Part 1 — Chapter 10: The Consent of Protestant Writers, and the Confession of Our Opponents for Ruling Elders

THE office of Ruling Elders is not only maintained by [illegible] Cartwright, [illegible], Bucer[illegible], and others whom our opposites will call partial Writers, let him who pleases read the commentaries of Martyr, [illegible], Gualther, Hemmingius, Piscator, Paraus upon (Romans 12:8; 1 Corinthians 12:28), Aretius on (Acts 14:23), Zepper. de Polit. Eccles. l. 3. c. 1. & 12., Bullinger on (1 Timothy 5:17), Arcularius on (Acts 14:23), Catal. Test. verit. col 103., Ossand. cent 1 l. 4. c. 11., Chemnit exam part 2. pag 248., Gerard. loc. Theol. tom. 6 pag. 363–364., Muscul. loc. com. de Eccles. c. 5., Bucan. loc com. loc 42., Suetanus de Discipl. Eccles. part. 4 c. 3., Polanus Synt. l. 7. c 11., Zanchius in 4 praecep col. 727., Junius animad. in Bellar cont 5. l 1. c 2., Danaeus de Polit. Christ. l. 6 p 452., Alsted. Theol. cas. pag. 518.520., Sopingius ad bonam fidem Sibrandi pag. 253. &c. The Professors of Leyden, Synt. pur. Theol. Disp. 42. and sundry others, whose testimonies I omit for brevity's cause, it is enough to note the places. The Author of the Assertion for true and Christian Church polity, pag. 196.197. cites for ruling Elders, the testimony the Commissioners of King Edward the sixth, authorized to compile a book for the reformation of Laws Ecclesiastical; among whom were the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishop of Ely. They say, Let the Minister going apart with some of the Elders, take counsel, &c. Voetius cites to the same purpose, Marlorat, Hyperius, Fulke, Whittaker, Fenner, Bunnius, Willet, Sadeel, Lubbertus, Trelcatius (both the one and the other) yes Socinus and the Remonstrants.

Besides we have for us the practice of all well reformed Churches, and the Confessions of the French, the Belgic, and the Helvetic Churches to be seen in the harmony of Confessions.

But what will you say if the adversaries of ruling Elders be forced to say somewhat for them? Whitgift confesses not only that our division of Elders, into preaching Elders and ruling Elders, has learned patrons; but also that the Christian Church when there was no Christian Magistrate had governing Seniors: and elsewhere he says, I know that in the Primitive Church, they had in every Church Seniors, to whom the government of the Congregation was committed. Saravia lends them his word likewise, Quod à me, &c. Which is not disputed by me in that meaning that the Belgic Churches, or any other which do with edification use the service of these Elders, should rashly change any thing, before that which is better be substituted. Again, speaking of the government of ruling Elders; he says, Quod ut, &c. Which as I judge profitable and good to be constituted in a Christian Church and Commonwealth, so I affirm no Church, no Commonwealth to be bound thereto by Divine Law: except perhaps necessity compel, or great utility allure, and the edification of the Church require it. Lo here the force of truth struggling with one contrary minded. He judges the office of ruling Elders, profitable and good, yet not of divine right; yet he acknowledges that necessity, utility, and the edification of the Church, makes us tied to it even by divine right. But if it be profitable and good, why did he call in question the necessity, at least the utility and the edification of it? Can one call in question the utility of that which is profitable? He would have said the truth, but it stuck in his teeth, and could not come forth. Saelvius de concil. lib. 1 cap. 8. says that among the Jews, Seniores tribuum, the Elders of the Tribes did sit with the Priests in judging controversies of the Law of God. Hence he argues against Bellarmine, that so it ought to be in the Christian Church also, because the privilege of Christians is no less than the privilege of the Jews. Camero tells us, that when the Apostle (1 Corinthians 6) reproves the Corinthians, for that when one of [illegible] had a matter against another they [illegible] the Saints to be judges [illegible] not by the [illegible] the [illegible] multitude, sed eos qui in Ecclesia constituti erant, ut vacarent gubernationi Ecclesiae: that is, those who were ordained in the Church, to give themselves to the government of the Church. My Lord Craigtanne finding the strength of that argument, that if beside the Ministers of the Word, other grave and wise Christians may be present in the greatest Assemblies and Councils of the Church, why not in Presbyteries also? answers, that indeed it is not amiss that the wiser sort among the people be joined as helpers and assistants to the Pastors, providing that this their auxiliary function be not obtruded as necessary. This is somewhat for us; but we say further, if it be necessary in Ecumenical Councils (for no less do the arguments of our Divines in that question with the Papists conclude) then is it necessary in Presbyteries also.