A Vindication of the Presbyteriall-Government and Ministry

by Ministers and Elders of the London Provinciall Assembly

3. To keep them in verity, it is Christs Weeding-hook to weed out heresies; and therefore King James (though no great friend to this Government) would often say, that it was Malleus hæreticorum, a Hammer to beat down Heresies: And we find, that wheresoever it is set up in strength, there the Churches are kept in unity, verity, and purity; and that (which is very observeable) where this Government hath once got possession, it hath for ever after kept out Popery and all Popish Innovations. The Prelatical Government with all its Lordships and Revenues annexed, as it was managed of late years in England, was an in-let to Popery, and it had tantùmnon brought it in. But wheresoever the Presbyterian-Government is setled, there Popery, root and branch, is plucked up and destroyed, and that without any hope of recovery.

Object.

But it will be objected, that notwithstanding all that hath been said to render the Presbyterial Government amiable and acceptable; yet there are two great Mountains which do lye in the way which do hinder, and (as some say) will for ever hinder people from submitting unto it: The one is,

1. Because it sets up a new officer in the Church, which is a meer humane Creature, having no authority from the Word of God, nor was ever heard of in the Church of Christ, till Calvin's time, & that is the LAY-ELDER.

2. Because it requireth all, of all sorts, to come to the Minister and these Lay-Elders to be examined, before they can be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper.

Answer.

We cannot deny, but that these two objections are great Remora's to the Government, and do hinder the general receiving of it, and therefore we shall be a little the larger in answering of them.

For the first of them, we do here freely confesse, that if we were of opinion, as some are, that the Ruling-Elder hath no foundation in the Word of God, but is a meer humane Ordinance brought into the Church only in a prudential way; we should heartily desire the utter abolition of him: For we are not ignorant, that the Ruling Prelate was brought into the Church upon the same account, for the avoiding of Schism and Division, and afterwards proved the great Author and Fomenter of Schism and Division. And if we should decline the Ruling Prelate, and take in the Ruling Elder upon the same prudential grounds, it were just with God to make him as mischievous to the Church, as ever the Ruling Prelate was: And therefore let us consider what may be said out of the Word of God, for the justification of this so much decryed Officer: Yet first we cannot but take notice that the name of Lay-Elder was affixed to this Officer by way of reproach and scorn, by the adversaries of him, and that it ought not to be continued. For though it be evident by Scripture[45], that there is a great difference betwixt the Ministry usually called the Clergy, and the people commonly called the Laity: yet its also as manifest, that the Scripture[46] distinguisheth them not by the names of Clergy and Laity; forasmuch as all Gods people are therein stiled the Lords Clergy, or Inheritance, and the Lord is called their Inheritance. And when persons are duly chosen from amongst the people to be Governours in the Church, as such, they are no longer Lay-men, but Ecclesiastical persons. And therefore we profess a dislike of the name Lay-Elder, and conceive they ought to be called either governours in the Church, 1 Cor. 12.23. or Ruling-Elders, as 1 Tim. 5.17. not because their Office is to rule alone (for the Teaching-Elder is a Ruler also, Heb. 13.17. 1 Thess. 5.12.) but because their Office is only to rule.[47] Now concerning these Ruling-Elders, we confess, that they are Officers somewhat new and strange to the Church of England; yet not new nor strange to the Word of God, nor to the Primitive times, nor (as all know) to the Reformed Churches.

First, they are not new nor strange to the Word of God, neither in the Old Testament, nor in the New. The Jews in the Old Testament, had two sorts of Elders; Elders of the Priests, and Elders of the people, suitable to our teaching and Ruling-Elders; as appears, Jer. 19.1. And these Elders of the people did sit and vote with the Priests and Levites in all their Ecclesiasticall Consistories, and that by divine appointment. That they were constituent members of the great Sanhedrim, appears, 2 Chron. 19.8. where we reade, That some of the chief of the Fathers were joyned with the Priests, to judge in the matters if the Lord. And howsoever, many things among the Jews after the captivity, did decline to disorder and confusion; yet we finde even in the dayes of Christ, and his Apostles, That the Elders of the people still sate and voyced in the Councell with the Priests, according to the ancient form, as is clear from Matth. 26.57, 59. Matth. 27.1, 12. Matth. 16.21. Matth. 21.23. Mar. 14.43. Luk. 22.66. and Saravia himself,[48] who disputeth so much against Ruling Elders, acknowledgeth thus much: I finde indeed, (saith he) Elders in the Assembly of the Priests of the old Synagogue, which were not Priests; and their suffrages and authority in all Judgments, were equal with the suffrages of the Priests. But he adds; That these Elders of the people were civill Magistrates; which is a poor shift, directly against many Scriptures, which contradistinguish these Elders from the civil Magistrate; as appears; Act. 4.5. Judg. 8.14. Deut. 5.23. Josh. 8.33. 2 King. 10.15. Ezra 10.14. And though it were possible, that some of them might be civill Magistrates, as some Elders amongst Us, are Justices of the Peace: Yet they did not sit under that capacity, in the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrim, but as Ecclesiastical Elders.