The Divine Right of Church Government Part 20

6. Nor is it the question whether friendly, consultative, fraternal, Christian advice or direction, be either to be desired or bestowed by neighboring churches, either apart or in their synodal meetings, for the mutual benefit of one another, by reason of that holy profession in which they are all conjoined and knit together: for this will be granted on all hands, though when it is obtained, it will not amount to a sufficient remedy in many cases.

But this is that which we maintain, viz. that the law of G.o.d holdeth forth a subordination of a particular church to greater a.s.semblies, consisting of divers choice members, taken out of several single congregations: which a.s.semblies have authoritative power and ecclesiastical jurisdiction over that particular church, by way of giving sentence in and deciding of causes ecclesiastical. For confirmation of this a.s.sertion, thus:

_Argum_. I. The light of nature may be alleged to prove, that there ought to be this subordination: this is warranted not only by G.o.d's positive law, but even by nature's law. The church is a company of people who are not outlawed by nature. The visible church being an ecclesiastical polity, and the perfection of all polity, doth comprehend in it whatsoever is excellent in all other bodies political. The church must resemble the commonwealth's government in things common to both, and which have the same use in both. The law of nature directs unto diversities of courts in the commonwealth, and the greater to have authority over the lesser. The church is not only to be considered as employed in holy services, or as having a.s.semblies exercised in spiritual things, and after a spiritual manner, but it is also to be considered as consisting of companies and societies of men to be regularly ordered, and so far nature agreeth to it, that it should have divers sorts of a.s.semblies, and the lower subordinate to the higher.

That particular parts should be subject to the whole for the good of the whole, is found necessary both in bodies natural and politic. Is the foot to be lanced? though it have a particular use of its own, and a peculiar employment, yet it is to be ordered by the eye, the hand, and the rest. Kingdoms have their several cities and towns, which all have their governments apart by themselves; yet for the preservation of the whole, all join together in the Parliament. Armies and navies have their several companies and s.h.i.+ps, yet in any danger every particular company and s.h.i.+p is ordered by the counsels and directions of the officers and guides of the whole army or navy. The Church is spiritual, but yet a kingdom, a body, an army, &c. D. Ames himself affirms that the light of nature requires that particular churches ought to combine in synods for things of greater moment. The G.o.d of nature and reason hath not left in his word a government against the light of nature and right reason.

Appeals are of divine and natural right, and certainly very necessary in every society, because of the iniquity and ignorance of judges. That they are so, the practices of all ages and nations sufficiently testify.

_Argum_. II. The Jewish church government affords a second argument. If in that they had synagogues in every city, which were subordinate to the supreme ecclesiastical court at Jerusalem, then there ought to be a subordination of particular churches among us to higher a.s.semblies; but so it was among them: therefore,

That the subordination was among them of the particular synagogues to the a.s.sembly at Jerusalem, is clear--Deut. xvii. 8, 12; 2 Chron. xix. 8, 11; Exod. xviii. 22, 26.

That therefore it ought to be so among us, is as plain: for the dangers and difficulties that they were involved in without a government, and for which G.o.d caused that government to be set up among them, are as great if not greater among us, and therefore why should we want the same means of prevention and cure? Are not we in greater danger of heresies now in the time of the New Testament, the churches therein being thereby to be exercised by way of trial, as the apostle foretells, 1 Cor. xi.

19? Doth not unG.o.dliness in these last times abound, according to the same apostle's prediction? Is there not now a more free and permitted intercourse of society with infidels than in those times?

Nor are the exceptions against this argument of any strength: as, 1.

That arguments for the form of church government must yet be fetched from the Jewish Church; the government of the Jews was ceremonial and typical, and Christians must not Judaize, nor use that Judaical compound of subordination of churches: the Mosaical polity is abrogated now under the New Testament. Not to tell those that make this exception, 1. That none argue so much from the Jewish government as themselves for the power of congregations, both in ordination and excommunication, because the people of Israel laid hands on the Levites, and all Israel were to remove the unclean; 2. We answer, the laws of the Jewish church, whether ceremonial or judicial, so far are in force, even at this day, as they were grounded upon common equity, the principles of reason and nature, and were serving to the maintenance of the moral law. 'Tis of especial right, that the party unjustly aggrieved should have redress, that the adverse party should not be sole judge and party too, that judgment ought not to be rashly or partially pa.s.sed upon any. The Jewish polity is only abrogated in regard of what was in it of particular right, not of common right: so far as there was in their laws either a typicalness proper to their church, or a peculiarness of respect to their state in that land of promise given unto them. Whatsoever was in their laws of moral concernment or general equity, is still obliging; whatsoever the Jewish Church had not as Jewish, but as it was a political church, or an ecclesiastical republic, (among which is the subordination of ecclesiastical courts to be reckoned,) doth belong to the Christian Church: that all judgments were to be determined by an high-priest, was typical of Christ's supremacy in judicature; but that there were gradual judicatories for the ease of an oppressed or grieved party, there can be no ceremony or type in this. This was not learned by Moses in the pattern of the Mount, but was taught by the light of nature to Jethro, Exod. xviii. 22, and by him given in advice to Moses. This did not belong unto the peculiar dispensation of the Jews, but unto the good order of the church.

To conclude our answer to this exception, if the benefit of appeals be not as free to us as to the Jews, the yoke of the gospel should be more intolerable than the yoke of the law; the poor afflicted Christian might groan and cry under an unjust and tyrannical elders.h.i.+p, and no ecclesiastical judicatory to relieve him; whereas the poor oppressed Jew might appeal to the Sanhedrin: certainly this is contrary to that prophecy of Christ, Psal. lxxii. 12, 14.

_Argum_. III. A third argument to prove the subordination of particular congregations, is taken from the inst.i.tution of our Saviour Christ, of gradual appeals, Matt, xviii. 17, 18, where our Saviour hath appointed a particular member of a church (if scandalous) to be gradually dealt withal; first to be reproved in private, then to be admonished before two or three witnesses, and last of all to be complained of to the church: whence we thus argue:

If Christ hath inst.i.tuted that the offence of an obstinate brother should be complained of to the church; then much more is it intended that the obstinacy of a great number, suppose of a whole church, should be brought before a higher a.s.sembly: but the former is true, therefore the latter. The consequence, wherein the strength of the argument lies, is proved several ways.

1. From the rule of proportion: by what proportion one or two are subject to a particular church, by the same proportion is that church subject to a provincial or a national a.s.sembly; and by the same proportion that one congregation is governed by the particular elders.h.i.+p representing it, by the same proportion are ten or twelve congregations governed by a cla.s.sical presbytery representing them all.

2. From the sufficiency of that remedy that Christ here prescribes for those emergent exigencies under which the Church may lie; since, therefore, offences may as well arise between two persons in the same congregation, Christ hath appointed that particular congregations, as well as members, shall have liberty to complain and appeal to a more general judgment for redress: the salve here prescribed by Christ is equal to the sore; if the sore of scandal may overspread whole churches, as well as particular persons, then certainly the salve of appeals and subordination is here also appointed. If a man be scandalized by the neighbor-church, to whom shall he complain? The church offending must not be both judge and party.

3. From that ecclesiastical communion that is between churches and churches in one and the same province or nation, whereby churches are joined and united together in doctrine and discipline into one body, as well as divers particular persons in a particular congregation; since, therefore, scandals may be committed among them that are in that holy communion one with another, most unworthy of and destructive to that sacred league, certainly those scandals should be redressed by a superior judicatory, as well as offences between brother and brother.

4. He that careth for a part of a church must much more care for the whole; he whose love extends itself to regard the conversion of one, is certainly very careful of the spiritual welfare of many, the edification of a whole church; the influence of Christ's love being poured upon the whole body, bride and spouse, by order of nature, before it redound to the benefit of a finger or toe, viz. some one single person or other.

Nor are the exceptions against this inst.i.tution of gradual appeals of any moment.

The grand one, and that makes directly against our position is, that our Saviour would have the controversy between brother and brother to be terminated in a peculiar church, and that its judgment should be ultimately requested, he saith, _Tell the church_, not churches. The subordination here appointed by Christ is of fewer to more, but still within the same church, not without it. To which we answer, our Saviour means not by church only one single particular congregation, but also several, combined in their officers, as appears by these following reasons.

1. A particular church in sundry cases cannot decide the difference, or heal the distemper our Saviour prescribes against; as when a particular church is divided into two parts, both in opposition one to the other; or when one church is at variance with another; if Christ here limits only to a particular church, how shall such distempers be remedied?

2. When Christ bids _tell the church_, he speaks in allusion to the Jewish Church, which was represented not only by parts in the single synagogue or congregation, but wholly in their sanhedrin, consisting of select persons, appointed by G.o.d, for deciding controversies incident to their particular congregations, and their members. So that we may thus reason: the subordination here established by Christ is so far to be extended in the Christian Church, as in the Church of the Jews, for Christ alludeth to the Jewish practice; but in the Jewish Church there was a subordination of fewer to more, not only within the same synagogue or congregation, but within the whole nation, for all synagogues were under the great council at Jerusalem. Now that Christ gives here the same rule that was of old given to the Jews for church government, is clear, 1. From the censure of the obstinate, who was to be reputed a heathen and a publican; wherein is a manifest allusion to the present estate of the Church of the Jews; and, 2. From the familiarity and plainness of Christ's speech, _Tell the church_, which church could not have been understood by the disciples had not Christ spoken of the Jewish judicatory; besides which they knew none for such offences as Christ spake of to them, there being no particular church which had given its name to Christ: as also, 3. From his citing the words of that text, Deut. xix. 15, where the witnesses and offenders were, by way of further appeal, to stand before the Lord, before the priests for judgment, ver. 17.

3. It is plain that our Saviour intended a liberty of going beyond a particular congregation for determining cases of controversy, from the reason of that subordination which Christ enjoins, of one to two or three, and of them to the church. The reason of that gradual progress there set down, was because in the increase of numbers and greatness of a.s.semblies, more wisdom, judgment, and gravity is supposed to be, than in the admonitions of a few and smaller number; now, then, this power of right admonition increaseth with the number of admonishers, as well without as within the same congregation; if ten go beyond two in wisdom and gravity, forty will go beyond ten, and be more likely to win upon the offender, and regain him.

_Argum_. IV. A fourth argument is taken from the pattern of the apostolical churches, Acts xv.

The church of Antioch (though presbyterial, as was proved Chapter XIII., Position II.) was subordinate to the synod at Jerusalem; therefore a particular church is subordinate to higher a.s.semblies, &c.

If a synodal decree did bind them in those times, then may it bind particular churches now, and these ought even still to be subject to synods.

The consequence is undeniable, unless we hold that what the synod there imposed was unjust, or that we have now less need of those remedies than they had; nay, since the apostles (who were a.s.sisted with an extraordinary spirit of inspiration) would nevertheless in a doubtful business have synodal conventions for determining of controversies, much more ought we to do so whose gifts are far inferior to theirs; and unless it had been in their determination to leave us their example of a synodal way of church government for our pattern, they had not wanted the meeting together of so many with them for decision of the doubt, whose doctrine was infallible, and of itself, without an a.s.sembly, to be believed.

The exceptions against this pattern of church polity are of no validity, e.g.

1. This was no synod. First, that it was no synod appears, in that we read of no word of a synod. Secondly, no commissioners from Syria and Cilicia, which churches should have sent their delegates, had they been a synod, and had their decrees been to have bound in a synodal way.

Thirdly, all the believers had voices here.

2. If it were a synod, yet it is no pattern for us, in regard it was consisting of members guided by an infallible and apostolical spirit.

We answer, 1. Here is the thing synod, though not the word, which is a meeting consisting of the deputies of many single churches.

2. That Jerusalem and Antioch had their commissioners there, is evident; and by consequence many single churches had their commissioners, for there were many single congregations at Jerusalem and Antioch, as hath been proved, Chapter XIII., Position II.; that these met together, the word used, verse 6, _they came together_, evidenceth, and verse 25. For the churches of Syria and Cilicia not sending their commissioners, it follows not that because _they are not named_, therefore _they were not there_; and if _they were not there_, therefore _they ought not to have been_: but it is rather thought Syria and Cilicia had commissioners there, in regard the synodal decrees are directed to them as well as others, and the decrees bound them, which they could not do as formal Scripture; for the words, _it seemeth good to us_, and their submitting the matter to disputation, argue the contrary; therefore as synodal decrees, which inasmuch as they bound those churches, they either were present, or were obliged to be present by their commissioners.

3. To that exception, that the mult.i.tude of believers had voices there, and therefore it is not one of our synods, ver. 22--

We answer, it can nowise be proved that every particular believer had a suffrage in the a.s.sembly.

Eminent divines[116] understand by _mult.i.tude_ and _church_, the mult.i.tude and whole church of apostles and elders, who are said to be _gathered together_, verse 6, _to consider of the matter_; besides which no other mult.i.tude is said to be gathered together, while the matter was in debate; yet we shall not deny even to other members the liberty of their consent and approbation, and freedom to examine all determinations by the rule of G.o.d's word: but the ordaining and forming those decrees is here evinced to be by the apostles and elders, when as they are called _their decrees_, Acts xvi. 4,6.

3. Those only had definitive votes, who met together synodically to consider of the question; but they were only the apostles and elders, Acts xv. 6. That the epistle is sent in the name of all, is granted; because it was sent by common consent, and withal thereby was added some more weight to the message.

4. Further, if the believers of Jerusalem voted in that a.s.sembly, by what authority was it? How could they _impose a burden_ upon, and command decrees unto the churches of Syria and Cilicia, and other churches, who, according to our brethren's opinion, were not only absent in their commissioners, but independent in their power?

To the exception, that other synods may not pretend to the privileges of that, since its decrees were indited by the Holy Ghost; and therefore no pattern for our imitation--

_Ans_. The decrees of this a.s.sembly did oblige, as synodal decrees, not as apostolical and canonical Scripture: this appears several ways:

1. The apostles, in framing these canons, did proceed in a way synodal and ecclesiastical, and far different from that which they used in dictating of Scripture, and publis.h.i.+ng divine truths; their decrees were brought forth by much disputation, human disquisition, but divine oracles are published without human reasonings, from the immediate inditing of the Spirit, 2 Pet. i. 2.

2. Besides the apostles, there were here commissioned elders and other brethren, men of ordinary rank, not divinely and infallibly inspired.

The apostles in the penning of Scripture consult not with elders and brethren, (as our opposites here say they did:) our brethren make mandates of ordinary believers divine and canonical Scripture.

3. Divine writ is published only in the name of the Lord; but these in the name of man also, "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us," Acts xv. 28.

4. Canonical and apostolical writing of new Scripture shall not continue till Christ's coming, because the canon is complete, Rev. xxii. 18, 19, &c.; but thus to decree through the a.s.sistance of the Holy Ghost, who remaineth with the Church to the end, and to be directed by Scripture, shall still continue. Therefore this decreeing is not as the inditing of the Holy Scripture. The minor is clear both from Christ's promise, "Where two or three are met together," Matt. xvii. 18-20; Matt. viii.

20; as also by the Spirit's inspiring those councils of Nice of old, and Dort of late: Therefore the apostles here laid aside their apostolical extraordinary power, descending to the places of ordinary pastors, to give them examples in future ages.

To conclude, it is plain, that all the essentials in this a.s.sembly were synodal, as whether we consider: 1. The occasion of the meeting, a controversy; 2. The deputation of commissioners from particular churches, for the deciding of that controversy; or 3. The convention of those that were deputed; or 4. The discussion of the question, they being so convened; or 5. The determination of the question so discussed; or 6. The imposition of the thing so determined; or 7. The subjection to the thing so imposed.

1 Tim. i. 17

TO THE IMMORTAL G.o.d ALONE BE GLORY FOR EVER AND EVER.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: This truth, that Jesus Christ is a king, and hath a kingdom and government in his Church distinct from the kingdoms of this world, and from the civil government, hath this commendation and character above all other truths, that Christ himself suffered to the death for it, and sealed it with his blood. For it may he observed from the story of his pa.s.sion, this was the only point of his accusation, which was confessed and avouched by himself, Luke xxiii. 3; John xviii. 33, 36, 37; was most aggravated, prosecuted, and driven home by the Jews, Luke xxiii. 2; John xix. 22, 23; was prevalent with Pilate as the cause of condemning him to die, John xix. 12, 13, and was mentioned also in his superscription upon his cross, John xix. 19; and although in reference to G.o.d, and in respect of satisfaction to the Divine justice for our sins, his death was [Greek: lytron] a price of redemption; yet in reference to men who did persecute, accuse, and condemn him, his death was [Greek: martyrion] a martyr's testimony to seal such a truth.--Mr.

_G. Gillespie, in his Aaron's Rod Blossoming, &c., Epist. to the Reader_.]

[Footnote 2: _Cent. I. lib. 2, cap._ 7, _p._ 407 _ad_ 418, _Edit. Basil.

An._ 1624. De rebus ad Gubernationem Ecclesiae pertinentibus, Apostoli certos quosdam, Canones tradiderunt: quos ordine subjiciemus, &c.]