Part 14
And when a man comes before sach to be excommunicated, he may say, I am not bound to obey you in such an authoritative way, nor do I owe a subjection as to a power of censure in you; for many, nay, most of you, have never spoke the word to me, nor do watch over my soul; nay, perhaps the man can say be never saw their faces afore.
And it avails not to say, that they may occasionally preach ; for the apostle, 1 Thes. y. 12, speaking of respect to their officers, ' Know them,' says he, 'that labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you.'
These two, those that labour and are over you, are commensurable, and they are meant, who make it their callings to have the care of the flock, which the many pastors and elders in & common presbytery do not.
But in what is it they labour?
The 1 Tim. vy. 17 expounds it to be, 'that labour in the word and doctrine ;' 'the elders that rule well, as worthy of double honour, especially those that labour in the word and doctrine.'
And whether you expound this latter known place of teaching elders only, or of ruling and teaching both (as the reformed churches do), howeverit affords this to us, that the extent of ruling, in either the one or the other, is but as large as teaching.
And if it be meant of . teaching elders only, that both rule and labour in the word and doctrine, yet if they be limited in labouring in the word, as being fixed pastors to their own congregations, then in ruling also.
And if it be meant of ruling elders (as distinct from them), yet their ruling is of the same extent that the others' labouring in the word, and that is extended but to one congregation, where as pastors they are fixed.
And 2. Though in a pastor's office preaching and ruling is joined, yet his power of ruling flows in him from, and is the adjunct of, his power to preach; and to be sure it is not extendable farther.
And however, yet there is the same proportion of either;and then byjust reason, the extent of the church, which is the subject of his ordinary ruling, cannot be extended larger than what is the ordinary subject of his preaching ; and so those relations are of equal limits (which is the present case of a pastor's authority, appropriated to a congregation, and extended but to his own in an ordinary way), and to make the ground of a relation narrower than the extent of itis absurd.
If a father hath the power of governing as a father, then it is extendable only to those And that a pastor hath his ordinary ruling power annexed to his ordinary power of preaching, we prove by these reasons.
1. If he hath not his ruling power upon this ground, then must be assigned some other.
He hath it not by any special faculty or office over and above this of preaching; for then he should be made a ruling elder, over and above his being first a preaching elder, as a new faculty given him.
Nor hath he it by being madea ruler first, and then having this of preaching superadded (as the bishops first made deacons, then presbyters).
For 2. All the keys are given him at once, the keys of ruling with the keys of knowledge.
The power of the staff intrinsecally follows, his being a pastor or shepherd; and though the one is a power of mere order, namely, that of e
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boos IV. preaching, and that of his ruling is of jurisdiction (to be exercised in many cases with others, and not alone), yet still his receiving power to join with others in those acts of rale of jurisdiction, is from this power of order, and the ordinary extent of his authority therein is extended no farther than his ordinary call to preaching.
Yea, 8. The extent of the power of the apostles themselves in ruling in all the churches was founded upon and extendable with their commission to preach; and their very call and obligation being not to preach in a set and fixed relation, as an ordinary pastor's calling is, but to all nations and in all churches, hence their power of ruling was answerable.
It was their very call to be universal pastors, and therefore universal rulers ; yea, and their authority of ruling was narrower in the extent of it than of their preaching.
The apostles might preach to heathens, and their call was so to do, to convert them, but they had not power to rule all men : ' What have I to do to judge them that are without ?' says the apostle, 1 Cor. xv. 12.
But in this'way of presbyterial government, though they also may occasionally preach where they may not rule, yet the proportion of their ordinary ruling is extended beyond the proportion of their ordinary preaching, which was not so in the apostles themselves.
Let but the same line of proportion equally be drawn over the apostles' power in these and theirs, according to their several measures.
Their call to ruling was uniform to preaching in all churches, though their preaching was larger than their rule, namely, to those without ; but ordinary pastors have a standing fixed call to preach but in one congregation.
Let their call and power of ruling be uniformto it, and they can have an ordinary standing power to rule but in that congregation ; either extend both farther, or contract both to this.
It is no answer to say that they may preach as pastors in neighbour ehurches occasionally, for so they may preach to any reformed church, as in Scotland, where yet they have not so much as an occasional call to rule; and in such occasional acts of preaching also they have but the proportion which the apostles had, whose power in preaching was larger than of ruling, for it was extended to them without; but still if an ordinary standing power in raling, although with others (for the apostles exercised their power with others), should be stretched where they have not an ordinary standing call to preach, it should exceed the proportion of the apostles in that respect.
} 4. And, fourthly, from hence ariseth another disproportion between these : officers, ruling and preaching elders, compared among themselves, and it is
| such a disproportion as is like to the former alleged between the deacons and the elders; for this government makes the extent of the ruling elder's office
* and relation to be larger than that of the teacher's or pastor's ; for the pastor, as pastor, is limited to his particular congregation he is fixed to, as the deacons algo are; but the ruling elder's office, as ruling elder, is extended over all these congregations in this presbytery.
The ruling elder performs his office in the highest perfection of it, as to admonish, excommunicate, &o., to all in these churches, but the pastors are limited as pastors in the highest work of their callings (which preaching is, and more excellent than ruling, yea, than baptizing), unto one congregation.
That place in 1 Tim. v. 17, i (interpret how you will) justifies what is asserted.
| Now these are strange disproportions, which are occasioned by this and the presbyterial government; and this greatly makes for the congregational way, wherein as to these particulars no such incongruities are found, but all things fall naturally uniform.
2. A second head of incongruities and inconsistencies which will follow upon this government, concerns the mutual duties required, that do necessarily
| | Cuar. VI.] THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST. follow upon this standing relation for a constant government of these elders to all this people of these churches, and of the people to these elders.
1. The people of all these elders {scoording to what the Scripture speaks of as due to standing elders) owe at least honour and esteem to them, yea, maintenance to all of them, whether they ordinarily rale them or preach to them, and they owe it on both accounts : 1 Tim. iv. 17, 18, ' Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially that labour in the word and doctrine ;' which hononr is (ver. 18), in the analogy of that law,
'not to muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn ;' and this is certainly due to elders on account of what is the work of elders, whether performed apart or together by way ofjurisdiction. And it cannot be denied but that their constant ruling, as in the presbytery, is one great part of the work of elders here intended, and mentioned with preaching, for which an especial honour is due.
God appoints no constant work in the ministry, but he appoints a reward from those for whom it is performed ; and as they owe adaty of ruling to every one in the flock, as Acts xx. 28, so there is a due of maintenance and honour due from all this people to all and every one of those elders, to those that rule, as well as to those that labour in the word and doctrine; and in reason, if the elders that rule well and perform the lesser acts of ruling in their particular congregations are to have this honour from them in their relations, then all these elders that rule well in the common presbytery, and perform the greatest acts of ruling, are to have the like from all of that classical church ; for the emphasis being put upon ruling well, and in those acta done by them the excellency of ruling consisting, therefore to these is this honour due from this great church, more especially than from the lesser congregations respectively unto their proper elders.
Neither will the distinction of being a presbytery in common salve it, for if the particular elders of congregations are to have this honour for what is done by them in their joint acts of ruling in the particular presbyteries, then these are to have it in what is done in their common presbyteries also ; and the precept is not to honour presbyteries in common in an abstract notion, but to hononr elders, because the particular persons of the elders are to be the object of it, and those most who excel most in that rale, that rule well or best.
But when there are many congregations apart who have their proper fixed pastors and elders, whom they maintain for performing one part of the elder's work (for they perform but one part of it), how shall they perform this due to all the rest for that other part of the work ?
How burdensome, how confused, must this be!
And yet due it is, for they are all one church to them.
And then how can this duty be proportioned (suppose it should not be maintenance, but honour and esteem), for the people will not be able well to judge of it, not only because they cannot be present at their work, and so cannot judge of it, but because either it must be proportioned to them that are constant as preaching elders or as ruling; for the ground it is there (1 Tim. v. 18) required upon is that they tread out their corn, and the apostle says, ' Esteem them for their work's sake that labour among you,' 1 Thes. v. 12, 18, so as it is to be proportioned to the work of a pastor, as pastor; but to honour or esteem them as ruling elders only, were to honour the preaching elders below the rank and degree of their office.
2. It also brings the like incongruity upon tho performance of those duties of elders, which the New Testament indifferently requires of all those that it acknowledgeth to be elders unto a people, and therefore no such constant relation of elders to so many churches may be.
1. One duty is praying with the sick : ' Send for the elders of the church, to pray for them,' James v.14.
What! are these elders of the presbyterial church bound to this ?
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Book Iv.
And thts duty lies in common upon elders of the churches ; and how shall we distinguish when the Scripture doth not?
2. Another duty is visiting from house to house, as Paul in his example instructs: the elders of Ephesus, 8. Another duty is watching over men's souls, as those that must give an account, Heb. xiii. 17; and that the people should obey them, and no warrant is given to obey others in the way of an ordinary rule.
And to watch, is not to stay till causes are brought by appeals or so from the congregations, but personally to watch over them as souls committed to them.
4. Another duty is preaching (if they be preaching elders) in season and out of season.
The bishops said, the flock was theirs, and the whole care committed to them ; and to salve the incongruity of not being able to 'preach themselves to them all, they professed a derivative delegated power to inferior pastors, whom they called their curates.
This was plain dealing, but these elders make all the whole flock theirs, and this from those seriptures that speak of elders and flock; and yet themselves have no curates,
. and so are personally obliged, according to the rules in Scripture, and yet cannot perform the obligation, which is a worse incongruity.
5. It will be their duty also to attend to all causes, which so many churches will fill their hands with sufficiently, for churches will be full of scandal, and there will be cases of difficulty.
What a deal of work did one church of Corinth find Paul!
And it is the duty of each elder to attend to all those that come in his cognisance, as if he alone were to judge, for he is to give his jadgment of them all, as one that is to give an account.
It is an argument against episcopacy, that they cannot take the care (according to what the Scriptare seems to require of an ordinary officer) of so many churches in a diocese; now this work (suppose of ruling only, as in a presbytery) lies upon each of these elders, as if he were but one, as to the matters of attending thereto
(as was said) though each is helped by the suggestion of others.
And besides the common work that must needs arise from all these churches, they are to attend to all cases of conscience and of temptations in their particular congregations, or from elsewhere, if those churches will have recourse to them.
If it be said, thet they may part these duties among them, and perform only to the whole those that are in common, the answer is plain, Ubi scriptura non distingutt, nec nos debemus distinguers, Where the Scripture makes no distinction, we ought not to distinguish.
Now all those duties are spoken of, as owing from elders to the flock, without any distinction.
Paul saith to those Ephesians, ' Feed the whole flock,' Acts xx. 28.
Peter says the like to those he writes to, that they respectively should feed and take the oversight over the flock, éy iu, which was among them.
The apostle telis the Hebrews that their elders watched over their souls, Heb. xiii. 17.
And to the Thessalonians, he describes them to be those that are over them, and labour and admonish them, 1 Thes. vy. 12.
When these injunctions are thus laid upon all, how shall the conscience of elders be able to part and distinguish themselves out of the discharge of them, and to say, ThoughI am an elder in common to all in these congregations, yet I am bound but to govern them in greater matters, and to admonish them as with others, when publicly met in @ consistory, and to no other acts of eldership; snd yet to my own particular congregation, I am obliged to private admonition, rule, and watchfulness, &c.
Where hath the Scripture set these bounds, or thus parted them?
Therofore, certainly all these places hold forth singly only the elders of a particular church fixed thereto, and their duty to it, a3 knowing no other.
And indeed it was necessary that Christ should set the bounds and give the distinction, and not indifferently lay all these duties upon Cup. VI.J THE CHUROBES OF CHRIST. all; and either in these places the duties of elders in a common presbytery are contained, or they are not to be found in the New Testament.
Lastly, That which is inconsistent with the ordinary way of the call of elders held forth in the word, and by the reformed churches allowed, may not be; but such is this presbyterian government.
It is the call which breeds relation between elders and church, and is the foundation of it.
None are to assume the honour of ruling the church of Christ, that are not called thereto, as Aaron was not to have been over all the church, but that he was called of God.
There are two parts of this calling: 1, choice; 2, ordination.
1, As for choice, Chamier, in the name of all the reformed churches, allows to the people the approbation of their elders; and so it is in Scotland. And if the apostles themselves allowed them the choice of the deacons that had the charge of the church treasury, and took care of their bodies, then much more of their elders, that have to do with their conseiences.
Look whatever right of the people is in the choice of those who should preach to them, there is a8 much reason they should have the exercise of it in the choice of these that in a common presbytery do rule over them; for they perform one part of the elders' duty, namely, ruling, as the preaching elders do the other; and therefore by the equity of the same law that speaks of elders indefinitely, if they choose any elders as elders to them, they are to choose these also, there being no distinction put of choosing preaching elders only, but elders indefinitely.
And further, the greatest and highest acts of power over them are committed in an ordinary way unto them, as of excommunieation, which is of all punishments the most formidable; and so there is put as much, if not more, than every man's life, that is a member of that classical church, into their hands.
The enjoyment of all ordinances for ever, and the power of dePosing their ministers already fixed to them, and the power of refusing to ordain them they shall approve, is lodged in this classis.
And therefore in the primitive church the persons of the bishops, who had the power of all these, were chosen by all the people, and by panegyrical meetings.
And the argument is strengthened by this further parallel.
A minister's call hath two parts: 1, ordination, which belongs to the elders; 2, choice, in which the people have some interest » therefore these elders as elders in common, and these congregations as one church, being relatives, that interest which a church hath as a church is commensurable to the interest of these elders as elders.
If therefore in ordination all the elders in a common presbytery join to ordain an officer, then all the people as a church must join in choosing and approving him; for the common right of choosing cannot be swallowed up by the interest of their elders ordaining him.
And if it be said they all choose by virtue of the general law of combination, as in the shires they do parliament men, it is answered, that the constitution of the state makes it so, and if the like be found in Scripture for this other, it is sufficient; but if not, but that this interest must be common to the people of the classical church, it is asked, when a fixed pastor is to be chosen to a particular church, what office he shall be chosen to with respect unto the people of the other congregations ? Not to a pastor's office, for he is not to be such to them.
If he be chosen to be a ruling elder only, then besides that he hath two offices, he must have two choices and two ordinations.
We choose him for our pastor, says the particular church he belongs to; and we, say the other, to rule us.
And besides, the people have an interest of presence, and joining in fasting and prayer, at his ordination.
And this therefore must be performed either in a panegyrical meeting of all, which cannot be as the practice is, or in all the several churches, which will multiply the ordination of him.
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox V.
The jurisdiction of synods debated.—That appeals are not necessary to the government of the churches, and therefore there is no necessity of synods upon that account.—What power may be allowed to a synod occasionally mesting to consider the maladministration of anyparticular church.—That they have not that grand prerogative of power given by Christ to excommunicate other churches, and so by that rod to enforce them to revoke their sentence of maladministration, and to receive a person wrongfully excommunicated by them.
—tThe subordination of synods considered and refuted.— Though particular churches are not subject to the jurisdiction of synods, yet they are not wholly independent, but there is a communion which they ought to hold one with another.
Concerning appeals; that they are not absolutely necessary to the government of the churches.
Twat appeals are not of absolute necessity to the government of the churches, and that the law of nature doth not necessarily require them, is apparent from these reasons :
1. In the first government under the law of nature there were no appeals in criminal causes, but Judah, the head of his family, peremptorily pronounceth the sentence, 'Let her be burnt,' Gen. xxxviii.
And indeed, to whom then should any appeal have been made?
Therefore appeals are not necessary by the light of nature.
2. The law of nature among the Jews required them not.
The government was in the cities, and no appeals {in Deut. xvii. or elsewhere) in case of wrong were made by the injured party, but only in case of difficulty they had recourse to' the judgment of the great sanhedrim to resolve cases that ! were too hard for them. And as for that instance of Moses, Exod. xviii. 22, that the great matters were brought to him and the small matters to other elders, it was a dividing of causes according to their sort and kind, and not a bringing of matters by way of appeal unto him.
8. Some of the reformed churches have no appeals, and yet are well governed, and in as much peace as those in Scotland.
Yn Geneva there is but one consistory, and if there be any appeals in case of maladministration, they are made to the magistrate.
And if it be said that it is so because they, being a commonwealth, and having supreme power, do bound the church power, yet still however, if the power of this our government would appoint magistrates to hear appeals of particular churches, and so bound their power in themselves (as the imperial towns in Germany or the cantons in Switzerland do), there is a great possibility to govern these churches without any other or further appeals in case of unjust sentences, as well as Geneva and other reformed churches are governed.
. oT Cnap. I.] THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST.
4. In matters of life and death in this kingdom there is no appeals, not such as to right the man if wronged, but every corporation hath the privilege touching the execution of the man to do it within themselves, and yet ifm anything, De morte hominis deliberandum est, there is the greatest deliberation to be had abont the life and death of a man; and yet this way of Proceeding without appeals in such a case as this is not against the law of nature.
5. In democracies, where the sentence of life and death (as in many cases it was so) were referred to the immediate sentence of the people, there were no appeals ; and yet such a government is not against the light of nature.
Now, taking away of a man's 'life may well be conceived to be of as much moment as casting a man out of a church, for that deprives the subject of all ordinances for ever, and also of further time to repent; and yet incorporations and a recorder are betrusted with this, without the ordinary benefit of appeals to relieve the man; and therefore why may not a church, a company of saints, that hath the promise of Christ's presence to guide them, and which is a body to Christ, being sufficiently furnished with officers, having two or three elders over them, be as well betrasted in ecclesiastic administrations ?
Nor can it be supposed that God should take more care : under the New Testament for relief of wrongs in churches scattered than he did in that national church of the Jews, which (as a nation) was capable of appeals, or that God, for the pretended relief of particular persons wronged, should subject whole churches, yea, provinces,-to a coercive power armed with the dreadful sentence of excommunication in a national assembly.
(2.) That appeals are not absolutely necessary is evident, because if they were so they should be brought either antecedently to the sentence of excommunication in a particular church, or after it hath passed on the person excommunicated.
[1.] But that an appeal should not go before the sentence of excommunieation, appears, 1. From the power and duty of that court to which the person's cause is first brought.
The congregation that is told of the person's sin (according to Christ's institution, Mat. xviii. 17) hath the power of the cengures, and Christ's command lies upon them to execute Christ's ordinance, if he hears not that charch to whom the accusation of him is first brought;whereas, by an appeal afore, the sentence would be suspended, and so it would be in the power of an obstinate sinner to hinder the sentence from coming into act.
2. It is apparent from the good of the person.
For, 1, if an appeal was thus brought antecedentto the sentence ofexcommunication passed in a particular chureh, then a man should never be obstinate until he came to the national assembly, and so he would want the means of his conversion all that while, which would be the ready way to harden him in his sin, to defer his repentance at least for a year; and then he must run through all the samo course of admonitions by the higher courts ere they can pronounce the sentenee.
2. Then God must wait upon and lacquey after men, and suspend a senteneo till a man hath gone through all these courts on earth, and baffled both God's sentence and also man's.
(2.] That appeals are not to be made after the sentence of excommunication passed in a particular church appears, (1.) From the nature of the sentence, which is decisive, and is irreversible, as being bound in heaven, unless the person repents, and upon his repentance is restored again.
(2.) Because a particular church, by yielding to such appeals, would give '
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox V.
<P that power and authority with which Christ hath entrusted them.
For Christ hath given them full power to exercise all acts of discipline within themselves (as hath been proved) ; but if they admitted of appeals to be made to & superior court, as having power over them, to disannul their acts, they would thereby acknowledge a supreme authority, and that they had not the \ perfect power in themselves.
| 2. If there may be such appeals, whether afore or after sentence (other than to relieve the person, and those we grant), then there should be a greater punishment for the appellant, if he be cast in the provincial assembly, and yet @ greater also than that if he be cast again in the national.
So it is in civil i courts, and it-deserves it here as much as in any, for a man becomes guilty of a greater sin by so appealing (if indeed he is criminal), for he is guilty of more obstinacy ; if the appeal be afore the sentence, by hindering it, if after, by continuing more impudently impenitent, and in both cases in troubling all the churches.
But these courts have no greater punishment to inflict than what the congregation or first ehurch hath ; for the man is by excommunication out of his own church, cast out of all churches as well as when cast by the national.
They can only admonish and excommunicate at last, if the sentence be not passsed afore the appeal; or if the appeal be after the sentence, they can only pronounce the sentence to be just, they have no farther or more grievous excommunication for him. There is indeed a final excommunication with a curse, Anathema Maranatha (1 Cor. xv. 22), to him that loves not (whieh is a diminutive), that is, that shews hatred against the Lord Christ enlightening, and so hath sinned against the Holy
Ghost; but we believe that such an excommunication is not that which upon appeals to the national assembly (if the person be cast there also), they shall have power to inflict.
In the case indeed of eternal damnation, every degree for every sin is another hell added to the former (not an increase of torment by a circumstance, but substantially), but it is not so here, for every new sentence of these gradual courts add not a new degree of excommunication.
Whereas excommunication is a giving up to Satan, if the congregation excommunicating gave up to one devil, and the classical to more, and the provincial assembly to more, and then the national to worse than the former (as in the Gospel Christ says of a man apostatising, that seven devils worse than before enter into the man), then these courts might arrogate such appeals to them, and proportionably punish the person's obstinacy who wrongfully makes them ; but the case is otherwise.
If it be replied that the shame is increased, that he is rebuked by so many, and that is a punishment; and that as Christ's death is aggravated by the shame, so here the excommunication is made the more shameful in the national than it would have been in the lesser assembly.
The answer is, 1, That still that which is of the substance of this spiritual punishment, and which is spiritual in it, and in which the spirit of it lies, is not, nor cannot be, added unto, viz. ; God's binding the man in heaven, which God did, and doth as much upon the first excommunication as upon the second or third ; and as for Satan's power to terrify him, he is as much delivered thereby to it, and he is as much cast out of the ordinances in all churches by it, as by the confirmation of the sentence in the national
And what is that outward shame of it (such as follows upon all other civil crimes made public), to be compared with these, or to correspond to that further proportion of authority, that these higher courts, by challenging of appeals to be made to them, do seem to usurp, as if an answerable degree of spiritual punishment were by God's promise ministered in them ?
And if there should not be a further punishment unto the appellant, then it comes all to one with what we affirm; for if it be in order to relieve the party
Cuar. I.] THE OBURCHES OF OHRIST. only, we acknowledge appeals in those respects to be useful to, by declaring the sentence null, and that there was no due or just excommunication. And if it be a just sentence, we acknowledge appeals so far to be made to neighbour churches, that they may declare it is a just excommunication already past.
So that what we contend against is this, when under the colour of appeals they challenge to themselves a juridical power, to rescind sentences, to have the power of excommunication as much as the churches that do excommunicate, to oppose or stop any church inferior from proceeding; and in a reverence to this their power, to give liberty to any person offending, to appeal before sentence unto them to judge of it, and to pronounce it.
18. The liberty of such appeals, afore or after sentence, through all those gradual remedies, of classical, provincial, national (which we conceive should
. be rather for matters of doctrine, than for the relief of persons of all sorts ; and they should deal in generals rather than in such particulars, as themselves are more general assemblies), will breed great inconveniences.
As, 1. Either the lower churches must spare many gross offenders in a nation, that there may be few excommunications, and so prevent occasions of appeals
(and then they would not take away the dishonour done to Christ by multitude of scandals), or else, if the lower churches be faithful in proceeding against all such offenders, yet by setting up three such courts over them for gradual appeals, with liberty to appeal to them, there will, instead of relieving particular persons, be occasioned the greatest trouble and cumber to these assemblies in multitude of causes depending
; for who will not appeal, knowing at last he can be but excommunicated ?
And they must despatch these causes either by committees only (and so to do, is to reduce the supreme judgment to a fewer company of elders than were in the first classis or provincial synods that judged it, besides that it is a mere delegated powér which such committees exercise), or else they must trust the lower courts wholly, and proceed according to their sentence; and then to what end are such appeals ?
Surely the highest national court cannot deny to hear any man that appeals to them, and if they will hear all that will appeal, they will be filled with them; and that will prove vexatious both to the persons and churches appealing, and will be impossible to be despatched.
And besides, no man being to be excommunicated, but upon impenitency, which may be where the fact is acknowledged and confessed, and yet the church not satisfied with the repentance (for an undue outward formal confession will easily be acknowledged not to be that upon which churches should forbear excommunication, in case the fact be scandalous, it being a godly sorrow, 2 Cor. vii. 9, 10, that is required of men in such a case), may therefore proceed justly to excommunication, because they judge that he repents not, though the appealer says he doth repent; and then the trial will be of the man's repentance, performed at his confession, whether it be godly or no, which how can any judge of but upon their own having seen it, or putting the man to a new repentance afresh upon a reiterated admonition by them, and how then will a national assembly so easily be able to judge of it?
And if they could, yet if they hear all things as fully over again, as all the inferior courts did (or how shall they judge to the satisfaction of the appellant ?), what work would this create to all such assemblies!
It was objected against the bishops' extensive power over so many congregations, that they had more churches, and so more business to come before them, than any one man could or themselves did manage, and therefore had their archdeacons and chancellors, and the like under them; but a national assembly will have much more to do, and yet it sits not as the Sanbedrim, all the year, but only
To discourage men from those appeals at last by banishment, ' i THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boos V.
&e., if cast, is to eke out the spiritual power with the temporal. A sufficient spiritual remedy is sought for, and it must be within itself; for that of the magistrate is but external, though helpful, and we seck a sufficient government, that was in the primitive times, when there was no Christian magistrates.
2. Such national assemblies, in a due proportion, should rather have work ' suited to their constitution, viz., national reformation, and advices to the magistrate about that which is common to all churches in the nation (and they will find enough of it in all times), than every man's personal cause by way of appeal (that hath a mind to appeal), to come afore them ; even as civil assemblies, parliaments, &c., do not admit ordinary appeals from all courts in this kingdom, but leave them to these courts, the kingdom affording matters of far greater moment for their cognisance.
8. These appeals still being made from one ecclesiastical court to another, and those superior (when the canse is out of the congregation's hands), con- . sisting most of pastors, or if of others, yet of persons ecclesiastical (for as such they sit in those assemblies, being homogeneal members of presbyteries, and lay elders you will not call them), by this means all causes are taken up into the clergy's hands, abstracted from the people
; and the clergy will take part one with another, and the one ratify what the lower hath done, as the high commission did what a particular bishop had done, against an inferior minister or other.
4, When the cause comes to the national assembly, whose power is purely ecclesiastical, either the appeals must rest here and go no further, and the civil magistrate, if he back their sentence with a civil mulct, must, without his examining of the cause, judge as they have determined it; and so the temporal power must pursue and execute the decrees of the spiritual, by an implicit faith (which was the bondage the secular powers were in unto the popish bishops in those times) ; or else they also must take full cognisance of the cause, and have a power to redress and rectify the wrong, if they find all these courts to have injured a person, perhaps differing in judgment, or the like.
And then it must either be the supreme power, the high court of parliament (and then that honourable court must be filled with all men's ecclesiastical appeals), or it must be some lesser ordinary court of magistracy inferior, which shall have power to correct the wrong; and we believe the national assembly will very hardly subject their sentence to their power, to rescind and declare it to be unjust, so as to be bound by the magistrates' power on them to recall it; and yet, otherwise, it is in vain to appeal at all to the magistrate.
One of these ways must be taken, or else the civil magistrates must be denied to have appeals in such cases brought to them, but all be left in the church's hands, and the benefit of appeals made to them altogether be cut off.
6. If the king and parliament should, in the judgment of the national assembly, aggrieve you in point of religion, may appeals be made to the | national assembly therein?
Will you appeal to the national assembly against | them?
Whether our brethren will not decline that answer that was given | by one of the brethren in the debate, why should we be afraid to affirm they might appeal to them, we know not; but we cannot see how the principles of the presbyterial government can avoid the asserting of it.
Surely that independency so opprobriously ascribed to us, and retorted on us, is with submission to the magistrate, and an obedience by suffrage, without appealing farther, we professing not to know any spiritual power on earth, to which an appeal may be made from the sentence of the magistrate, especially if it be the supreme authoritative magistrate. Though we acknowledge a relation to | Cua. II.) THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST. no other ecclesiastical authority that hath a coercive power sub pana excommunicationis, or of delivering unto Satan, yet we own a subjection to an assembly of other churches, as occasion is, and that as to an ordinance of Christ.
But now, to set up a national assembly, growing up from the ecolesiastical state, as a court to whom appeals may be made from the sentence of the supreme magistrate itself, is so transcendent a way of independency, not negatively only, as knowing no superior, but affirmatively also, subjecting the civil power to the church, as the other deserves not the name of it.
And if, from the civil power, appeals may be made to such assemblies, then they have the authority over it, such as under the notion of appeals is contended for.
They will have a power to convent, yea, to excommunicate, and that as a joint body or parliament.
What power synods composed of the elders of particular churches, occastonally assembled, have in case of maladministration by any particular church.
As we acknowledge eleetive occasional synods of the elders of many churches, as the churches have need to refer cases of difference to them, so in case of maladministration, or an unjust proceeding in the sentence of exeommunication and the like, we acknowledge appeals or complaints may be made to other churches; and the elders of those churches met in a synod, who being offended may, as an ordinance of Christ, judge and declare that sentence to be null, void, and unjust; and that not simply, as any company of men may so judge, giving their judgments of a fact done, but as an ordinance of Christ in such cases, and for that end sanctified by him to judge and declare in matters of difference.
And the church and eldership of a particular church, that proesedeth so unjustly, ought to look at this their determination as an ordinance of Christ to them ; and, entertaining it as such, more sadly to review their own act and proceedings, to consider the grounds which the syned gives why it is unjust, and themselves ought to acknowledge
, it such, and receive the brother again, with acknowledgment of their sin, and of the wrong done him; yet not with an implicit faith, because the synod hath so determined, as having a greater power from Christ to restore the man.
In case this church will not own this person thus wrongfully ejected, these charehes, or any of them, upon this determination of their elders (the churches at their return approving their sentence), may both receive the party in among themselves, and so relieve the man; and farther, also profess to hold no communion with that church, if they perceive that church doth continue obstinate, having either for the manner proceeded therein against the common principles of equity and right (such as in judging of matters of fact, civil courts proceed by, as when matters are not sufficiently proved, &c.), or against and besides the principles whereby churches are to proceed (as for the matter of excommunication itself), which that church itself hath, and doth hold forth and profess.
If it fall out that a person be thus cast, first by his own church, and now by a synod of many churches, to whom he referred his cause and appealed, he is bound rather to sit down than cursitare (as Cyprian's word and advice is), ran up and down, still to other and greater number of churches, and to suffer wrong rather (as in 1 Cor. vi. the apostle in another case exhorts) than engage churches against churches (which may prove the event) in his own private quarrel.
In Christian commonwealths, appeals may be made in all such cases of a, THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox V. wrong to the magistrate, as to the other churches, the subject-matter of excommunication being but such things as are against the common profession
. of Christianity, in doctrine and manners, and not the niceties and curiosities in theology, and such as the laws of the magistrate approve of; and the manner of proceeding for the proof of the fact being the same that are to be in all other courts civil.
Now these things being premised and acknowledged by us, we proceed to the negative part, what power we deny to synods in point of maladministrations, which our brethren would give them ; and herein the points in difference are three.
1. We deny them to have powerto rescind a sentence, but only doctrinally to judge a sentence of excommunication to be void and unjust.
Now the power to rescind a sentence, according to the acceptation of the words, imports, 1, Anact of the same kind of ministerial power that gave the sentence.
It imports the same power to make it void that did establish it; yea, a power containing in it all that the inferior hath, and is withal superior to it.
The Christian magistrate hath a power over churches, in case of wrong, not only to declare the sentence to be unjust, as he is a Christian magistrate, but to cause that church that pronounced it to revoke it as such ; but yet the assembly will not own that they have power to rescind the sentence, as they say synods may.
Therefore this word (as in synods the assembly would place the power of it) must import not simply power of judging and declaring the sentence unjust, for that is refused; but further, a power of the same kind, and yet superior, by virtue of which the sentence is made void, coram ecclesia, before the church, and is now so to be conceived of all.
And as in tho act of the church that excommunicated the man, there was a further power put | forth than a bare declaration that he was to be excommunicated ; for they actually, with the power of Christ, did cast ont and deliver the man to Satan; so here, in this act that bears the name of rescinding, there must be supposed a power not simply to declare the sentence unjust, but further, a power upon their sentence to make void the other's act, that the person before excommunicated stands now coram ecclesia, unexcommunicated.
2. A second power which we deny to synods, which is contended for by our brethren, which also the word rescind imports, is the like coercive power in | this synod given them by Christ, whereby to compel this church to acknowledge their sentence unjust, and to receive that brother again.
And the punishment by which they are enabled to compel them to it, must be of the same kind with that which these supposed inferior churches have over ther members, if they did not obey; namely, to excommunicate and deliver up to Satan that church, classis, or province; that hath thus unjustly proceeded, and will not receive this man in again, upon their rescinding it.
And this it imports in the sense of our brethren, for otherwise they do but intend that government in these cases to be in synods, which we the dissenting brethren contend for ; which is, that these synods, and the churches under them, may in some cases withdraw a communion from other churches offending, but not presume to excommunicate, or deliver them to Satan, or unchurch them; and lay a law upon their consciences to shut up their church meetings, and to be all heathens and publicans to one another, as well as to their synod and their churches.
And yet this which we contend for is cried down with this common prejudice, that it is no government, because their power of excommunication is wanting.
Again, when they restore the party wronged, is it to their communion only, or to the communion of that church out of which he was excommunicated also?
If only to their own, then still it is no more than what we acknowledge neighbour churches may do in case of | Caap. I.] THE CHURCHES OF OHRIST. wrong, and it is a relief to the party.
But if also they have power to restore him to the church he was cast out of actually, then they must have . power to compel that church to receive him.
In this case these whole churches and their officers would be subjects to be dealt with by these synods ; for, 1, the appellant wronged is one party, and they another; and,
2, the excommunication was a public church act, wherein the elders and the people are involved, especially when they all stand to own him, and* to execate the sentence.
8. A third thing wherein we differ is concerning matters of appeals, we taking them as importing, in the sense of our brethren, a juridical superior power, in the superior synods to be appealed unto.
Concerning which we say, 1, that such appeals are not so absolutely necessary to the government of the churches, nor doth the law of nature necessarily require them ;
2, especially not such appeals as should acknowledge a superior power in the synod appealed unto, either by making the appeal afore the sentence is given in particular churches, and so the matter is taken out of their hands, by virtue of a superior power in synods, or by making the appeal after sentence given, we deny them to be such fixed and solemn courts of judicature.
First, As for that rescinding power pretended, if more than declarative is intended, we conceive that the nature of the sentence of excommunication, when untimely executed, is such, that by whatever court (that is the first subject of pronouncing it) it is pronounced and executed, it is not capable of being rescinded.
It is capable of being declared void, null, or unjust ; but not of being rescinded, in the sense afore explained.
In matters civil, one court having a superior power may in 4 true and proper sense rescind the sentence of another, because it hath a proper power of the same kind, by virtue of which it can make that act void which stood before by virtue of the inferior power as valid, each act depending upon that power which on earth is set up; and so the greater may undo and reverse what the former did.
But thus to reseind a sentence of excommunication, no power on earth is able to do.
Which is evinced thus:
There are two parts of that sentence, one outward, which the church performs (which is ejection ont of communion), the other inward, which God accompanies the sentence with.
And if the sentence were formally no more but a casting out of the outward communion of the church on earth, then a greater power in earth might have power to rescind their sentence, and restore him to communion; but there is a further judicial actannexed unto it, which is binding in heaven, and delivering to Satan, &c., which must be supposed a special judicial act of God.
Such man's sin is in some sense bound in heaven, till he repents, when he commits it, and is admonished by any Christian, whether he be in the church or no, and whether he be brought before the church or no for it; and so the brethren that admonish him in order to excommunication, may be said, in some sense, to bind his sin.
But there is a farther judicial act of God's put forth, when the church hath ministerially sentenced the man aright; for the church so binds sin as no private brother can, or else it might be said, that a brother may deliver to Satan.
Hence that assembly, which is the first subject of this power from God, hath the promise of this, and God is supposed by us to have performed it upon their sentence ; and then it is impossible there should be a superior power of the same kind on earth to rescind it, or unbind it in heaven, and to whoma farther promise is made, that when they pronounce it void there is an unbindinginheaven. So as suppose the congregational or classical church (be
© Qu. 'to own and'?—Ep.
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox V. it either the one or the other that is acknowledged the first subject of this power ; and which of these should be, could never yet be brought to the debate) hath bound the man, and the provincial confirms it, and binds him also, if the national hath power to rescind this, it hath then one key to unloose what these three keys have locked.
The answer to this is only that this argument goes upona false supposition, that appeals should be when the excommunication is just, whereas they are only when the appeal is unjust, and so the sin is not bound in heaven. To which it is replied,
1. In case of appeals.
That is the thing still in question between the parties, whether it be just or unjust?
And therefore to suppose that all appeals fall out only in cases of real injustice and wrong, cannot be a safficient answer.
Yea, 2. The sentence is to be judged by all the churches (till the matter is examined and cleared to the contrary) to be a right sentence of excommunication, and that his sin is bound in heaven =: for they are rather to judge that the church hath proceeded rightly, than to judge on the appellant's side, until the matter is cleared.
And so still it goes up as a sentence binding in heaven.
8. Whether the sentence be just or unjust, the matter is capable of no more than declaring and adjudging it such accordingly
; and therefore it is capable of no such act as may be called rescinding.
For if it be just, no sentence on earth can rescind God's act upon that first sentence, for it is bound in heaven, and man cannot alter God's act; and if it be unjust, then there needs no power to rescind it, but only to deelare it to be unjust and void, and so to hold the man as if he had never been excommunicated. And if synods have but such a declarative power, then let no more be affirmed, and we will not contend about it.
4, If they have power of reseinding the sentence, then the act done by the inferior courts is made void by their sole sentence, without any act of reversing, by the consent of those congregations or churches that have pronounced it.
For no superior coart hath that power to rescind the sentence of another, but hath it so, as by their act the sentence is made void, without any act of revocation by the lower court.
Thus the honourable house of parliament, if it rescinds an act of an inferior court, sends not down to that inferior court to reverse it, but doth it without them.
And if that be the intent of this rescinding, let it be so declared.
CHAPTER IIL | The other prerogative of power challenged by synods, to excommunicate other | churches, considered and invalidated.
The second prerogative of power challenged by synods, which we contend against, and deny to them, is such a coercive power to be in them, as given them by Christ, to excommunicate other churches, and so by that rod to enforce them to revoke their sentence of maladministration, and receive a person wrongfully excommunicated by them.
That such a power is not in synods to excommanicate a church or charches, or so rescind a sentence passed in a particular church, is evinced by these following arguments.
1. For such a pretended power, there is neither precept nor example.
(1.) The apostles never did exercise such a power, who yet had power in all churches, and over persons among them.
Caar. II.) THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST.
(2.) None of the reformed churches ever practised it.
Mr Paget, a learned preebyterial writer, acknowledgeth that none of the reformed churches ever practised it. Mr Cartwright, speaking of this power, did in his days patan if it may be upon it.
Tf it be said their government is so good, as it hath had no occasion to put such a power into act: I answer, Let the Arminian congregation, that were in the low countries, be remembered.
Though a national synod was called, yet none of them were excommunicated; and yet we believe they judged their errors worthy of their censure.
So the churches of anabaptists among them, who not only hold the not baptizing of children, but run into many other gross errors, were never yet excommunicated.
If it be said that they forbear to do it, because of great inconveniences that would follow, by provoking of multitudes; and that it tends more (in such cases) unto edification to forbear it, than to execute it; it is replied,
1. That God hath suited his ordinances to the ordinary way of his providence, and therefore would not have given an ordinary standing power for government, which could not ordinarily be executed without tumult and disturbance; and therefore there is no such power given.
2. Jf a church or churches did deserve it, it eannot be for edification to forbear it ; for not to excommunicate them is to edify them in sin.
Churches that deserve excommunication, can be edified in nothing by being connived at in their sin, that will damn them.
And excommunication is the means appointed by God for the destroying the flesh and saving the sonl.
8. Neither can a multitude be an excuse for the neglect.
For, however, these synods (if they have such s power) are to discharge their duty, and the soul or souls of sinners must thus be punished.
4. Let it-be observed, that such power is contended for by the presbyterial divines which was never practised, which themselves think and judge inconvenient to practise ; and yet without this power granted to them, they say there is no government.
And herein lies the main of this great controversy, whether they should have such a power or no, which they never have exercised; and themselves think it to be ordinarily inconvenient to exercise it, reserving it as a rod in the house which they never wilt use, as if they kept it to scare children with.
But the efficacy of government lies not in the speculation and doctrine, but in what is practicable.
Shall king- ' doms be disturbed about the dispute of that which in the practice is a chimera, and when they have it, shall be exercised arbitrarily, and at discretion?
Yea, may not a trial be made, whether that the other way (which they call no government) may not be sufficient ?
We farther conclude this first head of argument with this, that as such a synodical power hath no precedent or example in the primitive practices, nor in the reformed churches, so it hath this character upon it, that none but the pope and bishops, and synods of bishops, ever practised it; and they have practised it by interdicting kingdoms, not simply as civil states, but as ehurches in kingdoms, commanding the ministers to forbear to administer the holy things unto any that did cleave to their prince, or for any the like causes.
And certainly, by the principles of this doctrine, a general council of all the reformed churches may in like manner excommunicate any nation or kingdom whom they judge heretical, or to make a schism from them ; for whilst the foundation of the power of synods is pleaded to lie in Christ's institation, as it hath ordinarily been urged in the assembly in answer unto our reasons, that the church catholic is one politic body, and so the elders
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox VY. of all churches have power over any churches that are parts of that great body, be they in nations or in provinces; which subjects all states as truly to the thunderbolt of excommunication from foreign churches, as it did once
What though it be said that such counsels are not likely to be practised; | or if so, it must be with the states' own consent.
Yet still the mystery is, that such a power is contended for as a rod over them, as well as over lesser churches; for though they have not excommunicated, defacto, any particular churches, yet they have claimed that power as a rod to keep them in awe with, '
If it be said, the pope challenged to do this as an head of the church universal, and as infallible, we reply, that there is indeed this difference, that he, as but one, usurps it, and as the external head of the church; but yet these challenge the same power, as being themselves the catholic church itself representatively.
For if to tell the church, Mat. xviii., be in its ascent to tell general councils as the church, then they must be interpreted to be the catholic church, and infallibility may in the issue (through men's pride) become the claim also, by how much many consenting are more likely to have the Holy Ghost to assist them than that, and so have more reason for their claim than one set up to challenge it.
And at first, that one was set up only to receive appeals, and to rescind sentences, and to excommunicate churches; and from granting to them that power at the first, did that other of infallibility spring.
A second head of arguments is drawn from the nature of excommunication, because that it contains more in that, than that which we call non-communion, namely this, that persons are not only cast from communion with all these churches (which we acknowledge), but farther, are delivered to Satan for the internal part thereof.
And for the external part, it is strange that this law of synods should oblige their conscience, that they should not meet among themselves, whenas yet they are already a church, and were a church without any power derived from their associating with others.
All then that they can fall from by virtue of the sentence of the synod, is but what they have from them and among them by their association, and not what they have among themselves.
Yea, the very words whereby excommunication is expressed is but this, Sit tibt ethnicus, 'Let him be to thee an heathen,' and 'Take that wicked one from among you'; and therefore when neighbour churches deal so with a church, they can but eject and keep them and their members out from amongst them.
But this power contended for goes further, for the synod assumes to throw a church out of itself, and to make them to be heathens and publicans inter se, among themselves, who yet have all this while been 9 church.
And that which further strengthens all this, is that very principle which the assembly doth go upon to egtablish this power in synods and presbyteries
(given up in their answer to our reasons against presbyteries), that as families are bound to join into some congregational church, so those churches into association together; and as these joined in a new congregation gives them power over each other, so this association of churches gives the whole
& power over each of these churches.
Though we wholly assent not to this latter, yet supposing it (and it is one of the best and fairest grounds for the presbyterial way), the law of this principle (if the parallel be rightly made up) will not extend to a power of excommunicating any of these churches so associated.
For, 1, if you take that external part of excommunication, it is a cutting men off from all ordinances wherein church communion lies (as some hold), but more especially from the sacrament of the Lord's supper
Crur. IIT.] "THE OHURCHES OF CHRIST, "(which latter is acknowledged by all); for since suspension cuts off from the Lord's supper, therefore excommunication must do it much more.
Now the parallel law between these two kinds of associations must ran thus, that as a congregation casts out of the communion of all those ordinances which a congregation is the proper seat of, so this greater association can by . virtue of its association only cast out of those ordinances that belong unto them, as such an associated body in common, and from among themselves in particular; and then that sentence can arise to no more than what we contend to be the only power that churches have one with another, and that is non-communion.
The reason is clear, because they can but cast that chureh out of their association, and from having any interest in their counsel and advice, &c., for associated presbyteries have not the sacraments, nor the solemn constant ordinances of worship, and therefore they can but by virtue of this association deny them communion with themselves; and this we grant to neighbour churches, that they may and ought to deal thus with an offending charch, by virtue of that apostolic rule, ' From such turn away.'
But this power of excommunicating a church contended for is a further thing: it is a laying a law upon a church, to dissolve their being any longer a church, until they do repent of that sin they charge them with ; it is to call in their charter, that they can meet no more énter se, among themselves, to enjoy the sacrament, or any other ordinance whatsoever.
This is beyond the extent of the power of an association ; yea, this is more than they are able to execute; and doth Christ give power to do that which they cannot execute?
Now they may keep them from communion with them, either by not letting them into the assembly (and therefore they had ostsarii, door-keepers, in the primitive times), or they may do it by thrusting them ont, as the priests of Israel did the king when he came to offer sacrifice; or rather by a moral contest against them, or forbearing to communicate when they are present; bat they cannot keep them from meeting inter se, among themselves.
In the primitive times, indeed, they had recourse to the power of magistrates for it, but we seck for a sufficient ecclesiastical remedy.
To this, if it be retorted, that such will the case be too when in a particular congregation a company of persons deserving excommunication are ejected
(as a pastor, and others with him), yet they will meet still, and no law can oblige them to the contrary; we reply by giving this difference of the case.
1. That when a congregation doth cast out the very members, the act itself, whereby they cast them out from among them, Iéaves them barely a company of outlaws, without charch state or relation among themselves; for they had it but as members of that church they are now cast out of; and they can retain no other relation left them that gives them actual right to ordinances, for this is their original first relation.
And therefore if they meet, yea, with @ mutual consent to be a new church, they meet as men, and outlawed from a church relation which they had put their souls upon the laws of, or at least, by a judicial act passed on them, they have now forfeited.
They fall as the angels from that original state, and if they will set up a new kingdom, they . do it but as the devils do.
But although neighbour churches did cast them out from among them, that act, in the nature and extent of it, reacheth not to cast them out of that relation of a church that they had originally among themselves; neither do they fall by virtue of that act (which is all that is in the Synod's power) from that church relation they had among themselves,
' which they had Before their associating with them, and was the foundation of it.
2. By that act of being east out of this congregational relation, they are east out of the formerly enjoyed communion of the Lord's supper, in a cony |
THE GOVERNMENT OF [Boox V. stancy in that church, which they never enjoyed at all in that other classical church, for it is not the seat of it.
And so this act of excommunication, as in a congregational church performed, casts them out of all ordinances, and out of all that is proper to such relation and fellowship; but it is not so in the other case.
And hence it comes to pass that excommunication from all ordinances can only be in a church where all ordinances are; and therefore
. not in or by a classical church, where the main ordinances men are shut out from are not administered.
8. This act of a synod's exeommunicating a charch is yet further, for the external part of it, not simply an obligation not to meet for ordinances, and to account of each other as heathens, but further yet, the sentence terminates itself upon their church fellowship and communion, dissolves that, cute them off from being sn external body or spouse to Christ, gives them such a bill of divorce aa removes the candlestick, takes that in pieces, yea, delivers them
\ as such to Satan, and makes them as heathens and publicans each to other.
| For otherwise, if the act be only the synod's putting away this church from among themselves, or the communion of other churches, that we readily grant may be done, and surely it is remedy sufficient, through Christ's blessing,
(although this is reckoned no government).
But to do the other act mentioned to church or churches, Christ hath not given power to synods.
If it be answered, as it is by some, that the object of this excommaunication of a church is only the persons therein materially considered, but not their church state, otherwise than by consequence, we reply, that formally, the object of this sentence is a church as such, which is evident from this, that the great argument alleged by the presbyterial divines is, that else there
_ is no remedy for an erring church as well as for heretical persons; and also that the sins which are the grounds of such excommunications be still church acts, public, not personal, as grossly evil administrations, or permissions of notorious sins, or heresies professed, upheld, defended, adhered
+ to by all in their assemblies, And how else should excommunication of a church differ from the suspension of a church?
This pute them into that . state, as during the time of their excommunication they are to be reckoned as no church until they repent; for if they are as heathens and publicans, then they are no church, unless we will make heathen churches, which is a contradiction, And if that whole church should die impenitent, they are to be reckoned to die as out of church state among themselves, as well as in relation to other churches.