To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
IN the next place they proceed, and in an homely phrase, they say, Touching the English Conformist, the formablest of them are for us, in this poynt. And here they alledge B. Whitgift, D. Bilson, Whitaker, Bell, Willet, and Taylor.
Touching these I answer: First for B. Whitgift, though he confesse that in the Apostles time the state of the Church was popular,* 1.1 because the Church had interest almost in every thing; yet this proves not that he thought particular Congregations to be in∣dependent and uncontrolable by the Deputies of other Churches assembled in Synods. The ordinary practise of B. Whitgift, in judging the causes of other Con∣gregations, shewed that he was farre from the meaning of the Brownists in this poynt. His words are wrested by an unjust consequence to prove independency of Churches, and the undue power of Synods.
For D. Bilson, there is notable wrong done to him, in clipping his words, and defacing his testimonie, by omitting that which is most materiall in this contro∣versy. For when D. Bilson had sayd,(a) 1.2 Though the Presbyters had more skill to judge, yet the people had as much right to choose their Pastour; & if the most part of them did agree, they did carrie it from the Clergie; Thus farre Mr Canne reciteth his words, but here in the midst of the sentence, before the period be ended, he breakes off and leaves out this exception that is added, viz. so the persons chosen were such as the Canons did allow, and the ordainers could not justly mislike. In this exception D. B. acknowled∣geth, that there may be just cause to disanull the election of the people, if it be found worthy to be misliked. And his meaning is yet more evident by the story which in the sentence immediately preceding he alledgeth out of(b) 1.3 Socrates, tou∣ching the election of Proclus, who being chosen by the greater number was yet refused, because the election was sayd to be against the Canon of translating Bi∣shops, and so the people were forced to hold their peace. That which is prac∣tised in these Reformed Churches, is in this poynt the very same thing that D. B. testifies of the Primitive Church: for Classes and Synods doe not use to impose or choose Ministers. If particular Congregations doe choose a Minister, neither Classes nor Synods can disanull the election, if there be no just cause of exception against the person elected. And if upon just exception the election be hindred yet then also is the new election of another permitted to the free choyse of the particular Church; neither doth the Classis deprive them of their just power and liberty therein.
That it may more plainly appeare how unjustly and unreasonably D. Bilson is al∣ledged as agreeing with my opposites, let it be further observed, that in his Dis∣pute against Beza & such as approve the Discipline of these Reformed Churches, he doth not as my adversaries, complaine of the undue power of Synods, that judge and determine the causes of particular Congregations. He acknowledgeth that(c) 1.4 the necessity and authority of Synods is not so much in question betwixt us, as the persons that should assemble and moderate those meetings, &c. He would have(d) 1.5 Metropolitanes to be the Moderatours and rulers of Synods: he would have(e) 1.6 lay-Elders thrust out from assembling with Ministers in Synods: he complaines(f) 1.7 of the intolerable charges and expences of having frequent Synods, &c. Herein he differs from us, and we from him. But that there is a superiour Ecclesiasticall authoritie in Sy∣nods, to decide the causes of particular Churches, which is the poynt in question, herein he agreeth with us. He saith of such Synods and their power to judge, as followeth.(g) 1.8
Their warrant so to doe is builded on the maine grounds of all
divine and humane societies, strengthened by the promise of our Saviour, and assured unto them by the example of the Apostles and perpetuall practise of the Church of Christ.Afterwards he saith of their meetings in Synods;(h) 1.9
This hath in all Ages, as well before, as since the great Councell of Nice bene ap∣proved and practised, as the lawfullest and fittest meanes to discerne trueth from falshood, to decide doubts, end strifes, and redresse wrongs in causes Ecclesiasti∣call; yea when there were no beleeving Magistrates to assist the Church, this was the onely way to cleanse the house of God, as much as might be, from the lothsome vessels of dishonour: and after Christian Princes began to professe & protect the trueth, they never had, nor can have any better or safer direction amongst men, then by the Synods of wise and godly Pastours.And many other things to like purpose are written by him, complayning that the denyall of this or∣der is(i) 1.10 an heathenish, if not an hellish confusion, &c.
That which they bring out of Scultingius, a Papist before alledged, is idle & im∣pertinent: untill they heare me avouch such things as he doth for change of the order of Christ, let them refraine their surmises and conjectures of imaginary argu∣ments which they guesse that I will use.
Having brought such Authours against me, mark how Wil. B. or Io. Ca. for him, doth triumph against me before the victory; in these words,(k) 1.11 To say that this su∣periour power of Classes and Synods, is Jure Divino, I thinke he will not any more doe it: there being in the Scriptures no proofe (yea I may boldly say) nor shew of any proofe for it. I confesse indeed it is boldly spoken of him. for who so bold als blinde B.? But whether there be at least shew of proofe in the Scriptures, for the superiour au∣thority of Synods in judging the causes of particular Congregations, let us see what his owne witnesse saith.
D. Whitaker that is next alledged by him, doth by many arguments shew the profit and necessity of Synods; and to this end he citeth many(l) 1.12 places of Scrip∣ture, both from the old & new Testament: he alledgeth at large(m) 1.13 7 or 8 causes for which they are profitable, and of great use and fruit. He speaketh also of such Synods as are not onely for discussing and concluding of matters by way of coun∣sell and advise, but of those that have power to(n) 1.14 judge and condemne obstinate offenders by a publick judgement, and as occasion requires, to anathematise or ex∣clude from the fellowship of the Church: he maintaines that those which are lawfully called unto Synods, have authority of deciding and determining contro∣versies by(o) 1.15 definitive sentence or suffrage: he saith that(p) 1.16 appeales are of divine and naturall right, and cannot be denyed in controversies about Ecclesiasticall causes and persons. And thus by the testimony of their owne witnesse my adver∣saries doe offend both against the law of God, and the law of nature, in denying appeales, and in not allowing the actions and judgements of a particular Congre∣gation to be judicially examined by a Synod or Classis. The severall testimonies of D. Whitaker to this purpose, are alledged(q) 1.17 before and applyed at large, to de∣clare his judgement in this controversy.
Though D. Whit. doe(r) 1.18 grant (as is here alledged against me) that Ecclesiasti∣call authority is in the Church principally, primarily and essentially, &c. he doth not here∣by
contradict himself, or deny the power of Synods, where Ministers doe judge by vertue of their calling and deputation from many Churches. The authority of Churches is manifested in them, and by their service therein. The like testi∣mony alledged from Saravia and Schola Parisienfis is(s) 1.19 before answered. Yea the Schoole of Paris doth sufficiently(t) 1.20 explaine this matter by a fit similitude, shew∣ing that Ecclesiasticall authority is in the Church primarily, and instrumentally in the Ministers: as the power of seeing is in man principally, but instrumentally in the eye: As man sees by his eye, so the Church exerciseth Ecclesiasticall autho∣rity by the Ministers and rulers thereof; and so judgeth of all crimes and offences.
The testimony of Bell next alledged, is in like manner to be understood. Where∣as from(v) 1.21 him they object that Excommunication precisely and chiefly pertaineth to the Church; and that she hath authority to commit the execution thereof to some speciall persons, for that purpose, and chosen for that end: this doth no way condemne, but rather illu∣strate our practise agreeable thereunto. And that the meaning of this Authour was not repugnant unto us, it appeareth more plainely by another of his writings,(x) 1.22 where he evidently declares his minde, that Synods have power to exercise Ec∣clesiasticall authority, and to proceed judicially with delinquents, even to depose & excommunicate, though it were the Pope himself, upon due conviction. And to this end he alledges the confession of many Popish writers, and farre more truely and uprightly then Mr Canne hath done in this controversie.
As for D. Willet, if he speak but to the same effect with Bell, as they say, then the same answer may serve. But for the place alledged [Synops. cont. 4. qu. 4. p. 2.] I finde no such matter there. They alledge p. 2. when as there is no second part of that question. But in the same booke he gives plaine evidence against them; he acknowledgeth Synods to be(y) 1.23 an wholesome meanes for the repressing and reforming both of errours in religion and corruption in manners: he alledgeth the consent of anti∣quity to prove that our opinion is grounded upon trueth and Scripture, namely that those which are lawfully called unto Synods,(z) 1.24 have determining voyces, and power to give sentence; and giveth instance in the Councell of Antioch, where Pau∣lus Samosatenus was condemned and cut off as an enemie to the trueth, &c. he avou∣cheth that(a) 1.25 they have authority to judge, examine, suspend, punish and depose, &c. And thus D. Willet fully accordeth with us in this poynt, that there is a superiour power to judge the causes of particular Congregations.
D. Taylor next alledged, affords them no help. Whereas he saith, that(b) 1.26 Ex∣communication is the common action of the Church, and not of any private person or persons: we also affirme the same thing. Our profession and practise alwayes hath bene, never to excommunicate any without common consent of our Church; but had we done unjustly at any time therein, we might justly have bene subject to the censure of a Synod or Classis: and yet then also the Ministers and Deputies assem∣bled in the name of many Churches, could with no reason be accounted private persons. And though we think ourselves bound to ask counsell of the Classis, ac∣cording to the order of these Churches, before we proceed to cut off any mem∣ber of the Church by excommunication, this proves no deprivation but a direc∣tion of our power.
Now whether I have just cause to blush for denying to the Churches of God that due power which the Learned of all professions doe grant unto her, as Mr Canne and Will. B∣doe without blushing(c) 1.27 charge me, let the judicious & impartiall Readers judge.
See Def. ag. T. C. p. 180. 182.
Perpet. Gover. c. 15 p. 360.
Lib. 7. cap. 35.
Perpet. Gover. c. 16 p. 370.
P. 378, &c.
P. 387, &c.
P. 386, 387.
P. 372.
P. 374.
P. 376.
Chu. pl. p. 85.
DeConc. qu. 1. c. 3. p. 15.16. & q. 2. c. 3. p. 55, 56.
P. 17. &c.
P. 21.
Ibid. q. 3. c. 3. p. 95.96. &c.
DePōtif. Rom. qu. 4. p. 470.
P. 39. & 133-141.
DeCōc. q. 5. p. 178.
P. 170.
Schol. Paris. p. 1, 2.
Regim. of Chur. ch. 2. sect. 4.
Bells motiv. l. 2. c. 4. concl. 3. &c.
Synops. Papi. Cōt. 3. qu. 1, p. 105.
Qu. 3. p. 109.110.
Qu. 7. p. 123.
Com. on Tit. 3.10. p. 712.
Ch. pl. p. 86.