The consequence is undeniable, unless we hold that what the synod there imposed was unjust, or that we have now less need of those remedies than they had; nay, since the apostles (who were assisted with an extraordinary spirit of inspiration) would nevertheless in a doubtful business have synodal conventions for determining of controversies, much more ought we to do so whose gifts are far inferior to theirs; and unless it had been in their determination to leave us their example of a synodal way of church government for our pattern, they had not wanted the meeting together of so many with them for decision of the doubt, whose doctrine was infallible, and of itself, without an assembly, to be believed.

The exceptions against this pattern of church polity are of no validity, e.g.

1.  This was no synod.  First, that it was no synod appears, in that we read of no word of a synod.  Secondly, no commissioners from Syria and Cilicia, which churches should have sent their delegates, had they been a synod, and had their decrees been to have bound in a synodal way.  Thirdly, all the believers had voices here.

2.  If it were a synod, yet it is no pattern for us, in regard it was consisting of members guided by an infallible and apostolical spirit.

We answer, 1.  Here is the thing synod, though not the word, which is a meeting consisting of the deputies of many single churches.

2.  That Jerusalem and Antioch had their commissioners there, is evident; and by consequence many single churches had their commissioners, for there were many single congregations at Jerusalem and Antioch, as hath been proved, Chapter XIII., Position II.; that these met together, the word used, verse 6, they came together, evidenceth, and verse 25.  For the churches of Syria and Cilicia not sending their commissioners, it follows not that because they are not named, therefore they were not there; and if they were not there, therefore they ought not to have been:  but it is rather thought Syria and Cilicia had commissioners there, in regard the synodal decrees are directed to them as well as others, and the decrees bound them, which they could not do as formal Scripture; for the words, it seemeth good to us, and their submitting the matter to disputation, argue the contrary; therefore as synodal decrees, which inasmuch as they bound those churches, they either were present, or were obliged to be present by their commissioners.

3.  To that exception, that the multitude of believers had voices there, and therefore it is not one of our synods, ver. 22—­

We answer, it can nowise be proved that every particular believer had a suffrage in the assembly.

Eminent divines[116] understand by multitude and church, the multitude and whole church of apostles and elders, who are said to be gathered together, verse 6, to consider of the matter; besides which no other multitude is said to be gathered together, while the matter was in debate; yet we shall not deny even to other members the liberty of their consent and approbation, and freedom to examine all determinations by the rule of God’s word:  but the ordaining and forming those decrees is here evinced to be by the apostles and elders, when as they are called their decrees, Acts xvi. 4,6.