The Divine Right of Church Government Part 8

3. Because Jesus Christ, in giving the keys of the kingdom, gave not any one sort, act, part, or piece of the keys severally, but the whole power of the keys, all the sorts and acts thereof jointly. Therefore it is said, _I give the keys of the kingdom_--and _whatsoever thou shalt bind--whatsoever thou shalt loose--whose soever sins ye remit--whose soever sins ye retain_--Matt. xvi. 19, John xx. 23. So that here is not only key, but keys given at once, viz. key of doctrine, and the key of discipline; or the key of order, and the key of jurisdiction; not only binding or retaining, but loosing or remitting of sins, viz. all acts together conferred in the keys. Now if Christ gave the keys to the magistrate, then he gave all the sorts of keys and all the acts thereof to him: if so, the magistrate may as well preach the word, and dispense the sacraments, &c., (as Erastus would have him,) as dispense the censures, &c., (for Christ joined all together in the same commission, and by what warrant are they disjoined?) and if so, what need of pastors, teachers, &c.,, in the Church? Let the civil magistrate do all.

It is true, the ruling elder (which was after added) is limited only to one of the keys, viz. the _key of discipline_, 1 Tim. v. 17; but this limitation is by the same authority that ordained his office.

4. Because if Christ gave the keys to the civil magistrate as such, then to every magistrate, whether Jewish, heathenish, or Christian: but not to the Jewish magistrate; for the sceptre was to depart from him, and the Jewish polity to be dissolved, and even then was almost extinct. Not to the heathenish magistrate, for then those might be properly and formally church governors which were not church members; and if the heathen magistrate refused to govern the Church, (when there was no other magistrate on earth,) she must be utterly dest.i.tute of all government, which are grossly absurd. Nor, finally, to the Christian magistrate, for Christ gave the keys to officers then in being; but at that time no Christian magistrate was in being in the world. Therefore the keys were given by Christ to no civil magistrate, as such, at all.

The minor, viz. But all formal power of church government is at least part of the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven is clear. If we take church government largely, as containing both doctrine, worship, and discipline, it is the whole power of the keys; if strictly, as restrained only to discipline, it is at least part of the power. For, 1st, Not only the power of order, but also the power of jurisdiction, is contained under the word keys; otherwise it should have been said key, not keys; church government therefore is at least part of the power of the keys. 2d, The word key, noting a stewardly power, as appears, Isa.

xxii. 22, (as Erastians themselves will easily grant,) may as justly be extended in the nature of it to signify the ruling power by jurisdiction, as the teaching power by doctrine; in that the office of a steward in the household, who bears the keys, consists in governing, ordering, and ruling the household, as well as in feeding it, as that pa.s.sage in Luke xii. 41-49, being well considered, doth very notably evidence. For, Christ applying his speech to his disciples, saith, "Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his Lord shall make ruler of his household?--he will make him ruler over all that he hath," &c.

3d, Nothing in the text or context appears why we should limit keys and the acts thereof only to doctrine, and exclude discipline; and where the text restrains not, we are not to restrain. 4th, The most of sound interpreters extend the keys and the acts thereof as well to discipline as to doctrine; to matters of jurisdiction, as well as to matters of order. From all we may conclude,

Therefore no formal power of church government was ever given by Christ to the civil magistrate, as a magistrate.

_Argum_. 2d. There was full power of church government in the church when no magistrate was Christian, yea, when all magistrates were persecutors of the Church, so far from being her _nursing fathers_, that they were her _cruel butchers_; therefore the magistrate is not the proper subject of this power. Thus we may argue:

_Major_. No proper power of church government, which was fully exercised in the Church of Christ, before any magistrate became Christian, yea, when magistrates were persecutors of the Church, was derived from Christ to the magistrate as a magistrate.

_Minor_. But all proper power of church government was fully exercised in the Church before any magistrate became Christian, yea, when magistrates were cruel persecutors of the Church of Christ.

_Conclusion_. Therefore no proper power of church government was derived from Christ to the civil magistrate as a magistrate.

The _major_ proposition must be granted. For, 1st, Either then the Church, in exercising such full power of church government, should have usurped that power which belonged not at all to her, but only to the magistrate; for what power belongs to a magistrate, as a magistrate, belongs to him only; but dare we think that the apostles, or the primitive purest apostolical churches did or durst exercise all their power of church government which they exercised, merely by usurpation without any right thereunto themselves? 2d, Or if the Church usurped not, &c., but exercised the power which Christ gave her, let the magistrate show wherein Christ made void the Church's charter, retracted this power, and gave it unto him.

The minor proposition cannot be denied. For,

1st. It was about 300 years after Christ before any of the Roman emperors (who had subdued the whole world, Luke ii. 1, under their sole dominion) became Christian. For Constantine the Great was the first emperor that received the faith, procured peace to the Church, and gave her respite from her cruel persecutions, which was in Anno 309 (or thereabouts) after Christ; before which time the Church was miserably wasted and butchered with those ten b.l.o.o.d.y persecutions, by the tyranny of Nero, and other cruel emperors before Constantine.

2d. Yet within the s.p.a.ce of this first 309 or 311 years, all proper power of church government was fully exercised in the Church of Christ; not only the word preached, Acts iv. 2; 1 Tim. iii. 16; and sacraments dispensed, Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xi. 17, &c.; Acts ii. 4, and viii. 12: but also _deacons_ set apart for that office of _deaconship_, Acts vi.: _elders_ ordained and sent forth, Acts xiii. 1-3, and xiv. 23; 1 Tim.

iv.; t.i.t. i. 5: public _admonition in use_, t.i.t. iii. 10; 1 Tim. v. 20: _excommunication_, 1 Cor. v.; and 1 Tim. i. 20: _absolution_ of the penitent, 2 Cor. ii. 6, 7, &c.: synodical conventions and decrees, Acts xv. with xvi. 4. So that we may conclude,

Therefore no proper power of church government was derived from Christ to the civil magistrate, as a magistrate.

_Argum_. 3d. The magistratical power really, specifically, and essentially differs from the ecclesiastical power; therefore the civil magistrate, as a magistrate, cannot be the proper subject of this ecclesiastical power. Hence we may thus argue:

_Major_. No power essentially, specifically, and really differing from magistratical power, was ever given by Christ to the magistrate as a magistrate.

_Minor_. But all proper ecclesiastical power essentially, specifically, and really differs from the magistratical power.

_Conclusion_. Therefore no proper ecclesiastical power was ever given by Jesus Christ to the civil magistrate as a magistrate.

The major is evident: for how can the magistrate, as a magistrate, receive such a power as is really and essentially distinct and different from magistracy? Were not that to make the magistratical power both really the same with itself, and yet really and essentially different from itself? A flat contradiction.

The minor may be clearly evinced many ways: as, 1st, From the real and formal distinction between the two societies, viz. the Church and commonwealth, wherein ecclesiastical and political power are peculiarly seated. 2d. From the co-ordination of the power ecclesiastical and political, in reference to one another. 3d. From the different causes of these two powers, viz. efficient, material, formal, and final; in all which they are truly distinguished from one another.

1st. From the real and formal distinction between the two societies, viz. church and commonwealth: for, 1. The society of the Church is only Christ's, and not the civil magistrate's: it is his _house_, his _spouse_, his _body_, &c., and Christ hath no vicar[33] under him. 2.

The officers ecclesiastical are Christ's officers, not the magistrate's, 1 Cor. iv. 1: _Christ gave_ them, Eph. iv. 8, 10, 11: _G.o.d set them in the Church_, 1 Cor. xii. 28. 3. These ecclesiastical officers are both elected and ordained by the Church, without commission from the civil magistrate, by virtue of Christ's ordinance, and in his name. Thus the apostles appointed officers: _Whom we may appoint_, Acts vi. 3, 4. The power of ordination and mission is in the hands of Christ's officers; compare Acts xiv. 23; 1 Tim. iv. 14, with Acts xiii. 1-4: and this is confessed by the parliament to be an ordinance of Jesus Christ, in their ordinance for ordaining of preaching presbyters. 4. The Church, and the several presbyteries ecclesiastical, meet not as civil judicatories, for civil acts of government, as making civil statutes, inflicting civil punishments, &c., but as spiritual a.s.semblies, for spiritual acts of government and discipline: as preaching, baptizing, receiving the Lord's supper, prayer, admonition of the disorderly, &c. 5. What gross absurdities would follow, should not these two societies, viz. church and commonwealth, be acknowledged to be really and essentially distinct from one another! For then, 1. There can be no commonwealth where there is not a Church; but this is contrary to all experience.

Heathens have commonwealths, yet no Church. 2. Then there may be church officers elected where there is no church, seeing there are magistrates where there is no church. 3. Then those magistrates, where there is no church, are no magistrates; but that is repugnant to Scripture, which accounts heathen rulers the servants of G.o.d, Isa. xlv. 1; Jer. xxv. 9: and calls them kings, Exod. vi. 13; Isa. x.x.xi. 35. And further, if there be no magistrates where there is no church, then the church is the formal const.i.tuting cause of magistrates. 4. Then the commonwealth, as the commonwealth, is the church; and the church, as the church, is the commonwealth: then the church and the commonwealth are the same. 5. Then all that are members of the commonwealth are, on that account, because members of the commonwealth, members of the church. 6. Then the commonwealth, being formally the same with the church, is, as a commonwealth, the mystical body of Christ. 7. Then the officers of the church are the officers of the commonwealth; the power of the keys gives them right to the civil sword: and consequently, the ministers of the gospel, as ministers, are justices of the peace, judges, parliament-men, &c., all which how absurd, let the world judge.

2d. From the co-ordination of the power ecclesiastical and political, in reference to one another: (this being a received maxim, that subordinate powers are of the same kind; co-ordinate powers are of distinct kinds.) Now, that the power of the Church is co-ordinate with the civil power, may be evidenced as followeth: 1. The officers of Christ, as officers, are not directly and properly subordinate to the civil power, though in their persons they are subject thereto: the apostles and pastors may preach, and cast out of the church, against the will of the magistrate, and yet not truly offend magistracy; thus, in doing the duty they have immediately received from G.o.d, they must "obey G.o.d rather than men,"

Acts iv. 19, 20. And the apostles and pastors must exercise their office (having received a command from Christ) without attending to the command or consent of the civil magistrate for the same; _as in casting out the incestuous person_, 1 Cor. v. 5: telling the Church, Matt. xviii. 17: _rejecting a heretic_, t.i.t. iii. 10. And, 2. Those acts of power are not directly and formally subordinate to the magistrate, which he himself cannot do, or which belong not to him. Thus the kings of Israel could not burn incense: "It appertaineth not unto thee," 2 Chron. xxvi. 18, 19. Likewise, none have the power of the keys, but they to whom Christ saith, "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel," Matt. xxviii.

19: but Christ spake not this to magistrates: so only those that are _sent_, Rom. x. 15, and those that are governors, are by Christ placed in the Church. 3. The officers of the Church can ecclesiastically censure the officers of the state, though not as such, as well as the officers of the state can punish civilly the officers of the Church, though not as such: the church guides may admonish, excommunicate, &c., the officers of the state as members of the Church, and the officers of the state may punish the officers of the Church as the members of the state. 4. Those that are not sent of the magistrate as his deputies, they are not subordinate in their mission to his power, but the ministers are not sent as the magistrate's deputies, but are _set over the flock by the Holy Ghost_, Acts xx. 28: they are likewise the _ministry of Christ_, 1 Cor. iv. 1, 2: they are _over you in the Lord_, 1 Thess. v. 12: and in his name they exercise their jurisdiction, 1 Cor.

v. 4, 5. 5. If the last appeal in matters purely ecclesiastical be not to the civil power, then there is no subordination; but the last appeal properly so taken is not to the magistrate. This appears from these considerations: 1. Nothing is appealable to the magistrate but what is under the power of the sword; but admonition, excommunication, &c., are not under the power of the sword: they are neither matters of dominion nor coercion. 2. If it were so, then it follows that the having of the sword gives a man a power to the keys. 3. Then it follows that the officers of the kingdom of heaven are to be judged as such by the officers of the kingdom of this world as such, and then there is no difference between the things of Caesar and the things of G.o.d. 4. The church of Antioch sent to Jerusalem, Acts xv. 2, and the synod there, without the magistrate, came together, ver. 6; and determined the controversy, ver. 28, 29. And we read, "The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets," 1 Cor. xiv. 32; not to the civil power as prophets. So we must seek knowledge at the priest's lips, not at the civil magistrate's, Mal. ii. 7. And we read, that the people came to the priests in hard controversies, but never that the priests went to the civil power, Deut. xvii. 8-10. 5. It makes the magistrate Christ's vicar, and so Christ to have a visible head on earth, and so to be an ecclesiastico-civil pope, and consequently there should be as many visible heads of Christ's Church as there are magistrates. 6. These powers are both immediate; one from G.o.d the Father, as _Creator_, Rom.

xiii. 1, 2; the other from Jesus Christ, as _Mediator_, Matt. xxviii.

18. Now lay all these together, and there cannot be a subordination of powers; and therefore there must be a real distinction.

3d. From the different causes of these two powers, viz. efficient, material, formal, and final; in all which they are truly distinguished from one another, as may plainly appear by this ensuing parallel:

1. They differ in their efficient cause or author, whence they are derived. Magistratical power is from G.o.d, the Creator and Governor of the world, Rom. xiii. 1, 2, 4; and so belongs to all mankind, heathen or Christian; ecclesiastical power is peculiarly from Jesus Christ our Mediator, Lord of the Church, (who hath all power given him, and the government of the Church laid upon his shoulder, as Eph. i. 22; Matt.

xxviii. 18, compared with Isa. ix. 16.) See Matt. vi. 19, and xviii. 18, and xxviii. 19, 20; John xx. 21-23; 2 Cor. x. 8: and consequently belongs properly to the Church, and to them that are within the Church, 1 Cor. v. 12, 13. Magistratical power in general is the ordinance of G.o.d, Rom. xiii. 1, 2, 4; but magistratical power in particular, whether it should be monarchical in a king, aristocratical in states, democratical in the people, &c., is of men, called, therefore, a human creature, or creation, 1 Pet. ii. 13; but ecclesiastical power, and officers in particular, as well as general, are from Christ, Matt. xvi.

19, and xxviii. 18-20; t.i.t. iii. 10; 1 Cor. v. 13; 2 Cor. ii. For officers, see Eph. iv. 11, 12; 1 Cor. xii. 28.

2. They differ in their material cause; whether it be the matter of which they consist, in which they are seated, or about which they are exercised. 1. In respect of the matter of which they consist, they much differ. Ecclesiastical power consists of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, which are exercised in the preaching of the word, dispensing the sacraments, executing the censures, admonition, excommunication, absolution, ordination of presbyters, &c.; but magistratical power consists in the secular sword, which puts forth itself in making statutes, inflicting fines, imprisonments, confiscations, banishments, torments, death. 2. In respect of the matter or object about which they are exercised, they much differ: for, the magistratical power is exercised politically, about persons and things without the Church, as well as within the church; but the ecclesiastical power is exercised only upon them that are within the Church, 1 Cor. v. 13. The magistratical power in some cases of treason, &c., banishes or otherwise punishes even penitent persons: ecclesiastical power punishes no penitent persons. The magistratical power punishes not all sorts of scandal, but some: the ecclesiastical power punishes (if rightly managed) all sorts of scandal.

3. They differ in their formal cause, as doth clearly appear by their way or manner of acting: magistratical power takes cognizance of crimes, and pa.s.ses sentence thereupon according to statutes and laws made by man: ecclesiastical power takes cognizance of, and pa.s.ses judgment upon crimes according to the word of G.o.d, the Holy Scriptures. Magistratical power punishes merely with political punishments, as fines, imprisonments, &c. Ecclesiastical merely with spiritual punishments, as church censures. Magistratical power makes all decrees and laws, and executes all authority, commanding or punishing only in its own name, in name of the supreme magistrate, as of the king, &c., but ecclesiastical power is wholly exercised, not in the name of churches, or officers, but only in Christ's name, Matt, xxviii. 19; Acts iv. 17; 1 Cor. v. 4. The magistrate can delegate his power to another: church-governors cannot delegate their power to others, but must exercise it by themselves. The magistrate about ecclesiasticals hath power to command and compel politically the church officers to do their duty, as formerly was evidenced; but cannot discharge lawfully those duties themselves, but in attempting the same, procure divine wrath upon themselves: as Korah, Numb. xvi.; King Saul, 1 Sam. xiii. 9-15; King Uzziah, 2 Chron. xxvi.

16-22: but church-guides can properly discharge the duties of doctrine, worship, and discipline themselves, and ecclesiastically command and compel others to do their duty also.

4. Lastly, They differ in their final cause or ends. The magistratical power levels at the temporal, corporal, external, political peace, tranquillity, order, and good of human society, and of all persons within his jurisdiction, &c. The ecclesiastical power intends properly the spiritual good and edification of the Church and all the members thereof, Matt, xviii. 15; 1 Cor. v. 5, &c.; 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii.

10.[34] May we not from all clearly conclude, Therefore no proper ecclesiastical power was ever given by Jesus Christ to the magistrate as a magistrate?

_Argum_. 4th. The civil magistrate is no proper church officer, and therefore cannot be the proper subject of church power, Hence we may argue:

_Major_. All formal power of church government was derived from Jesus Christ to his own proper church officers only. To them he gave the _keys of the kingdom of heaven_, Matt. xvi. 19, and xviii. 18; John xx. 21, 28: to them he gave the _authority for edification of the church_, 2 Cor. x. 8, and xiii. 10: but this will after more fully appear in Chap.

XI. following.

_Minor_. But no civil magistrate, as a magistrate, is any of Christ's proper church officers. For, 1. The civil magistrate is never reckoned up in the catalogue, list, or roll of Christ's church officers in Scripture, Eph. iv. 10-12; 1 Cor. xii. 28, &c.; Rom. xii. 6-8; if here, or anywhere else, let the magistrate or the Erastians show it. 2. A magistrate, as a magistrate, is not a church member, (much less a church governor;) for then all magistrates, heathen as well as Christian, should be church members and church officers, but this is contrary to the very nature of Christ's kingdom, which admits no heathen into it.

_Conclusion_. Therefore no formal power of church government was derived from Jesus Christ to the magistrate as a magistrate.

_Argum_. 5th. The civil magistrate, as such, is not properly subordinate to Christ's mediatory kingdom; therefore is not the receptacle of church power from Christ. Hence thus:

_Major_. Whatsoever formal power of church government Christ committed to any, he committed it only to those that were properly subordinate to his mediatory kingdom. For whatsoever ecclesiastical ordinance, office, power, or authority, Christ gave to men, he gave it as Mediator and Head of the Church, by virtue of his mediatory office; and for the gathering, edifying, and perfecting of his mediatory kingdom, which is his Church, Eph. iv. 7, 10-12. Therefore such as are not properly subordinate to Christ in this his office, and for this end, can have no formal church power from Christ.

_Minor_. But no magistrate, as a magistrate, is subordinate properly to Christ's mediatory kingdom. For, 1. Not Christ the Mediator, but G.o.d the Creator authorizeth the magistrate's office, Rom. xiii. 1, 2, 6. 2.

Magistracy is never styled a ministry of Christ in Scripture, nor dispensed in his name. 3. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, John xviii. 36; the magistrate's is.

_Conclusion_. Therefore no formal power of Church government is committed by Christ to the magistrate as a magistrate.

6th. Finally, divers absurdities unavoidably follow upon the granting of a proper formal power of Church government to the civil magistrate: therefore he cannot be the proper subject of such power. Hence it may be thus argued:

_Major_. No grant of ecclesiastical power, which plainly introduceth many absurdities, can be allowed to the political magistrate, as the proper subject thereof. For though in matters of religion there be many things mysterious, sublime, and above the reach of reason; yet there is nothing to be found that is absurd, irrational, &c.

_Minor_. But to grant to the political magistrate, as a magistrate, a proper formal power of church government, introduceth plainly many absurdities, e.g.: 1. This brings confusion betwixt the office of the magistracy and ministry. 2. Confounds the church and commonwealth together. 3. Church government may be monarchical in one man; and so, not only prelatical but papal; and consequently, antichristian. Which absurdities, with many others, were formerly intimated, and neither by religion nor reason can be endured. We conclude:

_Conclusion_. Therefore the grant of a proper formal power of church government cannot be allowed to the political magistrate as the proper subject thereof, because he is a magistrate.

CHAPTER X.

_That the community of the faithful, or body of the people, are not the immediate subject of the power of Church government._