineyard, if without its\nproper hedge. Her members are still a mixture of tares and wheat; of\nsheep and goats: so that there is still a necessity of discerning\nbetween the precious and the vile; of trying and censuring false\nteachers; and of guarding divine ordinances from contempt and pollution.\nAs Jesus gives the New Testament Church the peculiar title of the\n_kingdom of heaven_, he could not, in a consistency with his wisdom,\nleave it without any particular laws or form of government, except the\nchangeable inclinations of men. As he was faithful in his New Testament\nhouse, he must fix a particular form of government for her, such as\ntends to her peace, order, and spiritual edification. And, amidst the\nprophet's vision of the New Testament Church, he is directed to teach\nhis people _the form of the house, the laws of the house_, &c., Ezek.\nxliii. 11.\n\n_Quest_. When may a particular form of church government be said to be\nof divine right?\n\n_Ans_. When all the parts thereof are agreeable to Scripture precepts;\nto approved Scripture examples; or are deducible by fair Scripture\nconsequences.\n\n_Quest_. How does it appear, that Scripture consequences are to be\nadmitted to prove any particular truth or doctrine?\n\n_Ans_. Because God has formed man a rational intelligent creature,\ncapable of searching out the plain meaning and import, and also the\nnecessary consequences of his express declarations. We find Christ\nreasoning by a deduction of consequences, when he showed that the\ndoctrine of the resurrection was revealed to Moses at the burning bush;\nthat the sixth commandment forbids angry words; and the seventh\nlascivious looks, Luke xx. 37, 38; Matt. v. 21, 28. And a great part of\nthe inspired epistles to the Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews consists in\nsuch a deduction of consequences. And as all Scripture is said to be\nprofitable \"for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for\ninstruction in righteousness,\" 2 Tim. iii. 16, without a rational\ndeduction of consequences, every portion of Scripture cannot answer each\nof these valuable ends.\n\n_Quest_. What particular form of church government may lay the only\nproper claim to a divine right, according to the Holy Scriptures?\n\n_Ans_. The true presbyterian form, without that lordly dominion and\ntyrannical power, which has too often been exercised by courts, bearing\nthis name. This government claimeth no power over men's bodies or\nestates. It does not inflict civil pains or corporal punishments. But it\nis a government purely spiritual, dealing with the consciences of men,\nand exercising the keys of the kingdom of heaven, doing all things\naccording to the word of God.\n\n_Quest_. What are the parts of presbyterial church government?\n\n_Ans_. It consists of a people, having the qualifications which the\nScriptures require; of certain rulers, who are to perform the duties of\ntheir respective offices; and of certain courts, in which these rulers\nsit and act in matters of judgment.\n\n_Quest_. What are the qualifications of persons who constitute the\nprivate members of the visible church?\n\n_Ans_. They ought to be true believers in Christ, to have a competent\nknowledge of the doctrines of the gospel, to make a sound profession of\ntheir faith, and to maintain a holy conversation.\n\n_Quest_. What rulers are there in the presbyterian church?\n\n_Ans_. Preaching elders, ruling elders, and deacons.\n\n_Quest_. Where is the divine warrant for the preaching elder?\n\n_Ans_. In the Holy Scriptures we find that God hath set some in the\nChurch, TEACHERS: that our ascended Redeemer hath given her PASTORS and\nTEACHERS: that the Holy Ghost had made some BISHOPS, OVERSEERS, to feed\nher; and qualifies some for _prophecy, ministry, teaching, exhortation_,\n1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph. iv. 11; Acts xx. 28; Rom. xii. 6-8.\n\n_Quest_. What are the duties of preaching elders?\n\n_Ans_. To preach the word; to dispense the ordinances of baptism and the\nLord's Supper; to administer church discipline; and to rule and govern\nthe church, 2 Tim. iv. 2; Matt. xxviii. 19; 1 Cor. xi. 23-29; 1 Tim. v.\n20; Tit. ii. 15, and iii. 10; Heb. xiii. 17; 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. _Quest_.\nIs the office of the gospel minister instituted by God to continue to\nthe end of time?\n\n_Ans_. Yes; the ends of it are of a permanent nature, the converting and\nconfirming of the elect, and the silencing of gain-savers, Acts xxvi.\n18; Tit. i. 9, 11.\n\n_Quest_. Where is the divine warrant for the office of the ruling elder?\n\n_Ans_. From the three following passages of sacred Scripture: 1. From\nRom. xii. 5 to 8: \"We being many are one body in Christ, and members one\nof another. Having then gifts, differing according to the grace that is\ngiven to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the\nproportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he\nthat teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation; he\nthat giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with\ndiligence,\" &c. Here we have a list of the ordinary officers of Christ,\none body, the church. Here is the teacher: _he that teacheth_. Here is\nthe pastor: _he that exhorteth_. Here is the deacon: _he that giveth_.\nAnd here is another officer distinct from all them, _he that ruleth_.\nHis description attests, that _ruling_ is, if not his only, yet his\nprincipal work. He that _ruleth_ is here marked by a distinct character,\nas having a different _gift_, and a distinct work from his\nfellow-officers. This office therefore must be _distinct_. 2. From 1\nCor. xii. 28, where the _Spirit of God_ informs us, that God hath set\nsome in the Church, GOVERNMENTS. These must be understood of\n_governors_, as _miracles_ are afterwards explained of _workers of\nmiracles_. These governments and governors are said to be _set_ in the\nchurch, not in the state; by God, not by men: they are declared to be\ndistinct officers by themselves. Their title, government, implies, that\n_ruling_ is their principal work. 3. From 1 Tim. v. 17, where the divine\nwarrant for ruling elders shines with more peculiar brightness than\nanywhere in the book of God: \"Let the elders that rule well be counted\nworthy of double honor; especially they who labor in the word and\ndoctrine.\" The ruling elders here mentioned necessarily pertain to the\nchurch. Two sorts of ruling elders are here plainly distinguished: some\nthat only rule well; others that also labor in word and doctrine. There\nis not one place in the New Testament, nor perhaps in any Greek author,\nwhere the word here translated ESPECIALLY does not distinguish between\ndifferent persons or things, Gal. vi. 10; Phil. iv. 22; 1 Tim. iv. 10; 2\nTim. iv. 13; and it would be absurd to suppose, that it does not\ndistinguish here also. Therefore this single text shows the divine right\nof both the teaching and ruling elder.\n\n_Quest_. What are the duties of ruling elders?\n\n_Ans_. To exercise ecclesiastical rule in church courts with the same\nauthority as the preaching elder; to watch over the flock; impartially\nto receive or exclude members; to warn and censure the unruly; and to\nvisit and pray with the sick.\n\n_Quest_. Where is the divine warrant for deacons?\n\n_Ans_. From Acts vi., where we are informed of the original and design\nof their office; and from 1 Tim. iii. 8-12, where the inspired apostle\ndescribes their necessary qualifications.\n\n_Quest_. What are the duties of deacons?\n\n_Ans_. To look into the state and to serve the tables of the poor, by\ndistributing the funds of the church, according to the respective\nnecessities of the saints, 1 Tim. iii. 12.\n\n_Quest_. What are the courts in which presbyterian rulers meet?\n\n_Ans_. Congregational sessions, presbyteries, and synods.\n\n_Quest_. Where is the divine warrant for congregational sessions?\n\n_Ans_. From Matt, xviii. 15-18, where, in the Christian form of church\ndiscipline prescribed by the Church's Head, the concluding expression,\n\"Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and publican,\" plainly alludes to\nthe Jewish form of procedure in scandals. They had rulers, and\nconsequently courts in every synagogue, or worshipping congregation,\nMark v. 35-39. By virtue of letters from the high-priest to these, Saul\nhad free access to punish the Christians in every synagogue, Acts ix. 1,\n2. To these congregational courts it pertained to cast out of the\nsynagogue, and to order transgressors to be held for heathen men and\npublicans, John ix. 22. Now Jesus, in alluding to these, intimates that\nsimilar courts should be in every Christian congregation. In this form\nof discipline our divine Saviour shows his utmost aversion against\nprivate offences being unnecessarily published abroad: and therefore the\nchurch, to which the offence is to be told, after private admonition is\nfruitless, must be understood in the most private sense of the word. The\nfollowing context evidences that it is a _church_, which may consist\nonly of _two or three_ met together in Christ's name; yet,\nnotwithstanding, a church having power to bind and loose from censure;\nthat is, a church having the keys of the kingdom of heaven. It cannot\nthen be the whole congregation or body of the people, as they are in\ngeneral far too numerous to conceal offences, and to them Christ has\ngiven no formal judicial power, Matt. xviii. 18-21.\n\n_Quest_. Where is the divine warrant for a presbytery?\n\n_Ans_. Timothy is expressly said to be ordained by the laying on of the\nhands of the PRESBYTERY, 1 Tim. iv. 14. And the number of different\nChristian congregations governed by one presbytery, as at Jerusalem,\nAntioch, Ephesus, and Corinth, proves the divine right of this court. It\nis shown in the xiii. chapter of the preceding treatise, that in each\nof these places there were more Christians than could meet in one\nworshipping congregation, for the enjoying of public ordinances: and yet\nall these different congregations, at Jerusalem, are expressly said to\nhave been one church, Acts viii. 1: so those at Antioch, Acts xiii. 1:\nso those at Ephesus, Acts xx. 17: and those also at Corinth, 1 Cor. i.\n2. Now the question is, How were the different congregations in each of\nthese places ONE CHURCH? Not merely in union to Christ and mutual\naffection one to another; for in this respect all the saints are ONE,\nwhether in heaven or in earth. And therefore they are one church in\nvirtue of conjunct government under ONE PRESBYTERY. And in difficult\ncases, or where a single congregation is so divided into parties that it\ncannot act impartially; where the difference is between the pastor and\nthe people, a superior court is necessary to obtain material justice.\n\n_Quest_. Where is the divine warrant for an ecclesiastical synod?\n\n_Ans_. In Acts xv. and xvi., where we have a cause referred; the proper\nmembers of a synod convened; the ordinary and equal power exercised by\nall those members; the ordinary method of procedure in such courts; and\nthe judicial decrees given by the synod; together with the effect which\ntheir judgment, in this matter, had upon the churches.\n\n_Quest_. What was the cause referred to this synod?\n\n_Ans_. False doctrine propagated by some Judaizing teachers, who had\ngone down from Jerusalem to Antioch, and maintained that circumcision\nand the observance of other branches of the ceremonial law continued\nnecessary for salvation, whereby they subverted some, and troubled other\nmembers of the churches there. After much unsuccessful disputing, Paul,\nBarnabas, and others were delegated to go up to Jerusalem to the\napostles and elders about this matter.\n\n_Quest_. Who were the proper members of the synod convened here?\n\n_Ans_. The apostles and elders at Jerusalem; Paul, Barnabas, and others,\nfrom Antioch; and other commissioners from the troubled churches to whom\nthe decrees were sent.\n\n_Quest_. Are not the brethren, the church, the whole church, mentioned\nhere as well as the apostles and elders?\n\n_Ans_. But none of these expressions can mean, that all the members of\nthe church of Jerusalem either were present or judged in that synod; for\nwomen, real members of the church, of the whole church, are expressly\nforbid to speak in the church, 1 Cor. xiv. 34. Church sometimes\nsignifies only a small part of the church, either as delegates or\ncommissioners, and in this sense it is used in verse 3, where the\ncommissioners from Antioch are said to be brought on their way by the\n_church_; and in chap. xviii. 22, it is said that Paul saluted the\n_church_ at Jerusalem. Now, it is not credible that all the Christian\nprofessors at Antioch would attend their commissioners a part of the way\nto Jerusalem; or that Paul saluted the many ten thousand Christians at\nJerusalem, Acts xxi. 20. And the _whole church_ does not necessarily\nmean the whole individual members of the church, more than the _whole\nworld_ mentioned, 1 John ii. 2, means every individual in the world. If\nany, to support a favorite opinion, will still insist that the whole\nmembers of the church actually met and judged of this affair equally\nwith the apostles and elders, they may inform us where they obtained a\nproper place for so many judges to reason and determine with\ndistinctness or order. That the brethren who joined in judgment with the\napostles and elders were not private persons, but rather delegates from\nthe troubled churches around, appears from Judas and Silas, two of them\nbeing preachers, v. 22.\n\n_Quest_. How does it appear that the power of all the members was\nordinary and equal?\n\n_Ans_. As every member, inspired or not, acted equally in the whole\nbusiness laid before them. Paul and Barnabas were delegated by the\nchurch of Antioch: and the elders, who convened, had the same power as\nthe apostles. To the elders, teaching or ruling, as well as to the\napostles, was the matter referred: both met to consider of it: both were\nequally concerned in the decision, saying, _It seemed good to the Holy\nGhost and to us_. Elders, as well as apostles, imposed the necessary\nthings upon the churches, and authoritatively determined the decrees. In\nthe name of the elders, as well as of the apostles, the letters of the\nmeeting, containing their decision, were written to the churches. And\nthe only reason why the inspired members put themselves on an equality\nwith others was to exhibit a pattern to after ages.\n\n_Quest_. How does it appear, that this synod followed the ordinary\nmethod of procedure in such courts?\n\n_Ans_. As they examined the cause by much reasoning and dispute. In\nconsequence of mature deliberation they determined the question, and\nsent letters, containing their decrees, by proper messengers, to the\nchurches concerned. In their disputation they reasoned from the oracles\nof God: on these they founded their decision; and hence therein they\nsay, _It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us_. And if this had not\nbeen to have given a pattern to succeeding ages, all this was\nunnecessary: how absurd for inspired men to reason and dispute on the\nsubject, when the sentence of one inspired was sufficient for decision!\n\n_Quest_. How does it appear that there were judicial decrees given by\nthis synod?\n\n_Ans_. In opposition to the false doctrine taught, they, by a judicial\ndecision, plainly declared, that obedience to the ceremonies of the law\nof Moses was no longer necessary: and by a decree for promoting decency\nand good order, they enacted, that to avoid offence, the believing\nGentiles should abstain from fornication, from things strangled, and\nfrom blood, verse 24-29.\n\n_Quest_. What effect had the decision of this synod upon the churches?\n\n_Ans_. They cheerfully submitted to these _decrees_, and were by them\nconformed in the faith, comforted in heart, and increased in number\ndaily, Acts xv. 31, and xvi. 4, 5.\n\n_Quest_. But might not this be a meeting merely for consultation, and\ntheir decision a mere advice?\n\n_Ans_. No: for every word here used imports authority. The word\ntranslated _lay upon_, commonly signifies an authoritative imposition,\nMatt. xxiii. 4. The decision is expressly called a _necessary burden_,\nand _decrees ordained_, which imply power and authority, Acts xv. 16,\nxvii. 7.\n\n_Quest_. How does it appear that inferior courts are subordinate to\nthose that are superior; sessions to presbyteries, and presbyteries to\nsynods?\n\n_Ans_. The true light of nature (which is proved, chap, iii., to be one\nof those ways, whereby a thing is of divine right) teacheth us, that, if\nwe be injured by an inferior court, we may appeal to a higher court for\nredress, if there be one. As in the Jewish church there was evidently a\nsubordination of judicatories, so that those injured in the synagogue\nmight appeal to the Sanhedrin, Deut. xvii. 8, 12; 2 Chron. xix. 8, 11;\nExod. xviii. 22, 26; Ps. cxxii. 5: therefore as our dangers,\ndifficulties, and necessities are as great as theirs, by reason of false\nteachers and corrupt doctrines, which were foretold should appear in the\nlast times, 1 Tim. iv. 1; 2 Pet. ii. 1; we cannot, without dishonor to\nChrist, suppose that he would deprive us of a proper remedy for\nredressing our grievances, which was afforded unto them:--the gradual\nadvance in managing offences prescribed by Christ himself, Matt. xviii.\n19, as his care for the whole church cannot be less than for a single\nmember. If then an inferior judicatory offend or injure us, we ought to\ncarry the matter to another that has more influence and authority. If\nthe offending judicatory neglect to hear this, we ought to tell the\noffence to the church in the highest sense, that redress may be\nobtained--the apostle Paul declaring, _that the spirits of the prophets\nare subject to the prophets_. But the right of reference or appeal from\nan inferior to a superior court is most clearly evinced from the case\nof the presbytery of Antioch, respecting circumcision, being referred\nfor decision to the synod of Jerusalem, and their readily submitting to\nits determination, Acts xv.\n\n_Quest_. How does it appear that no power of authority is lodged in the\nbody of the people, the private members of the church?\n\n_Ans_. Although every church member has a right to all the spiritual\nprivileges purchased with the Saviour's blood, and given to the church,\nas need requires; although he has a right to try the spirits, and to\nprove all things by the word of God; a power to choose the church\nofficers who are immediately to rule over him; yet the Holy Scriptures\nallow the exercise of no official power to the private members of the\nchurch. Not the Christian people, but their pastors have power to preach\nthe gospel, Rom. x. 15; and to administer the sacraments, those\nmysteries of God, which are connected with preaching, 1 Cor. iv. 1;\nMatt. xxviii. 19. Not the people, but their rulers, are divinely\nwarranted. Timothy was ordained, not by the people, but by the\npresbytery: elders, not by the people, but by Paul and Barnabas: and\ndeacons, not by the people, but by the apostles, 1 Tim. iv. 14; Acts\nxiv. 23, and vi. 3, 6. Not the people, but their rulers are to censure\nthe scandalous, and to absolve the penitent, Matt. xviii. 18; 1 Cor. v.\nThe Scripture nowhere ascribes to the people any such characters as\nimply authority lodged in them; but the contrary. Instead of being\nstyled pastors, they are called the _flock_, watched over and fed;\ninstead of overseers, the family overseen; instead of _rulers, guides,\ngovernors_, they are called the _body_ governed, the persons subject in\nthe Lord, and they are solemnly charged to know, honor, obey, and submit\nto those that are over them.\n\n_Quest_. What is the proper method of dealing with persons that fall\ninto scandal?\n\n_Ans_. If the offence be known only to one or to a few, the offender is\nto be told his fault secretly, with Christian meekness, plainness, and\nlove. If he profess his sorrow and resolution to amend, the whole matter\nought to be carefully concealed; and those offended ought to be well\npleased that their offending brother is gained. If, after one or more\nsecret reproofs, he continue impenitent, defending his fault, one or two\nmore Christian brethren, grave, judicious, and meek, are to be taken\nalong, and the offender to be dealt with by them, and in their presence.\nIf now he appear to repent, the several persons concerned in his reproof\nare, with care and in love, to conceal his offence, lest, by divulging\nit, they be reproached as wicked calumniators. If the offender contemn\none or more such private admonitions or reproofs, or if his scandal be\nof such a nature that it will necessarily become public, the affair is\nto be told to the church court, to which he is most immediately subject.\nAnd, to bring him to a due sense of his fault, he is to be there dealt\nwith in a prudent, affectionate, plain, and convincing manner. If this\nprove a means of bringing him to a sense of his offence, the censures of\nthe church are to be executed upon him according to the laws of Christ's\nhouse, and the nature of his crime, and he is to be restored to the\nprivileges of the church. But if, after due pains taken by the\njudicatories, he remain obstinate, he is then to be cast out of the\nchurch, and held as a heathen man and publican, Matt. xviii. 15 to 18.\n\nTHE END.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n                                                                   PAGE.\nPREFACE                                                               7\n\nPART I.\n\nCHAP. I.--That there is a Government in the Church of divine\nright now under the New Testament                                    19\n\nCHAP. II.--Of the nature of a divine right in general                22\n\nCHAP. III.--Of a divine right in particular, which is five ways;\nfirst, by the true light of Nature                                   24\n\nCHAP. IV.--Of a divine right, second, by obligatory Scripture        27\nexamples\n\nCHAP. V.--Of a divine right, third, by God's approbation             37\n\nCHAP. VI.--Of a divine right, fourth, by divine acts                 39\n\nCHAP. VII.--Of a divine right, fifth, by divine precepts             40\n\n\nPART II.\n\nCHAP. I.--A description of church government                         45\n\nCHAP. II.--The subject described, and the terms church government\nbriefly defined                                                      46\n\nCHAP. III.--The general nature of church government, viz., power or\nauthority                                                            48\n\nCHAP. IV.--The special difference of church government from other\ngovernments, as to the special rule of it, viz., the Holy            53\nScriptures\n\nCHAP. V.--The proper fountain from which church government is\nderived, so as to constitute it of divine authority, viz., Jesus\nChrist our Mediator                                                  55\n\nCHAP. VI.--The peculiar nature of this power and authority           57\n\nCHAP. VII.--The several acts about which this power and authority\nis exercised, viz., doctrine and discipline                          61\n\nCHAP. VIII.--The end and design of this government of the church     67\n\nCHAP. IX.--The peculiar subject intrusted by Christ with this\npower, and the execution thereof according to the Scriptures         70\n\nSECT. I.--The power granted to the civil magistrate about the        92\nChurch\n\nSECT. II.--The power utterly refused him in church affairs           94\n\nCHAP. X.--That the community of the faithful, or body of the\npeople, are not the immediate subject of the power of church         97\ngovernment\n\nCHAP. XI.--That Christ's own officers are the immediate subject of\nit; pastors and ruling elders                                       111\n\nThe divine right of the ruling elder at large                       114\n\nThe divine right of the deacon                                      149\n\nCHAP. XII.--The divine right of congregational elderships, or kirk\nsessions, for the government of the Church                          172\n\nCHAP. XIII.--The divine right of presbyteries, consisting of rulers\nfrom different neighboring congregations                            177\n\nCHAP. XIV.--The divine right of synods                              197\n\nCHAP. XV.--The subordination of particular congregations to greater\nassemblies, for their judicial determination of ecclesiastical\ncauses, proved to be of divine right                                210\n\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nNo. I.--Of the qualifications and duties of church members          219\n\nNo. II.--Who have a right to preach the Gospel                      237\n\nNo. III.--On the same subject                                       240\n\nNo. IV.--On the people's right to choose their own pastors          249\n\nNo. V.--On the ordination and duty of ministers                     256\n\nNo. VI.--Of ruling elders, from Dr. Owen                            258\n\nConclusion                                                          266\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[Footnote 117: The substance of this Number is extracted from Ford's\nGospel Church, printed 1675.]\n\n[Footnote 118: John xvi. 8, 9; 2 Cor. v. 5; Eph. ii. 1, 5.]\n\n[Footnote 119: Col. ii. 6; 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.]\n\n[Footnote 120: Col. i. 12.]\n\n[Footnote 121: 1 Pet. ii. 5.]\n\n[Footnote 122: From Brown's Letters.]\n\n[Footnote 123: Extracted from the Christian Magazine for Sept. 1797--a\nperiodical publication well worth the perusal of the friends of\nevangelical doctrine.]\n\n[Footnote 124: From Brown's Letters.]\n\n[Footnote 125: This number is a summary of Dr. Owen's arguments in favor\nof the divine right of the ruling elder, with an abstract of the duties\nwhich he ought to perform. Although the Doctor was a professed\nIndependent, yet he was entirely different, both in doctrine and church\ngovernment, from any in Scotland that bear that name, as all who are\nacquainted with his works will easily observe. The writer of his life\nasserts that he heard him say, \"He could readily join with presbytery as\nit was exercised in Scotland.\" And indeed it appears very probable that\nthe difference between the consultative synod which he allows, and the\nauthoritative synod contended for by true Presbyterians, is not so far\ndifferent as many apprehend, because the decisions of either bind the\nconscience only as they are agreeable to the Holy Ghost speaking in the\nScriptures.]","title":"The Divine Right of Church Government: Wherein it is proved that the Presbyterian government, by preaching and ruling elders, in sessional, Presbyterial and synodical assemblies, may lay the only lawful claim to a divine right, according to the Holy Scriptures","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":125737}