A survey of the summe of church-discipline. Wherein the vvay of the churches of New-England is warranted out of the vvord, and all exceptions of weight, which are made against it, answered : whereby also it will appear to the judicious reader, that something more must be said, then yet hath been, before their principles can be shaken, or they should be unsetled in their practice. / By Tho. Hooker, late pastor of the church at Hartford upon Connecticott in N.E.

I.

THe meaning of rhe question will best be discovered by our inquiry of the nature of profession, what it implies, and how it is taken in this discourse.

1. PROFESSION in the most frequent and familiar appre∣hension, signifies the publike manifestation of our assent to the doctrine of Faith, as in the word delivered and received by us, and our resolution to persist in the maintainance of the same. And then it is commonly used in a way of distinction from PRACTICE. And thus we say many professe fair, but their practice answers not their profession. And in this sense I suppose he doth not, nor indeed can he take profession, as serving his purpose.

For an excommunicate, who is cast out of the Church for his sinfull carriage, may notwithstanding in his judgement avouch all the truths of Scriptures, and outwardly desire to enjoy all Gods ordinances, and yet this gives him no formality of mem∣bership, because he may have all these and be cut off from mem∣bership.

2. Profession is yet larger, and includes also a sutable carriage in the life, so far as the profession which is made, is void of scan∣dalous courses.

3. As Profession must not be too narrow, so we must be care∣full not to make it too broad, as to exact more then is compe∣tible in truth unto it. Namely Such a profession of the faith and

assent to the doctrine of truth, is not here exacted, as that a person should not be counted to hold forth a profession of the faith, that (happily through ignorance and mistake) shall hold something differing from the truth, and from the apprehensions of many o∣ther both persons or Churches which professe the same.

As suppose a Christian maintain Justification by Christs pa∣ssive obedience only; Reprobation in massa corrupta; whether Children have habituall or actuall faith also. Such mistakes which may fall in some particulars, wherein pious and prudent men are of a different Judgement, do not make a person to be such a one, as doth not professe the faith savingly, so as may make way for membership in a visible Church warrantably.

Profession conceived according to the compasse of the former explication, doth make (i. add a causall power with baptisme to) a member of the visible Church, and so a member of all the visible congregation on earth.

The expressions of M. R. which lead me thus to conceive his meaning are diverse in divers passages of his books, lib. 1. c. 9. p. 116.

This doth not hinder but yet they may hear, and so be mem∣bers of a Church, l. 2, p. 125. 3. last lines. when a person removes from one Congregation to another, he makes a tacite cove∣nant, to serve God in all his ordinances, w••th that new society; but he is not therefore made a member of the visible Church, for that he was before. l. 2. p. 95. A called Pastor is a member, of the visible Church, before he be called to be the ••astour though he be no member of any particular Congregation.

(which expressions carry a kinde of mysterious difficulty with them, we shall take liberty to look further into them in the fol∣lowing discourse) Lastly, lib. 2. p. 194. the 2. last lines, he hath these words.

He who is a member of one visible congregation, is by his Baptisme and sincere profession, and his professed stan∣ding in covenant with God, a member of all visible congregati∣ons on earth, and is baptized into all congregations on earth.

Hence then we have two things to discusse.

1. That this profession makes not a member.

2. Being made and standing in his professed Covenant with God, or is not a member of every particular Congregation on earth.

To the first.

Argument. 1.

1. That which opposeth and hinders the work of Baptisme, and so hinders the constitution or formality of membership: that doth not help it forwards.

Because this is made the most especiall ingredient in the con∣stitution of that relation.

But Profession lawfull and warrantable may do so.

For suppose a man professe the whole truth of God, only he differs or mistakes in this, that all the Churches on earth are ill gathered, and therefore he dares not, and so refuseth to be baptized. This profession is a warrantable profession (as it hath formerly been explicated in the third conclusion) and yet this hinders the work and dispensation of baptisme in the sense their specified: and therefore hinders, and helps not to the con∣stitution of membership.

Argument. 2.

2. That which gives membership to a party, who had it not before, that can restore membership when he hath lost it. But this cannot restore membership lost.

That power which Iuridicè cast him out, that must Juridicè or regularly receive him in.

But the power of the Church in vertue of his consociation in that he falsified it, cast him out, and therefore must also receive him in upon his humiliation and subjection to the covenant again.

Whereas if possession and baptisme were sufficient to do the deed, baptisme remaining the same, as before his excommuni∣cation, and now his profession being renewed, there is the whole formality of membership, which experience evidenceth to be false.

Argument. 3.

3. That which gives actuall existence to a member, must give interest to a totum actually existing, and therefore to some par∣ticular Congregation.

For existentia est tantum Individuorum. Individuals only

exist, and since such a person is an Individuall member, he must have respect or reference to the whole that doth actually exist, and this the generall nature of the Catholike Church doth, in the par∣ticular Congregations only.

Beside if he be a particular member, he must be comprehen∣ded within the compasse of members, But all the members of the Church catholike (take it as an integrum) are comprehen∣ded within particular Congregations, therefore he must be a member of some of them, or else he comes not within the com∣passe or number of members.

Lastly, to be a member to the Catholike Church firstly, that is to be a member to an whole, which a man nor did, nor could see, nor do any homage to, nor receive any direction or influence of government from, This, I say, is such a sublimated imagination, that I must confesse, it is beyond my shallownesse to con∣ceive. I do beleeve, beyond the breadth of any mans brain to expresse.

That which is said afterwards, That a member is cast out of the Catholike Church antecedenter, will prove an apparent pa∣ralogisme, and we shall try the truth and strength of it, when we come unto that place.

The Proposition then hath free passe.

But (I assume) this profession gives no interest to any particu∣lar Congregation.

That which equally and indifferently belongs to all, that can make no particular appropriation to any one, why rather to this, then any other.

But this profession is equall and indifferent to all, as well as to any one, Therefore It can give no appropriation to any particular. No more, then if a woman love all Christian men, with Christian ••ffection, therefore she is a wife to this or that man. So it is here, it is not generall profession that will serve the turn: but there must be a peculiar ingagement and appropriation, to this or that particular body.

Argument. 4.

If a party become a member of a Church by this profession, then the Church hath Authority over him.

(For so she hath over her members) and can proceed against them in case of desert,

But by this profession no man hath authority over a party, for if they have any, let them claim it, and their own experience will easily evidence their mistake, 2. How can or why should one Church claim it more then another?

Argument. 5.

If this profession would give membership, then a man might make himself a member of this or that congregation, whether they would or no, nay, without the privity of the Congre∣gation.

A man baptized goeth into Africa, or to the utmost parts of the earth, he comes where many of the Churches of Christ are, he hath been baptized, and doth professe, and this is enough to make him a member of any Church, and therefore he hath right amongst them, as a member, whether they will or no.

We have done with the first.

The second now comes into consideration, namely.

Q, Whether a person, who is a member of one visible Congre∣gation, is, by his baptisme and sincere profession, and his professed standing in covenant with God, a MEMBER OF ALL THE CONGREGATIONS ON EARTH.

Ans. Negatur.

This tenet I cannot see how it can stand with the principles of truth, or with M. R. his own grounds.

Not with the principles of truth, because it draws many in∣conveniences with it, ne quid gravius dicam?

1. If he be a member of all the Congregations on earth, then he can perform the duty of a member unto all.

But that is impossible.

2. Look what liberty or power a man hath in one particular Congregation, as a member, he hath the same in all. because he is a member every where.

If so, then he hath as much in choosing all the Officers of all par∣ticular Congregations and in maintaining of them.

Then he cannot be cast out of one Congregation, unlesse all the Officers of all others do cast him out.

Nay no Officers of one Congregation shall proceed against him, for he will depart to another, because he hath as much right there

as here: and the Officers of those Congregations are his Pastors and Teachers, whose Judgement, presence, and concurrence, he may justly require, and none can justly deny, before any ad∣monition or Church censure shall passe against him.

3. Hence I cannot see, but it must of necessity follow, that one particular Congregation must be another, Ephesus must be Smyrna, and Smyrna must be Thyatira, For I reason thus.

Where there be the same Individuall members, there of nece∣ssity must be the same Individua•••• Integrum: and the ground is undeniable from the received rules of reason Integrum est totum, cui partes sunt essentiales. Therefore the same members carry the same essence which they giv•• unto the whole.

I assume then from the former grant.

There be the same Individuall members, of all the particular Congregations.

For if one professour be a member of every particular Congre∣gation, then by a parity of reason, All particular professours must be so: and so all of them members of one particular con∣gregation, and so of every one.

Hence, there being the same members of every particular con∣gregation, every particular Congregation is the same, and thence it will follow that Ephesus is Smyrna, and Smyrna to be Thyatira.

Hence, when Smyrna is destroyed, yet Smyrna remains, be∣cause it is the same with Thyatira, and that yet stands. &c.

Again secondly, this cannot stand with those principles of M^r. R. that are granted, and maintained, as maxims, which admit no deniall, l. 1 c. 7. p. 72.

We deny that Christ hath given power of Iurisdiction to one particular congregation over another.

Every member hath right to meddle with the Congregation whereof he is a member.

But a man professing, being baptized into one, he is a member of every particular congregation upon earth, therefore a member in every province and nation. Therefore the members of this province may send messengers to the Synod of another province. For the members of the Congregations of that province, may send messengers to the Provinciall Synod, But the members of the Congregations in this Province, are members of the Con∣gregations

of that Province, because they are members of all the Congregations on earth, Therefore they may send messengers to the Synod of that Province.

And this is a ready way to turn all into a chaos and confusion, and therefore certainly is not the way of God, who is the God of order, not of confusion.

Hence that expression of M, R. which he laies as a peremptory conclusion, will prove not to have so much certainty and solidity, as might appear at the first sight.

It is folly to seek for difference of particular Congregations, for Church-covenant makes not the difference, for a Church covenant is common to them all.

The Reply is.

That particular Congregations and Church-covenants doe not differ in their generall nature or essence, is a truth, and confessed on all hands, as that which is sutable to common sense. For things common or generall do not difference particulars, because in them they all agree.

But there is a specificating, or to speak more narrow, an Indi∣viduall formality, which makes a reall difference in the particu∣lar nature of this ••hurch, from that.

1. The rule was of old, Genus cum formâ constituit speciem.

2. If this and that particular combina••ion of Churches give a peculiar being distinct to this Classis from another, then the like may be in particular Congregations. That M. R. grants, and therefore this cannot be denied.

3. This Congregation differs really from another, habent se ut res & res, therefore there must be answerable grounds whence this reality of difference must proceed.

4. If they differ only in accidents, those must be common or pro∣per, If common they then bring in agreement and no difference. If proper, then they arise from some propriety, and peculiar for∣mality of the being of each Church. Nay,

5. How comes it that this Church hath power over this per∣son, which another hath not, but that he hath a peculiar inte∣rest in that, and they in him by speciall ingagement?

Lastly in all voluntary Covenants, which arise from the free consent of party and party, there is no difference to be found in those Covenants, but in the peculiar and Individuall formalities of speciall ingagements, which passe betwixt party

and party, and therefore the difference is there alone to be sought, and there alone it can be found.

Should a man come to a servant, and tell him, I am a master of servants, and it is a folly to seek for differences, for houshold covenant, or servants covenant, makes no difference; for ser∣vants covenant is common to all, there is only a difference in number, and some accidents, as there is betwixt many servants in my family. Therefore thou art my servant, and must do the work of my fam••ly.

Should people of one Congregation come to the Pastour of another, and tell him; come and bestow your pains constantly with us, for its all one, as if you did it with your own people, for its folly to seek for differences in covenant, betwixt Pastor and people, for that makes no difference, since the covenant is common to all. There is only a difference in number and ac∣cidents, as there is betwixt the Elders which we have in our Congregations, Therefore you are our Pastor, and must do the work of our Congregation.

That a man should be a generall Husband to all women, or a woman a generall wife to all men, because marriage-covenant is common to all, It seems strange at the first sight, and therefore its counted folly on our part to seek any difference here, and we are content to bear the charge of folly for it.