The Government of the Churches of Christ

CHAP. IV.

THere are three things may be proved out of this place. The first is that Church-power, is by Christ's Institution. Secondly, That a particular Congregation is there meant, and so we have an Institution for it. Then Thirdly, That suppose there were a Subordination of Churches, above particular Churches, that yet the particular Church should finally Excommunicate; and that the supposed Superior Orders of Presbyteries, should not take it out of their Hands.

1. The first is plain, that here is an Institution of Church-power, as is evident by comparing it with, Matth. 16. 18, 19. where it is said, I will Build my Church, and I will give thee the Keys. He speaks indefinitely. That place affordeth this Evidence, that Christ is the only Builder of his Church, (Every House is Built by someone, Heb. 3. 4.) and of all things about the House; The Builder of all things is God, (saith he) Namely Christ, who is God, as he had proved in chap. 2. having spoken this indefinitely in, Matth. 16. 18, 19. here in Matth. 18. 15, 16. he particularly determines the Seat, and Subject of this Ecclesiastical power. Here in Matth. 18. 17. Christ uttereth himself definitely, Tell the Church. The Jus proprietatis, is in Matth. 16 19. the Right of propriety is stated in the Right of Administration. The Jus Executionis, in Matth. 18. 16. He doth not give it to Saints and Officers simply, but as formed up into Bodies. Matth▪ 16. Holdeth forth, that they are to be Saints, making Confession as Peter did; there is the matter of a Church, to whom the keys is given, but Matth. 18. holdeth forth, how that these Saints are to be formed up into several Bodies or Churches, and so to execute this power. Therefore he speaks of them, as being gathered together in his Name, Mat. 18. 20. Their being Saints, or Faithful, is not enough; but Order is to be added to Faith, (as in Colos. 2. 5. which Order is held forth here, in Matth. 18. ver. 15. to 20.

2. The words of Christ here in Matth. 18. 18. Verily I say unto you, which are institutive; and again I say unto you.

1. That word Amen, or verily, Est idem quod firmum & ratum, shows the thing to be firm and ratified, as Amen doth also; but set to our Prayers. And here so it is taken, for it is with a promise of power from him, confirming and ratifying of such meetings as he speaks of. And a promise to anything that is beyond the Law of Nature, implies an Institution: For what is an Institution? But a setting up something with promise, to have a Blessing in it beyond the Efficacy of the thing.

2. Again I say unto you, saith he, ver. 19. The word again is Additionis, moreover, a Superadded Expression, as Matth. 4. 7. again it is written.

3. The words, I say, are institutive; or commanding with an Efficacy. As they are used in Luke 5. 24. I say unto thee arise. And if they be only Assertory, (as some say, they are) yet being spoken by the Son, of his own House, in his Mouth, they are Edificatory, or Institutive of it.

4. Jesus Christ giveth power to a Brother to Admonish; and that in an orderly way, in order to Excommunication. Then bids him take two or three, and then tell the Church. And it is not a matter of indulgency or liberty, or privilege, (as Cameron observeth) that his Speech importeth, for that is, when as there is a benefit to ones self by it, which if I will forego, I may; but what is spoken here is, per modum Imperij, by way of command, for it is for the gaining of a Brother. And it is in order also to a Court-Sentence, when it is brought to the Church, And the word, Established, Matth. 18. 16. that is, the Sentence shall be firm, and fixed, or ratified, confirms this to be his design and meaning.

5. To reckon a Brother as an Heathen, if obstinate after this course is taken with him, is an Act of power; which if Christ had not given, should not have absolutely necessitated it.

6. He saith, where two or three are gathered in my Name, therefore it is an Ordinance. What makes other things an Ordinance; but that they are done in the Name and Power of Christ? Is Baptizing in his Name, an Ordinance; and so gathering together in his Name also? And in his Name is all one, as in his Power and Authority, by Commission from him; and to such ends and purposes, as he hath appointed, whereof one is to throw out an offending Brother. He speaks as the Messiah, that did anew form his Church, and put a new Title upon their gathering together; calls it Assembled in my Name, as the Messiah is come in the Flesh; And whereas before he did Authorize the whole Nation, and made the Trust unto them, he Reduceth it now to a fewer company, to two or three gathered together in his Name. All Assemblies, if they be not Established by Authority, are unlawful, Acts 19. 39. Therefore these Assemblies that Christ here speaks of, must be Established by the Law of Christ.

And thus much may suffice to show in general, that let it be meant in Church-power, what ever it is, it is by Institution.

And when he saith, Go tell the Church, he imports Authority and Power, placed in that company he calls a Church, with which he invests them. The word Church in this, is an Authoritative Word; and the Authority, the Church hath, is his, and whom should she have it from, but from him? And therefore in 1 Cor. 5. 4. They are said to be gathered together in his Name, and in his Power. And by comparing this place and that together, it appears, that his intent is both institutive and directive, only with this difference, that in Matth. 18. Jesus Christ speaks by way of directing a Brother what to do, when he is offended; and upon that occasion, mentions what Authority he would give unto his Church, and Assemblies of his Saints gathered together in his Name; But in the other Text, 1 Cor. 5. Paul gives forth the direction to the Church itself, calling upon them to perform their Duty, according to the Power and Authority given them by Christ. As an Apostle, he commands them when gathered together, to deliver such an one unto Satan, and (saith he) do ye not judge them that are within? That is, have ye not power to do it from Christ, is it not a Duty lies upon you? And he Parallels it with that power himself, had according to proportion. Now the power he had all, I grant to be Institutive, for otherwise, what power could one Man assume over the Churches of Christ? And so likewise without the like Institution, what power could a Church assume to deliver a Man to Satan, which is out of their Natural and Moral power to do?

I shall now Demonstrate, that a particular Congregation is meant in this, Matth. 18. and that a particular Congregation is there Instituted, and Instituted too, as having that power of Excommunication.

Now that a particular Congregation is here meant, is proved first out of the place. The Church intended here, is a Church appointed for Worship, as well as for Discipline. Not only because that meeting to Pray. is mentioned as well as to correct Offences; but because if that be a Church which is appointed for Worship, it were strange if Christ should in his first Institution, mention that Church which is only for Discipline, and not that which is for Worship also. 2. Out of Presbyterian Principles.

And 1. Out of the place it is apparent, that a particular Congregation is meant, take Church to be interpreted by whatsoever you will, that Christ alluded to them in use.

There were many unformed Sects, that had several companies belonging to them, that were of the same Principles and Regular Order; who although they held a general Communion with the Church of the Jews, yet the manner of these Sects, was to have their Synagogues and Schools, (as Paul was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel; and we read of the School of Tyrannus.) And if any of them Transgressed the Principles of their Order and Sect, they were brought (as Grotius saith) before the whole; and so they were reproved, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is. before all. And now if this Allusion be to such a Church or Company, then the People are taken in, such as should meet and hear; and so then, Jesus Christ so fixed his Institution, as the People as well as the Officers met, for even those Sects, supposed Guides, who did bring it to the whole company of that Sect, whereto a Man belonged Secondly, if the Allusion were to this, then according to the liberty that was then given, of having Disciples, our Savior Christ had then a Church upon Earth, which he spoke actually unto. For he had by him twelve Apostles, and Disciples, who after grew unto one Hundred and twenty. And therefore according to the Law of those times, he directs them, that if any offenses were among them, after two or three Witnesses taken, they should tell it to this Church. Although Judas had sinned, yet he had not so sinned, as to have Witnesses against him, until his betraying of Christ, and then (as our Savior Christ Prophesied of him, John 15. 6.) he was cast out as a withered Branch. And then, 3. That Phrase of gathering together in my Name, is an Allusion to that custom in those times; for the manner was then, to call Disciples by the Names of those they followed, and their meetings by their Names, as Herodians were so styled, from the Name of Herod. In my Name (saith Christ) that is, such as profess me, and set up such Schools in my Name, are to observe the Rules which I set them, for their Order, and Government. Christ here expressed how his Churches should, after his Death and Ascension into Heaven, be ordered under the New Testament. As it is said, the Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles through Faith, (Gal. 3. 8.) made the promise unto Abraham: And as God foreseeing, that when the Israelites came into Canaan, they should live in Cities, and be a Kingdom or a Nation, accordingly Ordered beforehand their Government, and gave Laws aforehand, for that Nation of the Jews as such, when they should be in their own Land: So here (the Church of the New Testament, being to be multiplied and scattered, that they could not assemble in one, as that National Church of the Jews did) Christ aforehand speaks, what he would, have his Churches under the New Testament to be; and his Institutions are suited to what in his Counsels, and Providence he had Determined, should be; and he knew aforehand would fall out.

2. If Secondly, The Allusion be to the Jewish way, that was appointed by God, and had been of Old; then either the Sanhedrin is meant, or the Synagogues with the Officers there. But in the first place, the Sanhedrin is not meant; for (as Cameron saith) that is never called Ecclesia, a Church, no not by the Septuagint. But be it, that this word had been used of it, yet private offenses, (of which Christ here speaks) were never brought to the Sanhedrin; but Christ speaks this of private offenses; for it is, if he offend thee, then take two witnesses, and then tell it to the Church. Whereas there were but four Cases which belonged immediately unto the Sanhedrin, and those were Cases of Difficulty, when the private Judges in the Cities, could not end the controversy, who yet had full power to have done it. And then in the third place, Cameron's Reason, why the Sanhedrin is not meant, is good, because the Evangelists do still call it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and that now only, Christ should call Ecclesia, a Church, when it is nowhere used by the Septuagint, under that Name, would be very strange. Secondly, if his Allusion be to the Government of every Town, this makes for the way of Congregational Churches. For every Village hath their Government entire within themselves, Deut. 16. 18. in all their Gates. If it were a small Town, there were three Elders, (to which Christ here Alludeth) and in the Cities one and twenty. And from the Towns to the Cities, there was not an Appeal, but immediately to the Sanhedrin.

3. His Allusion rather is unto the Synagogues in every Town, which were the Ecclesiastical State. The Books of Moses were Read in every City, in the Synagogues, Acts 5. 21. For every City had their Synagogue, and so then in this Sense, to tell the Church, was to tell that particular Synagogue, (whereof they were Members) both to People and Rulers. Now that Christ alludeth to this appears.

1. Because that Excommunication was exercised in their Synagogues, not in the Sanhedrin. Indeed the Sanhedrin might make a Law as a Rule, according to which Men should be Excommunicated; but the Synagogues executed it, thereof it is called, Casting out of the Synagogues, John 16. 2. And Synagogues were not governed by an Association, but each Synagogue had it's Rulers, John 9. 22. and in John 16. 2. They shall cast you out of the Synagogues. And a Synagogue was a particular Assembly, such as Congregations now, Luke 7. 5. He hath Built us a Synagogue, Mar. 1. 21. Christ entered into the Synagogue and Taught. And when a Man was cast out of the Synagogue, and would come into the Temple, they used to say to him, when he would offer to enter into the Temple, (although they refused him not to enter thither, for he held Communion still with the Temple) May he who inhabits this Temple, give thee an Heart to hearken to the words of thy Brethren, that so they may receive thee.

2. In everyone of these Synagogues, there were two or three Officers. They had Rulers, Acts 13. 14, 15. Acts 18. 7, 17. And therefore Christ alluding unto this, saith, If two or three agree. They used to have three at least, that a Major Vote might cast it among the Rulers. And they used to have two or three Admonitions, afore they cast out, and thirty days between every Admonition.

3. In a manner, all other Authority was taken from them; but what they exercised in their Synagogues thus, or in the Sanhedrin, which dealt only in the great matters of Blasphemy; whereas this Authority of Synagogues, was for offenses of Brethren; and therefore it is still said, they should bring them into their Synagogues, when they questioned them, as Luke 12. 11. The Romans took away all other power from them. But here they could inflict punishments, They shall Scourge you in their Synagogues, it was the place of their punishment, so Matth. 23. 34. they whipt in them, for they had no other Courts left, Acts 26. 11. And they had Rulers, for the casting Men out from thence. And perhaps these meetings, in the Synagogues, are those which are called Synedria, in Matth. 10. 17. And in Luke 12. 11. when they bring you into the Synagogues, is mentioned first, and then, unto Magistrates and Powers, Namely, the Civil Magistrate, which in Matth. 10. 17. is rendered thus; They will deliver you up to the Council, or Sanhedrin, and they will Scourge you in their Synagogues; and then follows their being brought to the Civil Magistrate in the next verse, and shall bring you before Kings and Governors. And some Interpreters say, that the Allusion is here in Matth. 18. 17. to that Synagogue Government and Worship, Ecclesia and Synagogus, being used Promiscuously.

4. These Synagogues were Oratories, places of Prayer and Preaching, therefore Christ doth also Subjoyn here, if two meet together, to ask or to pray. It is not meant only of praying, when they Administred Discipline; for it is praying about any business, for they used to Worship and Pray in the Synagogues, as well as to cast out of the Synagogues; their Worship and their Discipline, there being of equal extent. And the word that is used in this Text, of Mat. 18. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall agree, signifies a meeting, as well as a consent, so Gen. 14. 3. And the words also that Christ useth, ver. 19. Again, or moreover I say unto you, (having spoken of Discipline afore, and now of Prayer) do hold forth the Scope of this Church, to be as well for Prayer, as for Discipline; and so to be understood of such a Synagogue, as was both for Discipline, and Worship, or Prayer. And then the Addition of the last words, ver. 20. For where two or three are gathered together in my Name, I am in the midst of them; is the general conclusion to both. So that the meaning is, that whether they meet for Worship or Prayer, (of which he had spoken, ver. 19.) or for Discipline, (of which he had spoken, ver. 17, 18.) Christ is in the midst of them. Now as our Savior Christ's allusion was unto that Synagogue, Government, and Worship, then extant, so particular Churches and Congregations under the Gospel, in answer thereunto, are expressed unto us, under the word Synagogue. They have that Name, because unto them did Christ allude; and they suited his Institution under the New Testament, Jam. 22. If one come into your Assembly, ir is in the Greek, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into your Synagogue; He speaks of Synagogues for Worship, as in Heb. 10. 25. forsake not the assembling of yourselves together. It is there 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meeting in a Synagogue, which is a particular meeting for Worship, which is therefore called the House, that God hath under the New Testament, ver. 20. whereof Christ is said to be the High Priest.

And indeed the analogy between their Synagogues and our Congregations, holdeth exceeding far. They hold two or three Officers, that were Rulers of the Synagogue; and we profess for kind, that there are three sort of Officers, Pastors, Teachers, and Elders. And the Jews in a manner for the substance, use the same expression concerning their Synagogues, they had two Wise Men to Teach, and one to Discern; and therefore Christ saith where two or three are gathered together. And to be an Heathen and a Publican and to be cast out of the Synagogue, was all one; and the word Synagogue and Ecclesia, or Church, are all one in the Septuagint; and so consequently to be cast out of the Church, corresponds to their Ejection out of the Synagogue.

And to this hath Christ framed the constitution of his Church, under the New Testament, that it should be both for Worship and Government, as the Synagogues were within themselves. And although these Assemblies are called Synagogues as for their extent; yet they are called Temples, as for their privilege. And this constitution of Christ, suited with the primitive times of the Gospel; for the Jews being Dispersed in several Nations, they had Synagogues in all Cities, and an entire Government within those Synagogues. Yea, even in Judea, in someone great City, there was but one Synagogue, as in Capernaum, Mar. 1. 21. Thus at Antioch too, the Jews had a Synagogue, Acts 13. 14, 15. as also at Thessolanica, Acts 17. 1. and at Corinth, Acts 18. 4. where the Greeks and the Jews were met in one. Now the Christians being to be called out of all places; and being Disperst, as these Jews were in all Nations, Christ suited a Government to these conditions of the Synagogue-Government, and answerably fixed his Institution of Churches, in imitation of the Jews Disperst, who had Synagogues amongst all the Gentiles, in their several Cities. Christ chose not the legal way of a National Church, or of a Sanhedrin, or of going up to one Temple, for a whole Nation, but he fixed on Synagogues, as fitting his turn best; for he chose Churches out of Nations; and so did not hold to one National Church of the Jews; and therefore we read of Churches in Judea itself, and not Church, Gal. 1. 22.

And to strengthen this assertion, it may be observed, that our Savior Christ did not take nor follow the Institution of the Old Testament, but the Appendixes of it, as for Example; In the Lord's Supper he Instituted the Bread and Wine, answerably to the Bread and Wine which were appendixes of the Passover, and he refuseth the Paschal Lamb, and chooseth the Bread and Wine. So likewise as the Jews used to Baptize Proselytes: So he refuseth Circumcision, and takes that Baptism. Thus also as the Synagogues were, as it were Chapels of ease to the Great Church, the Temple, where Moral Worship only was: he lets the Stately Temple-Worship go, and the glory of a National Government, and chooseth this mean way of a Synagogue, but yet endows it with the privilege of a Temple; that so whereas, before God was Worshipped in the Mount, and in the Temple, he is now Worshipped as much, and as truly, and as spiritually everywhere, and in every Synagogue having the same privilege. And indeed Christ's way in the Ordinances and Institutions of the Gospel was to choose that which in comparison, was before to the Jews, and to the World, foolishness; thus he choose the foolishness of Preaching, and instead of taking the High Priests and Rulers, he takes Fishermen, &c.

4. But yet though Christ might speak in the Language of the Old Testament, it is not necessary that his meaning should be, that the Churches in the New Testament, should be formed according as the Old were; but the contrary. Our Savior Christ had said before in Matth. 16. 18. I will build my Church; and as he speaks of New Keys that are to be given, so by that he prepares their minds to a persuasion, that he would have a New Church Distinct from the former. And then afterward, here in Matth. 18. 17. he tells them more distinctly, that they should tell the Church. And if it be said, that they understand not what he meant by the word Church, or that they could not apprehend, that he meant by it a particular Congregation; and that they knew not too, what he meant by Keys, for certainly they knew not the particular Ordinances, which he intended under that general expression, The Keys of Heaven; and so neither knew they what this New Church, in Matth. 18. (to which they were to tell) might import? The answer is plain, that the Holy Ghost was to come on them, to tell them afterwards. And indeed our Savior Christ spake of many things, which they then understood not, as of the Resurrection, Mat. 16. 21. I will destroy this Temple, and Build it in three Days; and also, that his Kingdom was not of this World, Jer. 18. 26. So when he washed his Disciples Feet, they knew not then the meaning of it; but he saith, he would send them the Comforter, which should tell them all things, John 14. 16. and chap. 16. 30. But yet it was necessary, that Christ should deliver the main Foundations of all those Truths, which the Holy Ghost afterwards should enlighten them in. Moses delivered many things in the Wilderness, concerning the Government of the Church of the Jews, which they could not so well understand, till they came into the Land of Canaan, and though they knew not the place that God would choose; yet many of the Laws that Moses gave, depended upon it. But

2. Our Savior Christ had according to the liberty that then was given, unto all several Sects, (though we call not his such) built a Church, he had a little Flock, as he calls it: And as he began to Institute Baptism, and began to Institute the Lord's Supper afore he died, so to Institute this Church, he began it as other Ordinances afore his Death, and he did cast Judas out of it. And

3. The manner is oftentimes to speak in the Language of the Old Testament, when the same thing is not meant. As when Christ speaks of the Person offending, Matth. 5. 22. He expresseth the Degrees of punishment to several sins, under the Names of three Courts amongst the Jews, and yet he meaneth Spiritual Degrees of punishment. Thus too, in 1 Cor. 9. 13. The whole service of the Sanctuary is called the Altar, (He that serveth at the Altar, must live of the Altar) yet there is no such Altar erected amongst us, as was amongst the Jews. And the Prophets also prophesying of the times of the Gospel, spake of our Ordinances, under the notion of the Old Testament, yet meant other Ordinances, anew to be Instituted; so in Isa. 66. 23. They shall go from one new Moon, unto another. Though under the Gospel, we have not Monthly Feasts and Meetings, as they had; yet the Meetings that we have, are expressed thereby. And so now here Christ speaks of a Church, that as the Jews had a Church so likewise under the New Testament, there should be a Church, to which Offences should be brought; but that Officers alone should be that Church, (supposing that the Ruling Officers, are called the Church in the Old Testament) it followeth not. For the word Presbytery, which was given to the Eldership of the Great Sanhedrin, of the whole Nation of the Jews; is now given to the Presbytery of every Congregation. So as though he useth the same word to express the Institution of the New Churches of the Gospel by, yet it follows not, that it is of the same kind with the Old, or that it runneth in the same way. But

4. We are rather to Interpret it by what kind of Churches we read afterwards, that the Apostles Erected. As Moses was Interpreted by the Prophets, so is Christ's mind in this to be known by his Apostles; for the Spirit came on them, and did Reveal unto them Christ's Mind and Intention. The Trial therefore will lie upon this, what Bodies, and consisting of whom, are called a Church in the Acts of the Apostles, and in their Epistles.

What that Church is, upon which the Institution of Christ falleth, is not to be argued merely out of the Analogy of the Old Testament, for that will not set up an Institution in the New. But when we have found out what manner of Church in the New Testament, Jesus Christ hath Instituted, we are then to consider the Analogy of that Form thereunto, so far forth, as Christ hath applied it.

Now both in the Phrase of the New Testament, Assemblies consisting of Elders and People, and of the Saints, are called Churches, and in the words also of, Matt. 18. 20. where two or three are gathered together in my Name, Christ tells us his meaning of a Church. And unto this Church say we, doth the Analogy of all the Church under the Old Testament hold, if you take the due proportion; and as the excellent stories and allusions in the Old Testament, are brought into the New, to set forth things that come under the New, in the Book of the Revelation, in their several proportions, (therefore speaking of Rome, he calleth it Spiritual Sodom, and Egypt and Babylon, &c.) so we find that all the Types of the Old Testament, are applied unto these Assemblies. Thus as to the Temple, which was the Seat of Worship, and the Sacrifices there; Congregational Assemblies, hath carried away the analogy of them by Christ's Institution; for they only are the fixed public Seats of Worship, where Spiritual Sacrifices are offered. In Congregations the living Stones are built up together, to offer up living Sacrifices acceptable unto God, as in 2 Pet. 2. 5. Eph. 2. 22. And unto these Assemblies, are the same promises made, that were made to the whole Nation of the Jews, when they were a Church encamped in the Wilderness, upon all their Assemblies, shall be a Cloud, and a Pillar of Fire, Prophecying of the Gospel, saith the Prophet Isa. Isa. 4. 5. And all the privileges which that Nation had, as a Church, (take them in a Spiritual Respect) hath every Congregation of Saints now. This therefore is called the House of God, over which Christ is an High Priest, Heb. 10. which in ver. 25. he Interprets to be the assembling of themselves together; In the compass of such an Assembly, also hath Jesus Christ contracted Appeals sufficient, for first (says he) tell him of his Fault thyself, then take two or three, and then go tell the Church; and then he is bound in Heaven, as the Supreamest Judicature, Matth. 18. 15, to 19. And God hath so advanced the State of the New Testament, above that of the Old; that as the Glory of the Second Temple, exceeded the First; so doth the Glory of the Saints now in these Assemblies, excel all former. Every Believer is a Priest now; yea, the Allusion in the company of Saints assembled for Worship, in Rev. 4. is unto the Twenty four Priests that were over the Twenty four Companies of Priests. And the Officers now are, as the four Beasts in Ezekiel, Rev. 4. 8. and are as Angels, rather than Priests, called therefore the Angels of the Churches, Rev: 1. 20. The Saints all are a Royal Nation; and the Name of the City of God, is written upon every Assembly. The great Presbytery or Sanhedrin of the People, is the Presbytery of every Congregation. Every Church is a City unto God, it is the City of the Living God; it is the Holy City, and hath a Government within itself, of Elders within its own Gates. Yea, here is the Synagogue-Government also, unto which the Allusion also is; and these Assemblies are so called, as I proved in the foregoing Chapter. Yea, and as God chooseth the mean things of the World under the Gospel, so he chose that Synagogue Frame; because the Worship therein was wholly Spiritual and Moral; it was not the Seat of Ceremonial Worship, as was the Temple. The Government of the Synagogues was natural, to cast any Person out of themselves, as all Bodies have by the Law of Nature, with a punishment suitable annexed, viz. to keep such from the esteem of Worshippers; and that they should be accounted as Heathens and Publicans. Thus Christ hath chosen a way more Spiritual, more Natural, suitablable to the Communion of Saints, that hath less Pomp and Glory in it. He hath taken this Bethlehem, that was the least, the lowest of the Governments amongst them; and hath made it the greatest, and endowed it with the privileges of all the rest. It hath both National and Temple privileges, and Sanhedrin privileges also, it hath the Spirituality of them all. There they have the Lord's Supper, instead of the Passover; There they have the Altar, 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17, &c. what glorious things are spoken of, in Jer. 3. 14, 15, 16. You shall say no more, the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, neither shall it come to mind, &c. I will give you Pastors, according to mine own Heart, which shall feed you with Knowledge and Understanding; and I will take you, one of a City, and two of a Tribe, call them out, and bring them to Zion. That Zion, is where the Pastors are Teaching, therefore meant of Congregations. He doth not take Nations, but Select out of Nations, out of Cities and Tribes, Saints here and there; and formeth them up into Congregations, because they have Pastors that feed them; and in such Congregations, is the feeding of the Pastors with Knowledge and Understanding. And this succeedeth the Ark of the Covenant, having the privileges thereof. It is a Prophecy, of the calling of the Jews under the Gospel.

And yet if that Judicial Government, (as we may so call it) that was in Jury, were the Pattern, of all Church-Government future, although it would indeed then, by the analogy of it, erect a National Assembly, over the lesser Churches; yet even that would conduce to the Establishment of more, to the Congregational way we contend for; than our Brethren will yield them, and will militate against the Presbyterian Pattern, as it is practiced, and that in these particulars. For

1. First, Each Town, as well as each City, had all Government within their Gates, as much as Cities; and the Elders in the Towns, were not to Appeal to the Elders in the Cities; but immediately to the National Assembly. In Ezra 10. 14. there were the Rulers of all the Congregation, (which was all the whole Nation) mentioned, and the Elders of every City, and Judges thereof; City according to the Hebrews, was every little Town. Thus Moses is said to be read in every City in the Synagogues, that is, in every Town; for they had Synagogues in Villages, Acts 15. 21. In Deut. 16. 18. (saith he) Judges and Officers shall thou make thee in all thy Gates, that is, in every Town; and therefore the Rabbins do say, that if it were a big City, where there were one Hundred and twenty Families in it, there were twenty three Sat in the Gate, if it were less, then but three; for there was no Court consisled of less.

2. Secondly, Those Towns were not Ruled by a Combination, but had a Government entire within themselves, unless things were too hard for them.

3. Thirdly, The Appeals unto the Sanhedrim, was only for the Decision of Law-Causes, in a Doctrinal way, (as if that the Judges of Westminster-Hall, should inquire of the Parliament, for the meaning of a Stature; and were bound to pronounce Sentence, according to their Interpretation of the Law) though still the Judgment of the matter of Fact, and to pronounce the Sentence itself, was to be done by Authority and Jurisdiction of each Town, like as we also contend, that all Censures should be by particular Congregations.

Obj. If so, then their Government was not Uniform.

Ans. Yes, only in lesser proportions in the smaller Towns, they had three Rulers, and in their Cities, and greater Towns twenty three. The Law of God not Determining, how many Elders should make up the Judicature, either in the one, or in the other. As also in Congregations, God hath not determined how many, but according to their proportion and necessity, hath left a liberty of choosing a greater, or lesser number.

CHAP. V.

IF by Church, in Matth. 18. 17. were meant the Officers, yet still the Officers of a particular Church, for there is a Presbytery in every Church. And the mention of two or three, doth rather carry it to that meaning. So that if by Church, should be meant the Elders, yet question will return what Elders, in relation to what Church? To a particular Church say we. Thus when it is said, in Jam. 5. 14. Send for the Elders of the Church, it could not be the Elders of a Presbyterian Church. Our Presbyterian Brethren acknowledge, that particular Congregations are Churches; they are the first of the Name in this Institution, and are first intended, and are therefore called Ecclesiae primae, the first Churches, even by Presbyterians themselves. We are sure also, that particular Churches, have the Name of a whole Church. 1 Cor. 14. 23. If the whole Church meet in one. We are sure too, that the first Churches in all places, were but particular Churches, even in Jerusalem itself. The Apostles did not forbear making a particular in any place, they did not stay till Christian's Church were multiplied, so as to make many Churches in one place. Now such a particular Church before Churches ever multiplied, had a Government within itself, by virtue of Matth. 18. 17. And if so, if here be an Institution, it falleth upon it; and it exercises its Government as a Church, by virtue of its Charter.

1. That a particular Church is meant, in Matth. 18. is evident, because it is such a Church that is spoke of, whereof a Man is a Brother; and now he is a Brother first, and more peculiarly of a particular Congregation; that's the Reason, why you Excommunicate him out of the particular Church, when out of none of all the rest. And when you bring the matter at last to an issue, you tell that Church of it, more than any of the rest; for that Congregation being a Church by the Order of Christ, it is to be brought unto that Church first, which the offending Person hath the relation of a Brother unto. Now see who are in the right, our Presbyterian Brethren, or we; they think themselves bound to tell the Church, because he is a Brother of it, but not at first; whereas Christ saith, Tell this Church first, and if he will not hear what that Church says, let him be an Heathen.

2. The method that Christ here prescribeth, evidently argueth it to be a particular Church; for 1. Saith he, do thyself deal with him. 2. Take two or three Witnesses; 3. Tell the Church; This must needs be that particular Church, that is the next Body, for that particular Church, is a Church, and it is his Church; and it is a Body in ascent next to the two or three Witnesses; and if there be any such thing as a Church Classical, that is a degree beyond it.

3. All that are for Presbyterial Government, do by virtue of this place, in Matth. 18. tell it to the Congregational Elders, the Presbytery. And so then, that the particular Congregation is meant in this, Matth. 18. both their Practices and Principles do import. For they argue from this place, by way of Analogy. They argue from hence, the power of many Churches over any Church; because, look what power the first Church hath over a Brother, that many Churches hath over a Church: And therefore according to their own Concessions, this first Church is first meant as the measure of the other; and therefore what is said here in Matth: 18. must be first true of the particular Congregation. For they make a Combination of Churches; for to deal with offending or disagreeing Churches, upon this ground, that a particular Church is that, which is here appointed to deal with a Brother. If then the Argument doth run by way of Analogy; then the power of their greater Churches, is fetched from the power that this particular Church hath. And they argue, that therefore they have an entire power over many Churches, because that this hath an entire power over its own Members; and that what power is in a particular Church is in the whole Body of Churches jointly: And therefore by the Presbyterial Concessions and Principles, the Institution must first fall upon this Church Congregational. For if any Man would argue from what power a Corporation hath over its Members, that the like power many Corporations may have over that Corporation, it would imply, that that Corporation hath an entire power over its own Members; and look how much of the entireness of the power, you take away from the particular Corporation, over its Members; so much you weaken the Argument and Analogy, for the power of many.

In a word, all the Arguments of all sides, of Papists, that would have the Pope to be the Church; of the Episcopal party that would have the Bishops to be the Church, all argue from the word Church. And they say, that a Diocesan hath power in a Diocese, because a whole Diocese may be one Church; and so, many Elders may make up a Presbytery, over many Congregations; because many Congregations make one Church. So as all these, and the Presbyterian Government itself, can prove their claim only, as they can make it out, that they are a Church. Now particular Congregations do, and may put first in for it, that they are Churches; therefore as a Church, they must have a power over their own Members, as the other have over Churches, according to their own Principles.

4. The first and primary Institution, must fall upon particular Congregations, as the Seats or Bounds of the first power, whether the Institution be supposed to fall upon them as Churches, or as a Presbytery. If it falls on them as Churches, the greater Churches consisting of many Congregations are but Ortae, or sprung of this: If it falls on them as a Presbytery, they are but Compounds, and Decompounds. The Native and first Genuine Church, is the Congregational, the other are but Representative Churches; when as this is more real.

5. As the Institution of a Congregational Church, in Matth. 18. most suits with Christ's Aim and Design, the Communion of Saints; so it most agrees too with that promise of his Presence, ver. 20. what kind of Assembly is most likely to be pitched upon by Christ, to be made his Court on Earth, but that wherein he is Worshipped; and where there is the personal Presence of his Saints, for whose sake he is present with the Officers of a Church; and not as they are Officers abstracted from the Church or Meeting, without it. And indeed it was for the Honor of the Saints, and was becoming of their State under the Gospel; that not Elders alone, but that Saints gathered together with the Elders, should be those fixed Bodies to which the power should be given; for so the Style runneth, the Churches of the Saints, 1 Cor. 14. 33. And what is the Church, without the presence of Christ? And what is more of a Church, than that to which more of the promise of the presence of Christ is made: Now to the Saints, and also to the Elders, as joined and united in Bodies with Saints, is the promise made. Those promises, I will walk among you, &c. 1 Cor. 6. 16. Ezek. 37. 26, 37. is made to the Bodies of Saints. So then if we take the State of the Saints under the New Testament, (where everyone comparatively, is said more to know the Lord comparatively, unto those of the Old) it is answerably in a way of comparison, more suitable to Reason; that if the Government should be placed upon Bodies formed up, the Institution should fall upon such Bodies, as have both Saints and Elders. And if there were no other reason, yet this might be pleaded for it; that the Officers have, though nor formal, power from the People as Officers, yet a virtual power, concurrence and assistance (through the promise of Christ's presence with them) as such from the presence of the Saints, in respect of the execution of their Office, and the blessing thereof, (which they do not carry about them alone) especially in such Acts, wherein they do things as for the People, and which do concern them, as Acts of Jurisdiction do. Although as Elders Dedicated unto Christ, they might have a Blessing in Preaching unto them, and that as Elders, or in Prayer, or the like; yet in all Ministerial Acts of Jurisdiction, that belong to a Church as a Corporation, they have a virtual assistance from the concurrence of the People with them, doing all this in their presence. Thus the Elders among the Jews, besides the Blessing of their Calling, as being Elders, and united into a Body over that Nation, in a Sanhedrin or Council, had also a Blessing from the place where they should meet, the place that God should choose, as also their Sacrifices had: And should the same Sanhedrin have met out of that place, they had not had that Assistance, neither could the Acts have been counted Acts of Jurisdiction. This Principle the Papists themselves seem to acknowledge, who make the Assistance that the Pope hath, when he speaks infallibly as a Pope, to be not alone, but in the Cathedrâ, in the Chair; and so in Council with the Cardinals: And so in a State or Kingdom, though the ultimate concluding and ratifying of Laws, doth lie in the King; yet he doth not do it alone, but having all other Estates of Nobles and Commons present, or else what he doth, is not legal nor binding. Now so under the New Testament, though all Church-power should be supposed to be formally in the Elders; yet not as abstracted from the presence of the Saints, which is instead of the place that God then chose among the Jews, in which they had an especial Blessing and Assistance. Nay, he hath now chose a better Temple for Elders to exercise their Jurisdiction in, Temples made of living Stones, that is, Churches consisting of Saints, from the concurrence of whose Spirits, Prayers and Applications, the Acts done by the Elders in a Church, do receive their strength. So Jesus Christ is in the midst of the Elders; because his promise is to be in the midst of the Saints, their Spirits join and concur in the Act, and so there is an Efficacy runneth along therewith. And this Honor at least, was meet to be given by Christ, to his Saints under the New Testament. For what though' the Elders be as the Loadstone; yet as the Virtue and Efficacy of the Loadstone, depends upon its being set in Steel, so the virtual Blessing of the Elder's Actions, in matters of Jurisdiction, (which are the highest Acts of Church-Government) depends upon their being in the midst of Saints, that concur with them. And therefore in Matth. 18. 17. it is said, Tell the Church, that is, the Elders joining with, and in presence of the People. Although the Eye is that Member that doth see for the Body; yet it hath the Virtual Efficacy that enableth it to see, from its being placed in the Body; and as the Eye cannot see out of the Body, nor can one Body, being in another Body's Eye to see withal; so cannot this power of the Elders, be carried out of its Seat, nor a Foreign power be brought in. And therefore when the Apostle says, in 1 Cor. 5. 4. When ye are gathered together with the power of the Lord Jesus, and so in 2 Cor. 6. 16. I will walk among you, and in Mat. 28. 20. when Christ promised I will be with you, to the end of the World, he speaks not only of Ministers, and the Successors of the Apostles; but of those also that believe through their word, for so in John 17. 20. he interprets it; and likewise in John 15. 16. your Fruit shall remain, and so be both with Ministers and Saints, as Successors of the Apostles; this being the Honor of the Apostles, not only to have Ministers to Succeed them, but Churches of Believers also, with whom Christ is. And therefore in the Revelation, where Jesus Christ's presence in the Church of the New Testament, is presented with Allusion to that of the Old, chap. 4. although the vision is of the Church Universal materially considered; yet formally the Representation of it is made, as it is the Seat of public Worship; and therefore represented under the Idea, of a Congregational Assembly, as appeareth, (as Mr. Brightman and Parker, and others have observed) in that it is set forth in order to Acts of public Worship, performed therein. Thus there is the Laver to wash in, as in the Temple there was, before they Worshipped; unto which the Apostle makes the Allusion, for meeting in the House of God for Worship, Heb. 10. 21, 22, & 25. verses compared; Let us draw near with a pure Heart, and Bodies washed, which afterward (ver. 25.) he expounds to be Assembling themselves together. And in that, Rev. 4. the four Beasts, who are the Leaders and the Chorus for Worship, when they fa • l down, and cast down their Crowns, the Elders do so too. Now those Assemblies, in which Jesus Christ hath thus set his Throne and Temple, they consist of Elders and Beasts, having Eyes, &c. that is, Saints and Officers; for such is the Advancement of the Saints, now in comparison of those under the Old Testament, that they themselves are called the Elders; and the four living wights, are those four sorts of Officers of Congregations. The thing we cite it for, is this; that the Throne and Presence of Christ, is with the Beasts, as joined with the twenty four Elders, and in Assemblies made up of both. And therefore the Officers are said to be set in the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 28. and so to work still, as set in the Church, but they are nowhere called the Church itself.

Yea, and though the Apostles were made immediately by Christ, without a relation to any special or particular Church; and in order principally unto gathering and rearing up Churches, yet the choice of one Apostle was made in a Congregational Church, consisting of Angels and People, Acts 1. And Paul and Barnabas, though' made Apostles immediately by Christ; yet received their Ordination in such a particular Church, whilst the Elders were Ministring unto the Lord, in the Church of Antioch, Acts 13. Yea, and they themselves ordinarily, did not exercise any Acts of Jurisdiction, either of Ordination, or Excommunication, but as still present in a particular Church. They did not set up a Court, unto which Churches were to come; but they rather came themselves, and visited Churches, ordained Elders in every Church with Fasting and Prayer in the Churches; and ordinarily they Excommunicated not, (though' they might give general Directions) but in a Church. And however, if there might be Cases wherein the Apostles did Excommunicate alone; yet they were very extraordinary, and no way to be imitated, as their Miracles are not. They did not Excommunicate when absent, 2 Cor. 13. 10. Shall I come with a Rod? And when I come, I shall bewail some of you, &c. As therefore the Apostles did not set up a Court out of particular Presbyteries, so Presbyteries are not to set up a Court out of particular Churches. Yea, in that only instance of a Synod, which we have in Acts 15. the Transactions of the Apostles and Elders were in, and with that Church of Jerusalem, where the Brethren also were present. Thus hath God Honoured the Saints of the New Testament, that the promise of the presence of Christ, should be made to them, when gathered together with their Officers; and that he will be with the Officers even as such, for the Peoples sake. You know, (saith the Apostle to the Thessalonians) what manner of Men we were among you, for your sakes, 1 Thess. 1. 5. They have not only a Ministerial power for them as they are in; but they have a Ministerial power through them, as having it for their sakes, and by virtue of their Communion, God's promise being to be in the midst of them, by virtue of their presence. So as although they have not a power derived to them, ab Ecclesiâ, as from the Church; yet they have it derived to them in Ecclesia, in the Church, and also instrumentally, ab Ecclesiâ. And although they Act not the power that is in the Church in their stead, and for their ease, doing such Acts, as otherwise the Church should, (as those of the Separation have held) yet the Assistance of the Exccution of their power, is virtually in the Church, the promise being made to them as a Church. Neither are they the Church Representative, having a power absent, and abstracted from the People, as is the Nature of all Representations, (for nothing is Represented, that is present) but the Church itself is the Sedes, the Virtual Seat, in which this power is exercised, as the Body is of the actions of the principal Members; the Spirit, and Strength, and Vigour of the whole Body, concurring and assisting the Acts of all such Members: And therefore Excommunication, is in the Name of Christ; that is, as some say, in vocato nomine, or of Christ called upon; and so as having the Prayers of the People of God to assist, to put force and efficacy into it. And so Ordination is done with Fasting and Prayer; and the Prayers of the Saints, the least Saints have as much influence unto the virtual assistance of the Officers in their Acts before them, as the Prayers of the Elders themselves; and therefore the Presbyterial acts that are abstracted thus from the People, have not that efficacy in them as when the Body of Saints and Elders are join'd together. So as the Institution falleth not only upon Elders, but upon Elders and People as a Body formed up of both, not only because all acts of Worship and Jurisdiction, are for the Edification of the Saints as well as of the Elders: But it is because that Jesus Christ will have the assistance of their Spirits and of their Prayers, &c. which have as much efficacy in them to prevail with him for a Blessing, as those of the Elders had.

And in this respect the keys (as was said before) are given unto Peter both as a Saint and as a Minister, as both respects considered did meet in him, when the keys were given to him, so that the words to their, include both. So that at least the keys are so given to the Ministers, as to be exercised before, and in the presence of the Saints, having an assistance from the concurrence of their Spirits and Desires. The Papists would have the keys given to Peter alone, simply and absolutely, only they say indeed for the Church, but they do not make the Church the subject to which the keys are given. Others do make the Church the first subject to whom the keys are given, and not only for whom, but then they make the Elders the Representative Church, and so that they are given to Elders only to be exercised instead of the Church. But we say they are given so to the Church, as that if they should not be the formal subject of parted power together with the Elders, yet they are the virtual subject in which the Elders should exercise them. And hence it is that the denomination of Church is from the Saints, and not given to the Officers anywhere in the New Testament. The Officers are said to be set in the Church, but they are not called the Church. For a Church of Christ must needs be a Body to Christ, that still is the periphrasis of a Church. Now as in 1 Cor. 12. 12. A Body is not one Member, but many, (and from thence it is rightly argued, that a Bishop is not the Church for he is but one) so nor is a Presbytery of Elders although many the Body for they bear not the immediate relation of a Body to Christ himself, but are only the representation of his Body. And as Members of all sorts do make a natural body, not only Members that are the Principal and Rule the Body, but also those that are ruled and ordered. So is it here.

And when Christ in Mat. 18. saith, Tell the Church, having first told the party alone himself, then brought a Brother or two; as the sin of the offending party doth by this increase, and grow more heinous, so the number of those by whom he is now to be rebuked that are called the Church, must be supposed to increase also, and therefore not two or three Elders of a Congregation alone. This last is the last and the highest remedy, and therefore the publicness must not lie only in respect that they are public Persons, Officers, for if it be told privately only in a Consistory, it is as private as if it were told to two or three of the Brethren before, or it may so be, that the same Elders had been taken to be the Brethren that should admonish him. By the word Church therefore, is meant a greater company, and therefore not the Elders alone, but the Elders before the Church, or rather the Elders in the Church, with whom the Church is to join in the Admonitions and Rebukes of him.

If it be said that by making the People thus the Church rather than the Elders, it argues that more Authority is given to the People than the Elders in the Church. The answer is, That that follows not; it only follows that there is more efficacy and virtue by reason of the Church, and the presence of the Elders in the Church, although the Authority should lie in the Elders themselves, as the virtue by which the Eye seeth, lieth in the Body subjectively and virtually more, though the Eye alone is the Instrument of seeing.

We argue also for this Congregational Institution to have been rather appointed than the other, because that the bounds of this are certain, and are natural. God (as Baines saith) did never set a Church but he did set certain bounds of it; As when he made the Jewish Church a Nation, he set the bounds of it to be that of the Nation. Bellarmine argueth that therefore Bishops are not Divino Jure of Divine Right, because God did not make Dioceses, and did not set them out by Lot as he did that of the Tribes. And it was therefore a great contention among Bishops of old in those times of the fourth and fifth Century, to whose jurisdiction such and such Villages or Towns should belong. In a word, the Church is God's House, and God hath not left it unto man to frame his building to what proportion he pleaseth. Christ's Body instituted (which is resembled unto the natural body throughout the Epistles) is to have set limits of it, a maximum quod sic. and if it have all the parts, that can have communion natural in the same common acts of Nature together, though it be never so small, it is a perfect body; so as it hath a prescription, and bounds are set it both for parts, and a Maximum quod sic for degrees of Stature. Now we have natural and set bounds for all instituted Churches. in this way of Congregational Churches.

1. The same Assembly that doth meet for Worship, is to meet for Discipline, so that Discipline and Worship is of equal extent, as touching the Seat of it. Now the public Worship is upheld by no other Society, in a constant way, nor can be, but by Congregations, as many as can meet to edify in one place. And therefore by preserving of fixed Congregations God hath always preserved the Essentials of a Ministerial Church, that although it suffered additionals of corruption in Power, and of Tyranny in Popish Bishops and Popes and the like over them, yet still because the Institution of a Church fell upon Congregations, there were true Ministerial Churches, and a true Baptism and the like in all Ages.

2. The Congregational Government, hath its bounds natural from a sufficiency of Elders, for the sorts and kinds of them; There is no sort appointed on purpose or alone for Presbytrial Government, as for Episcopal it was pretended there was, but even all the sorts that are, the seats of them are Congregational, and where all are, there is a sufficiency of Eldership, as we shall after show. A Congregational Church had Elders of all sorts appointed to it, as for what belongeth to Worship, Pastors and Teachers, and as for what belongeth to Men's Lives; ruling Elders, and there is no more Elders but of these sorts in the greatest Presbyteries over many Congregations. Yea the Presbyteries themselves of many Congregations, must come furnished of all these sorts out, of their having all these sorts in their particular Congregations: And our Presbyteries cannot say, this Church shall have a Pastor, and this Church shall have a Teacher, and this Church shall have a ruling Elder, and so we will make up a Presbytery out of all these; but every Church is the seat de jure, by Divine Right, of all these, and every Church hath need of all these, and Christ hath appointed these to Congregations first.

3. We can derive the Limits of Congregational Churches from the time that is Instituted for Worship, which is the Lord's Day, which God hath fixed, and on which Day no other Churches meet, and so there is no set time for the exercise of a Presbyterial Church. It is Baines his argument against the Bishops that God did appoint for all Church-Meetings under the Law a time. And in Tertullian 's time we read that the Censures of Excommunication were executed upon the Lord's Day, and Admonition and the like, though things might be prepared upon the Week Days. And the Apostle's words in 1 Cor. 5. That they shall cast him out when they are met together, (he doth not bid them meet together on purpose) seems to incline to it. We know of no time that God hath appointed for all Ordinances (whereof this is one) in a set way as the fixed season of them, but only this Lord's Day, and upon this Day Presbyterial Churches cannot meet for Government.

4. That the duties which lie upon the relation of Elders to Preach and to Rule, should all be of the same extent (for the subject of them over which they are exercised) all this falleth in naturally with the Institution of Congregations, and Elders over them, and the relation of Elders to them. Men should not govern ordinarily beyond their Preaching. This is evident from what the New Testament holds forth concerning Elders in their relations to their Flocks committed to them, the Exhortations and Charges to them of duties towards those Flocks founded upon that relation: As also the Duties of their Flocks to them: Which is like to be the truest measure, to find out the extent of their power, and bounds of their Flocks; whether for the ordinary way it be limited to one Congregation, or many. For those Exhortations must needs be supposed suited to the boundaries of Churches, and to that Constitution and Extent of Relation, wherein the Elders of these Primitive Times, were placed over them. And like as in the question about Polygamy, what the Scripture hath said, of the Duties of Man and Wife; which were given and suited to the Extent of that Relation, as God from the beginning bounded it, manifestly evinceth, that one Man cannot have many Wives, but one; so it may be argued as to the point in hand.

We have hitherto taken this for an undoubted Maxim, that as a Mutual Relation, is the Fountain of all power, whether Oeconomical, Civil, or Ecclesiastical; so the extent of all power is commensurable, with the extent of that Relation. A Master, as a Master, hath power but over such Servants, of whom he may say, I am your Master; and they of him, we are your Servants; for what hath any Man to do to judge another Man's Servant? As the Apostle speaks, Rom. 14. 4. And so correspondently here, those Elders that assume to be over either one, or many Congregations, must have as the Office of Elders, so the Relation of Elders unto that one, or those many Congregations, that they may be able to say, we are your Elders, and you all our Church; which two are in Scripture expression, the Relate and Correlate, as King and Kingdom, Magistrates and Common-wealth. All which falls in naturally, for the set bounds of a Church, to be those of Congregations. Whereas the bounds, that the Presbyterial way goeth by, in all their Subordinations, are uncertain. You have not a certainty of number of Officers, some particular Congregations, have as many Officers, as some Classes have had. Neither is it essential to that Government, that there should be many Congregations; for they acknowledge that it may so fall out, that there may be but one Congregation, that may have all the Government in it, in cases of necessity. But it is essential to upholding Worship in all the parts of it, that there be a fixed Congregational Church:

And to make the Jurisdiction of Cities, to be the pattern of Ecclesiastical Government, cannot be a certain Rule. For London, or Greater Cities, (as suppose Grand Cairo was converted) would vastly exceed the lesser; and so the Rule would fall in Disproportion, if you come in the Country Towns and Villages. And indeed what Reason can be given, that God should proportion an Ecclesiastical Government to the boundaries of the Civil? What! Because the Cities under the Roman Empire, had a Jurisdiction in them, and they over their Suburbs, must their Churches have so too? Hath God thus conformed his Church, unto the Government of this World? And besides all States, have not the like Government, neither was the Government of all Countries, a City-Government; and so there could be no certain Rule for Church-Government, if it were to be chalked out by these measures.

Neither is the Government of Nations, a certain Rule for that of the Church, for the Jews after that rate, when they were two Nations, should have been but one Church. And indeed, to Form the Institution of a Church, to that boundary, had been to do it from what is accidental; for that they should grow up to a Nation, is accidental. God did find the Jews a Nation entire, entered into a Covenant with them, and so made them a National Church. And if God had designed a National Church under the New Testament, he would have given Laws aforehand, as he did for the Jews, when they should come into Cities; so that although they were now in the Wilderness, and they were not to come into Cities, till they came into Canaan many years after; yet he giveth a Law, for that condition of their being a Nation, and living in Cities.

CHAP. VI.

NOW for the proof of all, or most of the particulars, of which I have Discoursed in the preceding Chapters, I shall bring as the conclusion of all the Instances of the Church of Corinth; which is the greatest and surest Pattern, and the most complete of all other. It is the greatest Pattern, because it answers to the Institution, in Matth. 18. (as in the Directions given to that Church in the, 1 Cor. 5. and the Phrases, that about Excommunication, are put into it, being compared with that in Matth. 18. doth appear) As there, Christ in the promise that he makes to the Church, when it bindeth sin, useth that Phrase; Where two or three are joined together, I am in the midst of them; Mat. 18. 20. So here likewise, in 1 Cor. 5. 4. the Apostles Direction runs in the same Phrase, when you are gathered together: As there Christ saith, gather together in my Name, so here the Apostle saith, when ye are gathered together in my Name, and with the power of the Lord Jesus. As Christ there in his promise, he saith, I will be in the midst of you, when ye are so gathered; so here speaking of their gathering together, and throwing him out of the Congregation, the Apostle useth the same Phrase, Take him from the midst of you: As thereupon his being cast out, he is to be reckoned as an Heathen and a Publican, with whom the Jews would not eat; so here, if a Brother be thus, they are not to accompany with him, no, not to eat with him. It is the surest Instance of the ordinary power left in a Church, because it was a Church that was formed up, in which there was that ordinary Government, which was to continue to the end of the World. The Instance of the Church of Jerusalem, is an Instance, though of the first Church, yet for the Government of it, hath this extraordinary in it, that it was then Governed by the Apostles; and therefore cannot make a Pattern of the Government of Churches, and the power of Elders therein, which should ordinarily, and for continuance be exercised. But this is an Instance of a Church, whom the Apostle Paul leaves to their own power, that is within them, (Do not ye judge, &c. 1 Cor. 5. 12.) which they had exercised and practiced. The Church of Jerusalem also had many other things Extraordinary, as that about having their Goods common, &c. But the Rules, that he gives to this Church, are such as he gave to all Churches; so when he speaks about laying up, not making their Goods common, as at Jerusalem, but the ordinary way that was to be observed concerning Alms, Let every Man lay up, (saith he, 1 Cor. 16. 3. 2, 3, 4. 1 Cor. 7. 17.) as God hath Blessed him; and so I ordain in all the Churches: So as the Pattern hereof is held forth, as that which held correspondency with the Ordinances in all Churches in the Primitive Times. And therefore is an Argument against the Bishops, when they urged the Instances of Timothy and Titus, Presbyterian Divines used to answer, that the Instance of their Government, will not hold as a Pattern for Episcopal Government; because that their Government was Extraordinary, and for the present, but that we must take that which was the ordinary Government, that was left in the Church, and make that the Pattern. So we may say of the Church of Jerusalem, and the Government thereof at first by the Apostles, whilst they were there, comparatively to this of the Church-of Corinth, that it is not so great a standing pattern to us. And this of the Church of Corinth is the most complete pattern of all other Churches, for he doth give direction almost about all sort of things concerning Worship and Government, and he utters more rules in his Epistles to this Church than any other. Thus he gives instructions concerning the Sacrament, 1 Cor. 11. about Minister's Maintenance, chap. 9. about matter of scandal and offense, chap. 8. about Collection for the Poor, chap. 16. How to order their Meetings, chap. 14. About covering and uncovering in their Assemblies, he saith he had left Traditions with them, and wherein they practiced according to his Traditions he commendeth them, 1 Cor. 11. 2. He speaks also of the power amongst them to judge of Doctrine, Chap. 14. And that they were a Church that had power amongst them to order things for matter of Worship in a decency, Let all be done decently and according to order, 1 Cor. 14. 40. and many things of the like nature. And last of all it is the only instance and example of Excommunication, the highest censure, which the Apostle gives direction about, and tells them they had power to do it, 1 Cor. 5.

Now concerning this Church, there are all these things appertaining to a Church, and the Institution, and Power, and Government thereof held forth here; As,

1. Here is a Church. So it is called.

2. Here is the qualifications of the Members, a Church of Saints, 1 Cor. 1. 2. conformable to which all other Churches were to be, as to the constitution of their Members also, chap. 14. 33. As in all the Churches of the Saints; All the Churches consisted of Saints then, that were visibly such, as this of Corinth also did.

3. It was a Church formed up into a Body, as all those phrases imply, that they are called a whole lump, chap. 5, 6. and a whole Church, chap. 14. 23. entire, complete within itself, which whole lump would be leavened, not only by the way of infection by the Incestuous person, but by way of guilt if he were not cast out.

4. It was a Body which had power to judge them that are within; Do not ye judge them that are within? chap. 5. 13. that is, within your own Body and Society and Fellowship, therefore also he saith, Put away from among yourselves, chap. 5. 13. therefore he useth those phrases, Fornication is committed among you; that he that did this deed may be taken from among you, chap. 1. 1, 2. It was a Church formed up that had a jurisdiction over them within, (and to them without it could not reach) and if they had power to cast out they had also power to take in, it was therefore a formed body.

5. It was a fixed Body in respect of the relation of the Members one unto another; why else doth he bid them to tarry one for another when they were to Eat the Lord's Supper? chap. 11. 33. And that they should not take the Sacrament alone, one Company by themselves, and another company by themselves, which, if such a promiscuous unfixt way was lawful, they might have done, but they were to tarry one for another, that all the Church might as one Body at once receive. Now if they had not been a fixed company, why should they have been obliged thus to have tarried, or who could have known who was absent and who present?

6. It was a Church also that had Elders over them, and those more than one, for speaking of the ordinary Teachers that were Ministers amongst them, some say (saith he) I am of Paul, and I am of Apollos, and I am of Christ, 1 Cor. 1. 12. which he in a figure transferred to himself and to Apollos, herein speaking in his own person, but it tendeth to represent the Persons of their Teachers, the Ministers to whom they did give Maintenance, and were therefore Officers, 1 Cor. 9. 12. If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather?

7. It was a Church having set bounds, by which they might know who were within, and who not, for when he saith, Do not ye judge them that are within? 1 Cor. 5. 13. he doth not mean all Saints in all Churches, but it must be those within themselves. The bounds set by this, that they might be as many as could meet in one Assembly, 1 Cor. 14 23. If the whole Church be come together in one place, &c.

8. It was a particular Congregation. 1. This is evident from their divisions and contentions which he findeth fault withal, as in a whole Church, a whole Body, That there be no Schism in the Body, as he himself expresseth, 1 Cor. 12. 25. applying it to them, now ye are the Body of Christ and Members in particular; he speaks of these divisions as being among those that did meet in one for Worship, 1 Cor. 11. 18. For first when ye come together in the Church, I hear there be divisions among you, and I partly believe it. And this Division was in their Meetings in the Church for Worship, 1 Cor. 11. 22. And have ye not Houses to Eat and Drink in, but despise ye the Church of God, the Assembly of the Saints, as he reproves their divisions and disorders in respect of the Sacrament? To remedy these divisions, he bids them tarry one for another, ver. 33. Thus these directions concern them that are one Congregation for Worship, that use to meet in one place; And chap. 12. 21. he saith they were Members of one another in particular, in a more special relation: Now that special particular near relation is that between those of the same Congregation, where they meet fixedly for Worship, by the consent, and before the People, of which a Man is therefore cast out, which he is not out of any other Church in the World. 2. In this respect he calleth them a Temple to God, speaking against them that caused Divisions in the Church, 1 Cor. 3. 16. The Temple of God are ye, and that he that went about to destroy it by Divisions, God would destroy him: He speaks not personally of each Member, as in chap. 6. but in respest of their Church state, as they were a Body, in opposition to Divisions: Now the Temple is for all the Ordinances of Worship, therefore called the House of God. 3. He gives directions to them as to a whole Church, chap. 14. 23. If the whole Church be come together in some place. 4. He speaks of it also as a Church, which was to receive edifying together by the Ordinances Administred, so chap. 14. ver. 5. I would that ye all spake with Tongues, but rather that ye Prophesied, for greater is he that Prophesieth than he that speaks with Tongues, that the Church may be Edified, so ver. 12. See that ye excel to the Edifying of the Church. And if the whole Congregation, &c. And v. 26. He speaks this in application to them all in respect of their meeting, How is it then Brethren when ye come together, &c.

As their Assembly for Worship proves them to have been a particular Congregation for Worship. So also the directions given concerning Excommunication evince it, chap. 5. For if they had been many Congregations in respect of their Members, 1. He would have Written to that particular Congregation whereof the Man was, as that Congregation (at least the Elders thereof) which should (according to Presbyterial principles) be told first of an offending Member before he is brought to the classical. He would have named that Church he was thus a Member of, and written to it in a peculiar manner, whereas now he names none, but writes to the whole Church. 2. When his directions come to fall upon the execution of the act, he doth not mention the Sentence so much that was to be past (according to our Brethren) in the Presbytery, but the act of execution, the act of delivery to Satan was to be done when they were met together, which being to be done in that particular Church whereof he was a Member, if there had been many Congregations there, he would have named that Church as that in which it should have been done. Especially considering that the Apostle in his Writing pitcheth upon that solemn act of Excommunication, which compleateth the throwing of a Man out, which as all grant is done and performed in the gathering together of that particular Congregation, whereof a Man is a Member. 3. If there had been a classical Church over many Congregations where the Elders meet, and a Congregational Church too, where this person did meet with the Elders of his own Church and the Congregation, if there had been these two several sorts of Church Meetings, it would have been obscure and dark▪ unto which the Apostle's directions should refer him. So as there would have been need of new distinctions of Meetings as well as of Elders and Churcches, when the Apostle speaks but of one. Yea the Apostle saith, When met together, 1 Cor. 5. 4. namely for other Ordinances, upon the Lord's Day, that then they should give this Sentence of Excommunication. He doth not give directions that they should meet together on purpose for that, but as Discipline is to keep Worship pure and subserveth it, so also is it to be performed when the whole meet together for Worship, that the Person also may see out of what a Communion he is cast. 5. Saith he, Do not ye judge them that are within? If there had been Congregational Churches, one whereof he had been a Member of (for he could be but a Member of one) and another classical Church, here had been two Within, and which of these should the Apostle intend? Our Presbyterian Brethren say, That the Congregations have power to judge things within themselves, so that they must needs have one Within, and why should not their Within be the Within here intended for the ultimate throwing out of this Man?

9. This Church of Corinth also had an entire Judicature within itself, not depending upon the advice of any for Sentence, and the like; for he speaks of the whole act, Do not ye judge them that are within? He useth the same word that he useth of himself and his power, Do not ye judge (saith he) speaking of them, what have I to do to judge, speaking of himself. And (saith he) when ye are gathered together with my Spirit, and the Power of the Lord Jesus to deliver such an one to Satan; So that they were not dependent upon the Apostle, to come to him for the Sentence, only in their neglect the Apostle Writes to them as an Apostle, with this rule, to Excommunicate such an one if the be party found guilty, which the Apostle did never know but by hearsay, therefore could never pass a judicial sentence, but he finds fault with them, because they had not done it, for do not ye use to do it saith he? Have not ye power to do it? Do not ye judge them that are within? He doth not say, whom I have delivered unto Satan; but directs them as a Church of Christ having such power, to do it.

Object. But it is objected by some, that he did it for a trial of their obedience, and therefore their act was but an act of obedience in them, but the power was in him.

Answ. The answer is this, that the power might completely rest in them, and yet they obey the Apostle in the act, as an Apostle directing them, when they neglected it: As when a Prophet in the name of God bad the Magistrate to do his duty, though it is an act of Obedience in him to do it thus commanded, yet he hath power as a Magistrate in himself: And as in case a Minister had neglected to Baptize, and the Apostle had sent to him or commanded him to have done it, the power of Baptizing must be said to be in him that Baptizeth.

10. If this Church of Corinth had been a Church that might have associated, it would have done it, for it had a neighbor Church near it, the Church of Cenchrea, which was a Port Town to Corinth as Leeth is to Edinburgh; and Cenchrea was but a small Town, not a City; but he writeth to the Church of Corinth as an entire Church distinct of itself.

That the People have an interest in judging, we refer that to the proofs out of this place; only we name it here to show the completeness of this pattern, for the forming of Congregational Churches answerable to it.

CHAP. VII.

TO decide the controversy about the Divine Institution of a Congregational Church, we may put it to the trial, whether single Congregations with their Elders have more the style of Churches in the New Testament, than the Elders of many Congregations as assembled in a Consistory; and let that determine it. Now that those Congregations where God is publicly Worshipped, and the Preaching of the Word, and the Sacraments Administred, are called each of them a Church, is evident.

1. In 1 Cor. 11. 18. When you come together in the Church: He speaks of their Meeting for the Lord's Supper, ver. 20. And in ver. 22. he calls it so again. So their meeting for Preaching, and for singing of Psalms, he calls it a Church, chap. 14. ver. 2, & 19, & ver. 23. he calls it a whole Church, meeting for those ends. And there he gives not the name to the Meeting or Assembly but to the state and company, ver. 28. for the Rules, he giveth there, are for ordering of Worship. So too in Rom. 16. 4. saluting Aquila and Priscilla (who for his Life would lay down their own necks) he giveth these Congregations the name of Churches, unto whom (saith he) not only I give thanks, but also all the Churches of the Gentiles, and ver. 16. The Churches of Christ salute you. Were those a company of Elders over many Congregations met? Presbyterial Churches, that did testify their thanks unto Aquila and Priscilla? Or were they Congregations of Saints and Strangers also where Paul had been? He had related unto them his own danger, and Aquila's, and Priscilla's, exposing their lives for his, and can it be supposed that the Saints as making several Presbyterial Churches (who are so vast, like unto ours, as the People never meet to do it) did salute the Romans, and Aquila and Priscilla? No rather the several Congregational Churches, might well have opportunity to express the remembrance of them at their Meetings. And the 1. ver. and the 5. ver. of Rom. 16. will easily prompt us what manner of Churches he meaneth, when he speaks of all these Churches, that they were such as was at Cenchrea, the Church which is at Cenchrea (saith he) which was a small Port seven miles off Corinth; and ver. 5. (saith he) Greet ye the Church that is (i. e. that met) in Priscilla's House. Such Churches as these were the Churches of the Gentiles, who saluted them. If we come to the Epistle of the Corinthians, saith the Apostle, 1 Cor. 4. 17. As I teach everywhere in every Church. Doth he mean these Presbyterial Churches or Consistories? Or Congregational? Surely the Churches where Paul still Preached and Taught must be Congregational; For those Assemblies are the Subjects and Seats of Teaching. Take also the 17th verse of the 7th chapter, and bring it along unto the 11th chapter; So I ordain in all the Churches; and, We have no such custom nor the Churches of God; What! Presbyterial? Or Congregational? Let but this one consideration decide it. The custom of which he speaks that the contentions were about, was whether Men should be uncovered or covered praying or prophesying. Now all the Meetings for Worship where Men and Women, and where the Angels (whether Celestial or Elders) were present, these Assemblies where these Ordinances were used, he calleth Churches, and he saith they had no such custom. And in these respects of Meeting thus for Worship they are distinguished, Churches, and are made several, Churches in the Plural; and the general usages of all these Churches as constituted and ordered by the Apostles everywhere, he here presseth. If we come to chap. 14. He there gives order about Prophecying in their Meetings, into which Strangers came and were converted, ver. 25. In which they had Psalms and Doctrines, ver. 26. Where Men and Women were present, ver. 34, and 35. and therefore Congregational Meetings are meant. And he enforceth these directions he gives, with the examples of all the like Churches in all their Meetings, God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace, as in all the Churches of the Saints, ver. 33. These must needs be Congregational Assemblies and Churches that met, for he speaks of the Churches of the Saints in common. Yet still you see when he speaks of Churches, yea and of all Churches, he speaks of them as such. And ch. 16. 1. When he Writeth about laying up Contribution for the Saints (the gathering and disposing of which belongeth unto particular Congregations, for the Money to be sure is had from thence) As I have given order (says he) to the Churches of Galatia, so do ye, he meaneth those Churches of Galatia he wrote to, Gal. 2. And these must be all Congregational, for to order that collection belongeth to the several Congregations. And ver. 19. The Churches of Asia (saith he) salute you. Now the many Congregations under a Presbytery, they do not meet to give salutes, they were therefore Congregational, for with a Congregational Church in this salute he doth join them all, for he addeth, Aquila and Priscilla saluteth you with the Church that is in their House, and why should we not think that he speaks uniformly in the same verse. This we see is the uniform style of the Apostle when he speaks of Churches and of all Churches.

2. As for the very name Church in the New Testament, the place of Congregational Meetings almost in all Languages hath the Name of Church, which name, no places, for General Councils or Presbyterial Meetings over many Congregations, at any time, have had. Not that we think the Place of Meeting to be properly called the Church, but only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , but yet it had originally its name from the Meeting, and the Persons, which were properly called the Church, and from their stated condition to meet in one place, the place was so named. The Clergy indeed hath been called the Church, but not as met, or assembled in any Synod, but in the Indefinite Universal Notion. But the place for the Congregation is called the Church, and the Meeting of the Saints hath the same name, 1 Cor. 14. 34. Let your Women keep silence in the Churches. And their constant Meeting in a fixed manner, and their state in order thereto is called the Church, Acts 11. 26. The Sacrament also was Antiently called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , i. e. the Meeting, their Meetings being said to be to break bread, Acts 20. 7. And in the great Bible the word Church is always translated by Congregation. And among the Grecians, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was never used for a representative Meeting only of Officers, but of the People also, and so it is in Acts 19. 39, 41. where the People making a tumult, it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , although an unlawful one. And although that Christ, Mat. 18. used the Hebrew phrase, yet Churches being to be set up among the Gentiles under the New Testament, that phrase was used also which was conformed unto what theirs signified.

Also under the New Testament the Name Church imports the Saints the People, in a more peculiar manner; and therefore the Meetings where Elders are severed from the People, are not called the Church. Grotius in Mat. 16. 18. And this to the expressions which are used in 2 Cor. 6. 16. Shew ye are the Temples of the Living God, I will dwell in them and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my People. And in Acts 12. 5. Prayer was made of the Church, i. e. of the Saints, unto God for Peter. Yea this word Church is taken for the People of Israel under the Old Testament, as Acts 7. 38.

3. We desire one place to be given, where the Name Church in all the New Testament is given, to the meeting of the Elders alone. When the Apostle speaks of all the Churches, he gives them this appellation, all the Churches of the Saints, 1 Cor. 14. 33. but he nowhere expresseth the Churches of the Ministers, or Elders, no nor of the Apostles neither. Now can we think that Christ in his first Institution (Mat. 16. & Mat. 18.) which the Apostles were to Interpret afterward, and to give directions to us about it, meaned the word Church in a signification different from what the Apostles used? This would be a strange procedure indeed. How then can the Elders lay a claim to the things, when they have not a sufficient ground to challenge the name of a Church. As Parker replying to Dr. Billson 's Assertion of the Keys being given in Peter 's Person to the Church of Ministers very well says, That it may be denied, that the name Church is ever in the Scriptures restrained only to the Priests. Clemens Romanus when he Writes to the Church of Corinth, Writes to the Church, and not to the Presbyters (so the Apostles too in their Epistles) and Writes also from the Church at Rome. And when all the Apostles were met at Jerusalem, yet they alone are not called the Church, being but (as Moses is said to be, Heb. 3. 2, 5. a part of the House, but nowhere called the House) a part of it, Acts 8. 1. The Church was scattered except the Apostles. And indeed if the Elders were the entire Church, then they were the House of God, whereas they are but stewards in it, 1 Cor. 4. 1. The Apostles though' they had the care of all the Churches, and that power in their hands which the Generality of Elders would never claim, yet they were but Officers in the Church, not the Church. Many Churches become one Church to no Officer in the World but Christ, but this pretence of the Elders being the Church, would make many Churches one Church to a company of Elders, that they may Govern them; and in relation to them as representers of the Church, they must be called one Church. What though' the Old Testament frame, or Language be urged, we grant there was then a Church representative, but the Gospel knows no such now.

4. Surely a settled Congregation of Saints deserveth the name of Church more, and suppose places could be found in Scripture, where it is taken both for Elders and the People apart, yet those meetings that have both Elders and People of both sorts, must needs have more of Church in them. We can give instances that the Disciples apart are called the Church in distinction from the Officers. You cannot give one instance where the Officers are called the Church in distinction from the Disciples. Certainly those that have the Power have the Name, and not those only that have the name Equivocally or Metaphorically.

5. A Presbyterial Church is called a Church in relation to the People of those Congregations by their own confessions when they interpret the Church of Jerusalem, the Church of Ephesus, to be many Congregations (and the Presbyterial's Argument is built thereon) and that the People of all those Congregations make one Church under that one Eldership. Now it is strange that they should have a Name of Church only as they are the subject or object of Discipline, and yet not so much as meet for that discipline actually neither, for so they cannot in a Presbyterial Church. The poor people of those Churches have no communion of Saints together herein, but such as they hold with all other Churches that are not under the same Presbytery; and yet they are according to Presbyterial principles in their Officers (as representing them) a distinct Church classical from all Churches else. So they make use of the name from the People, when the People enjoy not the thing. The poor Church of Jerusalem, Acts 8. 1. (when it is said that the Church was scattered) affords you an argument that therefore there was but one Church for Discipline in Jerusalem, and in that respect it is called one Church; when yet the scattering was not upon the Presbyterial Church that exercised Discipline, but upon the People. They were not in the representative body persecuted, and yet though' they were scattered as a Church personally, and not representatively, and persecuted as a Church personally, not representatively only, yet according unto the Presbyterian Principles they never met as a Church personally, but only representatively.

If it be said that the People in Classical Assemblies may meet. Yet it is no otherwise than the People in the next Classes, which if they will may come thither, neither can they all possibly. You lay no more obligation on them to be present than you do upon the People of the next Classes. And therefore in that respect the People of that particular Classes, are no more of that Church than those of other Neighbouring Presbyters.

6. Those Assemblies must have more of Church in them, not only that have both Elders and People, as Congregations have: but that have constant Worship in them as well as government, And our Presbyterians allow some Government to Congregations, i. e. to the Elders of Congregations. Worship is the chief end of a Church. The formal notion of a Church is to meet and communicate in worship, and where there can be no Church-fellowship and Communion to the edification of the whole, there cannot be a Church. Which may be illustrated by the natural body, to which still Instituted Churches in Scripture are compared. The Eye, the Hand, the Head, they serve to several uses in the body, yet they are so united as they are all nourished with the same individual nourishment, and from the same stomach, and therefore this is a several body having all these parts, from another body. So is it here in the Churches instituted, they are such as have a communion in all the common Ordinances, not only in the same kind, but in the same ordinances individually in a constant way. And the Analogy of the Church universal, and the Churches particular will help to illustrate this further, for the Church Universal being one body, is therefore fed by one kind of Ordinances, as there is one Body, so there is one Baptism for kind. But the particular Churches which are Instituted, are such bodies as are fed with one and the same individual Baptism, and one and the same individual Lord's Supper, and so are one Bread. In a word, then all can come to those Classical Churches, or they cannot come; if they come then they are to make one Church for Worship too: If they cannot come, then there cannot be a fellowship for the edification of the whole, and when the Communion of Saints cannot be exercised, how can that be a Church? Every Church is a Temple, Eph. 2. 22. 1 Cor. 4. 16. The Temple of God are ye; Now the Temple did chiefly relate to Worship, and was the subject of all Ordinances, and the place where the Sanhedrin sat too. Answerably under the New Testament, the Preaching of the Gospel is called serving at the Altar, 1 Cor. 9. 14. So 1 Pet. 2. 5. The Saints are built up to offer Sacrifices. God's House is called an House of Prayer. The Church is called a body to Christ, one Body and one Bread (as was said afore) 2 Cor. 10. 17. because they partake of one Bread. But none of these do belong to a Presbyterial Church, they may pray occasionally, but the Ordinance of Prayer, and constant Worship is not there. Public Worship lies in a Communion, therefore it is to be only with those that can enjoy Communion together. Yea it is made the very definition of a Church in the Article of the Church of England, which Article we hope will never be changed, Ecclesia est numerus fidelium (so others also define it) in cultu Divino & Disciplina Communicantium. The Church is a number of Believers communicating in Divine Worship and Discipline. which a Presbyterial Church is not. The end of a Church is that God may be publicly Worshipped, he would not have Instituted Churches else, but principally for that, therefore he had Congregations to do it, in which only it is done; and of Discipline superadded, is but to keep that kind of Worship pure, for Government is but casting out of the Body impure Members: And therefore the great Ordinance of Discipline, of Excommunication, is when they are met together, then they are to cast out from amongst them. As the intent of it is but to keep the Worship pure, so answerably it is to be exercised then when they meet to Worship, but Presbyterial Churches meet not for Worship, but Discipline only. Now as the Body is ordained for Meat Principally and Nourishment, and is not ordained for Physic but occasionally, so it is as to the state of the Church, and therefore our Divines make the Essential notes of a Church to be the Word, Sacraments, and Discipline; but in these Presbyterial Churches, the Word, and Sacraments are Wanting, and there is only Government. The General Assembly of the Saints in Heaven, is a Church in relation unto Worship, and though' there is no Discipline there, yet they are never more a Church than when they are there. And the Apostle also speaking of the Church in the New Testament, in Heb. 10. saith, that Now there is an House of God, because there is an High Priest as well as before, ver. 21. and therefore (saith he) let us draw near (he speaks of public Worship) not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, ver. 25. and that in Synagogues, for so the Word signifies. And therefore in Mat. 18. as Discipline so prayer is meant, and unto that is the Promise of Christ to be in the midst of them more peculiarly made, and upon occasion of that. And indeed it were exceeding strange that seeing the chief end of Churches, (which are Congregations) is for Worship, and that's the great business for which they are appointed, that if there were many Congregations in those of Jerusalem, and those of Antioch, and the like, as is pretended, that there should not be mention of those many Congregations, under the names of Churches, but that Discipline only must carry away the denomination of their being one Church, though many in relation unto it. If there were one word in any of those instances, that there were many Churches among them making one Church, it were something, but there is not.

7 If such a Presbyterial company of Elders were a Church, then Discipline must merely constitute a Church as a Church. And so the objection against the Episcopal Government, viz. That for Government alone there was an Order of Priesthood, namely a Bishop; will come with greater force here, as being very strange that for Government alone, there should be a Church Instituted. And that Discipline doth never constitute any kind of Church is clear, because that which can abesse be or not, and adesse be, without the destruction of the subject, will never constitute it. But so all Divines do say of Discipline, that a Church may be a Church though it be defective in Discipline, therefore it is not that which doth constitute a Church. And this principle the Church of England is concerned to hold up, or else they will justify separation from them, as having been hitherto no true Churches. But lo here is a Church, a Presbyterial Church, that is a Church upon no other consideration but for Discipline.

8. And add to this, that since Presbyterial Government makes Congregations (which are Churches, having each their Elders over them) to be united for Government unto one Presbyterial Church: Let us but consider how many several Churches it makes.

1. For first, There is the particular Congregations consisting of People and their Elders for Worship, they are one sort of Churches.

2. There is secondly the Eldership in everyone of those Congregations, which according to their principles is the Church, for they interpret Mat. 18. to be, Tell that Eldership, that is, Tell the Church; there's a second sort.

3. Then thirdly, There is all these Elders met in one for the Government of any of these Congregations; There's a third sort of Churches; for these Elders must be a Church in a true sense for the People, or they cannot meet: And if they will challenge Government by virtue of Mat. 18. they must needs challenge to be a Church. Now let it be considered, that those are not so much subordinations, as National and Provincial (which are but subordinations of the same kind, for the same ends) which consists of greater or lesser number of Elders; but these are diversifications, several sorts of bodies going to make up one Church that it might be a complete both for Worship and Government. And that it is a diversification is clear by this.

1. Because they are Churches for differing purposes. The Congregations are Churches for Worship, but the particular Elderships and Presbyterial Elderships, are only for Discipline; now ends do diversify such bodies.

2. They are not the same Churches by way of Accumulation, as many things of the same sort laid together: which is clear by this, because the particular Churches consist of People and Elders, but these have Elders of Churches only. And as we urge in our Argument that is drawn from Elders, that this Presbyterial Government would make one Man to be a double sort of Elders, both a Ruling Elder and a Teaching Elder, a Ruling Elder to some Churches, and a Teaching Elder to others, so also this makes them several sorts of Churches.

3. It must needs make a diversification of Churches. For as when many Families unite into a City for Government, there is a new relation and notion; so now here, there is the notion of a new Church. And then,

4. Add to this (which heighteneth the absurdity of it) that whereas the Presbyterial Church is made the complete Church, they yet do want those great and main Ordinances, for which principally a Church is said to be a Church, as the Sacraments and the like. So of the two, this greater Church is the less complete, and therefore is less the Church than a particular Congregation.

And if you say, they are made complete Churches by being both, yet you make at least wise two sorts of Churches, as we said before: And you make a whole Church more uncompleat, as it is the whole, than it is in the parts.

If it be said that the Church Universal is one, and yet hath no Ordinances as Church, as Preaching the Word and Sacraments, and yet it is truly a Church. We answer, it is not a Church Instituted in relation unto Ordinances; but a Church Mystical in relation unto Persons and Personal Graces.

This also farther addeth confirmation to us, that the supposition of there being many Congregations, in all, or many of those Cities, under a common Presbyterian Government of many Elders, thus in the general only held forth, leaveth room for, yea is the occasion of a variety of suppositions of several frames and forms of Government, which those Congregations might be cast into, both in relation to their Officers, and to the Members mutually among themselves. 1. As that either they were Conventus promiscui (as Didoclavius calls them) promiscuous unfixt Assemblies, some meeting together at one place or time, some at another time with others, having no fixed relation; Or else that they were fixed meetings in respect of the Members divided into set determinate companies meeting constantly together. 2. Or else otherwise, supposing them set and fixed Congregations in respect of the Members, yet there are other as various and more difficult suppositions may still be made concerning the relation of these Officers and Elders, how they were disposed of to the right performance of their duties, which the command of the Word lays on them toward their Flock. As, whether they were either fixed and appropriated to these several Congregations respectively, some to one, some to another (as it is in most of the Reformed Churches, and is with us, and we suppose will not be altered amongst us) or else unfixt in respect of all the Congregations, so as equally and mutually in their course, these Ministers might Preach and Officiate to them all by turns (as in some Cities in Holland.) And then 3 If you suppose them fixedly divided into several Congregations, then another question cometh, what power those Elders that are appropriated to each Congregation should have over the Flock? Whether over all, or none, or some part? Now it is the supposition of their being many Congregations under one Presbytery, that only is the ground of this uncertainty, and bringeth in this variety of suppositions of these several ways, how these things should be cast, whereas the supposing of them to be but several distinct Churches though' great ones, will make all things fall in naturally. For then there could be but one way of casting and moulding Members, nor could there be but one common relation of Elders, and so all those duties and things that are spoken about the Power and Duties of Elders, and of the Members amongst themselves, and whatsoever is spoken of Churches and Elders, their Dues, and Duties run all but in one Channel. And then consider too (supposing them many Congregations) that the designing out, which of those suppositions was the pattern left by the Apostles, was a matter of as much moment (as touching the point of the right ordering of Congregations) as this common Presbyterial Government can be supposed to be of, in as much as the execution of all mutual duties between People and Pastors, and the administration of all holy things amongst them, appertaining to this particular Government of the several Congregations, and upon the right ordering and settlement of them, and of these Elders relation to them, doth the right Government and Administration of all holy things depend. And yet consider too at the same time, that we do not find the Holy Ghost making so much as a mention of any such distinct subordinated Congregations to a Classis (only the multitudes of Believers are looked upon through multiplying Glasses to argue it) much less giving any hints to discern by, in the History of the Apostles, or in the Epistles, what the frame was of these supposed Churches, and what their particular special relation to Elders in this supposed variety was. There is not anything to any such purpose extant, in either that instance of Jerusalem or any other of those examples of Cities, that are pretended to hold forth this multitude of Congregations making one Church under one Common Presbyterial Government. This hath long and doth still stick in our Consciences because the Holy Ghost is silent, and hath not left us the least footsteps in the Sacred History, to discern in which of these ways (supposing many Congregations thus making a Church for Government) the Apostles did settle the constitution of this Church, and how they did dispose the relation of these Elders and Officers to those several Congregations.

CHAP. VIII.

LET us now go over all the Examples of the Churches in the New Testament (which must Interpret Christ's Speech in Mat. 18.) and let us see whether they were Classical or Congregational. For the instance of the Church of Jerusalem and the like, we will speak to them under the consideration of the Churches in greater Cities: But let us now go over all the other.

The first Churches we read of in the beginning of the Gospel, are in Acts 9. 31. Then had the Churches rest throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria, and were edified, &c. These are called Churches in that common notion, whereby Churches constituted by the Apostles were distinguished one from the other. And is this their diversification and title of Churches. like to have been in a Classical respect or Congregational, as here he speaks of them generally? Let the words and circumstances of the story be considered.

1. It was in the beginning of the Gospel, that these Churches had been raised, and the special means we read of whereby they were erected, was Peter and John 's Ministry, of whom we read, chap 8. 25. that returning to Jerusalem, they preached the Gospel in many Villages of the Samaritans, as also some of the dispersed from Jerusalem had done, ver. 4. They went everywhere 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , they went thorough or all about, namely Judea and Samaria, as Philip in Samaria, ver. 5. And as their Preaching had been everywhere, and in Villages, which is chiefly noted, ver. 25. so accordingly the Churches that were constituted out of those converted, are said to have been in all Judea and Samaria, &c. and therefore in Villages. For that the Holy Ghost should aforehand in the Acts, so remarkably relate their Preaching in many Villages of Samaria, and then make mention of Churches throughout Samaria, argues his intent to have been to show that these Churches were those in these Villages: And these not as gathered into Cities, but remaining throughout Samaria, as the Gospel had been Preached in the Villages. Nor needed they now (for they had rest) for bear to hold up their Church-fellowship in the several places of their abode. And therefore when upon this rest, Peter took the opportunity to visit them (as in the next verse of that 9th chapter, it is said Peter passed thorough all, namely as 'tis translated, all quarters where these Churches were scattered, some here, some there, up and down) all of them whether in Cities or in Villages, are in one uniform respect called Churches, for his Speech wherein he involves them all promiscuously is simular, and so meant of the same kind of Churches. Now is it imaginable that throughout these Regions or Countries, the Churches whereof he speaks should all be such Classical Churches as are now amongst us, when at the beginning of the Gospel, but a few Saints and Professors of Christianity can be supposed to be scattered everywhere up and down. It was well if by reason of their being so thin sown up and down in those Regions they could make up Congregational Churches with Elders to them.

2. When it is said that these Churches had rest and were edified, is it likely he should speak this of these Churches as Classical, as such which meet but in their Elders for exercise of Discipline; Or rather of these Churches as enjoying rest in the Ordinances of Worship on the Lord's Day, public Prayers, the Word, Sacraments, and all other means of edification and comfort? For the preservation of the purity of which, Discipline doth but subserve. They are the Congregational Churches, and the Communion the Saints have therein, that are the great means of Comfort, Edification, and Multiplication of Churches; and the enjoyment of these, in rest, is that which is the greatest outward Mercy and Privilege. And therefore when he sets out the condition of those times; Then had the Churches Rest, and were Edified, he means, Congregational Churches. And when he says the Churches were multiplied, which if understood, of more and New Churches Erected: Doth he reckon their Multiplication by Presbyterian Churches, that do consist of many Congregations each of them? It is likely a Multitude of many more such Churches were erected? No, rather they were so many fixed Congregations of Believers.

2. Let us come to the next mention of Churches in that Story, Acts 14. 23. (slipping over that Church of Antioch, chap. 13. The Demonstration of which, to have been a Congregational Church, we refer to another place, when we examine the State of Churches in Cities.) And when they had Ordained them Elders in every Church; and had Prayed with Fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed. That these were Congregational Churches, will appear in like manner by the like circumstances of the Story. In Acts 13. 14. We Read that Paul and his Company came to Antioch in Pisidia, where the Jews refusing the Gospel, Lo we turn to the Gentiles, said Paul and Barnabas, ver. 46. For so the Lord hath commanded us, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for Salvation, to the ends of the Earth, and many believed; and accordingly, ver. 48. and ver. 49. The word of the Lord was published throughout the Regions. Then chap. 14. Paul and Barnabas fled to Derbe and Lystra, Cities of Lycaonia; and unto the Region that lieth round about, and there they Preached the Gospel. Here again as afore in Pisidia, so now in Lycaonia, not in Cities only, but in the Regions they Preached. And this is noted, to show the spreading of the Gospel, (for to what end else, should the Preaching of it be Recorded?) And ver. 21. 'tis said, that when at Derbe they had Taught 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a sufficient competent number in that City; they went again to Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, the chief Cities of those Countries, Lycaonia and Pisidia, in the Regions of which they had preached the Gospel, as well as in those Cities. And the Story Relates, that the end and purpose of this second visit of these places, was to confirm the Disciples, ver. 22. and to gather them into Churches, and ordain Elders over them, ver. 23. whom they had afore Preached unto, and made Disciples. Thus they made fit matter for Churches, by making Disciples, ver. 24. and then molded and formed them up, into a way of order for Worship and Government, by Elders Established, in the several Congregations. For these Churches, they thus Formed and Ordained Elders unto, were surely Congregational. For,

1. If we suppose them to have been only the Disciples in these Cities of Lystra and Derbe, Iconium, and Antioch; yet it is not supposable, that in each the number of Disciples should arise to more than one Congregation in a City; now in this beginning of the Gospel, and in so short a time; and yet they were formed up into Churches, and had Elders in every Church. Or

2. Can we suppose, that the Apostles staid gathering them into those Churches with Elders, till their number would arise to many Congregations in each City, sufficient to make Classical Churches; and that they did not till then, constitute them Churches, nor placed Elders over them? Can it be imagined, they would keep Men out of Ordinances so long? Or that themselves, being Apostles, and to sow the Gospel in the World, would still stay so long, till everywhere such Members did arise? Yea,

3. The 21. verse intimates, (in the instance of Derbe) their manner to have been, (and as there, so in other places) that when they had Preached the Gospel to that City, and had Taught many, (or as the word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , made a sufficient and competent number of Disciples, and sufficient for what? ver. 23. to make up a Church, and whereof some might be fit Persons for Elders therein;) then they used to leave that City, and went to other places, as there 'tis said they did; and so long to stay there, till there were a sufficiency for a Church and Elders, or if before they could accomplish this, they were driven out, then they either returned to Form them into Churches with Elders, (which was their end of coming this second time to Lystra, and those Cities, to confirm the Disciples, and ordain them Elders, as now to become a Church) or else afterwards sent Evangelists to them.

And 4. As those Disciples were in the Regions about, as well as in the Cities; for (afore it was noted in the Story, that in the Regions about both of Pisidia and Lycaonia, the Gospel was Preached) so it must be supposed, that these Churches were set up in the Countries about, as well as in the Cities. And 'tis hard to think, that all the Christians should leave their Callings and Dwellings they were bred and born in, to come up to the Cities to make Classical Churches, or that they were so many converted in the Villages, as to make Classical Churches there. Paul saith, 1 Cor. 7. 10. that he ordained in all Churches, that Men should abide in the callings wherein God called or converted them in; and to suppose that Husbandmen in the Countries, should leave their callings of Husbandry, &c. and come up to the Cities, where they could not exercise that calling, to leave their Livelihood; and Wives converted to leave their Husbands, Children their Parents, Servants their Masters; and come to dwell in the Cities only, and not rather have Churches made up in the Countries also, is hard to think. But,

5. And Lastly. These could not be Classical Churches here; but Congregational, for it is the first Ordaining of these Elders, to these Churches that is here mentioned, and not an Associating of many Congregations into one Eldership; and therefore here is a gathering Congregational Churches, and ordaining Elders thereunto apart, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And as there must be a sufficient company of Christians, ere a Congregational Church is made up, as a number of Congregations with Elders must be supposed, ere a Classical Church can be framed. This being therefore the first framing them into Churches, and ordaining them Elders, (or else you must suppose Churches, long afore they had Elders) it must be in a Congregational way. And further also, there is this Reason; That these Congregations being then fixed for Officers and Elders, if these Elders were ordained to these Churches, their ordination, as Elders, must be to their several Churches Respectively; and not as the common Eldership made up of them. And such were called Churches, endowed with Elders proper unto them; and so much the word (that is added in that, Acts 14. 13.) doth import, they ordained or chose 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to them Elders in every Church, that is, to every Church they chose their own proper and peculiar Elders, fixed and appointed unto them.

That this was the primitive way of planting the Gospel, may further be confirmed by that Parallel place to this, Tit. 1. 5. where there being many Believers already converted, (as many passages in that Epistle do argue) and yet not in most places, formed up into Churches with Elders; the Apostle left Titus an Evangelist, (whose proper Office it was, as appears by the Epistle; and that to Timothy to settle Believers and Churches in their right frame and order, according to the Apostle's directions given) to ordain Elders in every City or Town, (as shall be shewn by and by) where any number of Believers were to make a Church; and where fit and meet Men for Elders might be found, to set over those Churches. And that which Luke, in the forecited, Acts 14. 23. calleth Ordaining Elders in every Church, Paul here calleth, Ordaining Elders in every City; and the one interprets the other: And the Apostle's, practice there, is here turned into a command or direction, as given to Titus, which therefore as it bound him, binds us to the end of the World; And he adds, as I appointed thee. Now his meaning is, not that Elders should be ordained in every City simply, as it was a City or Body of Men; for Elders and Church, were Relatives, as Shepherd and Flock, and therefore Elders were not ordained, but to a Church; and therefore to say, he ordained Elders in the City, necessarily supposeth, a Church extant in that City, unto which these Elders were ordained; and therefore the ordination was only in such Cities or Towns, where a Church was, and a competent sufficient number of Believers to make a Church. For that must needs be the reason, why Paul himself did not cast and mould these People in Crete, converted by him presently into Churches with Elders, as fast as they were converted; because a Church should have a convenient competent number, and fit Men to be Elders unto them, before they be formed into such a Body. And therefore, he being called away too soon, he left Titus behind him, to finish that Work.

The Writers for Episcopacy, have made use of this place, to show, that in the Apostle's times, they planted Churches only in Cities; (and 'tis certain, that they bestowed their pains chiefly therein) So that they make the Apostolical Institution to be, that look how many Believers soever were in a City, and the Villages about it, so many were to make one Church-Diocesan for Government; and therefore to ordain Elders, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in every Church, Acts 14. 23. is all one, and to ordain Elders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in every City as here, Tit. 1. 5. and this by the Apostle's own Ordination, as I appointed thee. i. e. over these Cities, and so the Churches therein, and the vicinity thereof, he as one Man, was as a Bishop set. And some of those for the Classical Government, do make use of of the same Notion, that all Churches in a City, when multiplied, were by Apostolical Institution, to be but one Church for Government, as well as at first, when they were but one Congregation; and the Elders, at first planted in that first Church, were still to continue, together with all the Elders, that should anew be set over those Churches) as one Eldership, a Presbytery, unto them in that City as one Church. The appearances for this opinion we shall speak to, when Arguments for the Presbyterial Government, come to be discussed. In the mean time as to this place, if we Interpret it by that former, and consider all circumstances, it makes for Congregational Churches and Elderships over them. For,

1. This Direction was given to Titus, now in the first beginning of the Gospel in Crete; For Paul having newly been there with him, and having converted many up and down in the Island, he left Titus behind, to ordain them Elders: So as here was the first Erection of Churches and Elders; and therefore 'twas in the beginning of the Gospel, at which time all the Saints, in each great City converted, were but as many as might make but one Church. And it was the Duty of Saints, that all the Saints, in a place cohabiting, should join in one, rather than in divers companies for Worship, and all Ordinances; and not divide, both because of Unity, and more presence of the Spirit, and the Solemnity of the Worship; and for all these ever to continue one Church, till absolute necessity, would cause a division into many: Hence in this beginning of the Gospel, he writes to him to ordain Elders in every City, because his ordination was, that Saints cohabiting, should make one Church, and not divide for all ordinances; and that they should have Elders, more than one, set over them, both for Worship and Government; because de facto, there were but so many in the greatest Cities, as would make but one Church. And,

2. This being Interpreted by the form, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 City, here therefore is not meant literally, the extent of a City; but Metonimically it is put for the Church, then extant in any City; and so doth not necessarily import, that the extent of the Church-Government, should be by God's Ordidination, equal to the extent of the City; as if because there were in a City, so many as would make more Churches, he was to ordain them Elders, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in every Church in those Cities, as the Apostle had done; for they were not to be Elders to that City, as a City, but to the Churches in that City; and as Congregational Churches are meant, in Acts 14. so also they here intended. But,

III. And chiefly, as Church by Church, in Acts 14. was not in Cities only, but in Villages, or Market Country Towns, so here also, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to be understood: For the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 when indefinitely used, (as here) is taken not for great Cities only, but Country Towns. And accordingly in the New Testament, when the Planting and Propagating the Gospel is mentioned, the business here spoken of, and concerned) we find that when the Commission to Preach the Gospel, is given to the Apostles and Disciples, that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is taken for Villages, as well as great Cities, as being those they were sent to preach unto, as indifferently and promiscuously, as to Cities; and therefore when like directions are given to frame Churches, and set up Elderships over them, (as here) it is answerably to be taken. Thus in the Commission given, Mat. 10. 11. whereas Christ says, Into what City or Town ye enter; the Evangelist Luke says, chap. 10. ver. 8. (uttering the same Commission) Into what City ye enter; that word therefore is put for all and both; and therefore he useth a general indefinite word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Into what ever City ye enter; that is, City of any sort or kind, small or great, as intending Towns, as well as Cities strictly so called. And further, he, in his Speech, useth it as the Contra-distinct Term to House or Family, of which he had said before, into what House ye enter; so now into what City, and therefore intended to take in all sorts of Towns, consisting of more Families than one. And the practice of the Twelve Apostles, who had received Commission, in Matth. 9. interprets it, ver. 6. 'tis said, they went through Towns, Preaching the Gospel, where the word Towns is only used, as including Cities, as in Luke the word Cities only is used, as including Towns; and so the one promiscuously is put for the other: For in the preceding verse, ver. 5. Christ in his Commission given, calls them Cities, when ye go out of a City (says he) where you have Preached, shake off the dust; and then in the execution of this Commission, they are called Towns, they went through the Towns Preaching, ver. 6. And further in Mat. 10. 23. when Christ teaching them if, they were persecuted where they Preached, to fly; if they persecute you in one City, fly into another; that is, if persecuted in one Town, fly into another: What, were they persecuted only in great Cities? Yes in Towns, for they were whipt in Synagogues, and Synagogues were in Villages, Mat. 10. 33. And is the direction given to them, to fly into smaller Towns, if they might be safe there as well as into Cities, or there only were they to have the promise of protection? so Acts 14. 6. Paul and Barnabas, fled to Derbe and Lystra, and the Regions about, as well as to the Cities; and there had safety, and Preached the Gospel. And Christ further adds in that place, you shall not have gone over all the Cities of Israel, &c, that is, the Towns, for in Towns they Preached. And so Christ himself Preached in all Cities and Towns, and so did the Apostles, and it was their Commission so to do.

And it seems there was something special in the state and condition of Crete, why the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should be there used, Crete is but a small Island, and there are at this day, but three Cities in it. In the Apostle's times, there were four Hundred Cities, for so Pliny, (who lived not long after them relates) said to have been in it, which were but small Towns. And therefore Beza hath Translated it, Oppidatim, Town by Town, as also so understanding it.

Now therefore if the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , be indefinitely taken for Country Towns, as well as great Cities, when Commission was given to Preach the Gospel; why should it not be taken also in that Sense, when Direction is given to make up Churches, and Ordain Elders to them, in the same place where it hath been Preached? And therefore to ordain Elders, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not to be confined to Cities only, (where many Congregations, as is supposed, have been) but in Country Towns, or very small Cities, (when in Crete there were so many) where Churches may be supposed to have been; and those to be sure but Congregational, and in both such Cities and Towns only, where Churches and Saints 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sufficient to make Churches were found. So there 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Church, City by City, Tit. 1. 5. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Church by Church, Acts 14. 23. are all one. And if in greater Churches, there were more than one Elder, then their Elders were ordained 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Church by Church.

And surely it is a hard Supposition, to suppose that in Crete the Apostle Paul and Titus the Evangelist, had Preacht only in the Cities, when the Commission was to Teach all Nations; and therein Towns as well as Cities, as they had occasion. Was God's Elect in Cities only? And were not Country Souls as precious? And if they be converted unto God, were not they to be Taught to do what Christ commanded, as well as those in Cities? And to become Churches, and to have the privilege of all Ordinances? Or were they to come up to the Cities for them, and to the Elders there, as the Tribes did for Judgment to Jerusalem? These are harder Suppositions, than what the Presbyterians put upon us, as an Absurdity, that the fruit of the Apostle's Preaching, should in great Cities arise to the conversion but of so many, as to make but one Congregation.

And besides, if City should here Tit. 1. 5. be taken strictly for greater Cities, then here is no Commission to Titus to ordain Elders to Churches elsewhere. And so then the Institution of the bounds of a Church, and the extent of the Jurisdiction of Elders, should be cast rather to the mould and extent of great Cities; that if one City, then one Church, one Eldership, though there were never so many Congregations in it; and thus Elders in every City, is to be understood of greater Cities, then not of the Churches in Towns and Villages, where there could rationally be but one Church in a Town. But why the pattern of Church Government should fall upon, and be framed rather to the example of a City, and so conformed to the mould of the Civil Government in Cities especially, and not as well upon the way of Country Towns, when 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 will import the one, as well as the other; (and the pattern surely was uniform in both) we see no ground of Reason for difference. Why should we imagine that the Apostle should still so have in his Eye in these Directions to Titus, Classical Presbyteries, (which are but the external Government of the Church) as to take care of the ordaining Elders, as in Relation hereunto, and not much rather for the ordaining Elders in order to the Worship of God in Churches, and for the Establishment of their Relation of Elders to Congregations or Churches.

Let us go on from these forementioned, to all other that are either called Churches, or where the Saints, written to by the Apostles, may by circumstances be supposed to have been gathered into Churches, under Elders and Officers.

In the Epistles of James and Peter, written to the scattered Jews, we find mention of Elders; and therefore there must be supposed Churches, whereof they were Elders and we find indeed mention of Elders of the Church; and let the circumstances be considered, whether those may be more rationally supposed Congregational or Classical. Let us consider their condition.

1. They were Jews scattered, and as some probably conceive, were many of them of those scattered, Acts 8. And as such, both of these Apostles did write to them; and as scattered up and down throughout vast Regions, whole Countries, Asia, Bythinia, Cappadocia, and therefore not thick sown, (being Strangers) nor in Multitudes, living so near, that they can be supposed to have made Associated Churches.

2. Those scattered Persons, therefore must rationally be supposed to have made up Churches of themselves, as those of the Dutch Strangers do in London, and the English in Holland; and not to have promiscuously mingled themselves with those Natives of the Countries, they were scattered into; for they had a differing Language from the Gentiles, though turned Christians. And this we find in Aquila & Priscilla, who being Jews, and having had a Church in their House, (namely of Jews) in Rome, as chap. 16. of that Epistle. And afterward the Jews being Banished from Rome Acts 18. 2. Aquila and Priscilla removed, but kept their Church together still distinct, from the Native Asiatique Christians; therefore in 1 Cor. 16. we read of the Church at their House in Asia, and • s some think at Ephesus, and there joined or mentioned with the rest of the Churches of Asia, in Paul's Salute unto the Corinthians, and is mentioned apart from them; because it was a Church of Jews, Strangers scattered among them, and kept distinct from them. And yet it was such a kind of Church (though less) that all those Churches in Asia, made mention of together with it, were of (both that particular Church, and all the rest, being alike spoken of promiscuously under the name of Church and Churches, as being all like Churches) and it will easily be granted, that that Church in Aquila and priscilla 's House was Congregational, for it is an instance alleged by the Assembly at Westminster of many Congregational Churches in Ephesus, whereof that was one particular. Now look as Aquila and Priscilla, and their fellow Strangers, kept a distinct Church of their Countrymen, (which is the reason that Church is in two Epistles so apart singly mentioned) so in like manner, did these scattered Strangers cast themselves into Churches of themselves, and their own Nation, distinct from the other Gentile Believers in the places where they came. And it was usual then for the Jews to have Synagogues for them of their Nation, in several Cities. And therefore both James and Peter writeth unto them apart as Strangers; and they involve not the mention of any Gentile Christians with them, because they themselves were apart from them. And yet they writ to these thus scattered and kept distinct, as to Churches that had Elders, The Elders that are among you, (says Peter) 1 Pet. 5. ver. 1, 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The phrase is of distinction, that as they writ to these Jews apart from the Christian Gentiles, so the Elders that are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Elders of you Jews, peculiar to you, that is, that belong to any of you. And therefore James, James 5. 14. also exhorts them that were sick among them, or of them to send for the Elders of the Church, not as if these had but one Church, for that was impossible, being scattered over so many Countries; therefore he speaks indefinitely, as giving a direction that they should send for the Elders of those Churches where they were; so as they had Churches and Elders. And these Elders must be considered (in that Speech) as Elders of Congregational Churches (as was afore observed) for how can it be imagined, that Men scattered so far off from one another, should be commanded to send (when sick) for the Elders of a Church Classical, and such a Church and Elders, is common to such Churches to be intended? The sick Persons could not send, but for Elders that were ready at hand; and therefore a Congregational Church is meant and intended, and the Elders of it. And therefore farther in the second Chapter, the same Apostle James speaking in the like indefinite manner, if a Man come into your Synagogue, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (says he, ver. 2.) that is, into any of your Synagogues where you Worship; a Phrase proper to express their Church meetings by unto Jews, (seeing as was said, they had Synagogues in several places.) And what, in the 5 ^th chapter, he calls the Elders of the Church, here in the second he calls a Synagogue, calling their Assembly, (as 'tis well Translated) such. And these Elders of the Church, (which was a Phrase suited to the Greek Idiom) is in Analogical Phrase of Speech, or by way of Similitude, all one as to say, Rulers of the Synagogues among the Jews, their Churches being Congregational, of as many as could meet to Worship, like as the Jews Synagogues were; and their Elders as their Rulers, and the Government of these Christian Synagogues of Christian Jews, like to the Government of those Jewish Synagogues, that were scattered up and down out of Judea in Gentile Cities (whereof we so often read) which was an entire Government within themselves, for they were therefore called Rulers of their proper Synagogues. And according unto the Analogy of these Assemblies of Churches of theirs, with their Elders over them Synagogue-wise, is that in Peter, (who Writes to the same Persons) to be understood, 1 Pet. 5. 1, 2. Let the Elders among you feed, (by Preaching and Ruling) the Flock, (indefinitely taken as Synagogue in James, and for the several Flocks Respectively) And in that he Writes to them to feed by Preaching as by Ruling; and the same to do the one, that did the other, it falls in with the former Notion, that he means Congregational Elders, who as they are fixed for feeding by Preaching to one Flock, so they must be for Ruling also, or else these are divided in their extent, when yet the Precept both is alike given, and made of like extent. But of this hereafter.

CHAP. IX.

WE now will go over all other Instances of Congregational Churches, as they appear settled by the Apostles in Cities.

1. The Church of Colossians was but one, which is argued by this, 1. That the Apostle Writing to that Church, Writes to them as a whole Church; and also that their Ministers that were over this whole Church, were fixed Ministers unto them; And if so, then that whole Church could be but one Congregation, for he that is a fixed Minister, hath a Relation, for his Teaching, but to one Congregation. Now their chief Minister Epaphras was a fixed Minister to that Church, Col. 1. 7. who is for you a Faithful Minister of Christ, Col. 4. 12. Epaphras who is one of you. If there had been many Congregations, to one of which he had been fixed, he had been more that Congregations Minister, than all the rest; and his special relation had been to them, and therefore his Salutation would have been mentioned, as especially to his own Church, more than to all the rest of the Congregations, as his Labor and Pains, (when constant among them) was more to that particular Congregation, than any other. Since therefore his Salutation is to all the Colossian Christians, its evident that they were but one Congregational Church, whose Pastor he was. And again, the Apostle Writes to the whole Church, as those that had learned the Gospel of Epaphras, who was for them a Faithful Minister: Now if Epaphras had been a fixed Elder to one Congregation, and there had been many more there beside, that one Congregation had been the Congregation, who had comparatively learned the Gospel of him, more than all the Congregations besides; and Paul would not have Written thus indefinitely, and alike of all, if there had been many. For he had been a full Minister only to that Congregation he was fixed to, and properly theirs as concerning Communion, by way of Learning and Teaching, wherefore the Apostle would have singled out that Congregation in his Speech from all the rest, if there had been more than one. And then as to their other Ministers, Archippas, Col. 4. 17. The Apostle enjoins them to say to him, Take heed to the Ministry that thou hast received of the Lord, that thou fulfill it. Had he been a fixed Minister to one Congregation; and there had been many Congregations there, besides the main of his Ministy lying in his Preaching and personal watching over that one Congregation he was fixed to, (for that which a Minister doth in ruling in common over all the Congregations, according to the Classical Suppositions, is the least part of his Ministry) the Apostle would have singled out that Congregation, with whom he walked continually, as those that should have said to him, fulfill thy Ministry; because that they who were his constant Hearers, must needs be best, if not only acquainted with what the fulfilling of the main and constant part of his Ministry was, and with what were any neglects or defects therein. Seeing therefore he Writes to them thus indefinitely, in relation to their own Ministers, without any Distinction, it argues that they were but one Church, having these Elders fixed to them for Preaching and Government. And of this Church he saith, that for their Faith and Order, for their Doctrine and Worship and Government, they were complete, and his Heart was comforted as well in the one, as in the other, Col. 2. 2, 5. and he encourageth them to walk in both, according as they had received of Jesus Christ the Lord; and if so, then to keep that Order too, (which already they had) without any alteration, to which he would never have exhorted them, it had been their duty (when multiplied to more Churches) to enter into another different Order and Form of Government. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

2. There is the Church of Philippi. The Apostle speaks of them in the beginning of the Gospel as a Church saying (Phil. 4. 15.) that in the beginning of the Gospel, no Church communicated to him by way of giving and receiving, but only them; and in the beginning of the Gospel, even in the greatest Cities, a Church was no more than could meet together in one. Now look what manner of Church they were at the first, he speaks of them as such still; and useth the same Style, No other Church but you, saith he.

3. The Church of Antioch, is another that is to be considered. It was an entire Church, having Government within itself. For if it could have discerned that controversy in Acts 15. and so had been capable of deciding it, it had power to have done it; and need never have sent to Jerusalem: They did not therefore as wanting power, appeal thither as to a Court of Judicature, but only sent for Advice and Counsel in a difficult Case, wherein their Opinions disagreed. And the Church at Antioch Ordained, that Paul and Barnabas should go to the Apostles at Jerusalem, to consult them about this question; and it was as one Church that they did thus Determine also of Barnabas and others, that for a whole year they Assembled themselves with the Church, or in the Church 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and Taught much People. And the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 relateth to Assembling together; so the kind of the Church, must be answerable to the kind of the Assembling; and if the Assembling was for Worship, then the Church in which they met, was a Congregational Church, which is the Seat for Worship; and we believe that none will say that many Churches are ever called one Church in respect of Assembling for Worship. But here that they Assembled of Worship is plain; for they Assembled themselves in the Church, and Taught much People, now the Church in which there is Teaching, is a Congregational Church. And besides that, he saith it was in the Church (as the Greek hath it) not only with the Church. If there had been several Congregations in this City, where the word had been Taught, speaking of Assembling for Teaching, if ever, or at any time he would have mentioned those many Congregations, surely he would have done it upon this occasion, especially relating to matter of Fact, he would have spoken distributively. For why should he call Congregations Churches upon other occasions (as often he doth) or in any other Relation, and not upon this; whereas the Relation here is purely Congregational, for it is for Teaching the Word and Worship? Again. 2. We read twice of the meetings of that Church together, Acts 14. 27. When Paul and Barnabas came back to give an account to those of Antioch, from whom they had been commended to the Grace of God, it is said, when they were come and had gathered the Church together, they rehearsed all that God had done by them; did they make the Relation to the Classical Elders only? Did not the Rehearsal concern all the People, as well as every Soul amongst them as any Sermon, it being to show how God had opened the Door of Faith to the Gentiles, that they might glorify God. And in Acts 15. 30. it is said when they came to Antioch to deliver the Epistle from the Church at Jerusalem, they gathered the multitude together, and at that time made a Sermon, an Exhortation to them; and he calleth this Multitude Brethren, ver. 32. They Exhorted the Brethren with many words, and confirmed them. Thus as the meetings in the Church of Jerusalem are, six or seven times mentioned to be in one; and the Church of Antioch is here twice so mentioned.

4. We have an account of the Church of Troas. A Church they were, for they had Elders, and Elders they had, for they had the Sacrament; and it was at a meeting but in one place, Acts 20. 70. And Paul staid there seven Days, till they met, They all met to break Bread, and all in one; for it was in an upper Room, where Paul Preached to them; and if there had been more Congregations than one, he would have Preached to one at one time, and to another at another time.

5. By the Churches of Galatia (as they are Stiled 1 Cor. 16. 1.) doth he mean Congregational Churches or Classical? Congregational only; for first, when he speaks of them, it is concerning Collection for the Saints, Even as I have given Order to the Churches of Galatia, so do ye; Now the Order for Collection, for the Saints, concerns Congregational Churches, not Classical; Let everyone of you upon the first day of the Week, lay up in store as God hath prospered him (i. e. lay up in the common Treasury of the Congregation) that there be no gathering when I come. And then, 2. If they had a provincial Church, he would certainly have called them so in his Epistle to the Galatians, but when (as we see there) those Churches were corrupted with corrupt Doctrine; and he exhorts them to purge out the Old Leaven, Gal. 5. 9. he then Writes to them as to Churches that were apart, to purge out the Old Leaven, as the Church of Corinth did; and each to become a new lump. If they be considered as one lump, yet it was as being leavened by way of infection; but that in 1 Cor. 5. is by way of guilt

6. The Church of Laodicea, mentioned in the Epistle to the Colossians, was also but a Congregational Church, Colos. 4. 16. when this Epistle is read amongst you, cause it to be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans. That Church, wherein reading of the Word is, is a Congregational Church, for reading is a Work of Worship. And if in other places he had ever called a Church, in relation to Government consisting of many Churches; yet here if there had been many Churches, and many Churches for Worship, he would have said so, and have thus expressed himself, Let it be read in the Churches of Laodicea. He would have spoke of the Duty, and of the Subject of the Duty in a suitable way. When he speaks of the reading of the Word among the Jews, he saith it is read in every Synagogue every Sabbath Day, he speaks distributively, and so he would have done here.

7. I shall now proceed to prove that the Churches of Asia, were Congregational Churches.

1. That the Church of Laodicea, was a Congregational Church, we refer to what hath been said.

2. Five of these Asiatic Churches even Downam acknowledgeth, not to have been in great Cities; and such are to be supposed probably to have but one Congregation, those smaller Cities containing but Christians, as made one Church in each of them.

3. The constitution of all those Churches for Worship and Government, was one and the same; and therefore if Laodicea and some of the rest, were but Congregational Churches, then all the rest were so too. For they are intended all as Types of all Churches to the end of the World, now if some of them had been Congregational Churches, and others had been Classical, they could not have suited the State and condition of all Churches, both Congregational and Classical, which have a Government and a constitution different. And the Apostle Rev. chap. 2, & 3. Writes to the Angels of those Churches, as having an entire Government among themselves; and he Writes to them about matters of Discipline, and therefore regards them as Uniform, for the Matter and Seat of Government. And if that be true, which some Historians have reported, that Laodicea was destroyed by an Earthquake in Nero's Reign, long afore the time of John's Writing the Revelation, then it must needs have been intended only as a Type. And that all these Churches were uniform, appears by this also; that in the closure of this Epistle, what he Writes to one Church, he Writes to all, Hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches, which is all one with the conclusion of the whole Book, in Revel. 22. 16. He sent his Angel to Testifie these things in the Churches. And if Congregational Churches be acknowledged Churches in the Scripture Phrase, they must be intended in that Speech; and that those should be mainly intended appears by this, because that the Book of the Revelation, was only to be read in such Churches. And likewise that they were Congregational Churches appears by this, that he Writes to them, as to the seven Candlesticks, which Christ walked in the midst of; and he threateneth them that he would remove the Candlestick. Now by Candlestick he interprets the Churches, chap. 1. 1. And they are Candlesticks especially in relation to Worship. It was an Ordinance of Worship in the Temple: And it is therefore in Zech. 4. 2. put for the completing of all the Temple for Worship, and all the utensils of it; for, though their Sanhedrin for Government might be complete before, yet the Temple was not then built, in which God was to be Worshipped. And indeed the promise of the presence of Christ is most in respect of Worship, which the Saints are most constant in. And when he threateneth to remove the Candlestick, certainly the chief threatening falls upon their Church-State, and the enjoyment of the Ordinances of Worship, such as Preaching, the Sacraments, &c. And whereas some would argue many Congregations to have been in everyone of these Churches; Bishops have done so, because in the end of each Epistle he concludeth, Let them hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches, as having many Churches in each Church of them: We Answer.

1. That it is a Speech all one with that in Rev. 22. 16. I have sent mine Angel to Testifie these things in the Churches; for as that is the closure of all, and is meant of all Churches, so this is the closure of each Epistle, and is meant by way of example of all Churches in the World, he singling out seven for all the rest.

And 2. It is but such an indefinite Speech, as that in Rev. 13. 29. If any have an Ear, let him hear, so here the meaning is, let every Church hear.

And 3. If that Notion be true of Mr. Brightman's, that they are Types of all Churches to come, to several Nations (as, it is most probable, they are) then it hath a clear other meaning, than that of their being many particular Churches, in each of those Cities.

To conclude, we find that in all those Epistles of Paul, when he Writeth to the several Churches of Philippi, Colossus, Thessalonica, &c. he Writeth to them most and chiefly, concerning the Duties, which lay upon them, in respect of their particular relation, to that particular Congregation, whereof they are Members, and with whom they have a fixed communion, and do ordinarily converse with, both Officers and People. Now if there had been more Congregational Churches, than one, in each of these Cities, (as is supposed) there is far more reason why he would rather have Written to them under the Style of several Churches, in such a place (as he doth when he Writes to the Galatians) when he urgeth such Duties upon them, rather than to have given them the Title of one Church, in respect of an Association for Government only: If he had Written of matters of Government only, or chiefly to them, then the expression of calling them one Church, had been suitable to the Duties he exhorts them to; but the Duties principally concerning them, as they were Members of distinct Congregations, having a nearer communion both toward their Officers fixed to them, and the People fixed in a near communion with them, he would rather have used the Style of Churches, than of one Church, if there had been many Churches in those Cities. And farther, since according to this Supposition, the primary relation of Pastors to Churches, being in the several distinct Congregations; but the Relation of these Members one to another, as they are a Classical Church, being but a secondary relation, it were strange, that when the Holy Ghost Writes and speaks to such and such Churches, in such or such a City (supposing many) he should Write to them only under the Notion of a Classical Church, and mention that only, and not mention their other Church-State, as being several Churches, making one Church, nay, not so much as speak, that they were several Congregations. Since they are Churches Congregational in the Language of the Holy Ghost, and that the main of what is a Church (as hath been shown) falls upon them as such; how can we think, that this Association, into one Church, which is a secondary thing, should wholly carry away and swallow up the Name, Style and Title of the other. And that, which further strengthens this consideration, is, that when they Write to Churches, in a Nation or in a Province (as in Galatia, and in Asia, and in Judea and the like) if that a politick Association, (such or the like Association to this, whereby it is affirmed, that in one City, many particular Congregations are made one Classical Church for Government) If such a one were intended, then they would as well, and by the same reason (in Writing to such Churches in a Nation or Province) have Written to them under the notion of one Church, as well as when they did Write thus to them in a City. But the Apostle when he Writeth to a whole Province, then he saith Churches (although, according to Presbyterian principles, they are as truly one Church in the same political respect, that a Classical Church is one, in respect of many Congregations of a City) but on the contrary, when he Writeth to a City, he doth give them the Name of Church, Without the least mention of Churches therein, as making that one Church. And the Reason is strong, that he should have done the one, as well as the other; For if many Churches were called one Church in a City, because that's the greater Association, whereby the lesser Churches were governed; by the same reason he would much rather have called the Churches of Judea one Church, because the Association, in a Province and a Nation, is larger and greater than that of many Congregations, in a Classical Church in a City.

And whereas some argue from the Multitude of Believers in a City, as too great to make but one Congregational Church. If the case had been so, it had been then more conducible for the Apostle to have expressed the Multitude in such Cities, by the Name of Churches in a City, than by calling them one Church. And it is strange, that when the Story is told of the Apostles coming to such or such a City (as in the Acts it is) it is still said they called the Church together, as when the People were called together in Antioch, Acts 14. 27. For, if they had been many Congregations, and had met in parts by way of Distribution, it had been a much more proper Phrase, to say they called the Churches, if there had been more in such a City.

Object. The Apostles still, in Writing unto the Saints in great Cities, calleth them one Church; and it were strange, if that, in the Apostle's times, they should not have multiplied in such great Cities, to more than one Congregation.

Answ. 1. As you say, it is hard to think that there were no Cities, that had but one Congregation; so it is as hard to think, that all the Churches, in other places, Villages and Cities, should not be uniform.

2. There might be some Cities, where there might be more Churches than one, to whom they Wrote, as the City of Rome to whom Paul Wrote, might have more Churches than one; for he doth not, in all his Epistle, call the Saints there one Church; and though he speaks of a Church in Aquila and Priscilla 's House, yet his Phrase of Writing otherwise, is only to the Saints at Rome.

3. All those, that Write against Episcopacy, both of the Scottish Nation and of our own, have with one Mouth affirmed, that it cannot by manifest Argument be made out, that the Churches, mentioned in the New Testament, were more than could meet in one Congregation.

4. The meaning is, that when the Story of the Acts, and those Epistles were written, that then there were no more, but not that afterwards there were no more.

5. Although the Apostles did specially Preach to Cities; yet let it be considered, how little time they were forced to stay in Cities, because they were to lay the Foundation of the Gospel in all the World. And though Paul staid three years in or about Ephesus, yet it doth not appear that he staid so long time in Ephesus itself, but as in the 13th and 14th chapter of the Acts, it is said they went into the Countries, so likewise he did.

6. The Apostles did teach the Saints in every City to become one Church, and to hold together so long as possibly they could continue in one Congregation with edification. And how great and large a Synagogue in a City was, we may see by that Instance of Capernaum. And the Christians met in the Cities, and built Synagogues for Meeting places, as well as the Jews were allowed to do in the Cities of the Gentiles.

CHAP. X.

LET us now see, whether of these two should in reason be the Institution of Christ, and which, a Classical or Congregational Church would suit most with the condition of the Saints under the New Testament. God hath still molded his Institution, and varied it himself according to what was the future condition of his Church Whilst the Church was continued in Families, as under the Old Law, he sorted his Government and Ordinances accordingly. When they grew up to a Nation, he fitted a New Government on purpose for them. When in the Wilderness, a Tabernacle only; when fully settled under a Kingly power, a Temple. Now under the Gospel, the condition of Saints in Nations varying in several Ages, he hath framed his Ordinance of Church-State suitably.

If it be said that therefore when Churches should multiply to a Nation, then the Government is to be suited unto that Nation as such.

We reply, 1. When we see whole Nations truly turn Christian, an answer is to be given.

2. God saw it would fall out otherwise with his Saints in the New Testament, that they would still be Redeemed out of Nations, therefore still suited his Government to his own design.

3. If in his Providence he foresaw that Nations, being turned to him, should have an answerable Government as the Jews had, he would have given Rules answerable. As although the Church in the Wilderness was not given up to a Kingdom, and had not a set place for Worship; and was not come to be disposed of in several Cities, (as when they should inherit the Land of Canaan they should) yet God, foreseeing what he would bring them to, did not give Laws only that suited their Church State in the Wilderness for the present, but he told them, that when they should come into Canaan, he would choose a place to which they should bring their Offering, that this should be the Law of their King, and also appointed what their Government should be, when dispersed into several Cities and Towns. And so answerably if he had intended a National Form of Government, for his Saints under the New Testament, and all things suitable thereunto, (when as yet they were not grown up to National Churches) he would aforehand have prescribed Laws accordingly.

Now 1. This Institution of Congregational Churches, was such as would suit all times of the beginning of the Gospel, and of the continuance of the Gospel. The first Churches were such necessarily as was said afore, and when multiplied, did still continue so, and might govern themselves without Foreign Oppression.

2. It suits all places, Villages as well as Cities; and we must suppose Saints to be as well in Villages, as in Cities. And those Villages had Elders for Worship and Government, and the rights of a Church. And if God were to make one uniform Law, why should the Institution be conformed to Cities, as is pretended, and that made the pattern, and the Jurisdiction of all the rest, rather than that of Villages; for God is the God of the Valleys, as well as the Hills; and there must be the same uniform Rule of both. But now, though the Institution, to have the Saints with their Elders make one Classical Church, might be supposed to suit Cities well enough (for it was but having many Churches in them) yet the lesser Towns it would not suit thus to form them up, under the Government of a Presbytery of many Congregations, especially in those times when they were scattered.

3. This Institution of Congregational Churches, suits also with all conditions of the Church of Christ.

1. With the times of Persecution, as well as the times of Peace. I may say of this Congregational Government as of Faith; it is said of Faith, that it is a standing grace; it is the Materia prima, the first matter, out of which all riseth, and into which all resolveth. A Man liveth by it in Prosperity, and if he be in Desertion, all is resolved into it. And so it is of Congregations, it agrees with all Estates, with all times: And though you suppose other Governments, yet that always existeth, and all begin from thence; therefore these are called Ecclesiae primae, and the other Ecclesiae ortae.

2. It suiteth the condition of the Saints, being scattered all the World over. Whole Nations are not Saints fit for Churches, for the Saints are but a company redeemed out of Nations. As therefore among the Jews, when they were scattered, their Government was a Synagogue-Government, (therefore some think they began that of Synagogues, when they first went into Babylon, which we will not dispute) therefore, as Synagogue-Government, suited with the scattered, the dispersed condition of the Jews; so this suits best with the scattered condition of the Saints under the Gospel.

3. The constitution also of Churches was certainly uniform in Cities, and in Villages, or wheresoever, or in what time soever, the Government of hem was uniform. When Christ bad them Teach every Nation, to do what he commanded them, he intended that the Rule should be uniform, whatever Government the Nations had, and therefore also the Apostle's Phrase and Style is still, 1 Cor. 17. 17. So I ordain in all the Churches; and that which will suit all Churches, all States, all Times, is certainly rather the Pattern than any other. Christ did not make one Form for Cities, and another for Villages; one Form for times of Persecution and another Form for times of Peace; for what suited times of Persecution, would suit times of Peace also: And as the Laws of Men, consider what is best for the generality of Men, so the Institutions of Christ considered, what was best for his Church of the New Testament, throughout all Ages, and all conditions and places whatsoever.

4 It suits best for the condition of Churches in times, whether pure or corrupt, reformed, or to be reformed, when the Churches are generally overgrown with corruptions.

5. By reason of this, that the Institution of Christ doth thus fall upon Congregational Churches, to be those Churches which should be the complete Seat of Worship and Government; there was a provision made (and in the event hath fallen it out prosperously) that the Truth and the Substance of his Ordinances, and of Church-State, (taking it as it is itself a Ministerial Ordinance) and of the Ministry, might and hath continued in all Ages. For there being a necessity (if there should be any Worship at all) to have Congregations for to continue, and uphold the public Worship of God; and to that end, to have Ministers over them to perform the Worship, in this Fundamental Institution of his, all that profess the Christian Name throughout the World in all Ages have agreed; and by this means, Jesus Christ hath preserved the Truth of a Church and Ministry, and Substance of Worship in the midst of all those varieties of Government of several sorts of Patriarchs, Archbishops and Bishops, in that Hierachical way, as also of General Councils, and other Assemblies Subordinate to them; and so whatsoever false Superstructions have been made, or whatever Interruptions; yet still this Fundamental constitution of his hath remained, and could not have been secured to continue in all Ages, (fall out what would) in any other way.

But the great thing, upon which all depends, is to find out what essential thing it is, that Church Institution should fall upon. We say, that the end of Churches is a fixed and immediate Communion of Saints, in all Ordinances; and that the Formal and External part of the Institution, is but suited so as to attain this end; which is, that Saints should be knit together, to meet in one for Ordinances, having their Officers that have relation to them, by whom the Ordinances are externally dispensed. So as it is not an accidental thing, or mere external thing (as that they should meet in one place,) that the Institution falleth upon, but it is the most solid and substantial and essential thing, that can be supposed to be the ground of so great an Institution. We shall gradually make out the meaning of this assertion, by these following considerations; which will make the glory of Christ in this Institution, and the consentaneousness of it to Spiritual Reason, and the highest ends that may be supposed to be aimed at, to appear.

1. Communion of Saints is the adequate end of a Church as such, be it what kind of Church soever; and therefore in the Creed, the Church Catholic, and communion of Saints are joined together, and do follow one another; for the one is the end of the other; and all particular Churches, are therefore also called the Churches of the Saints. And as the Church is framed and formed answerably, such is the communion; and such as the communion is to be, such is the Church to be rckoned, the one being suited to the other.

The Church Catholic, (as now it is called, in respect it is in all Nations) although it is one Body to Christ; yet the Saints therein cannot have, as Saints, a fixed standing set communion, but occasional; either occasional if outward, or secret and invisible if inward, such as the Church, in one Age, hath with the Church of another Age that went afore, such as the Church now in Heaven, and in Earth may have together: And in that respect, an Ordinance or an Institution, could not so well fall upon it. But meet it was, that besides this kind of communion, there should be on Earth a communion of Saints, suited to the State of the Church whilst on Earth, that should be most entire, and the nearest that can be, and most resembling Heaven, for the public Worship and Glorifying of God in a common enjoyment of Ordinances.

2. Under the Gospel, the communion of Saints is nearer and more intimate, than was under the Law, as the Church exceeded it, so the communion is to exceed it; and as their Ordinances are more Spiritual, so their communion. There is a greater distance of the Saints of the Church Catholic, in their Habitations under the Gospel, than of the Jews under the Law. The Jews were nearer as People dwelling in one Land; and so were capable of a nearer communion all together, than the Church Catholic now is capable of; yet because it was a Nation, therefore their communion was ordered in the way of a National polity, as a Government by Representation, and a Representative Worship, wherein the Females, were Represented in the Males; and yet not frequent and often neither, for it was but three times a year. The communion therefore of Saints then was carried on in a Worldly way, (as the State of Men in Kingdoms, and Common-wealths, and in Civil things is) and therefore it was a Worldly external Frame, and the communion answerable. And that of the Synagogues, was but for the reading the Word and Prayer only, and not for all sorts of Ordinances of Worship. The Catholic Universal Church, cannot attain to so general a communion under the Gospel, as the National Church of the Jews did, by reason of the difference of Language, and distance of places, and dispersions into all Nations; and yet they were to attain to a nearer communion, and more intimate, and the entirest that the Saints on Earth are capable of; and so to have Churches framed, as to attain to this.

3. The greatest and intirest communion that Saints are capable of, must therefore be by parts on Earth, to have communion in public Worship and Ordinances. It is therefore necessary, that the Saints should be cast into such Assemblies, wherein they might partake of one Spirit by one Bread, whereby they might partake of one and the same Bread individually; which is therefore called the communion of the Body of Christ, and whereby they are made one Bread, as in the 1 Cor. 10. 17. And therefore it is, that the Scripture doth express that communion by that word Meeting, or being together in Ordinances, Acts 2. 46. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , with one Mind or Spirit, importing that which is the Spirit and Life of public Worship, which (above all other Actions done by a Multitude) is to have the nearest Union of Spirits, wherein the entire communion of Saints lieth, and whereby God is glorified. And for several Churches to meet in the same manner, or at the same time, for the same kind of Ordinances, herein doth not lie so much communion, as an uniformity between them. But this is the most internal lively communion, to join in the same Act, at the same Instant, altogether to God; and is the greatest imitation of Heaven, where one Spirit will run through all, and God will be all in all at once.

4. And to make yet the communion nearer, (for it is to be the nearest) it must be of persons fixed and constant in such a communion; for that is still a more entire nearness, that the same Persons should still in an ordinary way, meet to join in their Spirits in the same Ordinances, and so inwardly and jointly thus to glorify God, as well as externally. The continuance and the fixedness of the same persons, makes still the union the intirer. And therefore if, for to enjoy the intirest communion of Saints on Earth, it was necessary to part the Saints for public Worship; then also it is needful to part them into fixed Bodies, which still also is the nearest resemblance to Heaven, which is the perfection of communion.

5. To make this communion yet more entire, it is necessary that as they should fixedly join in Ordinances of Worship, so in all other; and that the same persons should enjoy the same Ordinances, and one kind of Ordinances as well as another; that as they are Preached to by the same Elders, so they should join in the same Prayers, have the same breathings of the Spirit from those Prayers, partake of the same Bread, feed at the same Table; As in a Family, the entireness of it lies in this, that they have the same Father and Mother, the same Master and Mistress, partake of the same Bread every way, and of the same Family Duties and Family Comforts, and so now this communion, in a particular Church, both as to Worship and Government, is uniform. Yea and Acts of Government being Worship (which the Souls of Men are edified by, as well as they are by Sermons) are wholly Spiritual: It is not here as in Israel whose Government was more carnal; for it was the judging of civil causes (Civil and Ecclesiastical Government, being all one, mixed together, as the Church itself was) it was in such controversies and cases, as now men plead in Civil Bars about Estates; only God was pleased to give Laws himself for ordering of such things. But the Apostle in 1 Cor. 5. and 1 Cor. 6. severeth the judging of matters in the Church, as a Church by way of Excommunication, &c. from their judging of things about this Life. A Church as a Church meddleth not now with them, for these affairs of it are wholly Spiritual.

So that for a conclusion, if all the Wits of World should have studied a way to contrive what kind of Church to Erect for the intirest communion of Saints, to attain to that end which is the end of a Church Instituted, they could have pitched upon no other but this; neither could there have been such a way found out of all other as this is. If that the Church Universal, the communion of it had been only occasional, the Saints meeting only by virtue of being Members of the Catholic Church promiscuously and indefinitely, sometimes in one company, sometimes in another, though by this promiscuous and indefinite way, there had been a more extensive communion of Saints indeed, (that is, each Saint might have come to have joined in public Worship with more numbers of Saints, at several times, with more variety) yet it had not been so intensive, so near and high a communion, as for the same Saints under the same Officers fixedly to meet. And besides, they could not have had an Excommunication out of this communion, unless first knit into fixed bodies, neither could they have chosen Officers, unless such whose Office should cease with the Act, and performance, which indeed is not an Office; for that is a separation of a Man to a continued performance of a Duty. Nor would it have brought that blessing, that a constant dedication of Men to an Office for perpetuity would do, which could not be done in that occasional fluid way.

If that such Congregations and Officers, though bounded within such a compass of a City or so, should have remained unfixed, though' associated together within such a circuit or compass; yet this would not have made this entireness of Communion of Saints; as by this way of fixed Congregations there is. And also, in this case, the Institution of a Church would have been pitched upon someone part, or particular kind of Communion, and upon something less principal in it, and not upon the adequate and full foundation of it.

For First, In this unfixt way of People and Officers, though bounded in a compass, this number of Saints should have heard this Minister today, and with other Saints have heard another to Morrow, none meeting one day together, that do another day, in which also all might run to one Officer still where he Preached and leave the other, which would not breed an orderly communion, but rather a confusion. But to have the same Officers to be fixed, and the same persons to enjoy the dispensation of the same Officers, as in a Family, Children and Servants are under the same Governors, this is a nearer and intirer communion.

Secondly, In this classical way, there would indeed be a constant and a fixed communion in Government, of the Elders (namely of such a circuit) who, when matter of Government was to be exercised, should all meet; but they would not permit (in such a way) or let in the Elders of the same Province, to meddle, as often as they would come, no not though occasionally they were present there, or came thither to that end. But now to have the same Elders and People fixed for all acts of Government, and yet to have them unfixed in respect of performing of Worship (when that is the main end both the of communion, and for which Elders are appointed) and not to have the same fixed companies of People that communicate in this company with those Elders, as in this unfixed way they have not, this would put too great an inequality, between communion in Government and communion in Worship, and make the unequality on the part of Worship rather, because Government is fixed of the same Persons, People and Elders, and yet Worship, wherein is the nearest communion, is left unfixed. And surely, if communion, and entireness of public communion, be the end of a Church, the frame, and mould of the Church should rather be cast, and shap'd to that which is the intirest communion, than unto that which is more loose. Now in Worship (as to the Acts, and Duties of it performed) there is a capacity of an entirer communion, than in Government, because the Duties thereof are more constant.

If, Thirdly, The People be fixed for Worship in several Bodies, but the Elders Fluid in a circulatory Preaching, (as it is pleaded) and so they are made one Church, because the same Elders that teach, do also Govern them too and so they have a near communion in Worship too, because they are at times taught by the same Elders: If this (I say) be made a ground of moulding these several Congregations into one Church, yet it is defective. For it makes the Peoples communion, in enjoying the same Elders at times successively, to be the foundation of Church Institution (yea, and in this case of, the first Church proprie dicta, or properly so called) rather than the communion of Saints, and of the same persons of the Saints, meeting fixedly for Worship. But it is hard to conceive, how the oneness of a Church should be settled, rather on such a temporary communion in Elders, than on a constant communion in Ordinances, whenas the same Elders are enjoyed by these persons but at times; (which is an interrupted communion also) yea and there are no times neither, wherein as to Acts of Worship they enjoy the same Elders all together. Now that such a relation of Elders, and communion in them, in such a broken way, should carry away the great privilege of a thing (becoming the ground of the Institution of it) from constant communion, both of the same Saints and Elders, and be preferred thereto in this respect, seems strange. And if it be said, that yet the Saints themselves in this way meet, and have all communion in those Acts of Government, though not in Worship. Yet First; However it cannot be thought, that an occasional communion (as acts of Government comparatively are) should carry away the formation, the shaping and the institution of the first Church. Secondly; The Women (who though they have not the interest of Jurisdiction, yet of communion, and of deprivation, and of Virtual Assistance by their Prayers, &c. they have) are excluded; Unless such Churches be so framed that they also be present.

Fourthly; If we take that other Presbyterial way that is practiced, wherein they are fixed for communion in Worship, both Elders and People, but not for Government; yet, even here that fore-mentioned entireness of Government is parted, and the communion of Saints in that one respect divided. And being divided, the ground and foundation of all and either, being (as was said) the communion of Saints, is thereby weakened many ways. For 1. Still this communion is partial, and by that means each stands but upon one single Basis, whereas both join'd it might stand on two. For now in this case, the communion in Worship (the blessing of which should strengthen that of Censures, which is a casting out of the communion) is the ground of the meetings of each Congregation: But communion in Government in common, is the foundation of another Church over all Congregations. 2. A communion of Elders, rather than of the Saints, is the foundation of this supposed institution of a Church; and the communion of Saints therein is but representative, and at second hand, themselves being absent. It is a communion for them, but not a communion of them. Yea, they have no communion, not of presence in the Sentence and in the Execution, but are only Congregations of those Elders, that did make a Church concerned therein. But on the contrary, a communion of Saints, even in Government, is the ground and end of erecting of a Church, and therefore it is called one Church in relation principally unto them.

Now then to wind up all; If there may be such a communion of Saints under the Gospel, so adequate and entire, and Churches so formed, as that the same Saints should join in the same Worship, with a joint, constant, inward, individual communion therein, and these Saints may have, and do enjoy (as our Brethren grant) fixed Elders, by whose Ministry and Dispensation, they partake with them in the same Worship which makes their communion, yet comparatively more entire, (for in the Presbyterial way, there communion is principally by Elders, and therefore in this also, a due consideration is to be had, as adding a farther entireness) and these Elders being a Presbytery, yea and enough to make a Presbytery for all Acts of Government (as we shall after show a company of Elders in Congregations to be) at all which Acts of Government, which are for the edification of the Saints, they can be present, and have a personal communion, as well as in those of Worship; if also the communion of Saints be the end of Erection of particular Churches, and is the measure fitted; for finis dat Mensuram Mediis, the end gives Measure to the Means, and if this end may be adequately and entirely attained this way, why should partial ends be preferred to total and complete, all ends meeting in one? Yea if communion of Saints in Worship be the chief communion, yea and the communion of Saints be the principal fundamental cause of all Church Institution, Why should not it draw to itself communion in Government also, when there is a sufficiency for the performing the Acts thereof? Why should the communion of Elders be taken off from the communion of the Saints? Why should a Presbytery be erected, that is taken off from a Church and Assembly of Saints; When yet there is a sufficient Presbytery over a Church of Saints, that meet for all acts both of Worship and Government, and when yet these greater Presbyteries would challenge their power from this lesser Presbytery of Churches, rather than from the name Church, and yet take it off from these Churches, they pretend to be a Presbytery unto? Yea, why should any affirm, that, although a particular Congregation had a sufficiency of Elders, yet it is God's Ordinance that they should associate, for whereas the avoiding of Division is pretended, it makes a worse division, dividing Worship from Government, and Elders from the particular Churches of Saints, and so parting from them, that wherein they ought to have the intirest communion. So, as all things considered, the institution of a particular Church, falls most haply, uniformly, and adequately upon a Congregation entirely and alone, and upon no other manner of Assemblies at all.

CHAP. XI.

BUT this being granted, that Churches in the New Testament are formed and fixed Bodies, which are either the Seat of Worship, or of Ecclesiastical Government, and likewise that there is a necessity it should be so, yet the next question will be, whether the settled Form and Order of these Bodies, the extent, bounds and compass thereof, into which the Church Universal should be parted and divided, and which should be the Seat of Government, be set out by Christ's special appointment and institution, or hath been left by him to Men to frame and order, according to the common rules of edification, as matters of circumstantial order use to be. But we humbly conceive this to be a point of such order, and of so much weight and moment, and belonging to the substance of Government, as that, if there were any special institution and designment of other things, belonging to the order of Church Government, then also of this: As appears to us whilst we take estimate and comparison, with any other particular, acknowledged to be the subject of institution, as also established by more direct warrant. For the satisfaction of this Query, we shall give the general demonstration of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of it, That it is and must needs be so: whatever the form and extent of these Churches and Bodies, that are the Seat of Government shall prove to be, which whether Congregational, Classical, Provincial, or National, we yet dispute not. What at the present we endeavor to make forth is only this in the general, that whatsoever kind of form or extent they are molded into, this form and extent must be set out and taken from some institution. The Quale, or what sort of Bodies, and what measure thereof Christ hath instituted, is to be afterward discussed. And although the proof hereof will not be full and complete until the demonstration of the Quale, or of what is the particular form or boundary and extent, both of Church and the Elders jurisdiction, and this be shewn to have been instituted; yet we shall for the present endeavor such a demonstration as shall be sufficient for a general foundation to that which follows, and enough to confirm the point as in the General.

Now for the more distinct proceeding in this, there is a double Seat of Government conceived to be in these Bodies of Saints and Elders, whether according to our Brethren's Principles or our own. According to our Brethren's, all Government is put into a Body of Elders, and so they make the Elders the subjectum inhaesionis, the inherent subject of all the Power; and the Church or the company of the Faithful to be subjectum occupationis, that is, the subject committed to them to be governed. Even as in a Corporation, where though' the Power and Government is in the Magistrates alone, and so they are the subject of inherency, in whom the power resides; yet a limited extent of Jurisdiction, namely, a Corporation of People, in such a compass or precinct, is the subjectum occupationis, the seat, the circuit over whom, and among whom their Government is extended, and within confined. But if according to our principles, the Government is instituted by Christ to be mixed of an Aristocracy of Elders, and a Democracy of the People, yet still the like supposition necessarily ariseth, that there is, and must be, a limited seat or precinct, in which this Ecclesiastical Government is exercised, which we call the Seat of Government; And look, what Authority is in the Body of Elders, as Elders, it is within that seat or compass. That which therefore these following General Arguments and Demonstration did aim at, is, to prove that the extensive Limits, and Bounds of such Ecclesiastical Authority; and accordingly the proportion and measure of those Bodies, or Churches, the Seat thereof, and in which it is exercised, is a matter of that nature, weight, and moment, as to have a special Line of institution, by which it may be measured forth. And to that end the demonstration hereof shall be framed, and fitted to prove these two things.

1. That the forming up of Elders into Bodies, or Presbyteries, and the Limits and Boundaries of the extent of their Power, is a matter of that nature, as must be set out by Institution.

2. That answerably thereunto, the setting ou • the compass, measure, limits and extent of those Bodies of Saints and Elders making Churches (which are the seat or subject, in which a company of Elders shall have a Jurisdiction, and that company of Saints the privilege of Government, and unto which the extent of their Jurisdiction is to be limited) must also be set out by a special Institution, and that their privilege, to become such, depends upon a special Charter also.

We might speak to each, and either of these severally and apart, but that indeed these two, the setting the limits to the extensive power of Elders; and also the setting out the measure of those Bodies unto which their Government (whether joined with the People, or alone, we yet argue not) shall extend and be confined, are both commensurable each to other, and do mutually argue each other. For all Power and Government in what Company or Body of Rulers soever, that are the subject in whom it resides, must have a seat, compass or precinct of men united in one, in which to exercise their power. And the true measure of their extensive power is from the measure of the extent of that seat, so as the proving of either of them to be necessarily done by Institution, is to prove both, for they mutually argue each other, and the extent of the one is resolved into the other. And therefore if the extent of any one be of Divine Institution, the other must be of Divine Appointment also, as we shall after show.

Seeing therefore that these two are so conjunct in the nature of the thing, and mutually the demonstrations each of other; we will in discoursing of them, put them together, sometimes giving demonstrations that jointly concern both, and are common unto both; sometimes such as concern either of them singly, in such a method as may best serve to clear the truth of this Assertion, which to us lays the foundation of deciding this great controversy, as in the sequel will appear.

We shall rank our Arguments under these four heads.

1. That these two forementioned, are substantial points of Order, and therefore are to be fetched from Institution.

2. That they are matters of such Order, as other things are of, which we do find (and all do so acknowledge) to have been matter of Institution.

3. That the Wisdom, and Prerogative of Christ (who is the Supreme Institutor, and Law-giver to his Church) is as much concerned and interested; in the Institution of these, as in any other things he hath Instituted about Officers, and Church-Government.

4. That Spiritual Reason, suited to the Nature of the things themselves, fall in to confirm this.

The touch of the consequence of these three first, is justly founded upon what we have already said of Institution. As that the Colossians received their Order from Jesus as the Lord, as well as their Faith. And besides; That the Substantials of Church Government should be set out by Institution, all sides have acknowledged, and the case therefore must needs be like, in all matters of like Order and Substantialness, for the Wisdom and Prerogative of the Law-giver is alike concerned, to appoint one as well as another; and else too, Church-Government consisting of things of like rank and nature, some of them should yet be Divine, some Human, and so it would consist some part of Gold, and some of Wood. So as here we need but apply those generals to the confirmation hereof; but yet we shall further endeavor to confirm them all along, in the mention of, and together with those particular proofs, which we shall allege for the Heads forementioned. And those reasons shall not only or simply be drawn, from parallelling these two points of Order with other things, which are substantial in all Government, and are acknowledged almost by all, especially by our Brethren, to be matter of Divine Institution in, and about Church Officers and Government. We shall not thus only deal by consequence, in the closure of the proofs for the second Head, but also by Scripture, more directly holding forth the truth thereof, and all backed and seconded with an harmony of Spiritual Reasons, according to the nature of the thing falling in, and suiting to it.

Only let this be taken along and remembered, that the scope of these Reasons, in this place, is only to demonstrate this in the general, and in the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that it is so, and and not now to prove the point, by laying out the very particular bounds and limits, set by the Holy Ghost. For that is to be tried out afterwards, by our Brethren and Us, who of Us can show the surest and most ancient Land-marks hereof, which particulars when they shall come to be delineated, and set out, and confirmed by Scripture and Reason, the proof of this general truth will be found more full and complete, by whatever either side can show to be the true and notive characters of the Institution thereof. But till then, we must necessarily here in this place, content ourselves with general Arguments, and which are accordingly suited to this scope, and none other.

1. I shall begin with the first Head; That both these are as substantial matters in Church-Government, as any of those other about the Institution of Officers Power, &c. can be supposed to be. To evidence which, what fairer estimate can be taken, whereby to judge of what is substantial in this Government, than from what is in all Men's apprehensions such, in any Government whatever? Now take any Society of Men that are embodied for Government, and if the Officers and Laws of it are defined, the Common-wealth or Body itself, the Bounds and Limits of its Jurisdiction are defined also, and by the same hand, the one at first is constituted, the other is too, and this is true, especially of such bodies, as hold, from a supreme power, the Charter for their Government, as all Churches do hold their Order from Christ the Supreme Founder. In this case, it is every way as essential to have the Body of People itself formed up into an Unity, and the extent of their Jurisdiction, set by that Supreme Power, as to have Officers over it, and Laws by which they are Governed. The first is necessary in itself for the good of those bodies (in relation to orderly Government) and it is as necessary as the setting out the extent of every Man's Lands (which he possesseth, and of which the abutments and limits are as exactly mentioned in their deeds, as anything else. And thus necessary is setting down the extent of Jurisdiction, of every Incorporate Town, and accordingly set forth in their Charter. Thus London is differenced from Westminster, which otherwise would be judged but one City, and one Incorporate Body; And this was necessary in their first edition, and to preserve distinction and entireness of Government without confusion and usurpation. 2. For the other particular, it is as necessary to confine those Officers and their Jurisdiction within the compass of certain seats and bodies politick, as to define and limit the acts of their power, and wherein to judge and intermeddle. In all civil Bodies, Kingdoms, Common-wealths, &c. their Laws are as exact to set down the limits of Jurisdiction, the extent of power, as the degree, or kind, or sort of acts, of power to be put in execution by those entrusted with it; and all Officers in several Provinces or Bodies Incorporate, that give a Commission of Power, from the Supreme Power, have in their Commissions and Charters, as express a mention and definition of the circuit and extent of power, as of their acts of Power, so as a greater nullity ariseth not from any other thing, as from extending power committed beyond the bounds of Jurisdiction; and it is a Premunire as well to do an act of Government out of their Jurisdiction, as an undue act within it, as to Arrest or Imprison out of their jurisdiction. And that Mayors or Bailiffs shall judge only within such a Town or Borrough, is as express in their Charter (or at least that the limit of their Jurisdiction being determined within the same, their Power without is null and void) as that they shall be Mayors and Bailiffs there. And thus this parallel confirms both parts of the Argument, both that it is alike substantial, and also that therefore it alike depends upon the determining of the Supreme Lawgiver. And although this estimation be taken from Man's Law and Civil Government, yet it is in a matter, that is alike common to both. If indeed Church Government could be supposed to be a matter of that nature, that such boundings and determinings of the Seat and Extent of Elders Jurisdiction, in order to Government, were not existent in it, and necessary thereunto as well as to other Government also, but might be transacted promiscuously without any such boundings, then indeed the form of the parallel would not carry it to erect anything in Church-Government, by a parallel from the Civil. But all that (do or will acknowledge any Ecclesiastical Government, as they do acknowledge fixed Bodies of Saints and Elders (which the former assertion cleared) so withal they must acknowledge such a determination necessarily to be made to bound those Seats of Government, and Extent of Elders Jurisdiction, either by God or Men. Now therefore in this we only argue, that the determination thereof, is of that nature, that it must be set out by the Supreme Lawgiver, as well as other things are, that concern this Government. Thus much however is preparatory to what follows, that this Assertion is most rational and coincident with the like principles of reason human, though of, and about a matter Spiritual. Yet because it will be said it is but an Argument from Men (which yet in the case of Ministers maintenance, as in other things also, the Apostle useth to produce and confirm thereby the rationality of a Divine Ordinance, about this matter, when yet there were other grounds also for it in the Scripture that it is such) therefore we will proceed to the other general head, that the forming Saints into Churches, and setting the bounds thereof, are matters of such order as God and Christ hath Instituted, we shall endeavor to make forth (proceeding by degrees) both by parallelling these with other matters of Order, about Officers and Church-Government which God hath Instituted, and by demonstrating that these are as great points of Order, as those other which Christ as a Lord hath given: And we shall also evidence it, by the addition of such Scripture-proofs and instances, as do directly hold forth the truth thereof, and so confirm too, that other parallel reason about them.

Now to prove the parallel between this, and other matters of Order, let this be premised and taken along, that this second sort of reasons, drawn from comparing these, or either of them, with other things that are instituted, and thence proving the Institution of these also (though we insist not only or wholly on them) is in this case just and sure. For we stretch not the argument from parallel or like reason to find out any new thing in Church-Government, whose existency is argued and founded merely upon parallel reason. That way of reasoning we leave to our Brethren, in rearing up their whole Fabric upon the parallel reason of a particular Church, Mat. 18. to the prejudice of that foundation which these are built on. But the limiting of Elders Jurisdiction, and the seat of their ordinary Government, being a thing that necessarily existeth, and which must be acknowledged to have place already, or else no orderly Government can at all be supposed to be (as both sides do acknowledge) If then the question shall be (which is the thing now before us) whether the setting out those limits, &c. be a matter of that nature, as should be set out by the Institution of Christ, as other matters of parallel nature are? Or whether Christ hath left them as things of that inferior alloy and nature, and of so small moment, as to be determined by the common rules for edification, as other circumstantial matters are? In deciding this Case and Question, and for the general demonstration of it, certainly parallel reason will carry it, that these things are to be set out by God, and not left to Men, especially when there shall be added unto these, Scriptures that directly speak the same thing, that parallel reason doth. This being premised, we shall speak to each singly.

I. We begin first with that of the bounding the extent of the power and jurisdiction of Elders; that this is to be found set out by Institution will appear, for the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of it in the general, both ways, either, 1. By comparing it with other matters of Order, &c. Or, 2. By what the Scriptures do more directly hold forth, about setting the limits of the extensive power of Officers; Or, 3. By Reason falling in therewith.

1. It is evident by comparing this point of order with other things which our Brethren themselves, according to their principles, do hold to, and acknowledge to be matters of Instituted order, in many of which we also concur with them. Let but an impartial comparison and estimate be taken and made with other things, concerning Church Elders and their Power, which they cleave to, as instituted, even to a nullity for the want of it in other persons and things. They do show themselves sufficiently tender and jealous of having Institutions, for the exercise of any part of Ecclesiastical Power, and will allow none but persons authorised by an Institution, and in such and such a way, to the exclusion of others for want of Institution. For example, 1. Why else do they exclude the Body of the People from having an interest of suffrage in Excommunication, or casting out of the Church, or ordaining Elders, and confine these Acts, and all other supposed Acts of Government, unto Elders only? 2. Although to Excommunicate, &c. be an Act of Government, that belongs to the Office of Eldership, yet they would allow no one Elder to Excommunicate alone, no not in that Church whereof he is Pastor in a special fixed relation, but it must be Elders united into an Aristrocracy, because it is by Institution so implied, Tell the Church, &c. which is always more than one. Yea, they Assert that such an Act of Excommunication is Null and Void if but by one Elder alone. Yea, 3. If any one Pastor though never so eminent, should be set up in a lawful Presbytery to be of the Quorum in that Presbytery, wherein he is a Member and an Elder, so as nothing should be done but with, and by his consent, and suffrage, though not without the rest of the Presbytery also, (which was all that Power, that Bishops anciently challenged and exercised) yet this would be, and is denied to any, as a thing beyond that degree of Power given any one Man among the rest. And 4. Those that are acknowledged Elders, namely Ruling Elders, they would strictly debar from Preaching, from Praying in Public, or Blessing the People, or Administring the Sacrament, because these are Acts of the Preaching Elder's Office by Institution, or else why are they excluded if Christ would not have them so? Yea, 5. Though the substance of the Act of Ordination (which they call Missio Potestativa) be an Act of the whole Presbytery, Ruling Elders and others; yet the Right of laying on of hands, which is the lesser, they allow not to Ruling Elders, but appropriate it to Preaching Presbyters in the Presbytery. And 6. Although there may be many Elders in a particular Church, that make up therein an Eldership, who when alone, without Neighbor Churches, did exercise all, and had complete Power of Excommunication, &c. within themselves (as they grant) yet when Churches came to be Multiplied, or there are Neighbor Churches whom they may associate with, many of our Brethren hold, that in this case they have no longer Warrant or Power (at least not as to the exercise of Government within themselves) but are to join in common with those other Elders of Churches for all Acts of Government. And all this must be because Christ hath, by Institution, so fixed the Power of Governing (in respect of the Acts thereof) as they are not, by any other or any otherwise, to be put in execution. Yea, 7. If that the Churches go and choose,