A peaceable and temperate plea for Pauls presbytery in Scotland, or, A modest and…A peaceable and temperate plea for Pauls presbyterie in Scotland, or, A modest and…
A peaceable and temperate plea for Pauls presbytery in Scotland, or, A modest and brotherly dispute of the government of the Church of Scotland wherein our discipline is demonstrated to be the true apostolic way of divine truth, and the arguments on the contrary are friendly dissolved, the grounds of separation and the independency [sic] of particular congregations, in defence of ecclesiastical presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, are examined and tried / by Samuel Rutherfurd ...A peaceable and temperate plea for Pauls presbyterie in Scotland, or, A modest and brotherly dispute of the government of the Church of Scotland wherein our discipline is demonstrated to be the true apostolick way of divine truth, and the arguments on the contrary are friendly dissolved, the grounds of separation and the indepencie [sic] of particular congregations, in defence of ecclesiasticall presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, are examined and tryed / by Samuell Rutherfurd ...
Samuel Rutherford 1600?–1661London: printed for John Bartlet, 1642London: printed for Iohn Bartlet, 1642
[16], 326 [i.e. 334] p. · 119k words · Wing R2389 · ESTC R7368
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Answ. 1. Paul and Barnabas the Apostles of Christ chose Elders in every Church, with the peoples consent. Ergo, a congregation wanting pastors who ordaineth Elders, can and may of themselves ordain Pastors and Elders. What a weak consequence is this? Pastors in an Apostolic Church ordained pastors. Ergo, the multitude have power to ordain Pastors. I rather infer the contrary. Ergo, there are no congregations of believers independent, who have power to ordain Pastors without a College of Pastors,1 and observe (saith Caietan) on that place,2 That the fasting and prayers of the Apostles were at the Ordination of Presbyteries.
Answ. 1. Paul and Barnabas the Apostles of Christ chose Elders in every Church, with the peoples consent. Ergo, a congregation wanting pastors who ordaineth Elders, can and may of themselves ordaine Pastors and Elders. What a weak consequence is this? Pastors in an Apostolick Church ordained pastors. Ergo, the multitude have power to ordain Pastors. I rather inferre the contrary. Ergo, there are no congregations of believers independent, who have power to ordaine Pastours without a Colledge of Pastours,1 and observe (saith Caietan) on that place,2 That the fasting and prayers of the Apostles were at the Ordination of Presbyteries.
and a man more to be respected then Vasquez, Fran. Junius saith, that lifting up of the hands may well be meant of Paul and Barnabas their hands. See also Tilen, Calvin, Beza and Bullinger. Ordinary Election
⟨p. 240⟩
(saith he) is from this commended, and this form of rite of lifting up of the hands was borrowed from the Grecians, who gave suffrages with lifted up hands. However the peoples free election is hence authorized, which form was used in Cyprian's time,
vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes, vel indignos recusandi, quod & ipsum videmus de divina authoritate descendere, ut sacerdos plebe present sub omnium oculis deligatur, & dignus, atque idoneus publico judicio ac testimonio comprobetur. It is nought that Bellarmine saith, they had not jus eligendi, power of choosing, but jus ferendi testimonium devitâ ac moribus, power to give testimony of the life and conversation of the pastors chosen, but good man he seeth not that this is a power of Election, by Cyprian's testimony, and no power of choosing, which is a contradiction, and so saith Theodoret, avouching this to be the mind of the Council of Nice in an Epistle to the Bishops of Alexandria,
and the first general Council at Constantinople. Only from the time of Frederick the ij. who died, an. 1300. were the people excluded from the power of choosing Pastors and Elders,
It is true some say the election of Alexander the iij. which was four hundred years before, was made by the Cardinals only, without the peoples consent: But 1. What may the Antichrist not d•? his deed is not law. 2. Who can believe such a dreamer as Radevicus,
who allegeth this. Platine (I grant) saith, that Gregory the 7. was chosen 500. years before, by the Cardinals only: But to these I add Gregory was a lawless man,
and from lawless facts without the authority of Scriptures and Synods no lawful election, without the consent of the people, can be concluded. But what can be said against Chrysost. Leo and Gregor. Magn.
2. Suppose 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 were applyed to the people,1 I see not what can in reason be said against Vasquez, 2who saith, it will follow only they were created by the consent of the people,3 and a man more to be respected then Vasquez, Fran. Iunius saith, that lifting up of the hands may well be meant of Paul and Barnabas their hands. See also Tilen, Calvin, Beza and Bullinger. Ordinary Election ⟨p. 240⟩(saith hee) is from this commended, and this forme of rite of lifting up of the hands was borrowed from the Grecians, who gave suffrages with lifted up hands. However the peoples free election is hence authorized, which forme was used in Cyprians time,4 Quando ipsa (plebs) maximè habeat potestatem, 5vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes, vel indignos recusandi, quod & ipsum videmus de divina authoritate descendere, ut sacerdos plebe presente sub omnium oculis deligatur, & dignus, atque idoneus publico iudicio ac testimonio comprobetur. It is nought that Bellarmine saith, they had not jus eligendi, power of choosing, but jus ferendi testimonium devitâ ac moribus, power to give testimony of the life and conversation of the pastors chosen, but good man he seeth not that this is a power of Election, by Cyprians testimony, and no power of choosing, which is a contradiction, and so saith Theodoret, avouching this to be the minde of the Councell of Nice in an Epistle to the Bishops of Alexandria, 6and the first generall Councell at Constantinople. Only from the time of Frederick the ij. who died, ann. 1300. were the people excluded from the power of choosing Pastors and Elders,7 and this was the deed of Gregory the ix. as Krantzius reporteth. Vasquez defendeth Illyricus in this, whom Bellarmine refuteth,8 It is true some say the election of Alexander the iij. which was foure hundred yeares before, was made by the Cardinals only, without the peoples consent: But 1. What may the Antichrist not d•? his deed is not law. 2. Who can beleeve such a dreamer as Radevicus, 9who alleadgeth this. Platine (I grant) saith, that Gregory the 7. was chosen 500. yeares before, by the Cardinals only: But to these I adde Gregory was a lawlesse man,10 and from lawlesse facts without the authority of Scriptures and Synods no lawfull election, without the consent of the people, can be concluded. But what can be said against Chrysost. Leo and Gregor. Magn.
1Jun. de cloric. c. 7. n 61.Iun. de cloric. c. 7. n 61.
2T•len. disp 25 de voc. min thes. 15, 16.
3Calvin. comb. Beza. in may ib. Bulling. ib.Calvin. com•b. Beza. in mai ib. Bulling. ib.
4Cyprian l. 1. epist. 4. Bellar.
5Theod, l. 1. c. 9.
6Concil Nice. epist. ad episc. Alexand. Concil. Constantine. Greg •x. i• Missana de electione. Kran•zius l 8. Metrop. c. 3.Concil Nice. epist. ad episc. Alexand. Concil. Constantin•. Greg •x. i• Missana de electione. Kran•zius l 8. Metrop. c. 3.
7Vasquez. in 3. Tho. tom. 3. disp. 244 c. 5. n. 55.
8Radevicus de gest. F••de, 1▪ c. 50.
9Platinai• decret. elect. Greg•r. 7 Chrysost. de sacerdot. l. 3. sol. 14.
10Leo epist. 89. ad episcop. per V•ennensem provinc. Gregor. Mag epist. l 2 c. 69.
and many clear testimonies for us,1 which are to be seen in Gratian. all affirming that the ancient Church required the consent of the people to the ordination ⟨p. 241⟩of Elders, but all these expressly speak of popular cognition of the good parts, gifts and holiness of the chosen Elders, and do still ascribe authoritative Ordination of Elders to the presbytery of Elders, as all Ancients with one pen affirm.
and many cleare testimonies for us,1 which are to bee seene in Gratian. all affirming that the ancient Church required the consent of the people to the ordination ⟨p. 241⟩of Elders, but all these expresly speake of popular cognition of the good parts, gifts and holinesse of the chosen Elders, and doe still ascribe authoritative Ordination of Elders to the presbyterie of Elders, as all Ancients with one pen affirme.
They object from Col. 2. 4.1 That the Church of Coloss had order, and so discipline within themselves, Ergo, Coloss was an independent Church. And that same they allege of the Church of Thessalonica, which had the power of Excommunication within themselves, 1 Thess. 3. 6.
They object from Col. 2. 4.1 That the Church of Colosse had order, and so discipline within themselves, Ergo, Colosse was an independent Church. And that same they alleadge of the Church of Thessalonica, which had the power of Excommunication within themselves, 1 Thess. 3. 6.
Answ. Seeing Epaphras, Col. 1. 7. and Archippus, Col. 4. 17. and others were their pastors at Coloss, it is no marvel that they had discipline within themselves, but what then? therefore they had discipline independently, the Congregation not standing under subjection to the Presbytery, it followeth no ways.
Answ. Seeing Epaphras, Col. 1. 7. and Archippus, Col. 4. 17. and others were their pastors at Colosse, it is no marvell that they had discipline within themselves, but what then? therefore they had discipline independently, the Congregation not standing under subjection to the Presbiterie, it followeth no wayes.
2. They had discipline within themselves, not being compassed with sister-Churches in a Christian consociation, it will not follow therefore Churches conf•ciated with other Churches. 2. Churches in case of aberration. 3. Churches in points of discipline that concerneth many Churches. 4. In the case of difficulties that cannot be expedited and determined by the particular Churches, it will not (I say) follow, that they have power of discipline independently, and without subordination to superior judicatures.
2. They had discipline within themselves, not being compassed with sister-Churches in a Christian consociation, it will not follow therefore Churches conf•ciated with other Churches. 2. Churches in case of aberration. 3. Churches in points of discipline that concerneth many Churches. 4. In the case of difficulties that cannot be expedited and determined by the particular Churches, it will not (I say) follow, that they have power of discipline independently, and without subordination to superiour judicatures.
3. The conclusion to be proved is, that one pastor with some ruling Elders and believers is the most supreme ministerial Church,1 subordinate to none other Church assemblies now in Thessalonica, 1 Thess. 5. 12, 13. there were many pastors who warned and admonished them. The Syrian saith (who stand before your face to teach you) Beza saith they were teachers: so Erasmus, Calvin, Bullinger, so he stileth the pastors: so Marlorat, Sutlu. Brightman, Scultetus.
3. The conclusion to be proved is, that one pastor with some ruling Elders and beleevers is the most supreme ministeriall Church,1 subordinate to none other Church assemblies now in Thessalonica, 1 Thess. 5. 12, 13. there were many pastours who warned and admonished them. The Syrian saith (who stand before your face to teach you) Beza saith they were teachers: so Erasmus, Calvin, Bullinger, so he stileth the pastors: so Marlorat, Sutlu. Brightman, Scultetus.
4. They object, 1The seven Churches of Asia are comm•nded, or rebuked by Christ for exercising or omitting discipline, every candle stick stood by it self, and held forth her own light, if they had had dependency one upon another, one message would have served them all; but only Thyat•ra is charged for suffering Jezebel to teach, if they were one Church, the whole would have been guilty of the sins of the part, the whole being negligent to disciplinate the part, but every Church is rebuked for it's own fault, Ergo, every one was independent within it self. So M. Best, Author of Presb. gover. exam. and the female doctrix Childley.2
4. They object, 1The seven Churches of Asia are comm•nded, or rebuk•d by Christ for exercising or omitting discipline, every candle sticke stood by it selfe, and held forth her owne light, if they had had dependency one upon another, one message would have served them all; but onely Thyat•ra is charged for sufferin• J•zabell to teach, if they were one Church, the whole would have beene gulty of the sinnes of the part, the whole being negligent to disciplinate the part, but every Church is rebuked for it's own fault, Ergo, every one was independent within it selfe. So M. Best, Author of Presb. gover. exam. and the femall doctrix Childley.2
Answ. The first of these seven, to wit, Ephesus was not a particular congregation, but had a presbytery of Elders in it, Act. 20. 17, 36. Paul prayed with them all; this is not said in the word, but of a reasonable good number of persons;1 Brightman under the name of an Angel, 2he writeth to a college of Angels or Pastors. Bullinger he writeth to many Pastors. Didoclav. proveth by good arguments against Downam his Angel-Prelate that he writeth to a college of Angels in every Church.3 Augustine he speaketh to the Rulers; so saith Gregor. Magnus, 4Primasius, Bede, Haymo, Fulk, Perkins, Fox: neither hath one single pastor the power of the keys,5 but at the second hand, the believers have it as the prime ministerial fountain of all Church discipline, and so they by our brethren's learning, should have bin principally rebuked.
Answ. The first of these seven, to wit, Ephesus was not a particular congregation, but had a presbytery of Elders in it, Act. 20. 17, 36. Paul prayed with them all; this is not said in the word, but of a reasonable good number of persons;1 Brightman under the name of an Angell, 2he writeth to a colledge of Angels or Pastors. Bullinger he writeth to many Pastors. Didoclav. proveth by good arguments against Downam his Angell-Prelate that he writeth to a colledge of Angels in every Church.3 Augustine he speaketh to the Rulers; so saith Gregor. Magnus, 4Primasius, Beda, Haymo, Fulk, Perkins, Fox: neither hath one single pastor the power of the keyes,5 but at the second hand, the beleivers have it as the prime ministeriall fountaine of all Church discipline, and so they by our brethrens learning, should have bin principally rebuked.
2. Also Asia was of the Roman Empire, and contained Phrygia, Mysia, Caria, Lydia, Troas and Thessalonica, and every one of these must be proved to be single congregations, and suppose they were, they have many pastors in them, as Ephesus had, they had power of discipline in all points that concerned themselves, but in things common to all, they had it not, but in dependence, and what? howbeit Synods could not so conveniently be had under the persecuting Domitian, no absurdity will follow, discipline may be exercised without provincial Synods.
2. Also Asia was of the Roman Empire, and contained Phrygia, Mysia, Caria, Lydi•, Troas and Thessalonica, and every one of these must be proved to be single congregations, and suppose they were, they have many pastors in them, as Ephesus had, they had power of discipline in all points that concerned themselves, but in things common to all, they had it not, but in dependence, and what? howbeit Synods could not so conveniently be had under the persecuting Domitian, no absurdity will follow, discipline may be exercised without provinciall Synods.
3. It is a weak ground, Every candlestick stood by is self, and and held forth it's own light: For the light of the Candlestick is a preaching Pastor shining in light of holy Doctrine: We dispute not about independency of preaching Ministers in the act of preaching; but about independency of Churches in the acts of Church-discipline; And so this is a weak ground (I say) for independent Churches; yea neither is the Pastor in the act of Pastoral shining in sound Doctrine independent; for our brethren teach that private persons by the power of the keys ordain him, call him to office, censure and depose, and excommunicate him, if nee• require, and this is no small dependency.
3. It is a weake ground, Every candlesticke stood by is selfe, and and held forth it's owne light: For the light of the Candlesticke is a preaching Pastor shining in light of holy Doctrine: Wee dispute not about independency of preaching Ministers in the act of preaching; but about independency of Churches in the acts of Church-discipline; And so this is a weake ground (I say) for independent Churches; yea neither is the Pastor in the act of Pastorall shining in sound Doctrine independent; for our brethren teach that private persons by the power of the keyes ordaine him, call him to office, censure and depose, and excommunicate him, if nee• require, and this is no small dependency.
4. It is no less loose and weak to allege they are independent Churches, because every Church is reproved for it's own faults; reproof is a sort of censure: What, because the fornicator, 1 Cor 5. is repr• ved for a sin that is scarce named amongst the Gentiles, yea and judged worthy to be excommunicated? shall it hence follow that the fornicator is no member dependent, and in Ecclesiastical subjection to the Church of Corinth? So some of the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 15. 12. are reproved for denying the resurrection; for this was the fault of some, and not of all: But will it follow, these some were no independent parts of the Church of Corinth, but an independent Church by themselves? The faults of remiss discipline may be laid upon a whole National Church in some cases, when it cometh to the notice of the National Church, that such a particular Church faileth in this and this point of discipline; but we teach not that these seven Churches made up one National Church; yet this hindereth not, but parts of an independent and subordinate Church may be rebuked for their faults, and yet remain dependent parts.
4. It is no lesse loose and weake to alleadge they are independent Churches, because every Church is reproved for it's owne faults; reproofe is a sort of censure: What, because the fornicator, 1 Cor 5. is repr• ved for a sinne that is scarce named amongst the Gentiles, yea and iudged worthy to be excommunicated? shall it hence follow that the fornicator is no member dependent, and in Ecclesiasticall subjection to the Church of Corinth? So some of the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 15. 12. are reproved for denying the resurrection; for this was the fault of some, and not of all: But will it follow, these some were no independent parts of the Church of Corinth, but an independent Church by themselves? The faults of remisse discipline may be laid upon a whole Nationall Church in some cases, when it commeth to the notice of the Nationall Church, that such a particular Church faileth in this and this point of discipline; but we teach not that these seven Churches made up one Nationall Church; yet this hindereth not, but parts of an independent and subordinate Church may be rebuked for their faults, and yet remaine dependent parts.
5. They object, 1If Christ bid an offending brother tell the particular Church whereof he is a member, then that particular Church may excommunicate, Mat. 18. 19. and ⟨p. 244⟩so hath power within it self of the highest censures,2 and is independent, but the former is true, Mat. 18. Ergo, Ursine (say they) Zuinglius, Andrewes, Kemnitius, Aretius, Pelargius, Hunnius, Vatablus, Munster, Beza, Erasmus, Whittaker, &c. expound this of a particular Congregation.
5. They object, 1If Christ bid an offending brother tell the particular Church whereof he is a member, then that particular Church may excommunicate, Mat. 18. 19. and ⟨p. 244⟩so hath power within it selfe of the highest censures,2 and is independent, but the former is true, Mat. 18. Ergo, Vrsine (say they) Zuinglius, Andrewes, Kemnitius, Aretius, Pelargius, Hunnius, Vatablus, Munster, Beza, Erasmus, Whittaker, &c. expound this of a particular Congregation.
Answ. 1. We shall also expound this of a particular Church, but not of such an one as hath but one Pastor, neither do these Divines mean any other Church then a College of Pastors and Elders.
Answ. 1. We shall also expound this of a particular Church, but not of such an one as hath but one Pastor, neither doe these Divines meane any other Church then a Colledge of Pastors and Elders.
2. Your own Parker, 1the learned Voetius, and Edmundus Richerius, 2and the Doctors of Paris cite this place to prove the lawfulness of Synods, yea even hence they prove Peter, 3and so the Pope is answerable to a general Council.
2. Your owne Parker, 1the learned Voetius, and Edmundus Richerius, 2and the Doctors of Paris cite this place to prove the lawfulnesse of Synods, yea even hence they prove Peter, 3and so the Pope is answerable to a generall Councell.
3. When an Eldership of a particular Congregation is the obstinate brethren,1 to be censured, I desire our reverend brethren to show in that case a ministerial,2 governing, and censuring Church, consisting only of private persons out of office, to whom the offending person shall complain? I appeal to the whole old and new Testament, to all antiquity, to all Divines writings the word (Church) in this notion. See also G•rson.
3. When an Eldership of a particular Congregation is the obstinate brethren,1 to be censured, I desire our reverend brethren to shew in that case a ministeriall,2 governing, and censuring Church, consisting onely of private persons out of office, to whom the offending person shall complaine? I appeale to the whole old and new Testament, to all antiquity, to all Divines writings the word (Church) in this notion. See also G•rson.
1Dost. Paris. de Pol. Eccl. p 13.
2Gerson de Potest. Eccl. consid. 4.
The author
Samuel Rutherford 1600?–1661
PuritansScotland
Scottish theologian and commissioner to the Westminster Assembly.
